MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Tugg Speedman on March 02, 2015, 09:05:23 AM
-
We live in a new world order.
Joe Pa is run out of town in a matter of weeks, and his statues are torn down over sexual abuse.
Ray Rice creates national outage, see Adrian Peterson too.
Even NASCAR suspended Kurt Busch indefinitely over possible assault charges.
I'm not trying to stir the pot but given the hypersensitivity of sexual assault, how can Duke and Coach K "get away with" hiding sexual assault allegations and then dealing with it by dismissing Sulaimon ... letting him out to be someone else's (another woman?) problem? If their is serious blow-back on Duke/K, does it touch Wojo?
Will Sulaimon ever play another organized ball game again? How can he given the new standards?
-----------------------------------
Rasheed Sulaimon at center of sexual assault allegations prior to dismissal
http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2015/03/02/rasheed-sulaimon-center-sexual-assault-allegations-prior-dismissal#.VPR5LeFy2FX
By Emma Baccellieri and Nick Martin on March 2, 2015
Rasheed Sulaimon's dismissal from the Duke basketball program is clouded by allegations of sexual assault, which surfaced nearly a year before he was released from the team in January. Multiple sources close to the situation have confirmed that members of the athletic department were made aware of the allegations as early as March 2014.
The Duke men's basketball department has not provided a detailed explanation of the dismissal, which was the first in head coach Mike Krzyzewski's 35 years at the helm of the program. Sulaimon, a junior, was dismissed from the Duke basketball team Jan. 29 after he “repeatedly struggled to meet the necessary obligations,” Krzyzewski said in his official statement.
Sulaimon's dismissal came not from a singular incident, but was the result of multiple actions detrimental to the program, Matt Plizga—the men's basketball sports information director—told The Chronicle the day of the
The Duke athletic administration declined to speak with The Chronicle after multiple attempts were made to discuss the allegations.
The allegations
Separate allegations of sexual assault by Sulaimon came from two female students in the 2013-14 academic year. Both students voiced allegations publicly, but neither filed a complaint through the Office of Student Conduct or took legal action through the Durham Police Department. The students declined to discuss their allegations with The Chronicle.
In October 2013, a female student said in a large group session at the student-led diversity retreat Common Ground that Sulaimon had sexually assaulted her, three retreat participants said. At the following semester's Common Ground retreat beginning in February 2014, a second female student said she had been sexually assaulted by Sulaimon, according to four retreat participants.
Common Ground is a four-day retreat in which students discuss identity—including issues involving race, socioeconomic status, gender and sexuality—through interaction with other participants, discussion groups and personal narratives. The retreat is held once each semester, with 56 participants selected from a student applicant pool.
A former affiliate of the Duke basketball program, who was with the team throughout the majority of Sulaimon's basketball career, became aware of the allegations made at the Fall 2013 Common Ground. The anonymous affiliate began speaking to the female student in January 2014, and began speaking to the second female student in March 2014 after learning of her allegations.The allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, the anonymous affiliate said. That month, the allegations were brought to Krzyzewski and assistant coaches Jon Scheyer and Nate James and associate head coach Jeff Capel.
“It should have been a long time ago. [Krzyzewski’s] never [dismissed a player] before,” the anonymous affiliate said. “I don’t think he knew where the line was. I think he really didn’t want to do it.”
The anonymous affiliate said other athletic administrators were then made aware of the allegations. Among the administrators identified by the anonymous affiliate were Mike Cragg, deputy director of athletics and operations; Director of Basketball Operations David Bradley; and Kevin White, vice president and director of athletics. The allegations were also brought to the attention of Sue Wasiolek, assistant vice president of student affairs and dean of students, according to the anonymous affiliate.
“Nothing happened after months and months of talking about [the sexual assault allegations]," the anonymous affiliate said. "The University administration knew. Kevin White knew, Mike Cragg knew."The fear of backlash from the Duke fan base was a factor in the female students' decision not to pursue the allegations, sources close to the women said.“[The Jameis Winston sexual assault case reaction] would be the same from a fan base as large and as passionate as Duke’s,” the anonymous affiliate said, referring to the former Florida State quarterback, who was the subject of both a police investigation for alleged sexual assault in Fall 2013 and a university conduct hearing in Fall 2014. Winston did not face charges, and he was later found not in violation of the university's code of conduct.Because the women voicing the allegations did not want to pursue their cases, no official complaints were filed with the Office of Student Conduct.
If a complaint is filed with the Office of Student Conduct, an investigation is conducted and a disciplinary hearing occurs if necessary. If a student is found responsible for sexual misconduct in a disciplinary hearing, the recommended sanction is expulsion.Even if a student chooses not to file a complaint, however, the University is legally obligated by Title IX to look into any indications of sexual assault. If the Office of Student Conduct receives information about a possible assault with a student perpetrator, the protocol is to investigate to whatever extent is possible, Wasiolek said.“Sometimes, it’s so little information that there’s really nothing to follow up on. When we have the name of an alleged victim, we would certainly want to talk with that individual,” Wasiolek said. “When we have the name of an alleged respondent, we would want to talk with that individual as well. Depending on what information we get from either of those individuals, that will dictate how we proceed.”Even if an official complaint is not filed, Student Conduct still documents all conversations it has as part of an investigation of a potential sexual assault, Wasiolek said. The records are kept confidential under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.Wasiolek declined to comment on the subject of allegations against Sulaimon.
"The next big Duke scandal"
Senior Lincoln Wensley, a former secretary in the Duke basketball office and current intern for the Office of News and Communications, became aware of the allegations Jan. 21, 2015 when he heard a fellow intern mentioning what she called "the next big Duke scandal."
“And that Coach K had known and knew that Rasheed had these rumors swirling about him and that Kevin White had also known.” —Lincoln Wensley
Wensley followed up with the intern, who said she was best friends with a female student who alleged she had been sexually assaulted by Sulaimon.
“We started texting that Wednesday night,” Wensley said. “She informed me that one of her friends had been raped by Rasheed Sulaimon…. [She] was very upset and had known for some time about this because of the Common Ground retreat. She expressed an interest in taking action herself, but obviously [was] scared because of the power the men’s basketball team possesses on this campus.”Wensley worked with Duke basketball as an assistant to administrative assistant Laura Ann Howard, who works closely with the men's basketball assistant coaches and coordinates administrative duties regarding the team’s players and coaches.The following day, Jan. 22, Wensley—who had been working in the office for more than three years—notified Howard of his knowledge of the allegations and quit his job.The next day, Wensley received the following text message from Cragg:
“Lincoln - this is Mike Cragg from the basketball program. I would like to talk with you this afternoon on your convo with Laura Ann. In person would be great. Nothing long - just want to clean up the end of your desire to work here. And let you know some steps that Laura Ann would not know based on the info you provided her. Thanks.”
Wensley agreed to the meeting and the two met in Cragg’s office the same day. According to Wensley, Cragg began the conversation by advising him on how to better handle professional situations such as the one Wensley had with Howard.
But the conversation with Cragg did not end there.“I wanted personally for the conversation to steer toward Coach K and Kevin White and I think he could sense that too,” Wensley said. “After advising me on my interactions with Laura Ann, he said that if I wanted to pursue further action on this issue that I would need to go through Student Conduct. And that Coach K had known and knew that Rasheed had these rumors swirling about him and that Kevin White had also known.”Cragg and Bradley both deferred comment to Jon Jackson, senior associate athletic director for external affairs. White—whose media requests are handled by Jackson—did not respond for comment. Jackson said the athletic department would not comment on the matter and provided the following statement from Michael Schoenfeld, vice president for public affairs and government relations.
