MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: timinatorx3 on October 27, 2011, 10:00:39 PM
-
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-marquette-sex-cases-20111028,0,4057558.story
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-marquette-sex-cases-20111028,0,4057558.story)
Sorry if this is a repost.
-
Eek, no bueno.
-
Let sleeping dogs lie.
The isolation she felt on campus after the alleged attack peaked after the basketball team received an invitation to the NCAA tournament. Seemingly everywhere she went on campus, students were wearing Golden Eagles T-shirts. Her residence hall floor was decorated with blue-and-gold streamers. When students gathered to watch the games, she stayed alone in her dorm room.
This is one of the most idiotic lines I have ever read in an article ever...That is our mascot, it is on almost all of the school's clothing, and those are our school colors...What an idiotic line. In addition they never say the players shoved the "big girl shots" down their throats...this journalism is very slanted. I know that something happened, but I believe that the investigation showed that their was nothing to confirm these allegations.
-
Ah, the hatchet piece to follow up on the hatchet piece... complete with lawyer quotes!
-
My favorite part is the throwaway line about one girl's recollection possibly being clouded by alcohol. What they neglect to say is she got drunk and started giving lapdances to the players.
-
The details it gives about the girls and their conduct sheds alot of light on how such a situation could occur.
-
One of the woman's friends told police she became uncomfortable as the night wore on. The friend said an athlete poured alcohol into cups for the women and called them "big girl shots."
She became uncomfortable AS THE NIGHT WORE ON!!!! Why didn't you leave then? Did the players force her to get drunk too?
I'm not saying the players are entirely without blame but come on.
-
This is why our players get called thugs, regardless of the graduation rate stats.
-
Who cares...they are gone and we are moving forward.
-
Funny how she went to the police two days after Marquette beat Syracuse to advance to the Sweet 16 when the incident occurred 5 months prior.
I'm obviosuly biased but it sounds like she had too much to drink, made a drunken mistake like most college kids, and waited until an opportune moment to get attention.
-
The biggest point that stood out to me was that her closest friends bailed on her. True friends would stand by someone who had been through a tramatic experience like she claims to have gone through. IMO, that would far outweigh concerns over "social status." My initial impression is that those closest to her think she's full of it. The fact that she remains at MU despite feeling "alone" and "isolated" also reeks of someone who craves attention.
-
That's a lot of bashing the alleged victim, and it reflects poorly on the whole MU community.
Both sides probably deserve some of the blame. It's an awful, ugly situation, and hopefully it can be prevented in the future.
-
The biggest point that stood out to me was that her closest friends bailed on her. True friends would stand by someone who had been through a tramatic experience like she claims to have gone through. IMO, that would far outweigh concerns over "social status." My initial impression is that those closest to her think she's full of it. The fact that she remains at MU despite feeling "alone" and "isolated" also reeks of someone who craves attention.
Keep in mind that this happened 2 months into her freshman year. A lot of people make "best friends" right away that don't last long. Factor in all of this, and it's not far-fetched to think that some would rather cut and run than stand by the girl.
-
WOW. The story is the main story on the front of the tribune.
-
(http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj229/marquettetitan34/photo.jpg)
-
She told police that athletes were "dancing inappropriately"
I think I'd be more shocked if there wasn't inappropriate dancing at a college party.
-
Let sleeping dogs lie.
The isolation she felt on campus after the alleged attack peaked after the basketball team received an invitation to the NCAA tournament. Seemingly everywhere she went on campus, students were wearing Golden Eagles T-shirts. Her residence hall floor was decorated with blue-and-gold streamers. When students gathered to watch the games, she stayed alone in her dorm room.
This is one of the most idiotic lines I have ever read in an article ever...That is our mascot, it is on almost all of the school's clothing, and those are our school colors...What an idiotic line.
They are just stating how "she felt." The Tribune isn't saying it was inappropriate to decorate the residence hall.
Who cares...they are gone and we are moving forward.
Uhhh...not all of them. It even states that in the article.
That's a lot of bashing the alleged victim, and it reflects poorly on the whole MU community.
Both sides probably deserve some of the blame. It's an awful, ugly situation, and hopefully it can be prevented in the future.
Amen. Gotta love the groundless speculation.
-
College rape accusations are about as reliable as a junkie on payday. The Tribune has embarrassed itself with this one. This writer is trying to make a name for himself with a non story.
Somebody's bucking for a promotion...probably that pederast Hanrahan.
-
They are all idiots (the girl and the players) for putting themselves in a situation that would lead to something like this.
-
They are just stating how "she felt." The Tribune isn't saying it was inappropriate to decorate the residence hall.
Uhhh...not all of them. It even states that in the article.
Amen. Gotta love the groundless speculation.
My main problem lies with the way that stories are written nowadays. Obviously, the idea is to sell as many newspapers (people still buy them for some reason) as possible. What is most likely to sell papers? "Journalism" like this is what sells papers. It gets people all riled up when they can identify with a poor helpless drunk girl (because a lot of people have daughters or know daughters who attend college), and her plight against the faceless university.
Words matter. Using words like "attack" (invokes thoughts of violence), "outcast among some of her closest friends" (who drew88 speculates she could not possess, having only been at school some two months). These guys were never going to get a fair shake in this article.
While I do not condone the horrifying behavior of the student athletes, I think that the behavior of the victim was also questionable. I know it is extremely easy to look back at a situation and say that you were uncomfortable because you are now thinking clearly. How many people get in a car and drive home when they are a little too drunk, and realize how stupid that decision was the next day? What I am getting at is that the victim doesn't seem to accept any of the blame herself (or at least that is the way the Trib seems to report it). She drank the "big girl shots". She was at a private party (I know the reasons people go to private parties... to hook up... at least that is why I went). She went into a room with three of the guys. The blame should be shared by all who made the poor decisions... not just by the student athletes who are being demonized while the victim is being martyred.
To put it plainly, I am pleased that she went to police... I wish she'd gone earlier, in fact. And I am very happy with the changes to the Marquette policies. I just think that this article is so obviously one sided that it should be taken for what it is. One sided.
I can't wait for the response to this... I feel like I just tossed a hunk of meat to a pack of starving wolverines.
-
The biggest point that stood out to me was that her closest friends bailed on her. True friends would stand by someone who had been through a traumatic experience like she claims to have gone through. IMO, that would far outweigh concerns over "social status." My initial impression is that those closest to her think she's full of it.
Freaking Bingo. Friends that bolt because they value their basketball team and "social status" over, you know, an assault committed upon a friend? No freaking way. I don't believe that for a second.
-
I actually don't have a problem with what you said. What I don't like is when people say "Well, I bet *this* is what happened..." and then give their little theory about what occured (mostly) in an attempt to vindicate the players.
-
Any publicity is good publicity....right??
-
I can't wait for the response to this... I feel like I just tossed a hunk of meat to a pack of starving wolverines.
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSlnsQF42EG88P3oJY8NfQYRGVrJrdbRm816ZvKyPusa3XiX5crYA)
-
They are just stating how "she felt." The Tribune isn't saying it was inappropriate to decorate the residence hall.
I felt the reference to the school rallying behind the basketball team was included to further the inference that the basketball program "runs" (for lack of a better term) the university.
-
I am a litttle confused. I think this article is on a different women, than the one that was in the Tribune in spring. I thought the Spring article one was the February escapade and that women left the school. This one seems to be on one of the two women involved in the October escapade and in that case both are still at MU. Has the Tribune actually written on two different women or am I off base on this?
-
I felt the reference to the school rallying behind the basketball team was included to further the inference that the basketball program "runs" (for lack of a better term) the university.
Oh I didn't read it that way at all. I don't think people would find it over-the-top for a school to celebrate its athletic achievements. I just think they were painting a picture of why she felt isolated.
-
Oh I didn't read it that way at all. I don't think people would find it over-the-top for a school to celebrate its athletic achievements. I just think they were painting a picture of why she felt isolated.
