alleged sexual assault investigation of 4 on 1 by public saftey

[MUfan12]

The Assistant DA says that if she decides to press charges, it won't be until mid-May.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/119093059.html

[reinko]

To the JD's in the house, care to make guesses on what this could mean?

[wyzgy]

schools out

[bobnoxious]

+ 1

[MUMac]

schools out

Yep.  I doubt the investigation or decesion lasts that wrong, but the announcement will.

[bk18]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/119093059.html

I'm a SLU basketball fan and follow MU as well. I heard what happened to SLU last year may have happened at MU. But it is just a rumor.

It involves a train if you know what I mean. I also heard MU tried to cover it up so athletes plus school could be in big trouble. But it is all rumor right now.

[MU B2002]

Please see one of the other various threads on this subject.  And troll away.

[HouWarrior]

To the JD's in the house, care to make guesses on what this could mean?

CRIMINAL SIDE:

In general, sending back for more investigation is just that. It means, after the first rundown of facts, its...(i)Not a slam dunk conviction on its face; and (ii)its also not enough to yet to make an informed charging decision on...up or down.
It maybe  needing of corroboration, lacks physical/biology evidence, missing witness interviews...anything.... who knows, exactly what is lacking---nothing is gained on speculation on what investigation holes might be.

Even when this further investigation is complete, and presented --dist attorney must still decide whether YES: there is enough there either: (i) to inform and charge a misdemeanor...or (ii)to present to a grand jury(citizens panel) for them to determine whether a felony should be indicted,..., and if NO:the criminal case is dropped/never charged.

With the press, profile, and potential for collateral damage a local DA would, here, ensure no precipitous moves to charge, or prosecute. Any Favoritism claim is very sensitive, so DA also must show its not favoring anyone--....neither victim, her atty, (or their publicity pressure), ....nor the accused, or MU. It must appear thorough, unbiased, yet suff. important/prioritized to require prompt investigation...hence the assurance of prompt, further work, and some action...up or down in just 6-8 weeks.

MU has more than a few JDs, judges and DAs....and..unlike Durham NC--Duke..NO DA will be popular in Milw.for jumping too quick to pelt the hide of MUers, (i) for personal publicity, or (ii) in overcompensation..to just show the state wont sweep under any athletes bad act; or(JOKE)... (iii) to remind the other DA's she is from UW law school and still hurting over Vander (sorry, -lol).

Like wise, if this is closed/dismissed too quickly, without charges, the DA/MPD  risks the same victim/her atty will run to the press ,yet again ,to push that now MPD, and the DA, were just as favoring/suppressive as they "claimed" as to MU.

Duke is a cautionary tale here. There, the towwnie DA in Durham went fast and hard against the lacrosse players (feeding Durham's duke dislike -while running for office, only to shoot too high and miss); he ended up disbarred, and Duke was sued and settled for big civil  damages to the accused. Duke case says ..No one will move too fast here...and thanks to the milw press pressure on this...no one will move too slow.

CIVIL SIDE:

The accused kids arent deep pocketed for it to make it worthwhile (for the % atty)to sue the kids personally, especially if none are charged/convicted of an assault crime. Just sexual harrassment (as found by MU)of the victim (a civil claim..not a crime) doesnt recover big jury money here, as--- (i)the jury questions the delay, assumes that she lacked immediate anguish, and ongoing emotional distress; and (ii) in the press she is portrayed as more upset with MU, not the kids. So, as  her press assault is pointed to MUs improper, favorable finding of no assault, the MU case is next AND!!!!

The best thing I see  here .......is for MU (the possible civil defendant)...

..which, (although not equipped like cops, nor set up to pursue crime ) did not find any assault. When the police pros now, dont find a slam dunk assault charge on their first investigation pass, it tends to validate MU as not having obviously  failed in its prior work or papering over the claim,( to protect the accused), nor does it show they  clearly favored the accused. Of course...If cops dig, on their second pass, and find something MU should have found but didnt...There still may have been MU negligence, but this would seem to NEGATE any claim for intentionally bad acts, or gross negligence, by MU.Why?...
Favoritism implies a showing of intent...You intend for someone to be favored over another. Accidentally(negligence) missing something, does not show any MU intent to reach a   "favorable" finding of no assault.

This is being handled right, and we need to let is be thorough, and well reasoned work---both sides are entitled to fair justice...outside of the press.

"Let justice be done though the heavens fall."

[Les Nessman]

have at it

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26559.0

All the conjecture your little Billiken heart could desire.

[Ron Paul]

Just out of curiosity, I was pretty sure they were investigating a sexual assault...not rape correct?  I guess that would rule out a "train"...

[HouWarrior]

Mods please superbar this rumor mongering troller thread.
In the Al ...should involve Biliken types only on Majerus, and Raymonds, ..our points in common

[4everwarriors]

Nah, our team flies charter. Haven't used Amtrak in years.

