MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: jtrash37 on April 12, 2011, 10:08:40 PM
-
Just reported by WTMJ 4. Regardless of whether or not it is a bb player, it isn't a trend anyone should feel comfortable with.
-
Yeah I saw it on twitter, but couldn't find any of the news stations reporting it. Came up with a "Marquette" search.
-
Stanford just had an on-campus break-in and assault on a grad student a few days ago.
-
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/119744084.html
"In the most recent incident, the Milwaukee County district attorney's office is reviewing an incident involving a Marquette University student who allegedly sexually assaulted a woman on Feb. 27.
According to a report at Marquette's Public Safety Department, the alleged assault occurred on Sunday, Feb. 27, between 12 a.m. and 1 a.m.
"A student reported being sexually assaulted by an acquaintance in Humphrey Hall," the report said. The Marquette report says that the Milwaukee Police Department was contacted.
Miller said the university's Public Safety Department met with the victim following the incident. She said that it wasn't until March 31 that the victim filed a report with the department.
Once the woman filed a report, that triggered a case review with the student conduct system. "That is under way," Miller said.
Deputy District Attorney Kent Lovern confirmed that his office was reviewing the case, and that a decision of charges, if any, would likely be made in mid-May."
-
certainly puts a tarnish on the the MU team (assuming the fact that it happened again in Humphrey that it is a BBall player), should make for great table discussion at the team banquet tonight...
-
This is NOT Marquette! Distressing for the young women, the reputation of the school & the future of the program. When did Marquette turn into the bad old days of Oklahoma football?????
-
certainly puts a tarnish on the the MU team (assuming the fact that it happened again in Humphrey that it is a BBall player), should make for great table discussion at the team banquet tonight...
I'm not sure why you'd make the assumption that it was a BBall player. That is a rather large building.
-
Buuuttttt Hards, it's so much easier to do it. And it's the intertubes, so conjecture and rumor are valid while facts and reason are shunned.
-
The story says:
The woman told Marquette Public Safety the incident took place just after midnight on Feb. 27. She went to campus police that morning but she waited to file a formal complaint until March 31. At that point, the school notified police.
If I'm reading this correctly, it was just after midnight on Saturday Feb. 26 (which would be Sunday Feb. 27). On Sunday, Feb. 27, Marquette played Providence at home and won 86-62. Tip was 3PM
http://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/men_s_basketball/pc_02_27_11
-
I find this troubling regardless of what happened...
1) Assuming the players (assuming it is players) being accused of something are guilty, the problems associated with that are obvious.
2) This was reported to Pubic Safetey a couple days after the previous one was reported, which I have to admit raises a huge red flag. The timing is just a little too convenient, for me not to conclude that it is questionable at best, and perhaps intentional at worst.
-
The story says:
The woman told Marquette Public Safety the incident took place just after midnight on Feb. 27. She went to campus police that morning but she waited to file a formal complaint until March 31. At that point, the school notified police.
If I'm reading this correctly, it was just after midnight on Saturday Feb. 26 (which would be Sunday Feb. 27). On Sunday, Feb. 27, Marquette played Providence at home and won 86-62. Tip was 3PM
http://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/men_s_basketball/pc_02_27_11
Annnnnndddddddddd.....
-
The story says:
The woman told Marquette Public Safety the incident took place just after midnight on Feb. 27. She went to campus police that morning but she waited to file a formal complaint until March 31. At that point, the school notified police.
If I'm reading this correctly, it was just after midnight on Saturday Feb. 26 (which would be Sunday Feb. 27). On Sunday, Feb. 27, Marquette played Providence at home and won 86-62. Tip was 3PM
http://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/men_s_basketball/pc_02_27_11
Does the team stay in a hotel the night before home games?
-
Annnnnndddddddddd.....
Just that they were in town that weekend. No away game.
That is all.
-
Does the team stay in a hotel the night before home games?
I thought they did, though I could be wrong.
-
How many students live in Humphrey?
-
How many students live in Humphrey?
I'd say there are what? 6 or 8 floors? I believe all of the scholarship student-athletes live there, not just basketball players. I lived there my junior year. All in all, maybe 500?
-
The story says:
The woman told Marquette Public Safety the incident took place just after midnight on Feb. 27. She went to campus police that morning but she waited to file a formal complaint until March 31. At that point, the school notified police.
If I'm reading this correctly, it was just after midnight on Saturday Feb. 26 (which would be Sunday Feb. 27). On Sunday, Feb. 27, Marquette played Providence at home and won 86-62. Tip was 3PM
http://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/men_s_basketball/pc_02_27_11
Due to the "mum is the word" policy, I highly doubt we will ever know if it was a basketball player. IF, big IF, it was -- this is a big problem.
-
First, and foremost I feel bad for and pray for the young lady. Second, I am ashamed that it occurred at my alma mater. Third, don't you think that if a basketball player was involved that that would've been a headline already?
-
The only indication that the last assault accusation was a basketball player was all rumor. None of this will hit the headlines until someone gets charged.
Apparantely a lot of people know of whispers of who the initial accusation was against -- I wonder if similar rumors are out about whether or not this was a basketball player. Just heard from someone that this accusation is also a male athlete, no word if it was bball or not.
