MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: wyzgy on June 22, 2011, 04:53:46 PM
-
came in half way thru, need to re-listen to on podcast-wisn.com/belling-to hear his take on the story. between 4:30 -5:00pm. this just will not go away
-
Belling hates MU, so he wont let it go away. Kind of ticked me off that he threw buzz into this. The original article says that buzz made contact with the girl. Belling said that at OSU a coach resigns when the players get free tattoos but at MU, you get a contract extension and a raise for interfering in a sexual assault case."
-
The original article says that buzz made contact with the girl.
Wait ... what?
Where did you get that? That would be news to me, but maybe I missed something.
-
Paraphrasing Belling there too... i reread what and understand the confusion
-
Paraphrasing Belling there too... i reread what and understand the confusion
If Belling said that, and it's not true (and I can't recall anything to indicate it's true), I hope Buzz sues him. That's a big-time slander.
-
WISN and WITI had MU on the news tonight, but certainly nothing like what Belling is stating. I agree with Pakuni, if that is what Belling is saying and it's wrong, then Belling better issue a retraction to Buzz and to his listeners.
-
Belling runs hot and cold on MU. No doubt he loves to stir the pot if the situation arises. Honestly, we do have egg on our face and really not his job to defend us.
-
I really can't believe some of you even listen to that guy.
He has nothing intelligent to say ever.
-
I really can't believe some of you even listen to that guy.
He has nothing intelligent to say ever.
Pretty broad statement, my guess is a similar comment could be made about commentators on the other side but it would be equally untrue.
-
Pretty broad statement, my guess is a similar comment could be made about commentators on the other side but it would be equally untrue.
He's a proven liar...no need for that on either side.
-
I really can't believe some of you even listen to that guy.
He has nothing intelligent to say ever.
What? Are you kidding me.
-
He's a proven liar...no need for that on either side.
speakin of slander...
-
Pretty broad statement, my guess is a similar comment could be made about commentators on the other side but it would be equally untrue.
It is called a hyperbole and as it relates to Belling it is an excellent use of that rhetoric tool. But I am sure you know what a hyperbole is. However it is no suprise you've ignored it in order to interject your political opinions into the thread.
-
He's a proven liar...no need for that on either side.
Agreed, that's why I said they're on both sides.
-
It is called a hyperbole and as it relates to Belling it is an excellent use of that rhetoric tool. But I am sure you know what a hyperbole is. However it is no suprise you've ignored it in order to interject your political opinions into the thread.
If you don't think that's exactly what Hards was trying to do (insert his political opinions), you haven't been following along.
-
If you don't think that's exactly what Hards was trying to do (insert his political opinions), you haven't been following along.
I wasn't, actually.
But thanks for taking the bait again.
-
WISN and WITI had MU on the news tonight, but certainly nothing like what Belling is stating. I agree with Pakuni, if that is what Belling is saying and it's wrong, then Belling better issue a retraction to Buzz and to his listeners.
wow - I agree with chicos
-
I wasn't, actually.
But thanks for taking the bait again.
Deny it all you want, the fact that you were "setting bait" means you were doing exactly as I stated.
-
you guys need to listen to the podcast before you blow a vessel. belling merely said that john chisholm(d.a.) intimated that buzz may have intervened with an alleged victim in the first case. and if buzz did so, it was at least inappropriate and at most, interfering with an ongoing investigation. belling further states thaat because buzz will not say anything re: the case, that based on his involvement, he's being rewarded with a raise and contract extension. i.e. good job on helping us sweep this one under the rug. belling, being the "pit bull" of reporters is just being a dick b/c buzz won't give him an interview. but also, buzz should not have contacted the girl(as chisholm intimates) b/c it doesn't look good.
on another note, belling did say at about the 10+ min. mark of hour 2 part 2 that there is a former player in texas still facing sexual assault charges or something along those lines...hmmmmmmmm
marquette should have come as clean as it could have last fall and now again in february. with all the different modes of communication, people harboring animosities, jealousies, and regrets, nothing and i mean NOTHING just goes away. the chickens always seem to come home
-
Pretty broad statement, my guess is a similar comment could be made about commentators on the other side but it would be equally untrue.
that would imply that someone listens to them... if a tree falls in the forest... if a lib lies on Public radio..
-
on another note, belling did say at about the 10+ min. mark of hour 2 part 2 that there is a former player in texas still facing sexual assault charges or something along those lines...hmmmmmmmm
Monterale Clark? I would think that actually makes Buzz look good for not taking him after that.
-
you guys need to listen to the podcast before you blow a vessel. belling merely said that john chisholm(d.a.) intimated that buzz may have intervened with an alleged victim in the first case.
I'm pretty sure Chisholm never said what sport it was and he only mentioned that the coach in question held a team meeting regarding the incident. So, unless this is about the track team, I'm fairly certain that the victim isn't on the same team.
-
Monterale Clark? I would think that actually makes Buzz look good for not taking him after that.
thanks- i forgot about that macdonald's allstar. i was thinking about sam houston-say it ain't so
-
Deny it all you want, the fact that you were "setting bait" means you were doing exactly as I stated.