"Duke takes immediate action when a student reports allegations of sexual misconduct or other violations of the student conduct code," the statement read. "This includes investigation and referral to the Student Conduct Office as appropriate. The University is prohibited by federal law from disclosing information about any individual student or the student judicial process."
Schoenfeld said the University had no further comment on the matter.
After multiple phone and email requests for comment, Sulaimon declined to speak to The Chronicle prior to publication. A lawyer claiming to represent Sulaimon—Bob Ekstrand, Law '98—contacted The Chronicle's office late Sunday evening and said he believed the allegations of sexual assault to be false.
The dismissal
On Jan. 29—six days after Wensley had his conversation with Cragg—it was announced via press release that Sulaimon had been dismissed from the Duke basketball program. The decision was released a day after the Blue Devils’ 77-73 loss at Notre Dame Jan. 28, in which Sulaimon played 12 minutes and scored three points on 1-of-6 shooting.
“Rasheed has been unable to consistently live up to the standards required to be a member of our program,” Krzyzewski said in the press release. “It is a privilege to represent Duke University and with that privilege comes the responsibility to conduct oneself in a certain manner. After Rasheed repeatedly struggled to meet the necessary obligations, it became apparent that it was time to dismiss him from the program.”
Chronicle Graphic by Georgia Parke
(http://d2770i1y1fck5h.cloudfront.net/images/banner_636x/755a57668eca0428ad2ea91b77108c52a75734d7.jpg?1425297704)
The anonymous affiliate reiterated Plizga's statement that there were other factors that contributed to Sulaimon's dismissal.
“It should have been a long time ago. [Krzyzewski’s] never [dismissed a player] before,” the anonymous affiliate said. “I don’t think he knew where the line was. I think he really didn’t want to do it. It’s pretty incomprehensible.”
Reporting sexual assault
The majority of Duke's employees are required to report sexual assault. They may either notify a supervisor, campus police or submit the information through a website that is then sent to Student Conduct. There are select staff members who are not required to report a sexual assault, including staff members at Counseling and Psychological Services, the Women's Center, Student Health and University clergy.
If a victim of sexual assault decides to file a complaint with Student Conduct, a case is initiated. The accuser and accused then submit a statement, and Student Conduct hires an independent private investigator to interview witnesses and establish facts. After this process—which can take several months—Duke convenes a hearing and a three-person panel presides over the process. If the panel determines that there is a "preponderance of evidence" suggesting a sexual assault occurred, the recommended disciplinary action is that the student is expelled.
Sulaimon is still a Duke student and remains in good academic standing.
-
Wojo wasn't hired until March 31st if I recall correctly. Interesting Wojo wasn't named
"The allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, the anonymous affiliate said. That month, the allegations were brought to Krzyzewski and assistant coaches Jon Scheyer and Nate James and associate head coach Jeff Capel."
-
Wojo wasn't hired until March 31st if I recall correctly. Interesting Wojo wasn't named
"The allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, the anonymous affiliate said. That month, the allegations were brought to Krzyzewski and assistant coaches Jon Scheyer and Nate James and associate head coach Jeff Capel."
I agree it is good for Wojo that his name is not in this. But, this is the first version of the story. Many more are coming.
-
Two things:
Wojo is probably okay as an assistant who is now out of there; the focus will be on the higher ups, most likely. If this wasn't reported up the chain of command, it could be different. I'd expect someone at the top to take the fall in a case like this, given the "lower" ranked coach K won't be the scape goat.
This shouldn't end coach K's career, of course, unless he wants it to. If it did, from a Marquette prospective, that would probably cement Wojo as our coach for a long time. Wojo isn't going to be stepping back in at Duke at this point, I suspect, given the current season.
-
We'll see how this plays out. The Duke Chronicle over the years has had to retract a number of these stories... just a reminder.
-
Not sure how there is anything close to firable for Coach K here, but it is a preliminary report who knows what else comes out.
Lots of moving pieces to this whole story, but it will be very interesting to see how it gets reported and how big it gets. Interesting that the women didn't want to report to police but shared as part of an inclusion retreat, and then they weren't the ones to report to Duke administration, it was people who were at the retreat that reported it.
Not sure what the obligatory reporting laws do to cover that scenario. Also because of the Duke Lacrosse thing, this gets even more difficult and twisted. As convoluted as this seems, I'm betting the media has a field day because they love speculation without facts and insinuation.
Let's just hope Wojo was above the fray in this situation.
-
Not sure how there is anything close to firable for Coach K here, but it is a preliminary report who knows what else comes out.
With the caveat that this is version 1.0 of many more versions ...
Play rapes a student. Coach knows, keeps playing him as he investigates. Eventually he dismisses him from the team, less than 24 hours after a game. The first player dismissed in his 35 year career. So assume Sulaimon became radioactive to K like no one else has been since he became the head coach in 1980.
Until this story I believe no one knew that Sulaimon was a "predatory walking around looking for another victim" (which is how some will portray him).
It was argued that Joe Pa was responsible as the head of the team. Why doesn't this standard apply to K? Because he wins? I thought this standard was no longer the case (see Adrian Peterson). And by all accounts Joe Pa knew less about what was happening in his locker room than K knew about Sulaimon.
-
With the caveat that this is version 1.0 of many more versions ...
Play rapes a student. Coach knows, keeps playing him as he investigates. Eventually he dismisses him from the team, less than 24 hours after a game. The first player dismissed in his 35 year career. So assume Sulaimon became radioactive to K like no one else has been since he became the head coach in 1980.
Until this story I believe no one knew that Sulaimon was a "predatory walking around looking for another victim" (which is how some will portray him).
It was argued that Joe Pa was responsible as the head of the team. Why doesn't this standard apply to K? Because he wins? I thought this standard was no longer the case (see Adrian Peterson). And by all accounts Joe Pa knew less about what was happening in his locker room than K knew about Sulaimon.
Thing is, if he was a predator walking around, forget basketball for a second, but he's still at the school in good standing as well.
-
With the caveat that this is version 1.0 of many more versions ...
Play rapes a student. Coach knows, keeps playing him as he investigates. Eventually he dismisses him from the team, less than 24 hours after a game. The first player dismissed in his 35 year career. So assume Sulaimon became radioactive to K like no one else has been since he became the head coach in 1980.
Until this story I believe no one knew that Sulaimon was a "predatory walking around looking for another victim" (which is how some will portray him).
It was argued that Joe Pa was responsible as the head of the team. Why doesn't this standard apply to K? Because he wins? I thought this standard was no longer the case (see Adrian Peterson). And by all accounts Joe Pa knew less about what was happening in his locker room than K knew about Sulaimon.
There are differences in the Coach K and Paterno situations.
In the Duke case, it is a matter of months, with a student, and no formal complaint being filed.
In the PSU case, it is over the course of years, with a former member of the coaching staff. One that was still granted access to facilities even after retiring.
I've got to know more about the case before coming to an opinion about Coach K and how this was handled.
-
from this artical it looks to me that the basketball team took the right steps and brought it to the dean of students. If the kid was still allowed in school maybe the only thing K could have done is suspended him prior to his dismissal. Maybe it was taken care of internally
-
Not sure how there is anything close to firable for Coach K here, but it is a preliminary report who knows what else comes out.