She was as an outcast while the rest of the school celebrated the students who were responsible for her isolation. That was my interpretation - could be overthinking it and giving the writers too much credit though.
-
I am a litttle confused. I think this article is on a different women, than the one that was in the Tribune in spring. I thought the Spring article one was the February escapade and that women left the school. This one seems to be on one of the two women involved in the October escapade and in that case both are still at MU. Has the Tribune actually written on two different women or am I off base on this?
If I recall correctly, the Halloween incident referenced in today's article was somewhat brushed aside in the end on this board by inferences it was more of inappropriate comments and some dirty dancing. The detailed account in today's story is much more than that, and does not reflect well at all. Add the rape allegation in Feb, and I certainly understand why the current female students I have contact with say they would never go to Humphrey based on the reputation/stories that are out there. Whether every aspect of the allegations are true or not (I certainly understand there is room for a lot of gray and blurred lines when you throw in alcohol and the fact that these guys are quite used to girls throwing themselves at them voluntarily), I would certainly hope these guys have learned a lesson. It is embarrassing to see MU portrayed in this light.
-
I love Marquette and I bleed Blue and Gold but jeez, men having been taking advantage of women from my earliest days. Having worked my whole life with leading the 18-25 age group, I can attest the pain that these women (and sometimes men) endure. There is no gain for the victim to make this up ... reporting it is unusual and courageous.
I just hope that they all heal soon and continue to recover.
-
College rape accusations are about as reliable as a junkie on payday.
Oh come on.
A "junkie on a payday" would theoretically do anything for $ and/or their next high, right? They would lie, cheat, steal to gain what they want.
What does this girl have to gain by making up a rape accusation?
I won't pretend to know what happened, but to write it off like she made it all up to gain something is cold. Really cold, old man.
-
I'm having an awfully hard time squaring some of the attitudes/comments in this thread with some of the attitudes/comments exhibited in a thread about an alleged assault at Notre Dame (http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=22375.0).
-
What does this girl have to gain by making up a rape accusation?
First of all, let's examine the rape accusation. Accordinging to the accuser, she was at one point during a party trapped in a bedroom and forced to perform oral sex on one of the athletes. After leaving the room in which she was raped, she had a dance and a couple more drinks with another athlete and subsequently went into another bedroom with three other athletes.
Can't one reasonably argue that it's unlikely that a rape victim's next moves at a party would be drinks, dancing and another trip to the bedroom with her tormentor's friends? What does she gain by pointing the finger of blame at someone other than herself? Exemption from responsibility for her actions and the status (almost martyrdom) that victimhood provides. The fact that she stayed at MU (even though she claims her friends abandoned her and she was totally isolated) indcates to me she likes her status of celebrity/victim.
-
Oh come on.
A "junkie on a payday" would theoretically do anything for $ and/or their next high, right? They would lie, cheat, steal to gain what they want.
What does this girl have to gain by making up a rape accusation?
I won't pretend to know what happened, but to write it off like she made it all up to gain something is cold. Really cold, old man.
I, like everyone else here, have no idea where the truth lies in this whole mess. I'd suspect (at the risk of incurring the Wrath of Sultan) that both sides largely believe their account of what happened and the truth sits somewhere in between. Unfortunately, the circumstances exist where only one side of the story can be publicized. Too bad, but that's the way it goes.
All that said, it's naive to suggest the accuser here has nothing to gain. It's especially naive given that she's hired Bob Bazier to represent her. I know Bob personally and professionally, and he's one of the best personal injury lawyers in the Chicago area. You don't hire a guy like him to speak on your behalf to a newspaper. You hire him because you're going to sue the cr*p out of somebody.
None of that means she's lying. But it's foolish to pretend that she's talking now out of some noble quest for justice and to stand up for others. She, in fact, has a lot to gain.
-
I'm certainly not an expert on the matter, buy my guess is that the number of women who make up rape allegations to garner "martyrdom" status make up about 1% of all rape allegations. And this pales in comparison to the number of rapes that aren't reported.
So no, I don't think you can reasonably argue that. Its sounds mostly that you are making sh*t up to exonerate the players.
-
I wrote all the journalist that put together this article. Do I feel bad for the young lady? Yes! Should she have gone about things differently? Yes! Should the university gone about things differently? Yes! Should some athletes be held accountable for their actions? Yes!
I just feel this article stretches comments, and opinions into what they would consider facts. The main issue that I have with the article is the fact that the Tribune seems to have little to go on, and whatever they don't know they make assumptions. To imply that Marquette University protects its athletes, but not the thousands of students that attend the university is a very reckless comment. This is one young ladies story, and others involved interpreted the situation differently. Was there wrongdoing? It sounds like there was. To what extent? Who knows. There is no way anyone really knows how this all occurred.
Since this article can't name specific athletes who may have been involved, every athlete at the Marquette is technically targeted in this article. They mention the basketball team's success, which somewhat implicates the fact that it was basketball players involved. The Universities hands are tied because there was no law broken (no arrest) therefore the university has to follow privacy laws, and can't really explain themselves effectively.
In other words, what was gained by writing this article? A woman's voice, and her recollection of the night get to be on the headlines of a major newspaper. As for Marquette, they are dragged through the coals. They can't really say anything because of laws that protect everyone involved, and so the journalist determine that Marquette is guilty because they are not speaking on the issue.
The girl whose life has been turned upside down returns to the university where this all occurred. She believes that the students don't like her, and that the administration had looked the other way in favor of the athletes, but she feels the need to return. What?
I feel bad for anyone that has been harmed or hurt by this incident. The plain and simple fact is, I don't know what really happened. What I do know for sure is that this young lady has had her voice heard, changes have been made, and she is getting help and a great deal of attention. As for Marquette University, as a whole, they have really been the target of unsubstantiated comments, and the inability to respond to accusations because of the way the law is written. This has been a loss-loss for all parties involved, with Marquette University getting the short end of the stick in my opinion.
I hope this young lady can go on with her schooling, and her life, without this incident emotionally hurting her for the remainder of her life.
-
I'm certainly not an expert on the matter, buy my guess is that the number of women who make up rape allegations to garner "martyrdom" status make up about 1% of all rape allegations. And this pales in comparison to the number of rapes that aren't reported.
So no, I don't think you can reasonably argue that. Its sounds mostly that you are making sh*t up to exonerate the players.
What's your "guess" as to the % of the rape cases in which the victim escapes her tormentor only to start dancing and drinking with one of his buddies?
I think the players acted like ass#@les. Her story of rape, though, didn't pass muster to anyone she told it to other than a PI attorney. It doesn't with me either.
-
What's your "guess" as to the % of the rape cases in which the victim escapes her tormentor only to start dancing and drinking with one of his buddies?
No idea.
I think the players acted like ass#@les. Her story of rape, though, didn't pass muster to anyone she told it to other than a PI attorney. It doesn't with me either.
Pathetic that you would jump to such conclusions knowing as little about the case as you do. Really pathetic...
And it wasn't that her story of rape didn't pass muster, it was that any criminal evidence of rape didn't exist by the time it was reported. That doesn't mean that people, including MU officials, Public Safety and the MPD didn't believe her. Just that it couldn't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
And believe me, I am not saying that anyone raped her. All I know is, I most certainly would not drag people through the mud on either side based on my limited knowledge of what went on. People jumping to two-bit conclusions anonymously on a message board is about as sad as it gets.
-
1%?
doubtful
None of us know what happened but there is certainly a reasonable chance that it didn't happen the way she said.
Depends who you want to believe as to how often the reports are false
http://www.mediaradar.org/research_on_false_rape_allegations.php
http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/
http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2011/04/07/do-women-lie-about-rape/
http://www.mens-rights.net/law/falseaccusations/rape.htm
-
1%?
doubtful
None of us know what happened but thier is certainly a reasonable chance that it didn't happen the way she said.