Not really. It is possible for someone to think Mark Belling is a no nothing idiot without having a political agenda. For example, I have conservative friends who can't stand him.
-
Not really. It is possible for someone to think Mark Belling is a no nothing idiot without having a political agenda. For example, I have conservative friends who can't stand him.
that settles that, he must be pulled from the air then, immediately, damn it ;D
-
If Belling was right, Buzz should be fired.
-
If Belling was right, Buzz should be fired.
again, belling is just reporting from what he understands that chisholm has gathered. i believe we should first know what buzz's involvement was. if he told the girl to go to the police(i doubt that), went to console her(umm...), or told her to shut the pie hole(mouth) and here's some front row seats for life, hey, how about some locker room passes post game? o.k. o.k. in all seriousness, we need to know if buzz did meet w/ alleged victim and what he said before we send him on to texas a&m
-
If Belling was right, Buzz should be fired.
+1, that is a big if, but if he is right there is no question Buzz should be fired.
-
I agree, if true Buzz should be gone. However, that is a ginormous leap, I have seen nothing that comes even remotely close to what Belling's allegations seem to be. The closest thing is the report that Buzz had a team meeting regarding the four players involved in the first incident. Based on what I have seen officially reported I see nothing that Buzz has done wrong. There is probably just enough out there that Belling can avoid a defamation lawsuit, which is a same. That is awfully strong accusation to just toss out there; interfering in a sexual assault case is itself a felony I believe.
-
I agree, if true Buzz should be gone. However, that is a ginormous leap, I have seen nothing that comes even remotely close to what Belling's allegations seem to be. The closest thing is the report that Buzz had a team meeting regarding the four players involved in the first incident. Based on what I have seen officially reported I see nothing that Buzz has done wrong. There is probably just enough out there that Belling can avoid a defamation lawsuit, which is a same. That is awfully strong accusation to just toss out there; interfering in a sexual assault case is itself a felony I believe.
did you hear belling or listen to the podcast?? i'm not defending belling here, but belling did not allege anything. he is going off of reports and comments and news stories. he has repeatedly said that he is having trouble coming to any conclusions with this story and the first one that occurred in october 2010. just because you guys don't like belling doesn't mean you can throw him under the mack truck(getting sick of the bus thing)
-
again, belling is just reporting from what he understands that chisholm has gathered. i believe we should first know what buzz's involvement was. if he told the girl to go to the police(i doubt that), went to console her(umm...), or told her to shut the pie hole(mouth) and here's some front row seats for life, hey, how about some locker room passes post game? o.k. o.k. in all seriousness, we need to know if buzz did meet w/ alleged victim and what he said before we send him on to texas a&m
She was raped by a player (allegedly). You think she wants locker room passes?
Sultan, while you're right that Buzz should be fired if, but it can't be underestimated how big that if really is
-
you guys need to listen to the podcast before you blow a vessel. belling merely said that john chisholm(d.a.) intimated that buzz may have intervened with an alleged victim in the first case. and if buzz did so, it was at least inappropriate and at most, interfering with an ongoing investigation. belling further states thaat because buzz will not say anything re: the case, that based on his involvement, he's being rewarded with a raise and contract extension. i.e. good job on helping us sweep this one under the rug. belling, being the "pit bull" of reporters is just being a dick b/c buzz won't give him an interview. but also, buzz should not have contacted the girl(as chisholm intimates) b/c it doesn't look good.
There's no indication that Buzz contacted the girl, and Chisholm never "intimated" anything of the sort. In fact, Chisholm specifically stated that there's no evidence the coaching staff interferred, or intended to interfere, with the investigation.
Belling is wrong, and if I were MU I'd demand a public retraction. He has, for all intents, accused Buzz of a felony.
-
Why is it everytime some yahoo make an outlandish claim (or in this case maybe doesn't) people can't wait to come on here and say "if this is true,..." What nonsense. Why not just stipulate that if, at any time in the future, it can be proven that so and so is a father raper, mother stabber, etc., he/she should be fired. Duh!
-
There's no indication that Buzz contacted the girl, and Chisholm never "intimated" anything of the sort. In fact, Chisholm specifically stated that there's no evidence the coaching staff interferred, or intended to interfere, with the investigation.
Belling is wrong, and if I were MU I'd demand a public retraction. He has, for all intents, accused Buzz of a felony.
Agreed, I was listening to the radio when he was talking about this and it shocked me when he started talking about Buzz talking to the girl, because I had never seen or heard that anywhere before. If someone has a link to a story or comments where someone mentions Buzz talking to the girl that would seem to back Belling up, but in this instance I don't ever recall that being the case.
-
did you hear belling or listen to the podcast?? i'm not defending belling here, but belling did not allege anything. he is going off of reports and comments and news stories. he has repeatedly said that he is having trouble coming to any conclusions with this story and the first one that occurred in october 2010. just because you guys don't like belling doesn't mean you can throw him under the mack truck(getting sick of the bus thing)
I did listen to the last half of his discussion, and I don't know what alleging is if he didn't allege Buzz had contact with the victim and even worse. And I quote "It's time for somebody to ask the question, of whether or not it is appropriate to give a contract extension and a raise to a basketball coach who intervenes in a sexual assault investigation involving players' of his, and that is what happened at Marquette."