Duke Lacrosse
UVA Fraternity
Lena Dunham
Etc.
I'm not saying the accusers are lying in this instance, but Duke (more than anyone), should know not to immediately side with an accuser. They got burned once by this, I think they were correct in trying to determine the facts before dismissing the player.
The real issue is in letting the University determine guilt/innocence in these cases with internal investigations and on-campus Mock Trials with Judge Reinhold. Essentially a kangaroo court. These matters should be turned over to the police and investigated and prosecuted like any other criminal assault.
-
Although mentioned I think most underestimate the impact of the Lacrosse team debacle. I am sure all involved were going to be very careful with complaints of criminal activity that the complainants would not take to the police, and it was likely something besides those allegations themselves that resulted in the dismissal. I doubt there is any fallout on Wojo, other than to those few on here that are already calling for his job.
-
Duke Lacrosse
UVA Fraternity
Lena Dunham
Etc.
I'm not saying the accusers are lying in this instance, but Duke (more than anyone), should know not to immediately side with an accuser. They got burned once by this, I think they were correct in trying to determine the facts before dismissing the player.
The real issue is in letting the University determine guilt/innocence in these cases with internal investigations and on-campus Mock Trials with Judge Reinhold. Essentially a kangaroo court. These matters should be turned over to the police and investigated and prosecuted like any other criminal assault.
*bass shot*
(http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lmr29srBCm1qcm16uo1_r1_1280.jpg)
-
To summarize my thoughts (some mirrored by others):
1) Let's withhold judgement until we can ascertain whether this is the tip of an iceberg or simply a muddy snowball floating in the ocean.
2) If there does turn out to be something here and Coach K were implicated, I'm going to have three tubs of Orville Redenbacher's ready to go on moments' notice.
3) In the absolute worse case scenario where Wojo is implicated and MU is dragged into this, MU better be prepared to cut bait. On the heels of a couple allegations just a few years prior, it turns out that MU hired another coach who had a history of covering his eyes and ears (or worse), that would be Hiroshima. If I were MU, I would be hiring a PI to start doing its own digging immediately... as Reagan said, "trust, but verify."
-
With the caveat that this is version 1.0 of many more versions ...
Play rapes a student. Coach knows, keeps playing him as he investigates. Eventually he dismisses him from the team, less than 24 hours after a game. The first player dismissed in his 35 year career. So assume Sulaimon became radioactive to K like no one else has been since he became the head coach in 1980.
Until this story I believe no one knew that Sulaimon was a "predatory walking around looking for another victim" (which is how some will portray him).
It was argued that Joe Pa was responsible as the head of the team. Why doesn't this standard apply to K? Because he wins? I thought this standard was no longer the case (see Adrian Peterson). And by all accounts Joe Pa knew less about what was happening in his locker room than K knew about Sulaimon.
Also keep in mind, if Coach K reported it to the proper authorities he then, by law, is no longer allowed to follow up or take any action against the student/offender related to the accusation.
Also a huge difference in the data so far, Paterno had a witness report to him. In this account, Coach K had a coach come to him, who was told by a student who was at an off campus event that someone at the event claimed she was assaulted by a basketball player but refused to go to police.
If it wasn't so tragic it would be a Ferris at 31 Flavors equivalent.
-
from this artical it looks to me that the basketball team took the right steps and brought it to the dean of students. If the kid was still allowed in school maybe the only thing K could have done is suspended him prior to his dismissal. Maybe it was taken care of internally
Again I'm commenting on what we know from the story above understanding that this is version 1.0 and it often changes.
---
I don't disagree with you but I sense their are new rules of the road, thanks to Ray Rice et al, and I'm trying to understand them.
They new rules seem to be saying that society (women) need to be protected from those accused of sexual assault ("predators"). So it does not matter that the dean was notified and they had an investigation, the NFL did the same with Ray Rice and what did that get them?
The question is what did you do to protect society? Obviously Sulaimon did something serious to be the first players dismissed from the team in 35 years. If it was raping another Duke student, why is he a still a student in good standing at Duke? Why does "throwing him back into the pool" (dismissing him and allowing him to transfer) make that the right thing to do. Why were the police not informed and allowed to investigate.
And most importantly, who made the decision to not call the police, keep playing him, deciding that rape only needs to be punished by kicking him off the team?
-
To summarize my thoughts (some mirrored by others):
1) Let's withhold judgement until we can ascertain whether this is the tip of an iceberg or simply a muddy snowball floating in the ocean.
2) If there does turn out to be something here and Coach K were implicated, I'm going to have three tubs of Orville Redenbacher's ready to go on moments' notice.
3) In the absolute worse case scenario where Wojo is implicated and MU is dragged into this, MU better be prepared to cut bait. On the heels of a couple allegations just a few years prior, it turns out that MU hired another coach who had a history of covering his eyes and ears (or worse), that would be Hiroshima. If I were MU, I would be hiring a PI to start doing its own digging immediately... as Reagan said, "trust, but verify."
As to #3 that is my biggest fear. I really hope that he did not have any strong involvement in this case...like an active cover up of any type. That would be pretty devastating for our program, but more importantly, something morally repugnant and punishable.
-
One thing to note, statistically, as I re-read the article that seems very curious. To date there were two accusers and both "reported" the incident at a campus retreat but at two different retreats(weren't at same retreat together). According to the story, this campus retreat happens once a year and is attended by 56 students. Duke had 14,600 students in 2013 according to google. What are the odds that two different women in different years would be selected out 14,600 to be one of 56 and have the same experience?
This guy may be a serial assaulter which makes it even more tragic, or there could be some things that don't line-up from a factual standpoint.
Far to early to tell on anything, but it'll have legs, Washington Post has already picked it up. Christine Bremmer should be on this any moment.
-
We have nowhere near enough facts to comment intelligently on any of this ... but that certainly hasn't stopped us before!
It's Duke. There will be LOTS of stuff about this in the media. In time, we will have the facts.
Until then ... I still can't believe K was playing Sulaimon over Dawson!
-
Why is this nonsense on a MU basketball blog? The kid is still in school and you have Coach K resigning in disgrace. Go get your shine box and get the hell out of here.
-
With the caveat that this is version 1.0 of many more versions ...
Play rapes a student. Coach knows, keeps playing him as he investigates. Eventually he dismisses him from the team, less than 24 hours after a game. The first player dismissed in his 35 year career. So assume Sulaimon became radioactive to K like no one else has been since he became the head coach in 1980.
Until this story I believe no one knew that Sulaimon was a "predatory walking around looking for another victim" (which is how some will portray him).
It was argued that Joe Pa was responsible as the head of the team. Why doesn't this standard apply to K? Because he wins? I thought this standard was no longer the case (see Adrian Peterson). And by all accounts Joe Pa knew less about what was happening in his locker room than K knew about Sulaimon.
Very good questions. To my knowledge, nothing transpired with Baywhine on the Bernie Fine fiasco, either Some coaches like K, Baywhine and Prictino are glorified and untouchable, while other guys the media just pole axes: Peterson, Rice. Difference between teflon and stickem.
-
Why is this nonsense on a MU basketball blog? The kid is still in school and you have Coach K resigning in disgrace. Go get your shine box and get the hell out of here.
While Heisenburg is likely over the top with this stuff, it is very relevant given Wojo's being their during this time and the current national environment for this stuff.
-
While Heisenburg is likely over the top with this stuff, it is very relevant given Wojo's being their during this time and the current national environment for this stuff.