Hold on....I didn't say that it was a 1% chance that the allegations were false....either because the victim was lying or that she mis-remembers the truth. I said that my guess was a 1% chance that the victim was attempting to attain "martyrdom" status by telling her story.
-
It still creeps me out that Buzz held a team meeting to circle the wagons before he allowed the players to be interviewed by DPS or anyone else.
I just hope that crap like this never happens again, and I hope the girl(s) involved get their lives back in order.
-
Hoops12, i think your frustrations are shared with a lot of posters in this room. The details of the incident are so murky, it stains the athletes, the woman, and the university. The woman wants justice. The players want exoneration. The University wants anyone who will listen to know that their internal investigation, no matter how hokey the process, was legit and not biased.
This is precisely why these incidents should be treated as a justice matter (where the truth is sought) as opposed to a PR matter (where damage is minimized). Had the University pursued justice it would have been noisy in the media, but no one would accuse them of obscuring the truth.
-
First of all, let's examine the rape accusation. Accordinging to the accuser, she was at one point during a party trapped in a bedroom and forced to perform oral sex on one of the athletes. After leaving the room in which she was raped, she had a dance and a couple more drinks with another athlete and subsequently went into another bedroom with three other athletes.
Can't one reasonably argue that it's unlikely that a rape victim's next moves at a party would be drinks, dancing and another trip to the bedroom with her tormentor's friends? What does she gain by pointing the finger of blame at someone other than herself? Exemption from responsibility for her actions and the status (almost martyrdom) that victimhood provides. The fact that she stayed at MU (even though she claims her friends abandoned her and she was totally isolated) indcates to me she likes her status of celebrity/victim.
I hear you, but from my point of view, reporting an assault, going through the public safety interviews, police interviews, questions, rumors, looks from classmates, etc. is a lot of work, and hugely intimidating. Thus, a lot of assaults go unreported.
The idea that a girl would go through all of that in order to martyr herself/spite a college hoops player is a big jump for me.
I know people are crazy, so I'm sure it has happened at some point in history, but Occams razor tells me that the odds are pretty low in this case. These are not pro athletes that can/will pay her for her silence and/or settlement.
I can't/won't speculate on the specifics (I don't know them), but my response was to the notion that she should be written off like a "Junkie on a Payday".
That is a misguided notion in my opinion.
-
"and Marquette-centric blogs ridiculed her"
Stop this banter, the Tribune is on to us
-
I am sure the girl reads MUscoop...one of these guys has bitter feelings about Marquette. Seriously this is one year later. We have made big changes to the way this is handled, and the players went through a court process because of it. This to me is starting to border on libel.
-
Ok sorry I misinterpreted what you posted
Hold on....I didn't say that it was a 1% chance that the allegations were false....either because the victim was lying or that she mis-remembers the truth. I said that my guess was a 1% chance that the victim was attempting to attain "martyrdom" status by telling her story.
-
I'm having an awfully hard time squaring some of the attitudes/comments in this thread with some of the attitudes/comments exhibited in a thread about an alleged assault at Notre Dame (http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=22375.0).
From a psychological standpoint, the Marquette players are our "friends." We know them. We cheer for them. We care about them. For most of us on here, Marquette was our "home" for 4 years. We're proud to say we graduated from there and are proud of the education we got there. When "outsiders," like Tribune journalists, show up and start bad mouthing are friends and our home, it's human nature to go on the defensive. If people had actual friends involved in a situation like this, they would probably defend their friends and discredit the accuser even without having all of the facts. On the other hand, if their friend was the accuser, they'd be more likely to defend her and stand by her...unless, of course, they don't believe her account.
-
This to me is starting to border on libel.
Are you an attorney? Doubtful the Trib would proceed with an article like this would out consulting their legal council.
-
Are you an attorney? Doubtful the Trib would proceed with an article like this would out consulting their legal council.
Really? You don't have to be an attorney to know what libel is.
Criteria for libel
There are three criteria that must be proved in order to satisfy a court that defamation exists.
They are:
1. The statement must be defamatory. Such a statement will be regarded despite any
intention of the author. A statement may alternatively give rise to a secondary meaning apart from
any first sight innocent interpretation. This type of statement is known as innuendo when
considered together with additional or extrinsic facts that is known to the reader.
2. The statement must refer to the aggrieved party either directly or indirectly. It is
therefore a requirement that the one who claims defamation must be able to point to their
identification within the publication.
3. The final requirement is to show that publication was exposed to a third party. There
are various interpretations that assist in identifying publication to a third party, none of which
blur an ordinary common sense meaning.
That said, it clearly fails criteria #2. You'd never be able to prove it in court.
-
That said, it clearly fails criteria #2. You'd never be able to prove it in court.
The MU Athletics department is the aggrieved party here, isn't it?
-
It still creeps me out that Buzz held a team meeting to circle the wagons before he allowed the players to be interviewed by DPS or anyone else.
Wait, wait, wait. From where are you coming up with this?
There has never been a suggestion that Buzz Williams or anyone else didn't allow the players to be interviewed by DPS or anyone else. To the contrary, DA Chisholm - in a statement that hardly was friendly toward MU - said there is no evidence the coaching staff tried to interfere with the investigation. Are you suggesting that Buzz prevented players from talking to DPS, but Chisholm didn't see that as interference?
It has been reported that Buzz met with the players before DPS did, but whether it was a "circle the wagons" meeting (as opposed to a "what the hell is going on?" meeting or a "I'm going to chew your a-- out" meeting) is pure speculation on your behalf.
Sultan and others have - fairly enough - ripped those here who are offering up unfounded speculation that portrays the accuser in a bad light. Perhaps we should do the same when it comes to unfounded speculation that portrays the players and coaches in a bad light, particularly when it runs counter to the known facts.
There's enough of an "ick" factor surrounding this whole mess without people inferring/creating facts that aren't in existence that make matters look even worse.
-
From a psychological standpoint, the Marquette players are our "friends." We know them. We cheer for them. We care about them. For most of us on here, Marquette was our "home" for 4 years. We're proud to say we graduated from there and are proud of the education we got there. When "outsiders," like Tribune journalists, show up and start bad mouthing are friends and our home, it's human nature to go on the defensive. If people had actual friends involved in a situation like this, they would probably defend their friends and discredit the accuser even without having all of the facts. On the other hand, if their friend was the accuser, they'd be more likely to defend her and stand by her...unless, of course, they don't believe her account.
I probably chose my words poorly. I understand why the positions are different in this case. I just wanted to point out that some people are holding MU to a very different standard than ND, and aside from the obvious bias in favor of our "friends," there's no way to justify the difference.
-
Really? You don't have to be an attorney to know what libel is.
So you're not an attorney. Just making sure.
-
The MU Athletics department is the aggrieved party here, isn't it?
If you are making the case that MU Athletics is the party accusing libel, then you'd have to prove that the statements made are defamatory... meaning that they are false.
So you're not an attorney. Just making sure.
And, no, I'm not. I did attend law school though. Any other snarky questions?
-
The MU Athletics department is the aggrieved party here, isn't it?
I think that the school has taken enough of a public relations hit on this issue, but yet here we are nearly 6 months later reading the same negative press. Enough is enough, people know the issue they know how poorly it was handled, and they know that policies changed. It is time for the tribune to find a new story, because if it continues with no new events it doesn't take much of an imagination to believe that a lawsuit could be filed.
Blue Horseshoe the one who responded to your statement wasn't the one who posted about libel. I know what libel is, it's not a very difficult concept.
-
I'm not an attorney, so I'm not going to speculate about any legal ramifications. However, to the posts that talk about MU athletes being our "friends." Plain and simple they aren't. They don't know me and I don't know them. I hate the term "student athlete" (different discussion). Do I hope they win? Yes. Do I hope they represent the University in a positive manner? Yes. Am I surprised that stuff like that happens on a frequent basis around the country? No.