Sure looks like an allegation to me.
-
I did listen to the last half of his discussion, and I don't know what alleging is if he didn't allege Buzz had contact with the victim and even worse. And I quote "It's time for somebody to ask the question, of whether or not it is appropriate to give a contract extension and a raise to a basketball coach who intervenes in a sexual assault investigation involving players' of his, and that is what happened at Marquette."
Sure looks like an allegation to me.
http://belling.com/cc-common/podcast.html
2nd hour, part 2 starts around the 14 minute mark
-
I would say intervening in the investigation is a long way from actually contacting the girl. I'm not sure where people made that leap.
Also, how exactly did he "intervene"? All I've seen is that he allegedly held a meeting with the 4 players from the Oct. incident, which is completely separate from this Feb. incident.
-
Assuming Buzz even talked to the girls it may not have had anything to do with telling them what to do. He could of just been trying to find out what went on, so he could decide what punishment to hand out to the players. I agree he would be better off not talking to them, but it would be leaping to a conclusion that he was there to prevent them from reporting it. In fact, I would think if he had actually done that it would have been a big issue with MU's corpoarte counsel and he would not have got a contract extension.
-
Assuming Buzz even talked to the girls it may not have had anything to do with telling them what to do. He could of just been trying to find out what went on, so he could decide what punishment to hand out to the players. I agree he would be better off not talking to them, but it would be leaping to a conclusion that he was there to prevent them from reporting it. In fact, I would think if he had actually done that it would have been a big issue with MU's corpoarte counsel and he would not have got a contract extension.
now that's more like it!!
i think, but i will try to find it to verify, the part where belling brings up chisholm's alluding to buzz's possible contact or involvement in the situation was in podcast hour 2 part 1 @ 23:42 mark-belling says "buzz had contact with the women in the initial case(october) after the initial allegations were made and there are suggestions from milw. co. d.a. john chisholm, that buzz william's contact may have been inappropriate. belling then further adds/asks why an intermediary(buzz) is having contact with an alleged victim
so again, belling is merely commenting on only what is out there, rather than making any insinuations. he has tried/without success to contact marquette a.d. and of course hasn't heard back from him. he did however talk to janine geske-mu law professor, the only mu person he has talked to at this point
-
Buzz shouldn't have talked to the girls *at all.* Buzz should never have even found out who they are. I'm not saying merely contacting them would be a fireable offense, but it would be highly inappropriate for him to do so for any reason.
-
Buzz shouldn't have talked to the girls *at all.* Buzz should never have even found out who they are. I'm not saying merely contacting them would be a fireable offense, but it would be highly inappropriate for him to do so for any reason.
You're right.
But nobody has suggested that Buzz did this except Belling. and that includes Belling's supposed source, Chisholm.
Go back and read Chisholm's statement when he announced there would be no charges. Nowhere does he state that any girls were contacted by Buzz or the coaching staff. To the contrary, Chisholm says there was no effort by the coaching staff to interfere with any investigation.
This is a non-issue created by a loudmouth who apparently lacks any grasp of the actual facts.
I'd have a huge problem with this if Buzz actually contacted either of these accusers. But there's nothing to indicate that he did.
-
I think Belling needs to get his facts straight. Here is Chisholm's statement...
http://media.jsonline.com/documents/Chisholm_Marquette_letter.pdf
It doesn't say anything about Buzz contacting either of the women. Talking about the Oct. incident it says this:
"One factor of concern in this incident is that, according to one of the suspects, members of the coaching staff received information about the October incident and met together with the suspected athletes to discuss the allegations before any law enforcement agency was able to interview the suspects. Furthermore, at least one of the suspects sent a text message to the victim during this meeting, asking her if she reported something to Marquette Public Safety. There is no evidence that the coaching staff intended to interfere with the investigation. It highlights, however, that when proper procedure is not followed it prevents an untainted interview with any suspect and provides an opportunity for the individuals allegedly involved as suspects or witnesses to compare recollections regarding the circumstances of the alleged misconduct."
There's nothing about any contact regarding the Feb. incident, which is the subject of the Tribune article.
-
You're right.
But nobody has suggested that Buzz did this except Belling. and that includes Belling's supposed source, Chisholm.
Go back and read Chisholm's statement when he announced there would be no charges. Nowhere does he state that any girls were contacted by Buzz or the coaching staff. To the contrary, Chisholm says there was no effort by the coaching staff to interfere with any investigation.
This is a non-issue created by a loudmouth who apparently lacks any grasp of the actual facts.
I'd have a huge problem with this if Buzz actually contacted either of these accusers. But there's nothing to indicate that he did.
Pakuni is absolutely right, once again: Belling accused Buzz of committing a felony. Buzz's attorney should demand a retraction and threaten to sue Belling and WISN immediately.
