[Rosiak's Blog] Details released on Blue assault case

[immaeagle]

Eagle, in the words of Princess Bride....I don't think you are using that word right (contrarian).

A contrarian is someone who's bringing an opposing viewpoint to the forefront. A contrarian is NOT someone who projects onto a kid that he's guilty of rape or sexual assault simply because he seemed to hit on two women that you happened to see. That's not contrarian. That's deuschbaggery.

Hey Strawman, a couple thoughts.

1) Enough with the kid card. Vander Blue is a man. A man that gets paid a $250k education to play basketball.
2) I made assumptions (because I had to, due to 0 facts) that lead me to personally form an opinion that it is likely that player X was accused of sexual assault. Not guilting of sexual assault, and never once did I even use the word rape. I get that it is easier to tear down made-up stances, but please refrain.  

[PE8983]

How does anyone come to the conclusion that Vander was hitting on the girls at the table?  There is no indication of that whatsoever.

[Lennys Tap]

The fact that this basketball team is being represented by players who are getting accused of sexual assualt and punching students is a huge problem, and I am making due with what information I have (which is essentialy none, becuase it is the end of the world if anyone talk about this). I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.

Considering that I do not have personal knowledge of the alleged assault, and I should only speak from personal knowledge, should we just ignore this? Everybody? Forget that "vander blue punch" and "Marquette basketball sexual assault" are actual working google searches, let's talk about how many minutes Davante Gardner will get next year.

One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.

The problem with your "viewpoint" is this: You are angered that anyone would make any assumption about you even if that assumption is based on what you actually wrote, yet you are perfectly okay with making assumptions about others even as you admit to having no facts about them. If you don't see this as a problem you're not paying attention in Theology and Philosophy class.

[reinko]

immaeagle is either:

A. Pissed that VB hit on his own lady while ordering some cheese nachos at Qdoba last Fall, then got jacked in the face.
B. You are outraged student Derrick Wendler

[HouWarrior]

Ground control to ding dong doufus posters:  if they believed he assaulted the guy he would have been charged in criminal court and not a municpal citation.

Hold down the insult. A district attorney, on receipt of a complaint, proffers criminal charges, or presents the facts to a grand jury for a felony indictment. What officers believe, or dont believe on the scene, does not equate to the nature of the charges proffered, nor even constitute evidence of any crime..

[immaeagle]

What a courageous stand you've taken (by anonymously, on the Internet, tossing about accusations while admitting you have no knowledge of the events).

Courageous? I said that where? I passively hinted at that where? What is the point in even bothering to write "anonymously, on the Internet" while we are on a message board. I hold the same viewpoints in the company of my friends as I do online and would have the same stance in any other forum. Message me if you are interested in my name, address, background, or any other pertinent information.

[immaeagle]

immaeagle is either:

A. Pissed that VB hit on his own lady while ordering some cheese nachos at Qdoba last Fall, then got jacked in the face.
B. You are outraged student Derrick Wendler

I have to call a spade a spade here and concede that this was well done.

[StillAWarrior]

The fact that this basketball team is being represented by players who are getting accused of sexual assualt and punching students is a huge problem, and I am making due with what information I have (which is essentialy none, becuase it is the end of the world if anyone talk about this). I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.

Considering that I do not have personal knowledge of the alleged assault, and I should only speak from personal knowledge, should we just ignore this? Everybody? Forget that "vander blue punch" and "Marquette basketball sexual assault" are actual working google searches, let's talk about how many minutes Davante Gardner will get next year.

One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.

Speaking only for myself, the problem that I have with what you're posting here is that you're making a lot of assumptions and, based upon those assumptions, are conflating several events.

It's perfectly acceptable to be disappointed (or choose another appropriate word that describes how you feel) that Vander got into a fight with some kid.  It sounds like bad judgment and putting himself in a situation that he needs to avoid.  However minor the event actually is, it's regrettable.

It's perfectly acceptable to be troubled (or choose another appropriate word) that it appears that one or more members of the basketball team have been charged with sexual harassment (or assault or whatever).

What I (and apparently some others) have a problem with is your assumption that these things are related.  You are assuming that Vander was hitting on a couple of girls on the night in question.  Even if that assumption is true (and it might be - it's a possible scenario) many think it's unfair to Vander for you to move from that assumption to a suggestion that because he hit on those girls (and apparently spoke to a couple of girls on the street) that he also committed a sexual assault on a different occasion.

[Silkk the Shaka]

If LennysTap's post above doesn't shut this immaeagle tool up, nothing will. Couldn't have said it better myself.

[GGGG]

So your stance is that you *have* to make assumptions because you have 0 facts?  There is another option - don't make assumptions and let the facts come out.

[immaeagle]

The problem with your "viewpoint" is this: You are angered that anyone would make any assumption about you even if that assumption is based on what you actually wrote, yet you are perfectly okay with making assumptions about others even as you admit to having no facts about them. If you don't see this as a problem you're not paying attention in Theology and Philosophy class.

I admittedly paid no attention in Theology or Philosophy. If some reads what I said and responds with, "I think you are wrong because of xyz" that is fine. When some responds with "I think you are wrong because you disagree with me, also you are a douche" then I have a slight issue. I have received very few (though some) respectful responses.