+1
If Wojo was not our coach, I would have posted this on the superbar.
"over the top" ... probably :)
-
1. Nothing filed either with Duke or the Durham authorities.
2. Rumors are nothing but rumors.
3. K reached his own personal tipping point dismissed the player.
4. Duke lacrosse.
This doesn't bring K down. It doesn't trickle down to Wojo.
-
Seriously Heisenberg, you need something more to do to fill your days.
-
... as Reagan said, "trust, but verify."
(http://www.americanheritage1.com/assets/images/americana%20collectibles/special-interest-items/ollie-north-testifying-before-congress-1.jpg)
-
1. Nothing filed either with Duke or the Durham authorities.
2. Rumors are nothing but rumors.
3. K reached his own personal tipping point dismissed the player.
4. Duke lacrosse.
This doesn't bring K down. It doesn't trickle down to Wojo.
I tend to agree with you, but it really will depend on the media reaction. They are tempered by the Duke Lacrosse issue but if they think there is smoke here, they'll dig and it could snowball. Not saying it will or should happen but the next two days in the media will be interesting to watch.
-
When I was a young man stopping by my parent's house, I noticed a letter from Ollie sent to my Dad seeking contributions for his legal defense fund. On the outside of the envelope was a short message from Ollie which said; "Only God knows how badly I need it..."
(http://www.americanheritage1.com/assets/images/americana%20collectibles/special-interest-items/ollie-north-testifying-before-congress-1.jpg)
-
I tend to agree with you, but it really will depend on the media reaction. They are tempered by the Duke Lacrosse issue but if they think there is smoke here, they'll dig and it could snowball. Not saying it will or should happen but the next two days in the media will be interesting to watch.
Because there were no OFFICIAL complaints filed. Because K ultimately dismissed the player BEFORE any of this became generally known, K will come out of this OK. And his defense will be that he would never get rid of a kid because of a rumor. (And he shouldn't).
-
Because there were no OFFICIAL complaints filed.
Careful with that, there weren't any at PSU either. I agree he shouldn't dismiss for rumors, but Title IX requires a coach to report any knowledge of a potential sexual assault to the proper authorities. Even rumors count as part of that reporting requirement.
-
Seriously Heisenberg, you need something more to do to fill your days.
This.
A clown starting a foolish thread thanks to the product on the floor having dispirited all of us. By all accounts, Wojo had the MU job sewn up on March 30th. Says the Sulaimon allegations were first reported in March 2014. Which day, though? Could have been the 29th and Wojo was out the next day. This gets nowhere near Wojo (doesn't even affect K) and to suggest or intimate otherwise is plainly dumb.
-
In the absolute worse case scenario where Wojo is implicated and MU is dragged into this, MU better be prepared to cut bait. On the heels of a couple allegations just a few years prior, it turns out that MU hired another coach who had a history of covering his eyes and ears (or worse), that would be Hiroshima. If I were MU, I would be hiring a PI to start doing its own digging immediately... as Reagan said, "trust, but verify."
My thought about this story goes back to the Hillbilly and articles about our athletes and athletic department on Page 1 of the Chicago Tribune. Part of the undoing of the relationship between Marquette and the Hillbilly was related to this same type of thing and it would be tragic if we had a rerun.
If we do, cue the nuclear explosion.
If we actually have a problem, I would think the result would not be Hiroshima but instead Bikini Atoll, those hydrogen bomb tests in the 1950s where there was nothing left.
That said, I have extremely serious doubts Coach Wojo was part of this. Everything I have seen and heard about Coach Wojo is that he is an honorable man who would never tolerate shenanigans from his ballplayers. We are Marquette means something, as the Hillbilly found out.
-
**yawn**
(That is in regards to this having anything close to do with MU basketball or Wojo, not sexual assault or anything of that nature.)
-
Careful with that, there weren't any at PSU either. I agree he shouldn't dismiss for rumors, but Title IX requires a coach to report any knowledge of a potential sexual assault to the proper authorities. Even rumors count as part of that reporting requirement.
But here it looks like plenty of higher ups DID know. In the PoPa case, things seemed to be more quiet.
I'd also note a distinction that I haven't seem mentioned: The Penn State victims were minors - far more susceptible to intimidation, and far less likely to know what options they had to report. This case involved two (presumably 18+) students who could and did come forward, presumably knew about the option to file a formal report, but chose not to. I understand that Title IX still imposes obligations on the school to look into it, but that isn't K's obligation once he knew others were aware.
The only thing that would get K fired IMHO is if he interfered with Duke's title IX office investigation.
-
But here it looks like plenty of higher ups DID know. In the PoPa case, things seemed to be more quiet.
AD, VP for police, school president, etc were all informed at PSU of the 2004 allegation.
I'd also note a distinction that I haven't seem mentioned: The Penn State victims were minors - far more susceptible to intimidation, and far less likely to know what options they had to report. This case involved two (presumably 18+) students who could and did come forward, presumably knew about the option to file a formal report, but chose not to. I understand that Title IX still imposes obligations on the school to look into it, but that isn't K's obligation once he knew others were aware.
The only thing that would get K fired IMHO is if he interfered with Duke's title IX office investigation.
Doesn't matter the status of the victims. As an example, they've never found the victim Mike McQuerry testified about that he witnessed in 2004. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be reported. If you are an employee and you see, know about, or should know about an assault you have to report it, regardless of age. Both Title IX and The Clery Act require coach K to report if he knew what the article indicates he did.
If he reported, he should be ok, it's on the administration, if he didn't, that's an issue
-
So if I'm reading the story correctly, two separate students took the occasion of a retreat some period of time after an alleged assault to claim a prior attack for the first time. It was quite possibly the second accusation that got folks squarely focused on the issue and started a chain of disclosures and events involving Coach K and others beginning in March 2014. Neither accuser chose to pursue the matter internally via the Office of Student Affairs or the local police. And Duke seemingly undertook an investigation that ultimately resulted in the player's dismissal roughly 9 months later.
And somehow folks think that this has the potential to be Hiroshima for Marquette? Really? What if Wojo did learn of this in his last two weeks on Duke's campus? Assuming his boss and the entire university hierarchy became aware at roughly the same time, how does Wojo have any responsibility to act whatsoever? Quite the contrary. His job is to cooperate with any investigation and keep his mouth shut for the benefit and privacy of all parties. Now if Coach K or anyone impeded anything or even helped to establish a culture where coming forward was discouraged, that's a problem for them. But I see very little chance of that becoming a problem for Wojo unless some huge pattern over a number of years is demonstrated.
-
Doesn't matter the status of the victims. As an example, they've never found the victim Mike McQuerry testified about that he witnessed in 2004. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be reported. If you are an employee and you see, know about, or should know about an assault you have to report it, regardless of age. Both Title IX and The Clery Act require coach K to report if he knew what the article indicates he did.
If he reported, he should be ok, it's on the administration, if he didn't, that's an issue
Are the reporting obligations and legal consequences for sexual assault is the same regardless of whether the victim is an adult or a minor? I don't know NC law specifically, but that would be surprising.
-
ESPN Version of this story ...
Interesting that the title on the home page says
Duke quiet on Sulaimon assault accusations
And then when you click on the link, it says ....
Report: Sulaimon accused of assaults
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12408702/duke-blue-devils-mike-krzyzewski-refuse-comment-rasheed-sulaimon-sexual-assault-allegations
Duke men's basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski and the university on Monday declined specific comments on a report that Rasheed Sulaimon, who was dismissed from the team in January, was alleged to have sexually assaulted two women during the 2013-14 academic year.