-
Horseshoe here's my argument about them being student athletes...do they go to classes? yes. are they athletes? yes. STUDENT-Athletes. If you doubt that they go to class, or anything of that nature come to Marquette and check it out.
-
Now we're getting off topic. Hence the different discussion about student athletes and pay to play/benefits, etc.
-
Now we're getting off topic. Hence the different discussion about student athletes and pay to play/benefits, etc.
Then don't bring it up in the first place
-
Horseshoe here's my argument about them being student athletes...do they go to classes? yes. are they athletes? yes. STUDENT-Athletes. If you doubt that they go to class, or anything of that nature come to Marquette and check it out.
You did non attorney man. I should have been more specific. Excuse me, now you're getting off topic.
-
Wait, wait, wait. From where are you coming up with this?
There has never been a suggestion that Buzz Williams or anyone else didn't allow the players to be interviewed by DPS or anyone else. To the contrary, DA Chisholm - in a statement that hardly was friendly toward MU - said there is no evidence the coaching staff tried to interfere with the investigation. Are you suggesting that Buzz prevented players from talking to DPS, but Chisholm didn't see that as interference?
It has been reported that Buzz met with the players before DPS did, but whether it was a "circle the wagons" meeting (as opposed to a "what the hell is going on?" meeting or a "I'm going to chew your a-- out" meeting) is pure speculation on your behalf.
It doesn't matter what the meeting was about. It's what the perception is of a meeting between coaches and players after a serious incident instead of going to the cops/dps.
I'm not mad, or blaming anyone... it just gives me the creeps and I hope that this whole thing never happens again.
-
The biggest point that stood out to me was that her closest friends bailed on her. True friends would stand by someone who had been through a tramatic experience like she claims to have gone through. IMO, that would far outweigh concerns over "social status." My initial impression is that those closest to her think she's full of it. The fact that she remains at MU despite feeling "alone" and "isolated" also reeks of someone who craves attention.
Same here. In fact, I'd say such is quite damning to the alleged victim's story, but of course, I don't know these friends, and we haven't heard from those friends that were implied to have cooperated.
In any event, can someone please explain why MU has Gerald Boyle on retainer? I get the fact that he's an alum and all, but if you're trying to project an impression of innocence or contrition, you don't hire the go-to guy for Wisconsin's highest-profile serial killers and rapists. (I'm sure Mr. Baizer tells himself every morning that he hasn't bit off more than he can chew, even though he truly has.)
MU would do its mission and the Jesuit community - not to mention the athletes involved - a favor by severing all ties with Mr. Boyle immediately... but that's just my opinion.
-
You did non attorney man. I should have been more specific. Excuse me, now you're getting off topic.
You are a bitter bitter man, but I am over it...
-
You are a bitter bitter man, but I am over it...
More off topic banter?
-
MU would do its mission and the Jesuit community - not to mention the athletes involved - a favor by severing all ties with Mr. Boyle immediately... but that's just my opinion.
Since when did retaining qualified, successful and experienced legal counsel somehow make a person less "innocent?"
The only thing it does is make one smart. Contrary to popular belief, in the real world of the criminal justice system police and prosecutors aren't always right, don't always have the facts on their side, don't always tell the truth and rarely fight fair. And from money to staffing to resources to public perception, the deck is nearly always stacked in their favor. If I'm forced to enter into that world as a potential defendant, I want the strongest and best possible advocate on my behalf, regardless of how some dope on the street may perceive him and her.
As for perception .... there's a word for the kind of person who would call into question one's guilt or innocence based on the quality or reputation of their defense attorney. That word is "moron." Obviously those people do exist, but who cares? I'm not overly concerned with the perception of the moron community.
-
It still creeps me out that Buzz held a team meeting to circle the wagons before he allowed the players to be interviewed by DPS or anyone else.
Why? If he hadn't held a team meeting, it would have been alarming. From his perspective his players were being wrongfully accused. Why wouldn't he gather them to get the story and give them some advice on what to say? These are players who have been trusted by their families to this coaching staff. If your son was accused of something like this, would you sit him down and get his story and walk him through EXACTLY what went down before turning him over to the police? Golly, I sure hope so. I have no problem with what Buzz did. Zero.
What I find peculiar are those that assume these victims are beyond reproach. They most certainly are not.
-
Can't one reasonably argue that it's unlikely that a rape victim's next moves at a party would be drinks, dancing and another trip to the bedroom with her tormentor's friends?
+a bazillion
-
As for perception .... there's a word for the kind of person who would call into question one's guilt or innocence based on the quality or reputation of their defense attorney. That word is "moron." Obviously those people do exist, but who cares? I'm not overly concerned with the perception of the moron community.
I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, America is full of morons, and occasionally some do slip through voir dire. If you're truly innocent, the last thing you want on your jury is a moron. Conversely, if you're guilty, you want as many morons on the jury as possible. The problem I have is that Jerry Boyle has, incidentally, been embracing the moron community for years.
Also, to clarify... I'm not saying MU should cut Jerry loose to make the athletes appear more innocent; I'm simply stating my opinion that I don't think Jerry Boyle is a good representative of or for MU.
-
I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, America is full of morons, and occasionally some do slip through voir dire. If you're truly innocent, the last thing you want on your jury is a moron. Conversely, if you're guilty, you want as many morons on the jury as possible. The problem I have is that Jerry Boyle has, incidentally, been embracing the moron community for years.
Also, to clarify... I'm not saying MU should cut Jerry loose to make the athletes appear more innocent; I'm simply stating my opinion that I don't think Jerry Boyle is a good representative of or for MU.
Most members of juries are morons....on purpose.
-
Pathetic that you would jump to such conclusions knowing as little about the case as you do. Really pathetic...
And it wasn't that her story of rape didn't pass muster, it was that any criminal evidence of rape didn't exist by the time it was reported. That doesn't mean that people, including MU officials, Public Safety and the MPD didn't believe her. Just that it couldn't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
And believe me, I am not saying that anyone raped her. All I know is, I most certainly would not drag people through the mud on either side based on my limited knowledge of what went on. People jumping to two-bit conclusions anonymously on a message board is about as sad as it gets.
Unless I'm missing something, her story definitely didn't pass muster with MU officials. The players were found to be guilty of "sexual harrassment" not sexual assault. Call me pathetic and two bit all you want, but to me her behavior after the alleged rape (by her own admission more drinking, dancing and another trip to a bedroom) is not how I would expect a rape victim to react and it causes me to doubt her veracity. I readily admit that I don't know what happened - but I've read her account and it doesn't add up for me.
-
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned...
End of story.
Woman had a previous sexual relationship with player, began sex consensually, changed mind mid-thrust, was angry athlete didn't call her...
I have NO idea why a girl would want to go back to a school/situation where people know who she is, still has to deal with seeing one of the people said to have sexually assaulted her, etc. Wouldn't a fresh start be better? If the trauma is so great, why voluntarily expose yourself to the place of your trauma?
-
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned...
End of story.
I was wondering when you were going to show up with your same, tired, two-bit theory. You and Lennys make quite the team....solving crimes from your keyboard.
Honestly, I have never quite understood how people can be so quick to act like they KNOW what was going on when they have NO IDEA what actually went on.
-
I readily admit that I don't know what happened -
Yet that doesn't stop you from making assumptions about her actions and her story. Wow...
-
My main problem lies with the way that stories are written nowadays. Obviously, the idea is to sell as many newspapers (people still buy them for some reason) as possible. What is most likely to sell papers? "Journalism" like this is what sells papers. It gets people all riled up when they can identify with a poor helpless drunk girl (because a lot of people have daughters or know daughters who attend college), and her plight against the faceless university.
Words matter. Using words like "attack" (invokes thoughts of violence), "outcast among some of her closest friends" (who drew88 speculates she could not possess, having only been at school some two months). These guys were never going to get a fair shake in this article.