-
Due to the "mum is the word" policy, I highly doubt we will ever know if it was a basketball player. IF, big IF, it was -- this is a big problem.
I'm confused. If we'll never know if it was a basketball player how is this a big problem for the basketball program?
-
This is the first I have heard about this. I had heard about the first one back in december. And not all scholarship athletes live in humphrey.
-
I'm confused. If we'll never know if it was a basketball player how is this a big problem for the basketball program?
There are different types of problems. 1) It is a fundamental problem if this is happening, whether or not you or I know about it publically 2) It is a bigger public, reputation problem (on top of the initial problem) IF it actually comes out (i.e. player X charged with sexual assault).
-
Now the JSonline is saying it was a male student athlete in the Feb 27th incident.
Do we know which student athletes live in Humphery? Basketball for sure? I don't think golf? (A friend of mine lived in an apartment with Van Sickel) Soccer? Track/cross-country?
-
Do we know which student athletes live in Humphery? Basketball for sure? I don't think golf? (A friend of mine lived in an apartment with Van Sickel) Soccer? Track/cross-country?
Imma, please leave the investigation to the authorities.
-
Imma, please leave the investigation to the authorities.
I really don't want to get in an argument, but why is conjecture as to the POSSIBILITY that a basketball player was involved immediately shot down? Personally, I dislike that the previous public rumors about who the first accusations were against were not talked about. I'd like to know that information and I'm mature enough to understand the difference between rumor and fact (as I am sure most on this board are as well).
I would like to assume that we are all adults and would be able value information that is presented as "it is being rumored that...xyz" without running to the roof and reporting it as fact.
-
I'd say there are what? 6 or 8 floors? I believe all of the scholarship student-athletes live there, not just basketball players. I lived there my junior year. All in all, maybe 500?
Not all scholarship athletes are there. I know a lot of the soccer players live in Mashuda when they are freshmen and sophomores. I know when I was a freshman there was a women's volleyball player in Abbotsford. I see track athletes walking into and out of Mashuda a lot. There were some women's soccer players living on my floor in 2040s last year. I'm pretty sure the only teams that are required to live in Humphry for their entire time at Marquette are the men's and women's basketball teams. I do know that other athletes live in there as well, but I'm pretty sure it's not required and I'm pretty sure it's not for all 4 years.
-
I really don't want to get in an argument, but why is conjecture as to the POSSIBILITY that a basketball player was involved immediately shot down? Personally, I dislike that the previous public rumors about who the first accusations were against were not talked about. I'd like to know that information and I'm mature enough to understand the difference between rumor and fact (as I am sure most on this board are as well).
I would like to assume that we are all adults and would be able value information that is presented as "it is being rumored that...xyz" without running to the roof and reporting it as fact.
Clearly you are new here.
-
Clearly you are new here.
I get that that is kind of/sort of a joke, but it is a legit concern. I don't like the concept of information being prescreened before I have a chance to formulate my own opinions. If some people want to make ill-advised, inappropriate conclusions based on half-truths, well then a proper screeing of the information that gets to them isn't going to fundamentally fix that problem.
-
I get that that is kind of/sort of a joke, but it is a legit concern. I don't like the concept of information being prescreened before I have a chance to formulate my own opinions. If some people want to make ill-advised, inappropriate conclusions based on half-truths, well then a proper screeing of the information that gets to them isn't going to fundamentally fix that problem.
But at the end of the day, this is a private forum, and they have rules. If you are so desperate for rumor and innuendo, beg and plead for a personal message from folks. Then you can make that judgement for yourself.
-
Now the JSonline is saying it was a male student athlete in the Feb 27th incident.
I'm incredibly fascinated as to how this information keeps getting out.
-
But at the end of the day, this is a private forum, and they have rules. If you are so desperate for rumor and innuendo, beg and plead for a personal message from folks. Then you can make that judgement for yourself.
That came across very condescendingly. Not sure if that was the intent.
-
That came across very condescendingly. Not sure if that was the intent.
My intent was this. MUScoop is a private forum, run by the wonderful SoCal, Rocky, Sprial, and Hilltopper. They have established rules. Posters must adhere by said rules, or consequences will result. Those consequences include but are not limited to the deleting of posts THEY see as unfit for public consumption, timeouts ranging from a few days to a few weeks, and lastly lifetime banning.
Now, if you don't like those rules, skip on down the road.
-
My intent was this. MUScoop is a private forum, run by the wonderful SoCal, Rocky, Sprial, and Hilltopper. They have established rules. Posters must adhere by said rules, or consequences will result. Those consequences include but are not limited to the deleting of posts THEY see as unfit for public consumption, timeouts ranging from a few days to a few weeks, and lastly lifetime banning.
Now, if you don't like those rules, skip on down the road.
I was way off on the condescending accusation. I apologize.
-
I'd say there are what? 6 or 8 floors? I believe all of the scholarship student-athletes live there, not just basketball players. I lived there my junior year. All in all, maybe 500?