Krzyzewski dismissed Sulaimon from the team on Jan. 29, saying the junior guard "repeatedly struggled to meet the necessary obligations." Sulaimon is the first player ever dismissed from Duke's team.
According to the report, published Monday in the Duke Chronicle, the student newspaper, Sulaimon was accused of sexual assault by two different women, who told others of the incidents but did not file complaints with Duke's Office of Student Conduct or the Durham Police Department.
Sources told the Chronicle that officials in the athletic department, including Krzyzewski, knew about the allegations as early as March 2014 -- 10 months before Sulaimon was dropped from the team.
On Monday, Krzyzewski, participating in an ACC coaches' conference call, was asked whether he was aware of the report and whether he thought he handled it the right way. In all instances, Krzyzewski responded: "I don't have any comment on that."
The university also cited student confidentiality law in a statement issued Monday.
"Duke is prohibited by law from disclosing publicly any particular student's confidential education records," the statement said. "The university takes immediate action when it receives reports of alleged sexual misconduct or other violations of the student conduct code, which includes investigation and referral to the Student Conduct Office for review in a timely manner as required by law. Duke also takes every possible action internally to ensure anyone who raises a complaint of sexual misconduct is supported and the campus community is safe."
Sources close to the two women told the Chronicle the women did not pursue school or legal action against Sulaimon because they feared reprisal from Duke's fan base.
Neither accuser would discuss the allegations with the newspaper.
Attempts to reach Sulaimon were unsuccessful. A lawyer claiming to represent Sulaimon told the Chronicle he believed the allegations to be false.
Sulaimon is still a student in good academic standing at Duke, according to the newspaper.
The first allegation came in October 2013, according to the newspaper. A female student told a large group at a student-led diversity retreat called Common Ground that Sulaimon sexually assaulted her, according to three participants in the retreat. In February 2014, at a second Common Ground retreat, a second female student said she had been sexually assaulted by Sulaimon, four participants told the Chronicle.
A source, described as a former affiliate of Duke's basketball program during Sulaimon's playing days, became aware of the allegation in Fall 2013, and spoke to the accuser. The same person spoke to the second accuser after becoming aware of her allegations in 2014.
The source said the allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, and later that month were brought to Krzyzewski and assistants Jeff Capel, John Scheyer and Nate James, and other athletic department officials, including Kevin White, the vice president and director of athletics, and Sue Wasiolek, assistant vice president of student affairs and dean of students.
"Nothing happened after months and months of talking," the source told the Chronicle.
Sulaimon averaged 7.5 points and 2.0 rebounds in 20 games for Duke this season, all of them in a reserve role. He was a starter during his freshman year in 2012-13, averaging 11.6 points per game.
-
Washington Post story below
Above someone said this story is totally dependent on the media. If they decide it is a big deal, it is a big deal. If they decide to ignore it, it goes away.
Given this note the headline, they are implying some sort of cover-up. This suggests they are going to make this a big deal.
------
Duke reportedly had known of sexual assault allegations against Rasheed Sulaimon since March 2014
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2015/03/02/duke-reportedly-knew-of-sexual-assault-allegations-against-rasheed-sulaimon-since-march-2014/
Appearing on the ACC coaches’ teleconference, Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski refused to comment on the situation after being asked repeatedly about it.
@ikhurshudyan Coach K on Sulaimon sexual assault allegations: "I don't have any comment about that."
10:32 AM - 2 Mar 2015
@GoodmanESPN That's now four separate "No Comments" from Mike Krzyzewski on the ACC conference call regarding the Rasheed Sulaimon allegations. 10:40 AM - 2 Mar 2015
@BrianHamiltonSI One last try by a radio guy to Coach K - “Why the silence?” - followed by a "Why would I change? I have no comment. That’s it.” #Duke 10:40 AM - 2 Mar 2015
On Jan. 29, Rasheed Sulaimon became the first player ever dismissed from the Duke men’s basketball team under Coach Mike Krzyzewski, with the NCAA’s all-time victories leader saying the junior guard “repeatedly struggled to meet the necessary obligations.”
But according to a report from the Duke Chronicle, Sulaimon was alleged to have committed sexual assault by two separate women during the 2013-14 academic year. Both women told others of the incidents, but neither filed a complaint with Duke’s Office of Student Conduct or the Durham Police Department. However, sources told the Chronicle that members of Duke’s athletic department — including Krzyzewski — were aware of the allegations as early as March 2014, approximately 10 months before Sulaimon was dismissed from the team.
Here’s the Chronicle with more:
Separate allegations of sexual assault by Sulaimon came from two female students in the 2013-14 academic year. Both students voiced allegations publicly, but neither filed a complaint through the Office of Student Conduct or took legal action through the Durham Police Department. The students declined to discuss their allegations with The Chronicle.
In October 2013, a female student said in a large group session at the student-led diversity retreat Common Ground that Sulaimon had sexually assaulted her, three retreat participants said. At the following semester’s Common Ground retreat beginning in February 2014, a second female student said she had been sexually assaulted by Sulaimon, according to four retreat participants.
Common Ground is a four-day retreat in which students discuss identity—including issues involving race, socioeconomic status, gender and sexuality—through interaction with other participants, discussion groups and personal narratives. The retreat is held once each semester, with 56 participants selected from a student applicant pool.
A former affiliate of the Duke basketball program, who was with the team throughout the majority of Sulaimon’s basketball career, became aware of the allegations made at the Fall 2013 Common Ground. The anonymous affiliate began speaking to the female student in January 2014, and began speaking to the second female student in March 2014 after learning of her allegations.
The allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, the anonymous affiliate said. That month, the allegations were brought to Krzyzewski and assistant coaches Jon Scheyer and Nate James and associate head coach Jeff Capel.
The anonymous affiliate said other athletic administrators were then made aware of the allegations. Among the administrators identified by the anonymous affiliate were Mike Cragg, deputy director of athletics and operations; Director of Basketball Operations David Bradley; and Kevin White, vice president and director of athletics. The allegations were also brought to the attention of Sue Wasiolek, assistant vice president of student affairs and dean of students, according to the anonymous affiliate.
“Nothing happened after months and months of talking about [the sexual assault allegations],” the anonymous affiliate said. “The University administration knew. Kevin White knew, Mike Cragg knew.”
Sources close to the two women told the Chronicle that they did not pursue school or legal action against Sulaimon because they feared reprisal from Duke’s fan base. A lawyer claiming to represent Sulaimon told the Chronicle that he believed the allegations to be false. Sulaimon is still a student in good academic standing at Duke, the Chronicle reports.
According to the Chronicle, most Duke employees must report a sexual assault allegation if they become aware of one. Plus, federal Title IX rules state that the school must investigate any sexual assault allegations, even if the student doesn’t file a complaint.
Michael Schoenfeld, vice president for public affairs and government relations, issued the following statement to the Chronicle after its report was published:
“Duke takes immediate action when a student reports allegations of sexual misconduct or other violations of the student conduct code,” the statement read. “This includes investigation and referral to the Student Conduct Office as appropriate. The University is prohibited by federal law from disclosing information about any individual student or the student judicial process.”
Schoenfeld said the University had no further comment on the matter.
