Latest Notre Dame Scandal

[TallTitan34]

Why did they wait 15 days to talk to him?

[StillAWarrior]

Why did they wait 15 days to talk to him?

They waited 15 days to talk to him because it appears that the sum total of her allegation was that he grabbed her breast against her will and stopped when his phone rang.  Was in inappropriate?  Absolutely (assuming it happened -- and I do believe it happened).  Did it scare her or make her uncomfortable?  Apparently (she reported her level of fear was a seven on a scale of 1-10).

But did it warrant dropping everything else they might have been working on and rushing out to conduct an investigation?  It would have to be a pretty slow night on a college campus for this to be at the top of the campus police "To Do" list.  I even suspect that they might never have investigated it if the girl had not committed suicide.  And I' not convinced that it had anything to do with the fact that the kid was a football player.  I just suspect that cops who are running around breaking up parties, dealing with underage drinking, drugs, theft, etc., don't make it a priority to investigate an allegation that a boy grabbed a girl's breast.  I am not defending this response (or lack thereof), but I suspect that many police departments when receiving an allegation of this nature would respond with, "really?  That's it?"  It was only when she killed herself when someone said, "Oh crap, this looks really bad.  We need to get on this."  And that's why they waited 15 days.  As the father of three daughters, I would hope that wherever they end up in college, if they make a similar allegation it will receive prompt attention.  If it doesn't, I will certainly raise hell and I don't blame the family for doing so.  But, unfortunately, I wouldn't be surprised if they don't take it as seriously as I do.

Again, I'm not defending this.  But I am guessing (admittedly, guessing) that this is more or less the same response that this allegation would get in many places.  And maybe ND should be faulted for that.  I just really don't think it had anything to do with the fact that it was a football player involved.

Where ND really screwed up is in failing to reach out to the family.  Even if they believed that they did things 100% correctly in the investigation, a little human compassion would have gone a long way in this case.

[TallTitan34]

Alright I will give you that, but don't you think talking to him would to move to the top of the list once the girl killed herself?  It took another five days after her death to talk to him.

[StillAWarrior]

Alright I will give you that, but don't you think talking to him would to move to the top of the list once the girl killed herself?  It took another five days after her death to talk to him.

Absolutely.  I'm sure that once they received word that she killed herself, the proverbial s%#t hit the fan.  I have no idea how quickly they got that news.  I also would guess that once that happened, talking to their lawyers/bosses actually was at the top of the list.

They did try to reach him on September 9 (the day before the suicide) and apparently on September 13.  They finally got him on the 15th.  Too slow?  Perhaps.  Unusually slow?  I have no idea.

[TallTitan34]

I don't know.  I just think ND took their time investigating because it was a star player and probably wouldn't have at all had the girl not killed herself.

I don't think the guy should be jailed or anything.  I just think with his history they should have at least talked to him.  My beef isn't with the player getting punished, it's how they handled it.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Absolutely.  I'm sure that once they received word that she killed herself, the proverbial s%#t hit the fan.  I have no idea how quickly they got that news.  I also would guess that once that happened, talking to their lawyers/bosses actually was at the top of the list.

They did try to reach him on September 9 (the day before the suicide) and apparently on September 13.  They finally got him on the 15th.  Too slow?  Perhaps.  Unusually slow?  I have no idea.

Murky but if a female reports a sexual assault, it would be comforting to know as an alumni, student, citizen or parent that a trained police force would immediately investigate the incident to protect any evidence, offer the complaintant  help (physical or psychological), get any potential criminal off the streets, conduct witness interview, dismiss the claim against another student if unfounded, and protect the university's name.  The UND police only did the later it appears.  Really, they couldn't track down the suspect who they knew was a football player?  Try going to the 3:00PM practice guys....Barney Fife could have figured this one out.

The deep UND alumni are livid at the university and athletics program right now. The lawsuit is coming as it should--but it will be because they didn't do their friggin job vs. just the alleged crime. Just a shame for the girl and the family, and even for the player if this was this minor as reported.

[MUBurrow]

Just a shame for the girl and the family, and even for the player if this was this minor as reported.

Good point and important element of this.  The undoubtedly slow response and defense of that timeline in the weeks since is not helping anyone.  While the allegation of assault certainly don't make the player a stand up guy, its nature also doesn't warrant this type of firestorm.  His identity will get out, its only a matter of time.  If the university does its damn job in a reasonable fashion instead of the classic good ole boys, defer to us on everything stonewall, everyone involved is in a better position.

[Blackhat]

I'm not taking one side or the other, NDPD haven't released what they all did in nature to this investigation....but

lets remember accusation does not equal guilt.... to play devil's advocate imagine if you're the parent of the male student who gets falsely accused.  his rep would be ruined for a long time ala the duke lacrosse players because somebody else accuses due to frustration, greed, whatever.

[Dr. Blackheart]

I'm not taking one side or the other, NDPD haven't released what they all did in nature to this investigation....but

lets remember accusation does not equal guilt.... to play devil's advocate imagine if you're the parent of the male student who gets falsely accused.  his rep would be ruined for a long time ala the duke lacrosse players because somebody else accuses due to frustration, greed, whatever.