-
Pakuni is absolutely right, once again: Belling accused Buzz of committing a felony. Buzz's attorney should demand a retraction and threaten to sue Belling and WISN immediately.
you guys need to put your hate on belling away before you execute him. cheeeeesus, take a breath, your hate slobber is coming thru my monitor and messing my desk. i'm sure he will be commenting further today if he got anymore info. so keep your powder dry. ya'll get another stab at him and just lump everything you hear today into one big fat juicy lawsuit
-
Pakuni is absolutely right, once again: Belling accused Buzz of committing a felony. Buzz's attorney should demand a retraction and threaten to sue Belling and WISN immediately.
+1
Listen, this isn't about Belling per se.....this is really about a broadcaster with a large megaphone saying things that at BEST imply that Buzz committed a felony and out worst state that he did commit that felony, all while having no proof in the public record to substantiate these claims. This is an attack on Buzz's character and quite frankly, one that should be met with aggression because one of Buzz's recruiting tools IS his character.
-
I don't live in Milwaukee and never heard of Belling outside this board so I have no axe to grind, but if he made those accusations, then he needs to be called out by Buzz's and possibly MU's attorneys.
-
you guys need to put your hate on belling away before you execute him. cheeeeesus, take a breath, your hate slobber is coming thru my monitor and messing my desk. i'm sure he will be commenting further today if he got anymore info. so keep your powder dry. ya'll get another stab at him and just lump everything you hear today into one big fat juicy lawsuit
I don't live in Milwaukee and I've never heard of (or from) Mark Belling, outside an occasional post on this board. I can surmise from those posts that he's a Rush Limbaugh wannabe, but that's about the extent of my knowledge on him. I couldn't care less about his politics or his opinions. I do, however, take issue when he states as fact that someone committed a felony when there's no suggestion or evidence that that's the case.
Apparently, slander is just fine in your book, so long as you're a fan of the slanderer.
-
Please don't quote wyzgy or guys like him. It renders my ignore button useless.
As for Belling, he takes shots at MU any chance he gets. I don't think anything will come of his accusations of Buzz, because he and Marquette both know he has a very large microphone. MU and Buzz will want this to go away ASAP, but if they fire back or threaten Belling with a lawsuit he will go on-and-on about this for as long as he has air in his lungs.
-
Buzz shouldn't have talked to the girls *at all.* Buzz should never have even found out who they are. I'm not saying merely contacting them would be a fireable offense, but it would be highly inappropriate for him to do so for any reason.
+1 Highly inappropriate if that's what happened. Just stay away and let the authorities handle it. Inserting self only adds many levels of complexity. This is partly what happened to Tressel, instead of reporting it to the compliance people he decided to talk to Pryor's guys and handle it himself. I'm sure the best of intentions, but you just can't do that. Hopefully just Belling being a dope and he's called out for it.
-
+1 Highly inappropriate if that's what happened. Just stay away and let the authorities handle it. Inserting self only adds many levels of complexity. This is partly what happened to Tressel, instead of reporting it to the compliance people he decided to talk to Pryor's guys and handle it himself. I'm sure the best of intentions, but you just can't do that. Hopefully just Belling being a dope and he's called out for it.
Only you would find this analogous in any way, shape or form to the ongoing scandals at Ohio State. Sorry to dash your hopes, but this won't end up with Buzz = Tressel.
-
+1 Highly inappropriate if that's what happened. Just stay away and let the authorities handle it. Inserting self only adds many levels of complexity. This is partly what happened to Tressel, instead of reporting it to the compliance people he decided to talk to Pryor's guys and handle it himself. I'm sure the best of intentions, but you just can't do that. Hopefully just Belling being a dope and he's called out for it.
History is not on Belling's side.
The guy is a know nothing rumor mongering fact misinterpreting ratings whore.
-
This thread makes me want to bang my head against the wall. There is no IF here, yet it keeps getting brought up. Buzz clearly didn't have any contact with either of the women from either incident, end of story.
-
Only you would find this analogous in any way, shape or form to the ongoing scandals at Ohio State. Sorry to dash your hopes, but this won't end up with Buzz = Tressel.
Chico's has a point. Coaches that try to do their own investigation, outside of the University's official investigation, get in trouble.
And frankly this would be much worse than anything than Tressel did. This is more in-line with what Steve Alford did at Iowa with Pierre Pierce. Yet he is still coaching and Tressel isn't. Funny priorities that NCAA has.
-
Only you would find this analogous in any way, shape or form to the ongoing scandals at Ohio State. Sorry to dash your hopes, but this won't end up with Buzz = Tressel.
Nor do I want it to end up that way. Good to see you are playing psychologist again and trying to determine how people think. You obvious didn't read what I said in showing the ONE aspect of similarity...a coach doing his own thing to "seek truth" or whatever.. Nowhere did I state the episodes are entirely analogous.
For the umpteenth time, I want Buzz here for the long haul. I want him to put a good product on the floor and make sure the product off the floor stays out of trouble and can be something we are all proud of. That should be the requirement of all head coaches at the collegiate level. Unfortunately when dealing with young men in the 18-23 age group. they often have thoughts that are counter to what the coach or university is trying to do.
-
This thread makes me want to bang my head against the wall. There is no IF here, yet it keeps getting brought up. Buzz clearly didn't have any contact with either of the women from either incident, end of story.