Only 19 1br apts and 71 2br apts in the building. If all rooms are occupied at minimum occupancy (1p in 1br, 2p in 2br) its 161 people. All rooms at maximum occupancy (2p in 1br, 4p in 2 br) is only 322. I'd split the difference (not many people in Humphrey...or any university owned apt...have apts at full occupancy) and say maybe between 200 and 250 tops.
On another matter...and this is in no way trying to place blame on the female victims, I find it to be a very disturbing trend that it is taking so long for these to be reported. For the October incident how long it took to go to MPD. For the February incident, that it took so long to report to DPS.
edit: I saw this article from WISN after my initial post. It appears that the accuser in the February case went to DPS the morning of the assault but waited to file a formal complaint until March 31 http://www.wisn.com/news/27526059/detail.html
-
....please leave the investigation to the authorities.
I strongly agree. The very precept of investigations of any sexual crime claim is that it be done in TOTAL confidence, and as privately as possible. It is central to the process. An accuser should never feel inhibited, for a moment, in making a report due to she, or her claims being pushed into public before trial. Likewise, the accused, who is presumed not guilty, is given all privacy protections, until a charge is pursued. It must work this way.
Harming or destroying this process, especially by world wide internet postings has negative effects. Accusers with real claims think twice on making any report--thereby easing it for the crooks. Accusers lacking support on their claims, learn pushing out even a false accusation, into publicity, gives them leverage for civil settlements, but.... false claims make it harder for real claims to be beleived/pursued in real crime cases--so the publicity, in the end hurts real crime pursuit. The accused, regardless of liability, should have complete privacy, until the state makes a charge-- at which time, its public, and 12 peers will decide the facts, not the net.
If one respects the system , and your fellow men/women, respect the need for its privacy.
Think of the sermon given by the priest, in the movie "Doubt", as the internet is a huge feathered pillow, you cant rescind once said.
-
On another matter...and this is in no way trying to place blame on the female victims, I find it to be a very disturbing trend that it is taking so long for these to be reported. For the October incident how long it took to go to MPD. For the February incident, that it took 4 days to report to DPS.
Sexual assault is probably the most psychologically scarring crime to be victimized. The victim has to be ready to undergo the process of repeating their story of what happened over and over and over again.
-
On another matter...and this is in no way trying to place blame on the female victims, I find it to be a very disturbing trend that it is taking so long for these to be reported. For the October incident how long it took to go to MPD. For the February incident, that it took 4 days to report to DPS.
In the October incident, the accuser contacted public safety that same night. She didn't take it to the MPD for 5 months (i.e. when DPS found no evidence of assault).
Most cases of sexual assault go unreported so I wouldn't consider waiting 4 days to be "disturbing." If the accusations are true, it was likely a terrifying ordeal for the young woman.
I don't want to give the impression that I'm indicting anyone or have any insider info. Just trying to give some clarification.
-
In the October incident, the accuser contacted public safety that same night. She didn't take it to the MPD for 5 months (i.e. when DPS found no evidence of assault).
Most cases of sexual assault go unreported so I wouldn't consider waiting 4 days to be "disturbing." If the accusations are true, it was likely a terrifying ordeal for the young woman.
I don't want to give the impression that I'm indicting anyone or have any insider info. Just trying to give some clarification.
I got my dates and months confused (doh!). The victim from the latest incident says the assault took place on Feb 27. She then went to DPS the next day, however didn't lodge a formal complaint with DPS until a month later on March 31.
The victim from the October incident went to MPD on March 22 and MPD then said publicly on March 28th they were investigating the 4 men.
-
I strongly agree. The very precept of investigations of any sexual crime claim is that it be done in TOTAL confidence, and as privately as possible. It is central to the process. An accuser should never feel inhibited, for a moment, in making a report due to she, or her claims being pushed into public before trial. Likewise, the accused, who is presumed not guilty, is given all privacy protections, until a charge is pursued. It must work this way.
Harming or destroying this process, especially by world wide internet postings has negative effects. Accusers with real claims think twice on making any report--thereby easing it for the crooks. Accusers lacking support on their claims, learn pushing out even a false accusation, into publicity, gives them leverage for civil settlements, but.... false claims make it harder for real claims to be beleived/pursued in real crime cases--so the publicity, in the end hurts real crime pursuit. The accused, regardless of liability, should have complete privacy, until the state makes a charge-- at which time, its public, and 12 peers will decide the facts, not the net.
If one respects the system , and your fellow men/women, respect the need for its privacy.
Think of the sermon given by the priest, in the movie "Doubt", as the internet is a huge feathered pillow, you cant rescind once said.
I just don't know where the line is drawn. It is in the newspaper that student-athletes are involved. Are we supposed to just leave it at that and not wonder any further?
-
From WISN:
http://www.wisn.com/video/27525904/detail.html (http://www.wisn.com/video/27525904/detail.html)
"Another Marquette University Athlete Accused Of Sexual Assault"
I just don't know where the line is drawn. It is in the newspaper that student-athletes are involved. Are we supposed to just leave it at that and not wonder any further?
-
[snip]
If one respects the system , and your fellow men/women, respect the need for its privacy.