Sulaimon averaged 7.5 points and 2 rebounds in 20 games for Duke this season, all of them in a reserve role. He was a starter during his freshman year in 2012-13, averaging 11.6 points per game, but his production and his usage declined in his two subsequent seasons with the team.
After spending the first 17 years of his Post career writing and editing, Matt and the printed paper had an amicable divorce in 2014. He's now blogging and editing for the Early Lead and the Post's other Web-based products.
-
Are the reporting obligations and legal consequences for sexual assault is the same regardless of whether the victim is an adult or a minor? I don't know NC law specifically, but that would be surprising.
There is no distinction made, any sexual assault on an person regardless of all the usual descriptors including age is to be reported per Title IX and Clery Act.
If Coach K was informed, passed it along to the appropriate reporting authority, and then did nothing further to hinder the investigation, then he should be totally in the clear. It's the media angle that gives me even mild pause for the possibility of a different outcome. How, if at all, does the media drive this in a negative way.
-
Everyone is missing the largest point in this story.
THIS IS THE PROBLEM:
“Lincoln - this is Mike Cragg from the basketball program. I would like to talk with you this afternoon on your convo with Laura Ann. In person would be great. Nothing long - just want to clean up the end of your desire to work here. And let you know some steps that Laura Ann would not know based on the info you provided her. Thanks.”
-
Has Karla F.C. Holloway, a professor of English and African-American Studies, weighed in yet? How about Wahneema Lubiano?
Group of 88 had no problem back in the day to try, convict, hang a certain team at Duke that happened to be mostly caucasian....just sayin
-
Everyone is missing the largest point in this story.
THIS IS THE PROBLEM:
“Lincoln - this is Mike Cragg from the basketball program. I would like to talk with you this afternoon on your convo with Laura Ann. In person would be great. Nothing long - just want to clean up the end of your desire to work here. And let you know some steps that Laura Ann would not know based on the info you provided her. Thanks.”
Read the context again....Lincoln quit, he wasn't fired. Mike Cragg contacted him to council him on the manner in which he quit.
-
Has Karla F.C. Holloway, a professor of English and African-American Studies, weighed in yet? How about Wahneema Lubiano?
Group of 88 had no problem back in the day to try, convict, hang a certain team at Duke that happened to be mostly caucasian....just sayin
There are a lot of ways to say that Duke may be approaching this with utmost caution after the lacrosse incident. This is one of the dumbest. And it is posts like this that lead to accusations of racism being leveled at you.
-
Read the context again....Lincoln quit, he wasn't fired. Mike Cragg contacted him to council him on the manner in which he quit.
Yep, not as bad then.
-
Report: Duke Coaches, Administrators Ignored Sexual Assault Allegations
http://deadspin.com/report-duke-coaches-administrators-ignored-sexual-ass-1688875007
Deadspin
March 2, 2015
Duke junior Rasheed Sulaimon was dismissed from the men's basketball team on Jan. 29, 2015, with no official explanation given. According to a report published today by the Chronicle, Duke's student newspaper, Sulaimon was dismissed more than a year after he was accused of sexually assaulting two female students. The Chronicle also reports that high-ranking members of the university's athletic department were aware of the allegations as early as March 2014, and violated federal law by failing to report them.
The Chronicle reports that the allegations against Sulaimon were made on two separate occasions at a student retreat called Common Ground, which is held once each semester, and cites multiple witnesses at each retreat.
Separate allegations of sexual assault by Sulaimon came from two female students in the 2013-14 academic year. Both students voiced allegations publicly, but neither filed a complaint through the Office of Student Conduct or took legal action through the Durham Police Department. The students declined to discuss their allegations with The Chronicle.
In October 2013, a female student said in a large group session at the student-led diversity retreat Common Ground that Sulaimon had sexually assaulted her, three retreat participants said. At the following semester's Common Ground retreat beginning in February 2014, a second female student said she had been sexually assaulted by Sulaimon, according to four retreat participants.
Neither student filed a police report or an official complaint with the university, but the Chronicle reports that word of the alleged assaults still reached people in the athletic department, including the head coach.
The allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, the anonymous affiliate said. That month, the allegations were brought to Krzyzewski and assistant coaches Jon Scheyer and Nate James and associate head coach Jeff Capel
The anonymous affiliate said other athletic administrators were then made aware of the allegations. Among the administrators identified by the anonymous affiliate were Mike Cragg, deputy director of athletics and operations; Director of Basketball Operations David Bradley; and Kevin White, vice president and director of athletics. The allegations were also brought to the attention of Sue Wasiolek, assistant vice president of student affairs and dean of students, according to the anonymous affiliate.
"Nothing happened after months and months of talking about [the sexual assault allegations]," the anonymous affiliate said. "The University administration knew. Kevin White knew, Mike Cragg knew."
Title IX laws require almost all university employees to report any sexual assault allegations they have knowledge of to a supervisor, campus police, or the Student Conduct office, even if no official complaint has been lodged. In this case, the two students who claimed to have been assaulted by Sulaimon had painfully familiar reasoning for choosing not to formally file complaints.
The fear of backlash from the Duke fan base was a factor in the female students' decision not to pursue the allegations, sources close to the women said.
-
I'm posting these stories so you can get an idea of how the press is reporting it. My takeaway is they see a cover-up and potential violations.
It just beginning, not ending.
Question, if Duke knew about this for some time. Why did Sulaiman play (12 minutes) the evening of January 29 and then was summarily dismissed 12 hours later on January 30? Obviously he was still in good standing on the 29th, and not 12 hours later.
So what changed? Could it have been (and I'm speculating here) Duke found out the student paper was getting ready to blow the lid on the story and they had to get of him ASAP?
Duke Potentially Violated Title IX Code With (Non) Treatment Of Sulaiman
http://acc.sportswar.com/article/2015/03/02/duke-potentially-violated-title-ix-code-with-non-treatment-of-sulaiman/
Why the Duke Basketball Sexual-Assault Story Won't Go Away Quickly
http://www.motherjones.com/mixed-media/2015/03/duke-sexual-assault-sulaimon-coach-k
-
Has Karla F.C. Holloway, a professor of English and African-American Studies, weighed in yet? How about Wahneema Lubiano?
Group of 88 had no problem back in the day to try, convict, hang a certain team at Duke that happened to be mostly caucasian....just sayin
Like you, I hope we Caucasians -- especially those of us who also are male -- can overcome all the biases against us in this nation of ours.
-
Like you, I hope we Caucasians -- especially those of us who also are male -- can overcome all the biases against us in this nation of ours.
Hahahaha perfect.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6bcs8ln_9Q&feature=youtu.be&t=1m21s
EDIT: Crap, forgot how to embed videos. Anyways, here is the link.
-
There are a lot of ways to say that Duke may be approaching this with utmost caution after the lacrosse incident. This is one of the dumbest. And it is posts like this that lead to accusations of racism being leveled at you.
I'm pointing out a simple fact of what happened the last time. The Group of 88 tried, convicted, sentenced a team, coach, etc. of a crime they did not commit with nothing but an accusation to go on. Why? Perfectly fair question to ask. Not racist in one bit. Why was there such quick rush to judgment the last time around? Why will things be different this time around....or will they be the same? Why do you think the rush to judgment last time? Or is that honest and fair question not allowed to be asked or answered because someone with a PC mentality might be offended?
My answer....the group of 88 wanted someone to take down and those guys fit a perfect target. It happens in reverse as well. Doesn't make it right either way. People are wrongly accused of crimes because of race, gender, ethnicity, financial status, etc. It can happen to anyone.