[NCMUFan]

I don't know if the players are guilty or innocent of anything.  But I was thinking, why not have a "Life Lesson" with the topic "Respecting a woman".  It might avoid alot of future problems for many parties.

[wyzgy]

I don't know if the players are guilty or innocent of anything.  But I was thinking, why not have a "Life Lesson" with the topic "Respecting a woman".  It might avoid a lot of future problems for many parties.

that'll do it.  why haven't they thought of that before. and make it requisit watching for all new comers and we'll live happily ever after

[NavinRJohnson]

that'll do it.  why haven't they thought of that before. and make it requisit watching for all new comers and we'll live happily ever after

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/QS2UsjBufqE" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/QS2UsjBufqE</a>

[Tugg Speedman]

Just out of curiosity, I was pretty sure they were investigating a sexual assault...not rape correct?  I guess that would rule out a "train"...

+1  since they cannot tell the difference between assault, which is not the case here, and harassment, which is the allegation here, this rumor by definition is wrong.

[reinko]

Thank houwarrior for your insight, very much appreciated.

[NCMUFan]

that'll do it.  why haven't they thought of that before. and make it requisit watching for all new comers and we'll live happily ever after

Well, no one can guarantee stupidity won't rule, but at least it is worth giving a try.  If it wasn't important, why are these fans dedicating 14 pages + on this issue.

[Skatastrophy]

Thank houwarrior for your insight, very much appreciated.

+1

Thanks for taking the time to write all of that up, houwarrior!

[brewcity77]

+1

Thanks for taking the time to write all of that up, houwarrior!

+2

A great post, definitely helpful to those of us that went to Marquette for something other than law

[JerryBoyle]

I'm surprised all these months have passed with no mention of this

http://query.municourt.milwaukee.gov/AllDetails.asp?CNumber=10129943


Defendant Information Name: VANDER LEE BLUE
Month of Birth: 07/1992 Sex: Male  Race: Black  
Last Known Address: 1716 W WISCONSIN AV, Apt 561, MILWAUKEE, WI 53233
Case Summary Case Number: 10129943 Status: Active
Type of Case: Municipal citation  
Citation Number: 61079292  Deposit Amount: $366.00
Violation: Ordinance 105-2, Assault and Battery
Violation Date and Time: 10/24/2010   1:30 AM
Violation Location: 1610 W WELLS ST
Plea: Not Guilty Plea was entered by: Defense Attorney
Collection? No Installment Plan? No

---

Note that their are three types of Assault ..

Felonious Assault (think hurting someone)
Misdemeanor Assault (think hitting someone)
Municipal Assault (think pushing someone).

Vander was arrested for Municipal assault (the lowest of the three).  He pleas not guilty at posts a $366 fine.  His court appearance is April 19.  If found guilty, the court keeps the fine and nothing more.

[brewcity77]

Anyone know if this is legit? The link doesn't work. Seems odd that Jerry Boyle would sign up and post this here now...

[Skatastrophy]

Anyone know if this is legit? The link doesn't work. Seems odd that Jerry Boyle would sign up and post this here now...

I just looked it up.  It's legit

He's charged with violating Milwaukee Ordinance 105-2, Assault and Battery.

I have no clue what that is.  I tried to look it up, but Jerry's explanation is more than I found elsewhere.

[Pakuni]

I'm surprised all these months have passed with no mention of this

http://query.municourt.milwaukee.gov/AllDetails.asp?CNumber=10129943


Defendant Information Name: VANDER LEE BLUE
Month of Birth: 07/1992 Sex: Male  Race: Black  
Last Known Address: 1716 W WISCONSIN AV, Apt 561, MILWAUKEE, WI 53233
Case Summary Case Number: 10129943 Status: Active
Type of Case: Municipal citation  
Citation Number: 61079292  Deposit Amount: $366.00
Violation: Ordinance 105-2, Assault and Battery
Violation Date and Time: 10/24/2010   1:30 AM
Violation Location: 1610 W WELLS ST
Plea: Not Guilty Plea was entered by: Defense Attorney
Collection? No Installment Plan? No

---

Note that their are three types of Assault ..

Felonious Assault (think hurting someone)
Misdemeanor Assault (think hitting someone)
Municipal Assault (think pushing someone).

Vander was arrested for Municipal assault (the lowest of the three).  He pleas not guilty at posts a $366 fine.  His court appearance is April 19.  If found guilty, the court keeps the fine and nothing more.

All it means is that he got into a fight/altercation, and the fact it was charged as an ordinance violation - essentially a citation - rather than a criminal offense indicates it wasn't particularly serious.

[MerrittsMustache]

All it means is that he got into a fight/altercation, and the fact it was charged as an ordinance violation - essentially a citation - rather than a criminal offense indicates it wasn't particularly serious.

I knew someone at MU who got a charge like this after an early morning altercation at Real Chili (where else?). IIRC, he showed up to court, got his money back and that was that. That said, my friend's altercation took place 10 years ago and the exact details are a little foggy so I'm not swearing by this.