Despite only including part of your post in my quote, thank for you expressing much more clearly what I was getting at.
I just don't know where the line is drawn. It is in the newspaper that student-athletes are involved. Are we supposed to just leave it at that and not wonder any further?
There's no way we can keep you from wondering and speculating, you're free to have as many speculations as you like in your mind, or have hour long rumor-mongering sessions in person with your friends. However, all I'm asking here is that the discussion here is kept to the public facts.
Allowing our users to speculate and post rumors here regarding criminal investigations would at best be irresponsible, and at worst could result in a libel suit against our users (or a user).
I'm sorry if you still don't understand my reasoning, but that's my stance. Stick to the facts if you want to post about it.
-
I just don't know where the line is drawn. It is in the newspaper that student-athletes are involved. Are we supposed to just leave it at that and not wonder any further?
The press report of the existence of a complaint...should not affect your line boundry. If you cant see it in my earlier post...here is another, relative to the line to draw with the press/internet (which I posted viz the Oct 2010 issue)...this is where the line is ....quite far from any wonderment...it should be only your personal knowledge...to wit:
Quote from: Hamostradamus on April 03, 2011, 09:51:20 PM
WISN hasn't reported on this yet, apparently they were having trouble getting a quote from Derrick Wendler on the "word around campus."
It is bad lazy reporting to run around the MU campus hoping to muckrake some rumors circulating among the students.
I hope no student would validate that, or even talk to WISN reporters, except to share what they have direct personal knowledge of,....as repeating a hearsay rumor, that is not true, is libel.
Has the word around campus ever been wrong? DUH--yes!!
Trust your word and personal knowledge--but always be skeptical of that of others. Thanks.
-
MUScoop is a private forum, run by the wonderful SoCal, Rocky, Sprial, and Hilltopper.
You're being a little over the top again, reinkz.
Although I do hope to run into Rocky at the Cathedral Basilica of the Immaculate Conception on Sunday and/or Monday.
I also hate WISN's subtitle of "Second Alleged Incident In Matter Of Weeks". Granted, one is more than I would hope to hear about, but this is the second incident to have been alleged in the past few weeks.... I fear the subtitle would infer to many readers that two incidents are alleged to have occurred in just the past few weeks. That is an UNHOLY LIE. We've got alleged October and February incidents, (un-)respectively.
-
Although I do hope to run into Rocky at the Cathedral Basilica of the Immaculate Conception on Sunday and/or Monday.
Alas, my despite all my wonderfulishness, I'm not Catholic. Unless you're saying they turned it into a sports bar.
-
I think that we should just wait, all of this will be clear in a month. Until then I guess we should all just shut up and realize that there probably will be 1 or more players punished for whatever happened if that is what the D.A finds. At the end of the day they deserve the punishment
-
Alas, my despite all my wonderfulishness, I'm not Catholic. Unless you're saying they turned it into a sports bar.
We'll, we can chat sports while others offer one another a sign of peace... and the price on wine at this spot is a real bargain.
Or else stop on out to the Gold Crown Field House in nasty Lakewood. I'll be out there for an AAU tourney (Double Pump - horrible name) and plan to vocally cheer against Indiana Elite (except for Nader).
BTW... Marquette student athlete code of conduct.. or something similar.. what are the rules? I know of schools where.. if someone is arrested and charged with certain infractions (including any sexual assault, etc), there is an automatic suspension.. it can be lifted, on a case by case basis, but the suspension is automatic. I haven't read Marquette's 'rules' on anything for a number of years... and never really ever read them myself.. just was lectured on them and had them read to me.
-
Skimming through some public safety reports, I came across this incident from March 28th in Straz Tower:
http://marquettetribune.org/2011/03/31/news/dps-reports/dps-328-329/
-
That's cool Go MU but honestly most of these people care more if this is basketball players due to the nature of this site. College, alcohol, and girls in short skirts can often lead to issues. Read that report and you'll see the girl said she was assaulted for 2-3 hours...
-
you'll see the girl said she was assaulted for 2-3 hours...
I beleive that was a window of time, not all inclusive.
And for the old timers, Straz Tower is the former East hall, correct?
-
The wording of that report is pretty awful either way. I don't get how a girl could be assaulted again and again over that time frame...Just weird wording.
-
Skimming through some public safety reports, I came across this incident from March 28th in Straz Tower:
http://marquettetribune.org/2011/03/31/news/dps-reports/dps-328-329/
here is the one that is being referred to originally i think
March 31: At 1:00 p.m., a student reported being sexually assaulted on Sunday, Feb. 27 between 12:00 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. by an acquaintance in Humphrey Hall. MPD was contacted.
-
Pretty unrelated, but this is an incredibly well done article on the BYU honor code:
http://deadspin.com/#!5791461/the-truth-about-race-religion-and-the-honor-code-at-byu
-
here is the one that is being referred to originally i think
even just an hour of that...it is weird to see that listed in the report
-
MPD was contacted? Does this mean that they are investigating or that they have investigated and it didn't go anywhere?
-
And for the old timers, Straz Tower is the former East hall, correct?