While I do not condone the horrifying behavior of the student athletes, I think that the behavior of the victim was also questionable. I know it is extremely easy to look back at a situation and say that you were uncomfortable because you are now thinking clearly. How many people get in a car and drive home when they are a little too drunk, and realize how stupid that decision was the next day? What I am getting at is that the victim doesn't seem to accept any of the blame herself (or at least that is the way the Trib seems to report it). She drank the "big girl shots". She was at a private party (I know the reasons people go to private parties... to hook up... at least that is why I went). She went into a room with three of the guys. The blame should be shared by all who made the poor decisions... not just by the student athletes who are being demonized while the victim is being martyred.
To put it plainly, I am pleased that she went to police... I wish she'd gone earlier, in fact. And I am very happy with the changes to the Marquette policies. I just think that this article is so obviously one sided that it should be taken for what it is. One sided.
I can't wait for the response to this... I feel like I just tossed a hunk of meat to a pack of starving wolverines.
Well stated. I was trying to put my thought's into words on this topic. Your post so eloquently en-captures my thought and position.
-
I was wondering when you were going to show up with your same, tired, two-bit theory. You and Lennys make quite the team....solving crimes from your keyboard.
Honestly, I have never quite understood how people can be so quick to act like they KNOW what was going on when they have NO IDEA what actually went on.
Sultan - We know that the girl had a previous sexual relationship with the player, and began consensually. We know alcohol was involved. I don't understand why you take what you read in the Chicago Tribune/Journal Sentinel (girls story only) as Gospel. Have we ever heard the player's account of what happened? No - yet MU and the basketball program are getting put through the ringer in the press. Pardon me if I want to defend the team and university a little bit.
On another note, you don't know any more than I do that what the girl alleges has any truth to it..yet you want to seemingly take her at her word....
-
Ners, I think you are mixing the two incidents. The one in February that was in the Chicago Tribune awhile ago they had a previous relationship and changed her mind during the act.
Sultan, I don't know what you expect regarding speculation. It's a message board and that's what people do, a Marquette basketball message board no less. Not saying it is right to say some of the things that have been said about the girl, but it is just kind of the nature of the beast.
-
Sultan - We know that the girl had a previous sexual relationship with the player, and began consensually. We know alcohol was involved. I don't understand why you take what you read in the Chicago Tribune/Journal Sentinel (girls story only) as Gospel. Have we ever heard the player's account of what happened? No - yet MU and the basketball program are getting put through the ringer in the press. Pardon me if I want to defend the team and university a little bit.
On another note, you don't know any more than I do that what the girl alleges has any truth to it..yet you want to seemingly take her at her word....
What I find absolutely amazing about you is that you don't seem to know how to read.
Tell me....where have I said that I believe the girl's story? I want you to find one sentence I have written on this subject over the past few months where I said that I believed her. Throughout this entire thing I have said two things:
1. MU's internal policy was wrong. It has since been corrected...which is a good thing.
2. There are only handful of people who actually know what occured that night. Those people do not include the authorities, and they most certainly do not include you or I. Therefore I restrain from making assumptions. Somthing you fail to do.
-
Yet that doesn't stop you from making assumptions about her actions and her story. Wow...
Well, you're either calling "pathetic" or doing the "wow..." thing or typing BIG LETTERS or insulting me generally. Since you're channeling your inner Chicos why not throw in a "sigh" for good measure.
I'm assuming you read the article in today's Chicago Tribune. Her own story (no assumptions on my part) is that she was raped in one of the bedrooms at a party. After the rape, she says she left the room, had a couple of drinks and danced with another guy and then went into another bedroom with three guys where she was again assaulted. Now, one more time, I don't know what happened in that dorm room. But since her story is on the record I don't think it's unfair to judge it as plausible or not. I can't imagine anyone acting like that after a rape. Evidently you can. I guess that makes me pathetic.
-
Lennys, you are certainly changing your tune. What I found pathetic is your judgement that she "likes her status of celebrity/victim." You seem to have dropped that line.
As for your latest post, I don't know enough about rape to know whether or not the girl's situation was pausible or not.
-
Ners, I think you are mixing the two incidents. The one in February that was in the Chicago Tribune awhile ago they had a previous relationship and changed her mind during the act.
Sultan, I don't know what you expect regarding speculation. It's a message board and that's what people do, a Marquette basketball message board no less. Not saying it is right to say some of the things that have been said about the girl, but it is just kind of the nature of the beast.
You're correct, Cheebs. Ners is talking about the February incident. The University conducted an invetigation of the October incident just after it occured and concluded no sexual assault took place. The athletes were, however, judged to be guilty of sexual harassment. It's possible Sultan is also confusing the two incidents as he has been adamant that MU had made no judgement on whether a rape took place in October. They did make a judgement and that judgement was no.
-
Lennys, you are certainly changing your tune. What I found pathetic is your judgement that she "likes her status of celebrity/victim." You seem to have dropped that line.
As for your latest post, I don't know enough about rape to know whether or not the girl's situation was pausible or not.
2002 asked a hypothetical - "What would a woman gain by making a false claim of rape?" I provided a POSSIBLE answer - that if someone is ashamed of their actions they might deal with it by pointing the finger elsewhere and changing their own status to victim. I'm not saying I know for a fact that's what happened here - only that it's plausible. It's also plausible that she likes her status as celebrity/victim. It's also plausible it's about money. Lots oaf possibilities. You disagree. Fair enough, but I don't know why you felt the need to go off on me.
-
You're correct, Cheebs. Ners is talking about the February incident. The University conducted an invetigation of the October incident just after it occured and concluded no sexual assault took place. The athletes were, however, judged to be guilty of sexual harassment. It's possible Sultan is also confusing the two incidents as he has been adamant that MU had made no judgement on whether a rape took place in October. They did make a judgement and that judgement was no.
Well, because it was a he said / she said. I am not mixing up the two incidents.
-
Fair enough, but I don't know why you felt the need to go off on me.
Oh how cute! Do you "like your status as a victim" on MUScoop?
-
Ners, I think you are mixing the two incidents. The one in February that was in the Chicago Tribune awhile ago they had a previous relationship and changed her mind during the act.
Sultan, I don't know what you expect regarding speculation. It's a message board and that's what people do, a Marquette basketball message board no less. Not saying it is right to say some of the things that have been said about the girl, but it is just kind of the nature of the beast.
Thanks for clarification - so this latest Chicago Trib story is on the incident from October? Sultan's below statement addresses my confusion on the topic - I skimmed through the article rapidly...as it came off as a hatchet job on MU....was this perhaps a 1-year anniversary story, commemorating the horrific night for that girl last October?? I mean why write an article on something that happened a year ago?? Would not surprise me if some DePaul folks were behind this...trying to give MU a black eye as MU has been kicking their A$$ in hoops and recruiting for roughly 20 years now...
What I find absolutely amazing about you is that you don't seem to know how to read.
-
Would not surprise me if some DePaul folks were behind this...trying to give MU a black eye as MU has been kicking their A$$ in hoops and recruiting for roughly 20 years now...
Most of the wild-a$$ speculation in this thread upsets me. This just made me laugh. I trust this was not intended seriously?
-
Most of the wild-a$$ speculation in this thread upsets me. This just made me laugh. I trust this was not intended seriously?
If it wasn't DePaul administration at the very least I suspect it was UW girls planted by Bo.
-
Most of the wild-a$$ speculation in this thread upsets me. This just made me laugh. I trust this was not intended seriously?
Just floated it as a potential reason for an article to come out FRONT PAGE on the Chicago Tribune about an incident that happened 1 YEAR AGO. What's the motive - and is such a story truly front page worthy on the Chicago Tribune??
Perhaps it is just journalists trying to gain some measure of fame, acclaim, etc - but it sure seems peculiar to me for this story to hit 1 year after it occurred.