+1
There is nothing at all to indicate that this happened anywhere but Belling's fantasyland, which is exactly why someone needs to call him out on this issue. However, I agree with whoever said MU and Buzz will do nothing because thats like throwing fuel on Belling's fire, which is why Belling gets away with this kind of crap.
-
There is nothing at all to indicate that this happened anywhere but Belling's fantasyland, which is exactly why someone needs to call him out on this issue. However, I agree with whoever said MU and Buzz will do nothing because thats like throwing fuel on Belling's fire, which is why Belling gets away with this kind of crap.
Threatening Belling with a lawsuit might not do anything, but threatening his bosses with one for publishing Belling's slander might back him off a little bit.
-
Please don't quote wyzgy or guys like him. It renders my ignore button useless.
As for Belling, he takes shots at MU any chance he gets. I don't think anything will come of his accusations of Buzz, because he and Marquette both know he has a very large microphone. MU and Buzz will want this to go away ASAP, but if they fire back or threaten Belling with a lawsuit he will go on-and-on about this for as long as he has air in his lungs.
blame your ignore button for your ignominy 94- have a good one.
we need to hear from belling in order to continue. belling does need to clarify his comments re: buzz. until then, this is just a circle jerk (no pun)
-
blame your ignore button for your ignominy 94- have a good one.
we need to hear from belling in order to continue. belling does need to clarify his comments re: buzz. until then, this is just a circle jerk (no pun)
I have no idea why you take what the guy says at face value. His track record is terrible.
-
Buzz shouldn't have talked to the girls *at all.* Buzz should never have even found out who they are. I'm not saying merely contacting them would be a fireable offense, but it would be highly inappropriate for him to do so for any reason.
Don't follow the logic on this one. In one of the incidents, the players were found guilty, by the University, of Sexual Harrassment. There was a "trial" (for lack of a better word). I believe the *girl* testified there. Here name was known.
Also, there is no mention of how, when, why ... a meeting took place. Who asked for it? Who was there? Never is a strong word. I can see several reasons, instances, how and why a meeting would occur without anything sinister. As someone else pointed out, he may have been fact finding for discipling the players ...
-
Don't follow the logic on this one. In one of the incidents, the players were found guilty, by the University, of Sexual Harrassment. There was a "trial" (for lack of a better word). I believe the *girl* testified there. Here name was known.
Also, there is no mention of how, when, why ... a meeting took place. Who asked for it? Who was there? Never is a strong word. I can see several reasons, instances, how and why a meeting would occur without anything sinister. As someone else pointed out, he may have been fact finding for discipling the players ...
Sexual Harassment training is held by many companies for managers. If a sexual harassment complaint is leveled against an employee, absolutely under no circumstances is the boss of that charged employee to talk to the person that brought those charges. I see a parallel in this to what Sultan is saying. It would be improper for the boss to talk to the man or woman that brought charges against one of his/her employees just as it would be improper for a head coach to talk to the girls bringing charges against a player.
At least that's how I view Sultan's comments.
-
Sexual Harassment training is held by many companies for managers. If a sexual harassment complaint is leveled against an employee, absolutely under no circumstances is the boss of that charged employee to talk to the person that brought those charges. I see a parallel in this to what Sultan is saying. It would be improper for the boss to talk to the man or woman that brought charges against one of his/her employees just as it would be improper for a head coach to talk to the girls bringing charges against a player.
At least that's how I view Sultan's comments.
I pointed out the Sexual Harrassment as to the fact that her identity was not hidden.
No one, not you, knows what or if Buzz spoke with her. I chose not to blanket it all negative as Sultan had and as you typically do. If Buzz spoke with her, there is no time line as to when he would have spoken with her. It could have been AFTER the Sexual Harrassment Charges were heard. If Buzz spoke with her, there could be genuine and altruistic reasons why. You and Sultan do not see those. You both are acting in absolute worlds without the facts. Again, very dangerous.
-
Good grief, there is no IF here. Why are people even debating this? It's pretty damn clear Buzz didn't have any contact with either of the victims. Chisholm was concerned because members of the coaching staff met with the 4 players from the October incident, and one of those players sent a text message to the girl. If Buzz, or any member of the coaching staff, would have actually contacted one of the girls, Chisholm definitely would have mentioned it in his statement.
-
If Buzz likes running over infants with his car, he should be fired.
Hey, this is easy AND fun!
-
I pointed out the Sexual Harrassment as to the fact that her identity was not hidden.
No one, not you, knows what or if Buzz spoke with her. I chose not to blanket it all negative as Sultan had and as you typically do. If Buzz spoke with her, there is no time line as to when he would have spoken with her. It could have been AFTER the Sexual Harrassment Charges were heard. If Buzz spoke with her, there could be genuine and altruistic reasons why. You and Sultan do not see those. You both are acting in absolute worlds without the facts. Again, very dangerous.