[DJO's Pump Fake]

I don't know if this has been posted (sorry if it has)

This is a great read for all of us "experts" out there on the issue

http://www.anonymouseagle.com/2011/4/19/2120124/setting-the-record-straight-about-vander-blues-court-date

[foreverwarriors]

I get that it is easier to tear down made-up stances, but please refrain.  

I get that it is easier to make up accusations, but please refrain

[immaeagle]

What I (and apparently some others) have a problem with is your assumption that these things are related.  You are assuming that Vander was hitting on a couple of girls on the night in question.  Even if that assumption is true (and it might be - it's a possible scenario) many think it's unfair to Vander for you to move from that assumption to a suggestion that because he hit on those girls (and apparently spoke to a couple of girls on the street) that he also committed a sexual assault on a different occasion.

This could easily have been lost in the posts, but never did I intend to accuss Vander of being guilty of sexual assault. If he is found guilty by the courts, so be it. The only jumps I am comfortable making is that the events described above make it more likely (in my mind) that he would be accused of sexual assault. I respect that you are not willing to make those jumps, and don't expect everyone too. I'm not sold on much, just that it raises more red flags for me.

[Lennys Tap]

2) I made assumptions (because I had to, due to 0 facts) that lead me to personally form an opinion that it is likely that player X was accused of sexual assault. Not guilting of sexual assault, and never once did I even use the word rape. I get that it is easier to tear down made-up stances, but please refrain.  

Because you have (admittedly) ZERO facts, you don't "have to" form an opinion. As a matter of fact, having ZERO facts should cause you to refrain from having an opinion. Again, you don't like it when people jump to conclusions about you but feel it's okay (you even say you HAD to) to do so about others. Sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever.

[LON]

I admittedly paid no attention in Theology or Philosophy. If some reads what I said and responds with, "I think you are wrong because of xyz" that is fine. When some responds with "I think you are wrong because you disagree with me, also you are a douche" then I have a slight issue. I have received very few (though some) respectful responses.

Probably because the tone of your posts (as well as the date you registered and your low number of posts all having to do with allegations and your "interpretations" of said allegations) will not elicit a whole lot of respect from the people that frequent this board.  

And that, is why I called you a douche.

[Pakuni]

Courageous? I said that where? I passively hinted at that where? What is the point in even bothering to write "anonymously, on the Internet" while we are on a message board. I hold the same viewpoints in the company of my friends as I do online and would have the same stance in any other forum. Message me if you are interested in my name, address, background, or any other pertinent information.

"I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program"

If you're so certain of your stance, publicly state your name and address alongside your implication that Vander Blue is suspected of a sex crime, then forward that to his attorney(s) and Marquette's corporate counsel.
I'm sure they would interested in knowing who's making such claims.

[NYWarrior]

If you're so certain of your stance, publicly state your name and address alongside your implication that Vander Blue is suspected of a sex crime, then forward that to his attorney(s) and Marquette's corporate counsel.
I'm sure they would interested in knowing who's making such claims.

+1

[immaeagle]

So your stance is that you *have* to make assumptions because you have 0 facts?  There is another option - don't make assumptions and let the facts come out.

This is a message board full of people hypothesizing how many games we will win next year, where we will be ranked, whether or not Jimmy will get drafted, and where our next recruit will come from. Those are all MU-related issues that are talked about before they happen. How is this different?

[StillAWarrior]

This could easily have been lost in the posts, but never did I intend to accuss Vander of being guilty of sexual assault. If he is found guilty by the courts, so be it. The only jumps I am comfortable making is that the events described above make it more likely (in my mind) that he would be accused of sexual assault. I respect that you are not willing to make those jumps, and don't expect everyone too. I'm not sold on much, just that it raises more red flags for me.

I understand that.  And I suppose it could be true that guys who hit on girls more often are more likely to be accused of sexual assault.  But you're not just saying that he's more likely to be accused of sexual assault.  Putting aside whether or not that's true, you're also suggesting that he is one of the players who actually has been accused of sexual assault.  This is the leap that makes me uncomfortable.

[WarhawkWarrior]

This sort of provocation happens all of the time to pro athletes.  Give the kid some community service time and hopes he finds a way to avoid these type of creeps in the future.

[GGGG]

Speculating on recruiting and wins next year are a little different than speculating whether or not VB is guilty of a sex related crime.

[DJO's Pump Fake]

This is a message board full of people hypothesizing how many games we will win next year, where we will be ranked, whether or not Jimmy will get drafted, and where our next recruit will come from. Those are all MU-related issues that are talked about before they happen. How is this different?

haha...they are so similar your right.

[ATL MU Warrior]

This is a message board full of people hypothesizing how many games we will win next year, where we will be ranked, whether or not Jimmy will get drafted, and where our next recruit will come from. Those are all MU-related issues that are talked about before they happen. How is this different?

is this a serious question?

[esotericmindguy]

How does anyone come to the conclusion that Vander was hitting on the girls at the table?  There is no indication of that whatsoever.

Seriously? Yeah, I'm sure he just stopped by to say hi to the two gentlemen, which forced them into a verbal altercation. I've been to many bars/after bar spots and 90% of the fights that occur stem from women....I think it's more than reasonable to assume.