On another note, I don't believe these types of articles hurt MU's recruiting, but there are some who feel it does - and perhaps there are a some people in the DePaul/Chicago community who think it might hurt MU's reputation within Chicago/recruiting. We have posters on this board who think this stuff hurts MU's recruiting...so it is not a stretch to think some idiots in the DePaul/Chicago community might think so as well...
-
Just floated it as a potential reason for an article to come out FRONT PAGE on the Chicago Tribune about an incident that happened 1 YEAR AGO. What's the motive - and is such a story truly front page worthy on the Chicago Tribune?? ..
Ners ... I know two of the reporters on this story, one of them fairly well. They are respected professionals and in no way doing this on behalf of DePaul, or for any other reason than it's a good, legitimate news story. The Trib has been working on a series of stories about how universities handle sex assault accusations on campus (it's one of their Pulitzer projects, I imagine) and Marquette, through nobody's fault but its own, has made itself a very easy target. Do I agree with everything about the story's presentation? Nope. But in all reality, there's no way to present this fairly for MU. Any defense they have would almost by necessity present the accuser in a bad light, and for political/PR reasons they can't do that. Better off just offering a mea culpa and move on.
And certainly none of the accused is going to offer up his side of the story, and forever be labeled a sex offender in the process by the large number of people out there eager to embrace the stereotype (sometimes deserved stereotype) of the out-of-control college athlete. That may be my biggest problem with the Trib story ... it plays to those stereotypes (i.e. the dangerous (black) college basketball player abusing the poor little (white) suburban girl).
It sucks for MU and the players, but actions have consequences. While their actions may not have been criminal, they were criminally stupid and this will stand as a harsh lesson for them.
-
I agree with this assessment Pukini, however, there is absolutely no "update" to this story other than the alleged victim hired a civil lawyer (and Buzz hired Boyle for a speeding ticket), who is quoted extensively throughout on record and who provided much of the background or access to her side of the story. I also assume her legal team now has access to the Milwaukee DA's report (in preparation for civill proceedings)--one where no charges were filed--which it appeared they shared to the reporters. Her lawyer does not want this to go to trial because her story has exposure (she will have the burden of proof), but he rather wants to force MU into a settlement. Smart stuff by the lawyer, crappy journalism other than the sensationalism--they were played.
Perhaps a better, more objective "update" would have been a story on the many other MU students who alleged abuse--with parts of this story--over the ten years that the University failed to follow the law. Or how universities, like MU are changing to address these concerns. Or maybe a better "update" would be to note how alcohol is a major contributing factor to these types of cases, and that the MU Public Safety and Milwaukee Police failed to charge her for underage drinking which she freely admitted (and others), and how the Illinois Secretary failed to revoke her driver's license as a result. These journalists chose a different route, and frankly they did no benefit to victims of sexual assault in the process.
-
Just floated it as a potential reason for an article to come out FRONT PAGE on the Chicago Tribune about an incident that happened 1 YEAR AGO. What's the motive - and is such a story truly front page worthy on the Chicago Tribune??
Perhaps it is just journalists trying to gain some measure of fame, acclaim, etc - but it sure seems peculiar to me for this story to hit 1 year after it occurred.
On another note, I don't believe these types of articles hurt MU's recruiting, but there are some who feel it does - and perhaps there are a some people in the DePaul/Chicago community who think it might hurt MU's reputation within Chicago/recruiting. We have posters on this board who think this stuff hurts MU's recruiting...so it is not a stretch to think some idiots in the DePaul/Chicago community might think so as well...
Conspiracy theories still alive and well with you. Always the woman's fault, couldn't possibly be the team or the university administration at fault.
-
Well, you're either calling "pathetic" or doing the "wow..." thing or typing BIG LETTERS or insulting me generally. Since you're channeling your inner Chicos why not throw in a "sigh" for good measure.
I'm assuming you read the article in today's Chicago Tribune. Her own story (no assumptions on my part) is that she was raped in one of the bedrooms at a party. After the rape, she says she left the room, had a couple of drinks and danced with another guy and then went into another bedroom with three guys where she was again assaulted. Now, one more time, I don't know what happened in that dorm room. But since her story is on the record I don't think it's unfair to judge it as plausible or not. I can't imagine anyone acting like that after a rape. Evidently you can. I guess that makes me pathetic.
There is a reason why 15 to 20 of us rarely post here any longer, as commented in the bannings thread on the other Scoop board. Nothing changes with several of you. Some folks were banned that added some value on occasion and yet the same few guys that were constantly involved in the sniping, you in particular, remain to soil this board.
Sultan's comments are right on target.
After reading the Tribune the other day and seeing my alma mater on the front page (again), it comes as no surprise to me to see so many posters trashing the young lady, putting the blame on her, absolving the players and university of everything. It really is a site to see. One of my favorites was the analysis of how her social status with her friends proves her guilt. Yes, because 18 and 19 year old kids and how they choose to hang out with others should be the standard by which we judge a person.
-
Sultan, I don't know what you expect regarding speculation. It's a message board and that's what people do, a Marquette basketball message board no less. Not saying it is right to say some of the things that have been said about the girl, but it is just kind of the nature of the beast.
Sultan has nearly 6000 posts. He has "speculated" and offered opinions based on his own (sometimes accurate, sometimes not) reading of the "facts" more often than anyone on Scoop. Yet he feels that reading, examining and drawing any conclusions from the young woman's own statement is out of bounds. I guess this means that in the future he'll limit his commentary on all topics to instances where he has been "in the room".
-
Weird that Hoopaloop a.k.a. Chicos decides to resurface to comment on this thread
-
He ain't chicos. He just wishes he was. As to this story, I don't know what happened. I know one version. Regardless of where the truth lies, the university handled it poorly and has learned from its mistakes. Not MU's finest hour, rampant dumbness by all involved.
-
Sultan has nearly 6000 posts. He has "speculated" and offered opinions based on his own (sometimes accurate, sometimes not) reading of the "facts" more often than anyone on Scoop. Yet he feels that reading, examining and drawing any conclusions from the young woman's own statement is out of bounds. I guess this means that in the future he'll limit his commentary on all topics to instances where he has been "in the room".
I wish.
-
Would not surprise me if some DePaul folks were behind this...trying to give MU a black eye as MU has been kicking their A$$ in hoops and recruiting for roughly 20 years now...
This is actually something I never even considered, and it's a great point.
In fact, what do we even know about this girl? Is it possible that she was planted on campus to perform this whole charade?
The lengths people will go to hurt MU know no bounds.
This whole situation reeks of either:
- DePaul
- ND
- Wisco
Or dare I say, The Tan One.
Maybe some sort of combination effort between the 4 of them to hold Marquette hoops back. It's like SPECTTRE*, but instead of world domination, their goal is to simply dominate Marquette.
*Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Tanning, Tweating, Revenge and Extortion
-
Weird that Hoopaloop a.k.a. Chicos decides to resurface to comment on this thread
If he were CBB, he'd have 3,000 posts by now.
-
nm
-
nm
This is the most intelligent thing posted in this thread.
-
Sultan, I don't know what you expect regarding speculation. It's a message board and that's what people do, a Marquette basketball message board no less. Not saying it is right to say some of the things that have been said about the girl, but it is just kind of the nature of the beast.
I'm not saying it isn't the nature of the beast. I just find it disgusting that people jump to conclusions that she is simply "a woman scorned," or that she "likes being the victim." I guess on a men's basketball board, I think discussing the nature and motives of a potential rape victim is a little unseemly. If the mods are going to let it happen, that is fine by me. But that means I most certainly will let my opinion be known.
-
I'm not saying it isn't the nature of the beast. I just find it disgusting that people jump to conclusions that she is simply "a woman scorned," or that she "likes being the victim." I guess on a men's basketball board, I think discussing the nature and motives of a potential rape victim is a little unseemly. If the mods are going to let it happen, that is fine by me. But that means I most certainly will let my opinion be known.
Keep in mind that just because someone speculates, it doesn't mean they're jumping to that conclusion.