Sorry, we could not disagree more. There are no genuine and altruistic reasons why that are worth doing it. First, I don't think he spoke to her, so let's make sure we get that out of the way. Second, IF he talked to her and she is the person claiming a sexual assault against a member of his team, there is NO REASON (altruistic, genuine, whatever) to talk to her. PERIOD. Every attorney worth his salt and absolutely every employer would say the same thing. It has NOTHING to do with seeing something negative or acting without the facts. In the situation you describe you would open up yourself to further scrutiny, liability and possible criminal action by talking to her. So I fail to see where you are going with this idea that IF he spoke to her (again, don't think it happened) there "could" be some wonderful reason to do so. I can't think of an attorney in the world that is worth anything that would find a silver lining in the coach of a player accused of sexual assault talking to the alledged victim in any manner whatsoever. It's just not worth it.
-
Good grief, there is no IF here. Why are people even debating this? It's pretty damn clear Buzz didn't have any contact with either of the victims. Chisholm was concerned because members of the coaching staff met with the 4 players from the October incident, and one of those players sent a text message to the girl. If Buzz, or any member of the coaching staff, would have actually contacted one of the girls, Chisholm definitely would have mentioned it in his statement.
You are correct. I went back to the JS report from Chisholm. Here is the link: http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/122678858.html (http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/122678858.html)
In fact, Chisholm provides exonorating comments about the coaching staff.
-
Sorry, we could not disagree more. There are no genuine and altruistic reasons why that are worth doing it. First, I don't think he spoke to her, so let's make sure we get that out of the way. Second, IF he talked to her and she is the person claiming a sexual assault against a member of his team, there is NO REASON (altruistic, genuine, whatever) to talk to her. PERIOD. Every attorney worth his salt and absolutely every employer would say the same thing. It has NOTHING to do with seeing something negative or acting without the facts. In the situation you describe you would open up yourself to further scrutiny, liability and possible criminal action by talking to her. So I fail to see where you are going with this idea that IF he spoke to her (again, don't think it happened) there "could" be some wonderful reason to do so. I can't think of an attorney in the world that is worth anything that would find a silver lining in the coach of a player accused of sexual assault talking to the alledged victim in any manner whatsoever. It's just not worth it.
You are taking my comments out of context. Read the comments again, please. You either forgot, chose to ignore or were just flat out were disengenous. Did you even read the 3rd and 4th sentences of the 2nd paragraph? Kind of important to the rest of the comments, don't you think? ::)
Still, I have linked the comments from Chisholm. You got your undies all bunched up over a non-starter, it appears.
-
I read it just fine. You're asking me to ignore the line about how their could be altruistic reasons as if you didn't state it, sorry...not going to do it. That's just simply an inane statement to make. Can you imagine if he did this and it went to trial? He could be accused of trying to scare a witness, trying to get her to drop charges, trying to buy silence, etc, etc. Even if he did none of these things, that could be the perception which is why there is never an altruistic reason good enough to do something that silly.
I read everything else Mac, but I can't ignore the fact you actually put that sentence in there and pretend we should just gloss over it as if it was no big deal.
I'll repeat, I don't think he talked to her and said so multiple times. No undies bunched
-
is coming up after the news, etc... interested to see the difference btw. belling and sykes, although 2 days post chicago tribune article, is there new news?? the millin dolar question(s) have been circle jerked. hope this doesn't continue to take the spotlight off of jimmy b and the good mu...stay tuned wtmj 620am
-
Wow, I never guessed you listened to Sykes too...
-
Wow, I never guessed you listened to Sykes too...
just trying to help you guys out where ever i can ;D
-
Wow, I never guessed you listened to Sykes too...
Yeah. He's really stoopid.
-
Sykes and Belling are still on the air. Thank you God, for satellite radio. I used to listen to their stick once in a while. Now I haven't heard them whine for years.
Anyway, I like how the girls story is being taken as 100% credible. I know nothing, but I bet there is another side to this story, of course. Bottom line: MU and Milwaukee didn't see a crime to prosecute.
Could it have been handled better? Sure.
-
If Buzz likes running over infants with his car, he should be fired.
Hey, this is easy AND fun!
If Sultan is a father raper or Chicos is a mother stabber, I think they should both be arrested, prosecuted and convicted. I'm not saying they are, mind you. In fact, let me go on record as saying I don't think they are. But if they are, people shouldn't bury their heads in the sand. They should be punished and punished big time. Let me emphasize again that at this point I personally don't think either is guilty of these charges, but I hope we can all agree that father raping and mother stabbing are serious crimes and if Sultan and Chicos are guilty of them they should be punished. Anything less would be an injustice (if they did it, though as previously stated I don't think there is sufficient evidence to indicate they did). I hope this is something we can all agree on.
-
Yeah. He's really stoopid.
I heard he was dum and not very nowledgable, too.
-
If Sultan is a father raper or Chicos is a mother stabber, I think they should both be arrested, prosecuted and convicted. I'm not saying they are, mind you. In fact, let me go on record as saying I don't think they are. But if they are, people shouldn't bury their heads in the sand. They should be punished and punished big time. Let me emphasize again that at this point I personally don't think either is guilty of these charges, but I hope we can all agree that father raping and mother stabbing are serious crimes and if Sultan and Chicos are guilty of them they should be punished. Anything less would be an injustice (if they did it, though as previously stated I don't think there is sufficient evidence to indicate they did). I hope this is something we can all agree on.