Straz Tower = East Hall = the Y
-
not sure if this is related to this thread, but just in case
http://www.wisn.com/r/28014558/detail.html (http://www.wisn.com/r/28014558/detail.html)
-
No charges expected. This is exactly why they waited until students were gone from campus - including the alledged victim.
And announcing it on a Friday before the start of a three-day weekend is a good way to minimize its coverage.
-
No charges expected. This is exactly why they waited until students were gone from campus - including the alledged victim.
And announcing it on a Friday before the start of a three-day weekend is a good way to minimize its coverage.
Plus it's only WISN reporting on this whole non-story. Does anybody watch channel 12 news in Milwaukee?
-
Plus it's only WISN reporting on this whole non-story. Does anybody watch channel 12 news in Milwaukee?
latest news I could find about ratings: http://www.onmilwaukee.com/movies/articles/feb11demos.html
Looking at the flagship 10 p.m. half-hour, among viewers 25-54, Channel 4 was in first with a 4.53 rating -- up 19 percent from the previous February. Channel 6 was a close second with a 4.31, up a whopping 31 percent from the previous February.
Channel 12 was third with a 3.82, up 6 percent from the previous February and Channel 58 had a 2.55, up 42 percent from February 2010.
--
I remember some prior news articles about this, though I can't find them, I remember reading that WISN was first, WTMJ second CBS 3rd and Fox6 4th.
things shift but its pretty tight numbers for local news
-
No charges expected. This is exactly why they waited until students were gone from campus - including the alledged victim.
And announcing it on a Friday before the start of a three-day weekend is a good way to minimize its coverage.
That's exactly correct.
It's a very, very tough situation for an elected prosecutor. On the one hand, you never want to give off an appearance that you're going easy on what's perceived as a privileged class (in this case, college athletes).
On the other, no prosecutor is eager to take on a losing case, especially a high-profile case against, presumably, minority defendants in a city that's 40 percwnt African-American.
So unless you've got a lockdown case - which has never seemed to be the case here - best give an appearance of a serious, thorough investigation (whether or not it's necessary), then drop it quietly when no one is paying much attention and hope it goes away.
-
I remember some prior news articles about this, though I can't find them, I remember reading that WISN was first, WTMJ second CBS 3rd and Fox6 4th.
things shift but its pretty tight numbers for local news
Exactly right. When I worked at WISN, we were usually neck-and-neck with Channel 4, usually less than a quarter-point behind them. What still amazes me is that Channel 4 is almost always at the top of the ratings despite the weakest network programming. It's a testament to how respected their news programs are going all the way back to the 1980s, maybe even further.
The only reason WISN is all over the Marquette stuff is because it's easy news. Most of their interns come from Marquette and the station is located practically on campus (19th & Wells). It's an easy 30-45 second fill for them, and just as easy to walk outside and talk to the "man on the street" if you want to do a 90 second package. Much more difficult for Channels 4, 58, or (especially) 6 to do that, considering their proximity to campus.
-
Exactly right. When I worked at WISN, we were usually neck-and-neck with Channel 4, usually less than a quarter-point behind them. What still amazes me is that Channel 4 is almost always at the top of the ratings despite the weakest network programming. It's a testament to how respected their news programs are going all the way back to the 1980s, maybe even further.
The only reason WISN is all over the Marquette stuff is because it's easy news. Most of their interns come from Marquette and the station is located practically on campus (19th & Wells). It's an easy 30-45 second fill for them, and just as easy to walk outside and talk to the "man on the street" if you want to do a 90 second package. Much more difficult for Channels 4, 58, or (especially) 6 to do that, considering their proximity to campus.
Right and I think Fox 6 gets numbers because of the 9pm news, instead of a network show. Fox6 WISN and TMJ all seem to have a few really solid anchors/reporters and they've had some for many years
CBS seems to remain the bastard redheaded stepchild of Milwaukee news.
-
Right and I think Fox 6 gets numbers because of the 9pm news, instead of a network show. Fox6 WISN and TMJ all seem to have a few really solid anchors/reporters and they've had some for many years
CBS seems to remain the bastard redheaded stepchild of Milwaukee news.
CBS got screwed out of any influence in the Milwaukee by the NFL way back when. As soon as Fox won the NFC broadcast rights back in the early 1994, it changed everything here. At the time, Fox was on Channel 24 and their biggest draws were The Simpsons and Married With Children. For ratings, they were really just on par with Channel 18 competition wise, despite being in the same building.
But suddenly, Fox wanted a stronger signal. They anted up and bought out Channel 6 to get them on the VHF side of the dial (back when that mattered). I remember CBS was looking at other stations, but at the last minute settled on WDJT. For awhile, there was no true CBS channel in Milwaukee. They only had the broadcasting power to reach Milwaukee and the near suburbs (I grew up in Hartland, we didn't get the new CBS station) and didn't have a news department. The local cable providers also didn't have 58 at first, they had pretty much just been an independent that broadcast to West Allis, Tosa, and parts of western Milwaukee.
In 1996, they moved to their current location on 60th Street, just south of I-94 and put together a news department. At that point they really morphed back into being a true network affiliate, but in terms of local news, have never caught up with the big boys they used to compete with when CBS was affiliated with WITI.