-
Sultan, everyone here knows that no one on this board knows what actually happened. Everyone is just speculating.
Due to some of the pretty strange claims the girl made, what is wrong with speculating? No one is claiming to know for a fact what happened.
Kim Jung Il has said he shot a 38 on a par 72 course, including 5 holes-in-one during his first time golfing. Is it ok if we speculate that this may not have happened?
-
Kim Jung Il has said he shot a 38 on a par 72 course, including 5 holes-in-one during his first time golfing. Is it ok if we speculate that this may not have happened?
That would not be okay, Hans.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_k07pirzBU34/S_idi9y9hxI/AAAAAAAAEqk/AtOZkGo-YSA/s400/HansBrix.jpg)
-
There is a reason why 15 to 20 of us rarely post here any longer, as commented in the bannings thread on the other Scoop board. Nothing changes with several of you. Some folks were banned that added some value on occasion and yet the same few guys that were constantly involved in the sniping, you in particular, remain to soil this board.
Sultan's comments are right on target.
After reading the Tribune the other day and seeing my alma mater on the front page (again), it comes as no surprise to me to see so many posters trashing the young lady, putting the blame on her, absolving the players and university of everything. It really is a site to see. One of my favorites was the analysis of how her social status with her friends proves her guilt. Yes, because 18 and 19 year old kids and how they choose to hang out with others should be the standard by which we judge a person.
Generally, when someone is a true fan/alum of a school, they tend to support the university/school/team, etc. - not always post on the contrary - taking the side of the opposition. In your 70+ posts, 95% of them skew negative toward Marquette...and the 5% that could be construed as positive seemingly involved Tom Crean/Indiana U...
Last thought, do you always take the "she said" side in "he said/she said" cases - yet you've never even heard the "he said" side of this story?? Why so quick to assume the girl is on the up and up, and the guys/players are at fault? Guilty until proven innocent in your view?
And as for the 4 or 5 posters that don't post here a whole lot anymore - you are not missed. The board tends to be a much more harmonious place without the crap of you, Chicos, Marquette 84 and Willie Warrior.
-
And as for the 4 or 5 posters that don't post here a whole lot anymore - you are not missed.
I miss bma.
-
I miss bma.
Agree - Good point...and why does he not post here anymore? Largely because of the departed members...specifically Chicos, and probably 84 and Willie Warrior. BMA still seems to post on the Scout board (where Chicos is banned), so seems plausible BMA took issue with Chicos as did many here.
-
Agree - Good point...and why does he not post here anymore? Largely because of the departed members...specifically Chicos, and probably 84 and Willie Warrior. BMA still seems to post on the Scout board (where Chicos is banned), so seems plausible BMA took issue with Chicos as did many here.
My understanding is that it was more than Chicos.
-
Agree - Good point...and why does he not post here anymore? Largely because of the departed members...specifically Chicos, and probably 84 and Willie Warrior. BMA still seems to post on the Scout board (where Chicos is banned), so seems plausible BMA took issue with Chicos as did many here.
So someone e-mailed me a link to this, and beyond the fact that I think you're all a bunch of women who need to find something better to occupy your time with, I figured it was time to set the record straight so no one gets the wrong idea.
It's been awhile, so let's play a little game and every body see if they can follow along. I've been posting on MU related boards since the mid 1990s, most of that time Chicos and MU84 have been posters as well. I am, theoretically at least, a contributor to Cracked Sidewalks a website started by Chicos where MU84 is also a contributor. Never had a problem with either one of them in those all those years, either on the boards or on CS. Then, in 2009 a member joined this board who's behavior I found so objectionable that within a year I could no longer read this board. Any body want to take a guess on who that member was? DING DING DING if you said Ners, you're a f'n winner.
Since you asked, since you pretend to know why I'm not posting here anymore, let me make this as clear as I can for you Ners. You are the reason I'm not posting here anymore. Your constant verbal fellating of Buzz, your inability to take off the Blue and Gold glasses, your willingness to attack anyone who might express even the slightest of bit of an opposing view, your inability to make a coherent argument without resorting to name calling....all of those make people(myself especially) want to leave this board. Couple that with your inability to ever let anything go, and your stalker like behavior following posters from thread to thread attacking them, and this place has become downright unreadable since you became a member. Chicos and 84 weren't the problem, you turned them into one. If you had never joined, they'd still be here as the same thing they'd always been...occasionally annoying, but unlike yourself never actually malicious....and as a result I'd still be here. Make sense? Clear enough for you? Maybe next time you'll stay away from trying to explain my decisions?
With all that said, time for me to go again. Have fun everyone...maybe I'll be back in the future, maybe not.
-
Hooo-leeee crap....
-
Wow. That's been long overdue.
-
So someone e-mailed me a link to this, and beyond the fact that I think you're all a bunch of women who need to find something better to occupy your time with, I figured it was time to set the record straight so no one gets the wrong idea.
It's been awhile, so let's play a little game and every body see if they can follow along. I've been posting on MU related boards since the mid 1990s, most of that time Chicos and MU84 have been posters as well. I am, theoretically at least, a contributor to Cracked Sidewalks a website started by Chicos where MU84 is also a contributor. Never had a problem with either one of them in those all those years, either on the boards or on CS. Then, in 2009 a member joined this board who's behavior I found so objectionable that within a year I could no longer read this board. Any body want to take a guess on who that member was? DING DING DING if you said Ners, you're a f'n winner.
Since you asked, since you pretend to know why I'm not posting here anymore, let me make this as clear as I can for you Ners. You are the reason I'm not posting here anymore. Your constant verbal fellating of Buzz, your inability to take off the Blue and Gold glasses, your willingness to attack anyone who might express even the slightest of bit of an opposing view, your inability to make a coherent argument without resorting to name calling....all of those make people(myself especially) want to leave this board. Couple that with your inability to ever let anything go, and your stalker like behavior following posters from thread to thread attacking them, and this place has become downright unreadable since you became a member. Chicos and 84 weren't the problem, you turned them into one. If you had never joined, they'd still be here as the same thing they'd always been...occasionally annoying, but unlike yourself never actually malicious....and as a result I'd still be here. Make sense? Clear enough for you? Maybe next time you'll stay away from trying to explain my decisions?
With all that said, time for me to go again. Have fun everyone...maybe I'll be back in the future, maybe not.
Wow. The irony. Not even sure where to start - perhaps you don't post as much anymore BMA because you aren't in the inner circle anymore, and don't really have any insider information? Ball game has changed for you since Buzz became the coach?
Stalker? Me? I believe Chicos is the one who resorts to trying to learn of people through God knows what means. Calling Canadian Dimes by his first name, Lenny's Tap, me, etc.? How on earth did Chicos ever track down peoples names?? I know (and dropped Chicos name here), from having worked game day operations from 1993-1997...and was made aware of who he was by another here. If I turned Chicos into a problem, why was the guy banned from the Scout Board?? Am I to blame for that as well?
Maybe you need to grow a sack, and not be so sensitive? So I've called people out here with their hypocrisy - and that makes me malicious? And while you are still around - go read some of my first posts here - they were Pro-Crean...but after dealing with the constant passive aggressive jabs at Buzz from 84 and Chicos...over and over and over...I began to defend the hell out of Buzz. Turns out Buzz has been pretty damn good for Marquette...and deserved our support and not the crap Chicos and 84 threw around here. Pardon me for having a little bit of intuition and recognition of talent when it comes to a head coach...while many short sighted idiots want to throw the guy under the bus after every close WIN to UWM, or loss to DePaul, or whatever other garbage the knee jerkers here come up with. Sorry for asking fellow fans to have a little perspective and not go way off the deep end. Pardon me for getting tired of some of the ignorance posted on this board with regard to calling 19 year old kids "Choking Dogs who pee themselves," or guys who rip the hell out of Vander, our JUCO's, etc.. Who are the kids here?? Feel like having to channel Mike Gundy for a minute..who's the kid here?