I'm confused. What are we supposed to be agreeing on? Sultan being a father raper & Chicos a mother stabber, that father raping and mother stabbing are serious crimes, or the fact that they should be punished if that's what they are? I'm with you on the last part - they should be punished, but since that's rather obvious, it begs the question as to why would you preface that with "juicy" allegations with no basis whatsoever?
Do you think Scoopers are just a bunch of morons who are so oblivious to the world that the only way to demonstrate a point is by inserting extreme allegations into a simple hypothetical? Are you pushing an anti-Sultan and Chicos agenda behind the cloak of an "if/then" statement? Do you have some sort of obsession with being objective (or wanting anonymous people to think you're objective)? Or are you just trying to stir the pot?
(Rocky's right... this is fun.)
-
Uh....has anyone here talked to my father?
-
very interesting replies to what charlie had to say about the topic-classic
-
very interesting replies to what charlie had to say about the topic-classic
I'm thinking that we all had better things to do than listen to rumors pushed around by a gossip queen.
-
The left wingers are coming out of the wood work. :'( :'(
-
I'm confused. What are we supposed to be agreeing on? Sultan being a father raper & Chicos a mother stabber, that father raping and mother stabbing are serious crimes, or the fact that they should be punished if that's what they are? I'm with you on the last part - they should be punished, but since that's rather obvious, it begs the question as to why would you preface that with "juicy" allegations with no basis whatsoever?
Do you think Scoopers are just a bunch of morons who are so oblivious to the world that the only way to demonstrate a point is by inserting extreme allegations into a simple hypothetical? Are you pushing an anti-Sultan and Chicos agenda behind the cloak of an "if/then" statement? Do you have some sort of obsession with being objective (or wanting anonymous people to think you're objective)? Or are you just trying to stir the pot?
(Rocky's right... this is fun.)
Just stating the "pesky fact" that if true (I personally am one of those who believe them not to be true) these would be more than disturbing and would and should result in serious consequences.
-
Uh....has anyone here talked to my father?
This is funny. Being able to take a joke is an admirable quality.
-
very interesting replies to what charlie had to say about the topic-classic
What did he say?
-
I'm thinking that we all had better things to do than listen to rumors pushed around by a gossip queen.
attack attack attack, shut up shut up shut up, nothing to see here, move on
all charlie was doing was asking for input from people on what constitutes rape. don't listen to the podcast or anything, you might learn something different-so much for diversity of opinions and tolerance... interesting replies as one of the few women to call in gave the most controversial opinion. no accusations, buzz never came up, no names, just conversation. you guys go tune in to your npr for some "real" dialogue ?-( funny how we have so many dumb, stupid, people for media except whoever they listen to, double :o we'll let daniel bice sort it all out ?-(
-
attack attack attack, shut up shut up shut up, nothing to see here, move on
all charlie was doing was asking for input from people on what constitutes rape. don't listen to the podcast or anything, you might learn something different-so much for diversity of opinions and tolerance... interesting replies as one of the few women to call in gave the most controversial opinion. no accusations, buzz never came up, no names, just conversation. you guys go tune in to your npr for some "real" dialogue ?-( funny how we have so many dumb, stupid, people for media except whoever they listen to, double :o we'll let daniel bice sort it all out ?-(
Dude....calm down. All those shows (on either side) are basically the same. Some people get off on that. I'd rather listen to someone strangling a cat.
-
Uh....has anyone here talked to my father?
Or my mother for that matter?
-
Dude....calm down. All those shows (on either side) are basically the same. Some people get off on that. I'd rather listen to someone strangling a cat.
hey, no big deal. i'm cool. just enlightened verification of the left's thinking-you all passed. i can't stand listening to RAYchel madow and chrissy "tingles" matthews or kweef olberwoman either-i get it. go brewers!!
-
hey, no big deal. i'm cool. just enlightened verification of the left's thinking-you all passed. i can't stand listening to RAYchel madow and chrissy "tingles" matthews or kweef olberwoman either-i get it. go brewers!!
The point he was making is that people who listen to or watch those shows only do it to confirm what they already know or think. Regardless of their political beliefs.
Additionally, the only definition of rape is the one that is in the CSC... not what some lady from Waukesha thinks.
-
hey, no big deal. i'm cool. just enlightened verification of the left's thinking-you all passed. i can't stand listening to RAYchel madow and chrissy "tingles" matthews or kweef olberwoman either-i get it. go brewers!!
Going by the ratings, nobody is watching MSNBC
-
Or my mother for that matter?
A likewise funny and admirable response.
-
A likewise funny and admirable response.
If Sultan is a father raper and Chicos is a mother stabber, not saying they are, but if they are, which one should be fired faster? Which crime that I don't know they committed, but could have, is a more significant crime? Rich Pitino also might be a mother stabber and a father raper, so should we blame the Chicago Tribune for revealing no facts whatsoever that Chico and Sultan are partakers in father raping and mother stabbing but praise them from their revelation of Pitino's crimes he didn't commit but if he did would be a fire able offense?