True...in fact her parents even said they didn't think this was chargeable based on what they heard way after...but their daughter was already fragile and OD'ed soon after the incident and the authorities did nothing to investigate one way or the other when they should have which led to further stress on the girl...and then the harassing texts came with no police action.  The crime was on the police force who did nothing proper--leading her over the edge.  Pathetic and it is why the UND Board is going to have to write another big check to dead students' parents on their watch. The parents relied on a school and authorities they trusted to do what should have done and check this out and report back. 

[Blackhat]

The girl wasn't a UND student.

You're assuming stress points though....a lot of assumptions in this story.

The girl had mental health issues, it could have been her getting in a fight with the mother caused her to kill herself.  So it's the mothers "fault"?   No, because most people in those situations don't kill themselves.

Hell she could have felt terrible for falsely accusing and killed herself...we could play these games all day.

[MUBurrow]

I think this story gets into big problems when there is an attempt to draw causation from the alleged assault to the tragic suicide.

I agree with Stone Cold's point on the danger of false accusations as well.  The sad part is that because of the timeframe of investigators in the case, there will never be any type of legitimate investigation into what did or did not happen.  The girl has died, the alleged assailant will be forever assumed guilty because of the impossibility of an effective investigation.  Because ND did not take the allegation seriously (for whatever reason, that is up for speculation) everyone is worse off.

As for the fact that she went to St Mary's and not ND, ND has worked incredibly hard to cultivate a close relationship with St. Mary's, and has always done so. That's why they aren't raising jurisdictional issues, because they want St Mary's to be seen as an extension of ND.  That's also a big reason why it is such a popular destination for ND generational families to send their daughters.  ND doesn't want to alienate that crowd, its incredibly important to them to keep that tie. 

Relatedly, does anyone know if ND campus police also patrol and have jurisdiction over St. Mary's campus?

[Dr. Blackheart]

The girl wasn't a UND student.

You're assuming stress points though....a lot of assumptions in this story.

The girl had mental health issues, it could have been her getting in a fight with the mother caused her to kill herself.  So it's the mothers "fault"?   No, because most people in those situations don't kill themselves.

Hell she could have felt terrible for falsely accusing and killed herself...we could play these games all day.

I am not assuming anything in terms of the girl's mental condition...but the contributing facts of any civil case are fairly clear cut:  the UND police waited days to even follow up on a criminal complaint filed within 24 hours of the alleged crime. And then did not formally investigate a written claim of criminal harassment of the victim by a witness to the event.  UND will have no leg to stand in a civil court. They are culpable in a major way to the lawsuit as they didn't even come close to following proper police procedures. More so, as they have refused to even turn over the paperwork to her parents after her death--count on a claim of triple the damages as the fox is watching the hen house.  UND will be writing a check to settle this out of the court as they usually do.  Sad all the way around.   

[TallTitan34]

I'd like to see how the ND police handle similar reports where the suspect isn't a star football player. 

[StillAWarrior]

I'd like to see how the ND police handle similar reports where the suspect isn't a star football player. 

And my point all along has been that you (and I) have absolutely no idea.  It might be exactly the same; it might be completely different.  None of us know.  We can fault them for the way they handled it, but without more information, we can't fault them for handling it incorrectly because he was a football player.

[TallTitan34]

Wow.  It looks like Notre Dame just disregards sexual assaults cases whether a football player was involved or not:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-notre-dame-20110217,0,4917455.story

Notre Dame:  Hide your kids, Hide your wife

[🏀]

Wow.  It looks like Notre Dame just disregards sexual assaults cases whether a football player was involved or not:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-notre-dame-20110217,0,4917455.story

Notre Dame:  Hide your kids, Hide your wife

Hide your TV reporters.

[Dr. Blackheart]

"The department assigned the case to a detective Sept. 8 — more than 72 hours after the woman reported being sexually assaulted. Authorities waited because the department was stretched thin by the first home football game of the season Sept. 4, sources said."

Glad it takes four days of rest and recovery from directing traffic to finally investigate a felony.

[Henry Sugar]

HT:  Tim

Just remember... it ain't the crime.  It's the cover up.

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/docs-notre-dame-edited-declan-sullivan-videos-29574

[TallTitan34]

What a joke.  How are they allowed to edit the tapes before turning them over?

Typical Notre Dame arrogance.

[StillAWarrior]

What a joke.  How are they allowed to edit the tapes before turning them over?

Typical Notre Dame arrogance.

Well, actually they didn't turn them over...they just showed them to OSHA investigators.

If they destroyed anything, that's a problem.  If they edited them, you can speculate all you want, but as someone who works in this area, that's not terribly surprising to me and it doesn't necessarily suggest arrogance to me.  Based on that report, they did not try to hide the fact that the videos were edited.  Many, many times in my career during government investigations, I have advised my clients to produce only what the investigators "need" to see to complete an effective investigation.  Just because you're being investigated, does not give the government the right to see things that are unrelated to the investigation.  If the government investigators follow-up and ask for more, we work through it.  Far more often they are satisfied that what we've provided is sufficient for their purposes and they don't ask for more.  That doesn't make my clients arrogant.  That doesn't mean they are hiding anything.  It generally means only that they're trying to keep government investigators from having unfettered access into information that unrelated to the investigation or is not needed.