So sorry that I've caused you to retire from Scoop and that my malicious posts were just too much. Rather ironic that you just maliciously attacked me. Nonetheless, good for you for finally speaking your feelings on the matter.
-
Wow. The irony. Not even sure where to start - perhaps you don't post as much anymore BMA because you aren't in the inner circle anymore, and don't really have any insider information? Ball game has changed for you since Buzz became the coach?
His posts on the Scout premium site don't indicate that.
-
His posts on the Scout premium site don't indicate that.
Hmm...I don't recall seeing any inside info from BMA on the Scout Premium site? It's been all Mark Miller, IWB, Ilbullseye - with regard to any real inside scoop. In my experience BMA seems to repost what Miller, IWB, Roy/Harv Schmidt post/break.
-
So someone e-mailed me a link to this, and beyond the fact that I think you're all a bunch of women who need to find something better to occupy your time with...
Hey, I resemble that!
-
The smart play here would be to "let it go."
-
Hooo-leeee crap....
November 11th can't come soon enough. Then this "basketball" board can actually go back to normalcy.
I actually enjoyed reading BMA's posts and where he received his info didn't matter to me. I also enjoyed Willie and his amusing rampages. The responses to his, at times lunatic notions, were outstanding. That is the reason I like the Scoop. But these personal vendettas as to why, where, how, when and even mis-spelled words have gotten old.
Lets get back to b-ball.
-
The smart play here would be to "let it go."
You would think, but Ners will probably start fighting everyone here.
-
I haven't been to Cracked Sidewalks since the infamous "Choking Dogs" post referenced above and will never go back as that ludicrous rant really crossed the line for a supposed "fan" site. Now that I know that site was started by Chicos, I'm certain I've made the right decision. Thanks BMA!
-
Should this thread be renamed to the MUScoop assual story? ::)
Could have used without this garbage. Nice personal attack bma, frankly, you should have kept that to yourself. Are you any better than Ners?
Hopefully this thread gets deleted. Childishness.
-
So someone e-mailed me a link to this, and beyond the fact that I think you're all a bunch of women who need to find something better to occupy your time with, I figured it was time to set the record straight so no one gets the wrong idea.
It's been awhile, so let's play a little game and every body see if they can follow along. I've been posting on MU related boards since the mid 1990s, most of that time Chicos and MU84 have been posters as well. I am, theoretically at least, a contributor to Cracked Sidewalks a website started by Chicos where MU84 is also a contributor. Never had a problem with either one of them in those all those years, either on the boards or on CS. Then, in 2009 a member joined this board who's behavior I found so objectionable that within a year I could no longer read this board. Any body want to take a guess on who that member was? DING DING DING if you said Ners, you're a f'n winner.
Since you asked, since you pretend to know why I'm not posting here anymore, let me make this as clear as I can for you Ners. You are the reason I'm not posting here anymore. Your constant verbal fellating of Buzz, your inability to take off the Blue and Gold glasses, your willingness to attack anyone who might express even the slightest of bit of an opposing view, your inability to make a coherent argument without resorting to name calling....all of those make people(myself especially) want to leave this board. Couple that with your inability to ever let anything go, and your stalker like behavior following posters from thread to thread attacking them, and this place has become downright unreadable since you became a member. Chicos and 84 weren't the problem, you turned them into one. If you had never joined, they'd still be here as the same thing they'd always been...occasionally annoying, but unlike yourself never actually malicious....and as a result I'd still be here. Make sense? Clear enough for you? Maybe next time you'll stay away from trying to explain my decisions?
With all that said, time for me to go again. Have fun everyone...maybe I'll be back in the future, maybe not.
You know there's an "Ignore" feature, right?
-
Wow. The irony. Not even sure where to start - perhaps you don't post as much anymore BMA because you aren't in the inner circle anymore, and don't really have any insider information? Ball game has changed for you since Buzz became the coach?
Stalker? Me? I believe Chicos is the one who resorts to trying to learn of people through God knows what means. Calling Canadian Dimes by his first name, Lenny's Tap, me, etc.? How on earth did Chicos ever track down peoples names?? I know (and dropped Chicos name here), from having worked game day operations from 1993-1997...and was made aware of who he was by another here. If I turned Chicos into a problem, why was the guy banned from the Scout Board?? Am I to blame for that as well?
Maybe you need to grow a sack, and not be so sensitive? So I've called people out here with their hypocrisy - and that makes me malicious? And while you are still around - go read some of my first posts here - they were Pro-Crean...but after dealing with the constant passive aggressive jabs at Buzz from 84 and Chicos...over and over and over...I began to defend the hell out of Buzz. Turns out Buzz has been pretty damn good for Marquette...and deserved our support and not the crap Chicos and 84 threw around here. Pardon me for having a little bit of intuition and recognition of talent when it comes to a head coach...while many short sighted idiots want to throw the guy under the bus after every close WIN to UWM, or loss to DePaul, or whatever other garbage the knee jerkers here come up with. Sorry for asking fellow fans to have a little perspective and not go way off the deep end. Pardon me for getting tired of some of the ignorance posted on this board with regard to calling 19 year old kids "Choking Dogs who pee themselves," or guys who rip the hell out of Vander, our JUCO's, etc.. Who are the kids here?? Feel like having to channel Mike Gundy for a minute..who's the kid here?
So sorry that I've caused you to retire from Scoop and that my malicious posts were just too much. Rather ironic that you just maliciously attacked me. Nonetheless, good for you for finally speaking your feelings on the matter.
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/kym-assets/photos/images/newsfeed/000/108/728/Oprah_umad.gif?1318992465)
-
Hopefully this thread gets deleted. Childishness.
(http://thorps.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/chuck-norris-thumbs-up.jpg)
-
Wow. The irony. Not even sure where to start - perhaps you don't post as much anymore BMA because you aren't in the inner circle anymore, and don't really have any insider information? Ball game has changed for you since Buzz became the coach?
Stalker? Me? I believe Chicos is the one who resorts to trying to learn of people through God knows what means. Calling Canadian Dimes by his first name, Lenny's Tap, me, etc.? How on earth did Chicos ever track down peoples names?? I know (and dropped Chicos name here), from having worked game day operations from 1993-1997...and was made aware of who he was by another here. If I turned Chicos into a problem, why was the guy banned from the Scout Board?? Am I to blame for that as well?
Maybe you need to grow a sack, and not be so sensitive? So I've called people out here with their hypocrisy - and that makes me malicious? And while you are still around - go read some of my first posts here - they were Pro-Crean...but after dealing with the constant passive aggressive jabs at Buzz from 84 and Chicos...over and over and over...I began to defend the hell out of Buzz. Turns out Buzz has been pretty damn good for Marquette...and deserved our support and not the crap Chicos and 84 threw around here. Pardon me for having a little bit of intuition and recognition of talent when it comes to a head coach...while many short sighted idiots want to throw the guy under the bus after every close WIN to UWM, or loss to DePaul, or whatever other garbage the knee jerkers here come up with. Sorry for asking fellow fans to have a little perspective and not go way off the deep end. Pardon me for getting tired of some of the ignorance posted on this board with regard to calling 19 year old kids "Choking Dogs who pee themselves," or guys who rip the hell out of Vander, our JUCO's, etc.. Who are the kids here?? Feel like having to channel Mike Gundy for a minute..who's the kid here?
So sorry that I've caused you to retire from Scoop and that my malicious posts were just too much. Rather ironic that you just maliciously attacked me. Nonetheless, good for you for finally speaking your feelings on the matter.
So... what you're saying is that BMA was entirely correct in his assessment? Ok, just wanted to make sure, because you just exhibited pretty much every behavior he accused you of.
-
Gosh, I didn't think this was going to turn into the "Follow up on MUScoop poster of the past assaults MUScoop poster of the present, both vying for to be a poster of the future".
Locked for childishness, sorry to those that wanted to discuss the actual topic.