-
So most of you are still refusing to even think that all of the athletes are innocent? It is just a cover up? I originally would've said the opposite, but over the duration of this investigation I am unsure what to think.
-
Who said it was a cover up? What Pakuni said is since prosecuters could likely not prove they were guilty, they aren't going to press charges. That's not a cover up...it's a lack of evidence and knowledge about specific details.
-
I was just remembering when this stuff first came out and how many people assumed the athletes were guilty...that's all I was trying to say. I was wondering if people still think this actually occurred and nothing came from it only due to lack of evidence.
-
No one here has any idea what happened.
-
No one here has any idea what happened.
+1
If the cops don't have enough evidence to even attempt prosecution then that says it all, IMO.
-
No one here has any idea what happened.
+2.
But that won't stop anyone from claiming otherwise.
-
We know the school found the players in violation of the sexual harrassment policy. The players were in the wrong but to what extent. The DA obviously does not feel there is enough evidence to bring charges. I hope to heck that means there was no assault and not just that it couldn't be proven.
-
Per WTMJ's Dan O'Donnell's twitter:
@DanODonnellWTMJ:Breaking news--Milwaukee DA will not charge any @muathletics student-athlete in connection with alleged sex assault
-
Per WTMJ's Dan O'Donnell's twitter:
@DanODonnellWTMJ:Breaking news--Milwaukee DA will not charge any @muathletics student-athlete in connection with alleged sex assault
I would have been shocked if they did.
-
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/122678858.html
No sex charges, but DA's office rebukes Marquette
-
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/122678858.html
No sex charges, but DA's office rebukes Marquette
You quoted the headline reference to a rebuke.
The article body, however, outlines MUs response/reporting procedures have been improved as a result of it consulting with police, and DA.
This is a very positive result for the school, victims, and the accused, both currently, and in the future.
This ended well, on multiple levels.
-
You quoted the headline reference to a rebuke.
The article body, however, outlines MUs response/reporting procedures have been improved as a result of it consulting with police, and DA.
This is a very positive result for the school, victims, and the accused, both currently, and in the future.
This ended well, on multiple levels.
It's a nonsensical "rebuke," at that.
At any point during this process the players were free to discuss their situation with one another, their coach, school officials, an attorney or anyone else of their choosing. If charged, a judge could as a condition of bond restrict them from discussing the case among themselves or certain others, but until that point, there's nothing inappropriate or unethical about it.
The school and/or public safety could have advised (not required) them not to talk about it with anyone, but at that point it seems the players weren't even aware of a complaint/investigation. The rebuke essentially says the players shouldn't have been allowed to discuss with one another or their coach an investigation of which they were unaware.
Hmmm.
-
It's a nonsensical "rebuke," at that.
At any point during this process the players were free to discuss their situation with one another, their coach, school officials, an attorney or anyone else of their choosing. If charged, a judge could as a condition of bond restrict them from discussing the case among themselves or certain others, but until that point, there's nothing inappropriate or unethical about it.
The school and/or public safety could have advised (not required) them not to talk about it with anyone, but at that point it seems the players weren't even aware of a complaint/investigation. The rebuke essentially says the players shouldn't have been allowed to discuss with one another or their coach an investigation of which they were unaware.
Hmmm.
I agree, the players can talk to whomever they want relating to the incident. But Chishom was not talking about any the players. He was talking about Marquette. The University should have reported the alledge assault to the police so MPD could begin their investigation. Marquette evidently agreed with Chisholm because they changes their procedures to comply with the "rebuke".
-
I agree, the players can talk to whomever they want relating to the incident. But Chishom was not talking about any the players. He was talking about Marquette. The University should have reported the alledge assault to the police so MPD could begin their investigation. Marquette evidently agreed with Chisholm because they changes their procedures to comply with the "rebuke".
Having read the full statement (http://media.jsonline.com/documents/Chisholm_Marquette_letter.pdf), not just what was highlighted by the JS, you're partially correct. He does say MU should have reported the incident to police, regardless of the accuser's wishes. But he also was critical, as the JS reported, that the students discussed the incident among themselves and the coach.
Notably, one of the accused athletes said that the athletes and coaching staff met and discussed an alleged October incident before any law enforcement officer was able to interview the suspects, Chisholm said in a statement released Thursday. One of the athletes texted the accuser during that meeting, asking whether she had reported any incident to Marquette's public safety officials.
"There is no evidence that the coaching staff intended to interfere with the investigation," Chisholm said. "It highlights, however, that when proper procedure is not followed, it prevents an untainted interview with and provides an opportunity for the individuals allegedly involved as suspects or witnesses to compare recollections regarding the circumstances of the alleged conduct."
What really bothers me about the statement, though, is that it never actually addresses the evidence or lack thereof other than to say "unfortunately" there wasn't evidence to support a prosecution. What's unfortunate about that?
I understand that it's pretty much SOP for a prosecutor not to say anything that might disparage an accuser, especially in a sex case, but to say it's "unfortunate" there's no evidence of a crime seems to carry that a bit far.