I'm not defending ND in this because I think it's clear that they screwed up big time and that their mistake cost a kid his life.  It's tragic and Notre Dame should be held accountable.  But OSHA has announced its fines so apparently it completed its investigation against ND.  The agency saw what it needed to see to complete its investigation (and for all we know they followed up and were provided additional video).  I do not have any problem whatsoever with ND editing the video, and at this point we really don't know if OSHA does either.

[MerrittsMustache]

Well, actually they didn't turn them over...they just showed them to OSHA investigators.

If they destroyed anything, that's a problem.  If they edited them, you can speculate all you want, but as someone who works in this area, that's not terribly surprising to me and it doesn't necessarily suggest arrogance to me.  Based on that report, they did not try to hide the fact that the videos were edited.  Many, many times in my career during government investigations, I have advised my clients to produce only what the investigators "need" to see to complete an effective investigation.  Just because you're being investigated, does not give the government the right to see things that are unrelated to the investigation.  If the government investigators follow-up and ask for more, we work through it.  Far more often they are satisfied that what we've provided is sufficient for their purposes and they don't ask for more.  That doesn't make my clients arrogant.  That doesn't mean they are hiding anything.  It generally means only that they're trying to keep government investigators from having unfettered access into information that unrelated to the investigation or is not needed.

I'm not defending ND in this because I think it's clear that they screwed up big time and that their mistake cost a kid his life.  It's tragic and Notre Dame should be held accountable.  But OSHA has announced its fines so apparently it completed its investigation against ND.  The agency saw what it needed to see to complete its investigation (and for all we know they followed up and were provided additional video).  I do not have any problem whatsoever with ND editing the video, and at this point we really don't know if OSHA does either.

Good points.

Question for you: What could ND have felt the need to edit out of the tapes?

[Henry Sugar]

I do not have any problem whatsoever with ND editing the video, and at this point we really don't know if OSHA does either.

If you click through to the link, you can see quite clearly that OSHA has a problem with ND editing the video.  That is the entire point of the post.

[TallTitan34]

Question for you: What could ND have felt the need to edit out of the tapes?

They could have edited out major gusts of wind since they claim it was a "beautiful day".

[StillAWarrior]

If you click through to the link, you can see quite clearly that OSHA has a problem with ND editing the video.  That is the entire point of the post.

I did click through to the link, and I didn't come to the same conclusion.  I saw that OSHA commented in their initial notes that some was missing.  I have no idea, and I suspect that no one else here does either, whether OSHA "had a problem" with that.  They noted the edits, as any competent investigator would.  The statement that it was "unduly" edited is editorializing by the web site.  What happened next is the key.  Did they follow up with ND and ask why the video tape was edited?  What did ND say?  Was OSHA satisfied with the response?  Did they ever comment or allege that ND was not cooperating with the investigation?  Where are the notes from those conversations?

We simply don't know.  All we know is that OSHA completed its investigation and levied fines.  What I'm telling you, from experience, is that it's not uncommon for an employer who is being investigated by the government to refuse to turn over everything that is requested.  Government investigators often make extremely broad and unreasonable requests.  Employers often limit what they produce.  This doesn't necessarily mean that they're arrogant, that they're hiding something, or that they're not cooperating.  It might mean that, but it doesn't necessarily mean that.  If OSHA thought that ND didn't provide sufficient information, it could have and would have followed up.  For all I know, OSHA did follow up.

My only point here is that just because they edited the video tape doesn't mean that they did something inappropriate (aside from the obvious improprieties that led to the videographer's death).

[StillAWarrior]

They could have edited out major gusts of wind since they claim it was a "beautiful day".

That would be a shockingly stupid thing to do.  I'm not saying that it's impossible, but it would be really, really dumb.  At some point, ti's almost certain that someone is going to see the full video.  If the parts that were edited out of the copy provided to OSHA are damning, ND will be in even more trouble than they are now.  If the original video has been destroyed, whoever sues ND will be entitled to a jury instruction that they jury can presume that the destroyed video would have been favorable to the plaintiff's cause.  I'm comfortable in assuming that the video is not destroyed and will see the light of day.

As much as some people would prefer to think that this is some sort of conspiracy to hide what actually happened, I think the most likely explanation is that the video that was edited out is just more of the same.  It's likely that ND told OSHA that what they produced was representative of the entire video.  They produced video that showed that it was windy/gusty.  It showed that the comment that it was a "beautiful day" was questionable (at best - dishonest at worst).  The video led, in part, to the fines.  If the video that was edited out is incriminating, God help ND.  They will, and should, get hammered if that turns out to be the case.

I'm coming at this as someone who helps clients deal with government investigations all the time.  Government investigators often make requests that are extremely broad that seek information that is not really necessary to complete their investigation.  I don't think it is at all unreasonable to cooperate with an investigation, but limit what you produce to that information that is needed to complete a fair investigation.  In saying this, I am not advocating hiding information relevant to the investigation.  This is illegal and stupid and causes far more problems than it solves.