-
If Sultan is a father raper and Chicos is a mother stabber, not saying they are, but if they are, which one should be fired faster? Which crime that I don't know they committed, but could have, is a more significant crime? Rich Pitino also might be a mother stabber and a father raper, so should we blame the Chicago Tribune for revealing no facts whatsoever that Chico and Sultan are partakers in father raping and mother stabbing but praise them from their revelation of Pitino's crimes he didn't commit but if he did would be a fire able offense?
4never also goes by the internet moniker "Cap't Stabbin."
-
If Sultan is a father raper and Chicos is a mother stabber, not saying they are, but if they are, which one should be fired faster? Which crime that I don't know they committed, but could have, is a more significant crime? Rich Pitino also might be a mother stabber and a father raper, so should we blame the Chicago Tribune for Chico and Sultan non commital of a crime but praise them from their revelation of Pitino's crimes he didn't commit but if he did would be a fire able offense?
I don't know why everyone is assuming that the rumor is that Sultan raped his own father, and that Chicos stabbed his own mother. That's not the way I interpreted the rumor at all. Granted, if, in fact, Sultan did rape his own father, and if Chicos did stab his own mother (and I'm not saying they did...I personally don't believe that), then I really think they should be punished. That's some pretty bad stuff.
But, I interpreted the rumor as being that Sultan raped random fathers indiscriminately, and that Chicos stabbed random mothers on the street. I doubt seriously that this is true, and I haven't seen any documentation, but if it is true, they should have the book thrown at them and punished severely. There's absolutely no excuse for random, indiscriminate father raping and mother stabbing. That's a lot worse than run-of-the-mill father raping and mother stabbing. It would make me embarrassed to have been associated with them on this board if it is true (which I've mentioned that I don't think it is).
-
If they are raping and stabbing, this is a new development that would never have happened under Crean. Our standards have really slipped. Why can't anybody but me see this? And wyzgy, I listened to the second guy just as much as I listened to the first guy. Their names don't matter to me because I don't live there.
-
If they are raping and stabbing, this is a new development that would never have happened under Crean. Our standards have really slipped. Why can't anybody but me see this? And wyzgy, I listened to the second guy just as much as I listened to the first guy. Their names don't matter to me because I don't live there.
Actually, some people that I know said that if they were raping and stabbing, it started in 2001, while Crean was still there. But, they told me that they don't think there was any raping or stabbing, and I'm inclined to agree with them. But if there was...well...
-
Just stating the "pesky fact" that if true (I personally am one of those who believe them not to be true) these would be more than disturbing and would and should result in serious consequences.
Gotcha. One more clarification -- are we holding Chicos and Sultan to a higher standard? Shouldn't we be equally disturbed if someone else raped a (or their) father or stabbed a (or their) mother?
-
The point he was making is that people who listen to or watch those shows only do it to confirm what they already know or think. Regardless of their political beliefs.
I wouldn't limit that to just "those shows"....plenty of research out there that people gravitate toward media that confirms their beliefs as well. NY Times, Fox News, etc, etc. They all pander to an audience of some kind.
-
I read it just fine. You're asking me to ignore the line about how their could be altruistic reasons as if you didn't state it, sorry...not going to do it. That's just simply an inane statement to make. Can you imagine if he did this and it went to trial? He could be accused of trying to scare a witness, trying to get her to drop charges, trying to buy silence, etc, etc. Even if he did none of these things, that could be the perception which is why there is never an altruistic reason good enough to do something that silly.
Do you understand the concept of a paragraph? Sentences before set up sentences after? Obviously the answer is no. Try 1st grade english again. My god, you are a difficult individual to discuss anything with. Twist, turn, run away. MO of chico's.
Again, and I will type slowly so you can follow. If following my comments, there was no longer an MU trial, nor was there any investigation by the police (as no complaint had been filed). Yikes, you really do not put concepts together very well, do you? I guess your hatred and abstinence clouds your ability to understand.
-
You sound angry. Try a beer, it's the weekend. You'll live longer with less anger in your life...seriously you will.
Incidentally I haven't run away from anything. Nor do I hate anything to cloud my perception, but it's clear you still have some issues because this has been your rant for awhile now. May I suggest an IPA?
-
Could I recommend a little Kate Upton to cool off this thread. She is my new obsession, now that I can't engage in dialogue with the Bailbondsmen. Scroll to middle of the linked page below and press play. Enjoy.
http://egotastic.com/2011/05/kate-upton-jiggles-when-she-wiggles-for-beach-bunny-swimwear/
-
wow - this thread is creating hatred - maybe time to lock/delete/retire
-
Speaking of Belling, remember his old WISN commercials during MU games? Something about a hunter confusing a man for a deer is PREPOSTEROUS!
-
You sound angry. Try a beer, it's the weekend. You'll live longer with less anger in your life...seriously you will.
Incidentally I haven't run away from anything. Nor do I hate anything to cloud my perception, but it's clear you still have some issues because this has been your rant for awhile now. May I suggest an IPA?
For someone who complains about the treatment they receive from others on this board, you certainly get low and in the gutter in a hurry. Hope that cheap attack made your night and allowed you to sleep better.