-
[What really bothers me about the statement, though, is that it never actually addresses the evidence or lack thereof other than to say "unfortunately" there wasn't evidence to support a prosecution. What's unfortunate about that?
I understand that it's pretty much SOP for a prosecutor not to say anything that might disparage an accuser, especially in a sex case, but to say it's "unfortunate" there's no evidence of a crime seems to carry that a bit far.
[/quote]
I find that statement "unfortunate" as well. It is as if it was a foregone conclusion that the evidence would have been there but for the actions of Marquette and the accued. What if an assualt never occurred?
-
So most of you are still refusing to even think that all of the athletes are innocent? It is just a cover up? I originally would've said the opposite, but over the duration of this investigation I am unsure what to think.
You pretty strongly wrote two months ago that this could be very damaging to the future prospects of the program and that you were unnerved about what was going on and scared of what would happen. Paraphrasing, of course.
What changed your mind?
-
He does say MU should have reported the incident to police, regardless of the accuser's wishes.
I don't quite get where MU would be obligated to report an alleged crime against an alleged victim's wishes. It seems to me that the decision should ultimately rest with the allged victim.
-
What really bothers me about the statement, though, is that it never actually addresses the evidence or lack thereof other than to say "unfortunately" there wasn't evidence to support a prosecution. What's unfortunate about that?
I understand that it's pretty much SOP for a prosecutor not to say anything that might disparage an accuser, especially in a sex case, but to say it's "unfortunate" there's no evidence of a crime seems to carry that a bit far.
There's no evidence either way apparently, because if there was evidence to support nothing having happened, then the statement with this tone wouldn't even be issued. I can see a DA being forced to admit that he has nothing useful either way calling that "unfortunate."
-
I agree that the "unfortunately" quote from the paper is very biased and unprofessional from the DA. "Unfortunately, there wasn't enough evidence for me to convict these guys and score a big case."
Send the DA an email and let him know you didn't like his tone. da.milwaukee@da.wi.gov
Also, I always thought (although I had no inside knowledge) that MPD and PS had a good working relationship. Does MPD really want to respond to all the stuff that goes on at Marquette? They don't have the budget for it. It seemed like they were plenty happy just getting referrals for tickets with fake IDs and coming in after something major happened. PS acts as a filter for MPD, and it saves MPD a lot of money. Demonizing Marquette for these practices seems a bit much. As long as students are always given the option to contact MPD (which was always the case the couple of times if had a run in with PS), I think it sounds like the system was working just fine.
-
I don't quite get where MU would be obligated to report an alleged crime against an alleged victim's wishes. It seems to me that the decision should ultimately rest with the allged victim.
If the victim has taken the step to contact Public Safety, PS has a reponsibility to move it up the chain to MPD.
-
There's no evidence either way apparently, because if there was evidence to support nothing having happened, then the statement with this tone wouldn't even be issued. I can see a DA being forced to admit that he has nothing useful either way calling that "unfortunate."
First, let's work off the almost certainly accurate presumption that this was a thought-out, well-prepared statement in which the words were chosen carefully.
That being the case, had Chisholm meant what you're suggesting and he were lamenting that he had nothing "either way" he probably would have said that, or words to the effect of "unfortunately, the available evidence offers no clear picture of what occurred."
That's not what he chose to say, however. What he intentionally chose to express was disappointment that he could find no evidence with which to prosecute. I've been around prosecutors long enough to know that that's what they love to do - prosecute cases. They'll work much harder to find a reason to file charge than they will seeking reasons not to. So I understand the mindset. Still, they have an ethical obligation not to prosecute when the evidence doesn't allow it. Chisholm seems to have done that here, and that's probably to his credit. But what's not to his credit is his public grumbling over it.
Then again, maybe I'm reading way too much into his choice of words.
-
Anyone else find it interesting that the player acutal had the alleged victim's cell number, to where he could text her and ask if she had reported the incident to Public Safety? Clearly the parties involved were previously acquainted....and the fact the player felt comfortable enough texting the girl to ask if she told Public Safety - tells me there was a pre-existing relationship of some variety.
Regardless, unfortunate that the guys even got themselves in this position...but there are some pretty crazy girls out there too...so fault/guilt can very likely lie on both sides of this type of equation/case.
-
If the victim has taken the step to contact Public Safety, PS has a reponsibility to move it up the chain to MPD.
Not exactly.
The law states Public Safety has a responsibility to notify MPD if it has "reasonable grounds to believe that a crime is being committed or has been committed." It appears DPS did not believe a crime has been committed.
That said, it's probably better if they err on the side of caution and report it. And it seems the new policy requires just that which, IMO, is a good thing. Still, there's no legal obligation they do so under every circumstance.
-
If the victim has taken the step to contact Public Safety, PS has a reponsibility to move it up the chain to MPD.
On what basis? To what chain are you speaking of? DPS doesn't report to MPD. Where is the line drawn? Does DPS have the responsibility to report every reported crime to MPD? If a bar fight happens between two students at 16th and Wells (which it does every weekend) does DPS have some responsibility to contact MPD even if neither party wants them involved?