-
Like you, I hope we Caucasians -- especially those of us who also are male -- can overcome all the biases against us in this nation of ours.
Racism can be practiced against anyone by any person, regardless of their race. There is a number of people out there that actually believe that is not possible, which is truly amazing.
-
There are a lot of ways to say that Duke may be approaching this with utmost caution after the lacrosse incident. This is one of the dumbest. And it is posts like this that lead to accusations of racism being leveled at you.
hey Al, is that you pulling the race card again for the 100th time.? Why don't you do something responsible instead, pay your 4 million in taxes owed--now that would be patriotic
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6bcs8ln_9Q&feature=youtu.be&t=1m21s
EDIT: Crap, forgot how to embed videos. Anyways, here is the link.
https://www.youtube.com/v/r6bcs8ln_9Q&feature=youtu.be&t=1m21s
-
Um, what is the Group of 88?
-
Racism can be practiced against anyone by any person, regardless of their race. There is a number of people out there that actually believe that is not possible, which is truly amazing.
Don't worry, Chicos. I have a dream, and we shall overcome!
-
Duke Lacrosse
UVA Fraternity
Lena Dunham
Etc.
I'm not saying the accusers are lying in this instance, but Duke (more than anyone), should know not to immediately side with an accuser. They got burned once by this, I think they were correct in trying to determine the facts before dismissing the player.
The real issue is in letting the University determine guilt/innocence in these cases with internal investigations and on-campus Mock Trials with Judge Reinhold. Essentially a kangaroo court. These matters should be turned over to the police and investigated and prosecuted like any other criminal assault.
Unlike Notre Dame, who took sides immediately, to the detriment of the accusers.
-
Um, what is the Group of 88?
I'm not a big fan of wiki, but this is one way to describe them. Plenty of other descriptions if you google.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_88
All of them, doing just fine. Like it didn't even happen.
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-group-of-88-is-doing-just-fine/24314
-
Don't worry, Chicos. I have a dream, and we shall overcome!
I have one as well, that racism is omitted everywhere by everyone. Including by some Duke professors.
-
Unlike Notre Dame, who took sides immediately, to the detriment of the accusers.
What exactly are you referring to here?
-
ND has a lousy track record. Protects its football players. At all costs.
-
ND has a lousy track record. Protects its football players. At all costs.
Any specifics or just broad generalizations?
-
There were two cases. Written up in the Chicago Tribune.
-
Racism can be practiced against anyone by any person, regardless of their race. There is a number of people out there that actually believe that is not possible, which is truly amazing.
Actually this is false. In order to be racist, the perpetrator must have some sort of societal power or privilege over the victim. Ergo, it is impossible for people of color to be racist towards white people. Women cannot be sexist towards men. Etc.
However, it is possible for anyone to be prejudiced against any person regardless of race.
-
Lots of misinformation in this thread and probably in the articles as well.
Biggest question for me is the timeline. If I read correctly, allegations were first brought in October or 2013. I'm assuming that the allegations were heard by some sort of university official. This should have started a "clock" that expired in 60 days. Per Title IX, universities have 60 days from the date of first report to complete an investigation and put the student through the conduct process. This happen no matter if criminal charges were brought or not. So if the university followed this clock, the investigation should have been concluded by January 2014. If he was found responsible, than there is no way he would have been allowed to stay on the team (at least any credible conduct system would require this). If he was found not responsible, than there would have been no reason for him to be kicked off the team.
What I am assuming happened is, similar to the Jamies Winston case, Duke found some reason to extend the 60 day clock. There are some allowances for this but there's no way it should have stretched for over a year. I actually wonder if new information or charges came up later and that's what prompted Coach K to give him the boot.
The timeline is confusing, but I see almost no way that it comes back on Coach K or Wojo. They have no obligation not to play a player who is accused of committing a crime and they were not the original reporting employees so they have no responsibility to report. This may come back on the administration if they dragged their heels on the investigation. The Office of Civil Rights from the DOE is already gunning to destroy Florida State for their mishandling of the case. I'm sure they'll have room for Duke.
-
Duke Lacrosse
UVA Fraternity
Lena Dunham
Etc.
I'm not saying the accusers are lying in this instance, but Duke (more than anyone), should know not to immediately side with an accuser. They got burned once by this, I think they were correct in trying to determine the facts before dismissing the player.
The real issue is in letting the University determine guilt/innocence in these cases with internal investigations and on-campus Mock Trials with Judge Reinhold. Essentially a kangaroo court. These matters should be turned over to the police and investigated and prosecuted like any other criminal assault.
Why do people focus on the small minority of false reports instead of the millions of true reports?
Sexual assault has a false report rate of just under 8%. That is actually less than the false report rate for theft and murder. But no one accuses those people of lying.
I do agree that everyone should get due process but I don't think we should even jump to the thought of victims lying unless we are given reason to think it is possible.
All sexual assaults that are reported on campus are turned over to the police. It's a federal law. But the university also launches its own investigation. So it is possible for an accused student to be innocent in court but responsible on campus, they have different standards of evidence. It is also possible for survivors to not press charges in criminal court but still have an assault investigated on campus. This is handled the exact same way as cases of theft, assault, drugs, etc. I also don't know how familiar you are with campus judicial systems, but I don't think the comparison to mock trails are even close to fair. I can't speak for all universities but most are well run organizations led by professionals with more experience than I will ever have.
-
Actually this is false. In order to be racist, the perpetrator must have some sort of societal power or privilege over the victim. Ergo, it is impossible for people of color to be racist towards white people. Women cannot be sexist towards men. Etc.
LOL. What an absolute load of bovine excrement, psychobabble guilt propoganda.
-
While Heisenburg is likely over the top with this stuff, it is very relevant given Wojo's being their during this time and the current national environment for this stuff.
But at least he was careful to say he was not stirring the pot ::)
-
1. Nothing filed either with Duke or the Durham authorities.
2. Rumors are nothing but rumors.
3. K reached his own personal tipping point dismissed the player.
4. Duke lacrosse.
This doesn't bring K down. It doesn't trickle down to Wojo.
This.
-
Has Karla F.C. Holloway, a professor of English and African-American Studies, weighed in yet? How about Wahneema Lubiano?
Group of 88 had no problem back in the day to try, convict, hang a certain team at Duke that happened to be mostly caucasian....just sayin
Ah.... so this is a racial issue.
Unbelievable!
-
LOL. What an absolute load of bovine excrement, psychobabble guilt propoganda.
No guilt propoganda. You simply have your definitions wrong. You are saying racist when you mean prejudiced.
I know, all those pesky liberal Jesuits at Marquette, corrupting us young folk with all this social justice nonsense
-
LOL. What an absolute load of bovine excrement, psychobabble guilt propoganda.
Didn't know TAMU was a tumblr user.
-
No guilt propoganda. You simply have your definitions wrong. You are saying racist when you mean prejudiced.
I know, all those pesky liberal Jesuits at Marquette, corrupting us young folk with all this social justice nonsense
Nope...that is your interpretation, your definition.....no doubt shared by others with enormous guilt complexes, but that doesn't make it right or accurate.