-
The law states Public Safety has a responsibility to notify MPD if it has "reasonable grounds to believe that a crime is being committed or has been committed."
What law is this?
-
Not exactly.
The law states Public Safety has a responsibility to notify MPD if it has "reasonable grounds to believe that a crime is being committed or has been committed." It appears DPS did not believe a crime has been committed.
That said, it's probably better if they err on the side of caution and report it. And it seems the new policy requires just that which, IMO, is a good thing. Still, there's no legal obligation they do so under every circumstance.
I didn't say they had a *legal* obligation to do so.
On what basis? To what chain are you speaking of? DPS doesn't report to MPD. Where is the line drawn? Does DPS have the responsibility to report every reported crime to MPD? If a bar fight happens between two students at 16th and Wells (which it does every weekend) does DPS have some responsibility to contact MPD even if neither party wants them involved?
"Up the chain" was a poor use of words on my part. I think any potential serious crime that involves and investigation of some sort should be referred to MPD. All Public Safety is is a private security force - they shouldn't be investigating potential felonies.
-
I didn't say they had a *legal* obligation to do so.
I thought I read your post to say that "the law states...." I must have been mistaken?
Regardless, I agree that DPS should turn over its more significant investigations to MPD, and I assume they typically do. I still struggle with whether they have an obligation (or even the right) to contact MPD against a victim's wishes. Doesn't the victim have some rights to privacy? Isn't it possible that some victims would prefer that things be handled within the University so that it doesn't impact him/her or the alleged actor down the road?
I also think that students have a trust in DPS that they don't always have with MPD. If students know that DPS is going to run to MPD regardless of their wishes, there is a real possibility that the choice would be to make no report at all.
-
What law is this?
The state law that governs private security operations, such as Marquette Public Safety.
See state code Chapter 940.34(2)(b)
http://law.justia.com/codes/wisconsin/2010/940/940.34.html
-
The state law that governs private security operations, such as Marquette Public Safety.
See state code Chapter 940.34(2)(b)
http://law.justia.com/codes/wisconsin/2010/940/940.34.html
Interesting. Although it would not work from a practical standpoint, I think you're right if you look at it view it by the book.
If DPS reported every crime that was reported to them to MPD, MPD would need another 10 full time officers assigned to the MU area.
-
Anyone else find it interesting that the player acutal had the alleged victim's cell number, to where he could text her and ask if she had reported the incident to Public Safety? Clearly the parties involved were previously acquainted....and the fact the player felt comfortable enough texting the girl to ask if she told Public Safety - tells me there was a pre-existing relationship of some variety.
Regardless, unfortunate that the guys even got themselves in this position...but there are some pretty crazy girls out there too...so fault/guilt can very likely lie on both sides of this type of equation/case.
To be fair, most sexual assaults happen between parties that know each other well.
-
Interesting. Although it would not work from a practical standpoint, I think you're right if you look at it view it by the book.
If DPS reported every crime that was reported to them to MPD, MPD would need another 10 full time officers assigned to the MU area.
I could very well be wrong but in this type of case, I believe it's up to the accuser as to whether or not she would like to have the police contacted.
-
Regardless, I agree that DPS should turn over its more significant investigations to MPD, and I assume they typically do. I still struggle with whether they have an obligation (or even the right) to contact MPD against a victim's wishes. Doesn't the victim have some rights to privacy? Isn't it possible that some victims would prefer that things be handled within the University so that it doesn't impact him/her or the alleged actor down the road?
Well, I think that the victim gives away some of that right when they go to DPS in the first place. Also, there is an obligation beyond the victim. Crimes like these are not just crimes against one victim, but crimes against the State of Wisconsin.
I think it is a delicate balance, but I think they can handle that. I think every party learned from this incident and will work better in the future.
-
I still struggle with whether they have an obligation (or even the right) to contact MPD against a victim's wishes. Doesn't the victim have some rights to privacy? Isn't it possible that some victims would prefer that things be handled within the University so that it doesn't impact him/her or the alleged actor down the road?
A few times I've seen cases that could have been a domestic abuse or sexual assault, but we had no evidence and no accusation. If the victim doesn't want to report it, that's their choice. We'll call the cops or an ambulance if they want, they can also refuse services and unless it's a minor or invalid where we feel their interests aren't being addressed by the guardians, we most likely won't call the cops unless the boss sees an imminent need (such as clear and present danger). I imagine DPS is in a similar situation. All they can really do is make the avenue of going to the police available. As long as they did that, and all indications are that they did, I don't really see what more they could have done.
-
A few times I've seen cases that could have been a domestic abuse or sexual assault, but we had no evidence and no accusation. If the victim doesn't want to report it, that's their choice. We'll call the cops or an ambulance if they want, they can also refuse services and unless it's a minor or invalid where we feel their interests aren't being addressed by the guardians, we most likely won't call the cops unless the boss sees an imminent need (such as clear and present danger). I imagine DPS is in a similar situation. All they can really do is make the avenue of going to the police available. As long as they did that, and all indications are that they did, I don't really see what more they could have done.
Well said, Brew. I think DPS is getting a bit too much criticism on how they handled this.