Women can't be sexist? LOL http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peggy-drexler/who-says-women-arent-sexi_b_3331315.html
-
Biggest question for me is the timeline. If I read correctly, allegations were first brought in October or 2013. I'm assuming that the allegations were heard by some sort of university official. This should have started a "clock" that expired in 60 days. Per Title IX, universities have 60 days from the date of first report to complete an investigation and put the student through the conduct process. This happen no matter if criminal charges were brought or not. So if the university followed this clock, the investigation should have been concluded by January 2014. If he was found responsible, than there is no way he would have been allowed to stay on the team (at least any credible conduct system would require this). If he was found not responsible, than there would have been no reason for him to be kicked off the team.
Again it all comes down to standards. Coach K wins and is famous/important so what standard will he be held too? You think Duke/Coach K could survive the standard set below? And to be clear, the standard is that you followed every rule exactly to the letter of every rule without any exception or you will be fired.
-------
UW-Whitewater fires coach who reported sexual assault of student
Sept 30, 2014
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/purple-wisconsin/277665881.html
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater wrestling coach Tim Fader was one of the most successful athletic coaches the institution ever had. So why was he fired? It appears because he reported an alleged sexual assault to the police.
Tim Fader had been the coach of the UW-Whitewater Warhawks wrestling team for the last decade. Last year, the team won their third straight conference title and placed 2nd at the NCAA Division III tournament, the highest in school history. Fader had coached 18 scholar All-Americans and 21 wrestling All-Americans, and was a three time Division III Coach of the Year recipient.
On April 18, 2014, a recruit for the wrestling team was visiting the UW-Whitewater campus. Fader received a phone call from the mother of a student at the school, saying her daughter had been sexually assaulted by the recruit.
Fader reported the matter to the Whitewater Police Department.
In an interview, Fader said, "I followed my gut. My gut said to call the police. That's what you're taught to do. That's what I teach my kids to do if they see a problem."
A few weeks later the school told Fader that because he did not report the assault to the school, he would be suspended from his job as a teacher and coach. In August, the school announced they would not be renewing Fader’s contract after an internal investigation revealed that the wrestling team had violated NCAA recruiting policies.
Shortly after Fader was suspended, the Washington Post reported that UW-Whitewater is one of 55 colleges across the country under investigation by the United States Department of Education regarding how the school handles sexual assault cases.
The University of Wisconsin – Whitewater has refused to comment on the case, or release any documents relating to either the investigation of the team by the school or the Department of Education investigation.
These are the facts of the case, as reported in numerous media outlets. Neither the University, the UW System, or the NCAA has publicly disputed any of these facts, nor have they presented any evidence to negate these facts.
There are a number of things to keep in mind with this case.
First, school administration officials explicitly stated that the reason Fader was being suspended was because he reported the case to the police instead of reporting it to the university first.
Second, the school only initiated the investigation into the team’s recruiting practices after they had been notified of the assault and suspended Fader. In addition, the infractions reported to the NCAA were relatively minor violations of NCAA recruiting rules.
Lastly, and most importantly, UW Whitewater’s athletics programs are some of the best in the country. In the last year, the school has boasted 5 different national championship-winning teams. The athletics program is a cornerstone of the University’s operations, and a tainted image would have huge consequences for the school’s reputation and finances.
We do not know how UW Whitewater would have acted if Coach Fader had brought the matter to their attention immediately. However, is there something they would’ve done that wasn’t being done by the police? Or was their motivation to prevent the report of a sexual assault to law enforcement? The facts of this case certainly show a lack of accountability and transparency within the UW Whitewater Athletics Department and the University administration.
Unfortunately, this is only the latest episode for an institution with an established record of ignorance and incompetence when it comes to handling cases of sexual assault.
From 2004-2008 UW-Whitewater had among the highest number of sexual assaults of colleges in Wisconsin.
Then, in 2011, UW Whitewater had one reported case.
The statistics available on sexual assault on college campuses suggest that the 2011 report is far from correct. One in five female undergraduate students have experienced sexual assault during their college careers. However, as a recent White House report notes, only 12% of victims report the assault to law enforcement.
Underreporting of sexual assaults is one of the underlying causes of this crisis. The case of Coach Fader is an example of why victims and witnesses are hesitant to report these crimes to police.
Coach Fader took what he thought was the correct action. He acted in a way we hope anyone who is made aware of a sexual assault would act. Because of his actions, it appears he now faces retribution from the University he dedicated his professional life to.
If the administration of this institution should put as much effort into punishing sexual predators as they apparently put into punishing faculty who report assaults, their students would be much better off.
Update: The original version of this story stated that the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater was under investigation by the Department of Justice. It has been updated to correct this error.
-
Another example of administrators and bureaucrats making poor decisions.
-
Yeah Heisenberg, that isn't really the whole story. Multiple recruiting violations including an assistant coach telling someone to take the recruits to parties.
http://www.dailyunion.com/news/article_e6196956-b789-11e4-b6e8-ef9f498c4457.html
(Note that this article never mentions that the wrestling coach contacted the police. The alleged victim did.)
-
What K did or didn't know (rumors, never reported, brought forward second-hand from some sort of Kumbaya meeting) can't be compared to PSU where it went on for years, having the so-called foundation, having kids travel with him, etc., etc. - guys in the locker room know what's going on, plus even when the shower-humping was reported, it didn't get to the police, even though it was kids that were at risk. That's why it's so inexcusable.
-
Actually this is false. In order to be racist, the perpetrator must have some sort of societal power or privilege over the victim. Ergo, it is impossible for people of color to be racist towards white people. Women cannot be sexist towards men. Etc.
Incorrect. Here's the #1 definition, per the Oxford Dictionary:
Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior
Nothing about power or authority.
-
Incorrect. Here's the #1 definition, per the Oxford Dictionary:
Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior
Nothing about power or authority.
He used the ultra progressive version. Which normal people think is ridiculous.
-
Duke AD defends handling of allegations against Rasheed Sulaimon
http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/03/duke-ad-defends-handling-of-allegations-against-rasheed-sulaimon/
Duke athletic director Kevin White defended himself and his department against the suggestion that they mishandled allegations against a former basketball player.
On Monday, the Duke Chronicle, the university’s student paper, reported that Rasheed Sulaimon was twice accused of sexually assaulting a student. Neither of the alleged victims went to the Durham Police of Duke’s Office of Student Conduct, according to the report.
They did, however, implicate White, head coach Mike Krzyzewski, his coaching staff and a number of other staffers, saying they knew about the accusations as early as March of 2014. Sulaimon was dismissed from the program in late January of this year.
“Any allegation of student misconduct that is brought to the attention of our staff and coaches is immediately referred to the Office of Student Conduct in Student Affairs, which has responsibility for upholding the Duke code of conduct,” White said in a statement released by the university today. “The athletics department does not investigate or adjudicate matters of student conduct, and cooperates completely in the process.”
“These investigations are conducted thoroughly, in a timely manner, and with great care to respect the privacy and confidentiality of all students involved. Those procedures have been, and continue to be, followed by Coach Mike Krzyzewski and all members of the men’s basketball program. Coach Krzyzewski and his staff understand and have fulfilled their responsibilities to the university, its students and the community. As specified by federal law and university policy, all Duke officials, including Coach Krzyzewski, are prohibited from commenting publicly on any specific individual or situation.”
Krzyzewski refused to comment on the situation during the ACC teleconference on Monday.
Sulaimon is still a student at the university.
-
So, when K and the AD heard about the rumors, they followed their protocols and informed their higher ups in a timely fashion. K is in the clear.
-
So, when K and the AD heard about the rumors, they followed their protocols and informed their higher ups in a timely fashion. K is in the clear.
Seems likely everyone in the athletic department is in the clear