Yikes, Just The Messenger...

[GGGG]

Ahh...Ners continues to blame the victim.  Despite the fact he has no idea who she is and what she is like.  Do us all a favor and keep your two cents, along with your armchair psychology.

Anything to keep Buzz and the players in a good light I guess...

[ChicosBailBonds]

Drew Adams "resigned" and went to New Mexico - dig deeper here, guy.

Indiana does not have the #1 recruiting class in the nation coming in for 2011.  They have one slim center who is very good, a traditional shooter, and another kid coming in.  They are nowhere near #1. 

Of course, you're probably talking about a future year - specifically 2012.  You have vehemently expressed your opinion that no one - absolutely no one - is committed to a school for 2012... I guess this opinion changes based on what program you're talking about. 

I4's 2012 class has been referred to as the best at a given point in time, but this is largely due to the fact that Crean has gotten verbal commits out of his AAU company very young kids, years before (as you would say) they are even able to commit to a program.

They will not have the CONSENSUS #1 class coming in for 2012 when it is talked about ~15 months from now.  Not having Hanner be eligible to play for I4 would be a bummer for you guys.

I don't recall saying #1 recruiting class for this year...in fact I didn't mention 2011 at all.  I said the #1 recruiting class coming in. Right now, they are ranked #1.  Will it be #1 then?  Who knows.  Do you think Hanner will be ineligible entirely?  Maybe...I don't think that will be the case and the follow-up articles on ESPN destroying the Fish's commentary pretty much sum that up

Drew Adams left to work with Steve Alford, who he played for at Iowa.  He was given a promotion at his new job....dig deeper guy.

I'm still waiting for the fallout since someone really thinks these are on par.  One involved multiple CURRENT student athletes, cost the school their AD, gave us enormous negative press, exposed we were in violation of the law for 10 years, made the school apologize 3 times, etc, etc.....vs the other where the kid is still in high school, is not a student athlete of any kind at the university, was not considered a criminal act, no one lost their job, etc, etc.  But hey, let's not deal with the facts.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I suppose it will be, but seeing as DPS, MPD, and the DA with access to medical records (as I assume a cooperative plaintiff would allow their release) haven't come up with ANY evidence. And will she say she was just too traumatized to go to police sooner (like the times DPS made that avenue available) or was there another reason to wait half a year before coming forward?

I think maybe we are talking about different incidents.  The Tribune reported the February incident she reported within hours of the incident happening.

Secondly, there was medical reporting on this.  "Medical reports from that visit show the woman had vaginal abrasions, in addition to fresh injuries on her face, hip, foot, knee and both thighs, according to documents obtained by the Tribune."

She could sue in any number of areas....doesn't mean she will win.  At the end of the day, she left the university where she was pursuing an education, perhaps a dream, etc, because the school failed her.  She is clearly emotional and suffered as a result of it.  I've seen plenty of lawsuits that were filed for far less and won damages.  She claims the DPS officer said MPD wouldn't want to investigate her claim...("She did, only to be told that police wouldn't want to investigate her case and that the university's internal discipline process would likely cause her more harm than good, she said. The officer did not take an official report, she said.")....these are the kinds of things that she can build a civil case on if she wishes.  Again, doesn't mean she is going to win but at the end of the day

1)  Woman at MU, studying, claims to be raped
2)  DPS says MPD probably wouldn't investigate so why bother....more harm than good to go through internal process (basically..suck it up sweetheart)
3)  Woman left university emotionally damaged
4)  MU admitted to be in violation of state law for 10 years
5)  Medical information did show some injuries
6)  Players and coaches rebuked and disciplined (why....if nothing happened and no wrong doing occurred)  

Etc

That's hardly thin for her to pursue this if she wishes.  It's no slam dunk, either.

[NersEllenson]

Ahh...Ners continues to blame the victim.  Despite the fact he has no idea who she is and what she is like.  Do us all a favor and keep your two cents, along with your armchair psychology.

Anything to keep Buzz and the players in a good light I guess...

Why don't you enlighten all of us Sultan and tell us your relationship to the victim, and what you perceive her to be like?  How much time have you spent around her?  Here's a fact for you Sultan - how someone acts in their public life, and social life, can be quite different than their love life.  If you can't understand that basic piece of armchair psychology, Lord help you.

If you would, since it sounds like you are closely connected to the victim, can you share with us her reasoning as to why she didn't go to police when offered by DPS??  Just to indulge you, I'll give you a bit more armchair psychology - considering she'd had a previous consensual sexual relationship with the player, began that evening consensually - I'm sure in her somewhat sane mind she realized she didn't want the player charged or for the police to be involved.  Having said that, as more time passed and the player didn't ever get back together with her (assuming), her bitterness won out and she decided to try to extract some form of revenge.

Whatever the case, it is not an emotionally stable person who begins having sex, and then halfway through it decides no thanks.....

[GGGG]

Why don't you enlighten all of us Sultan and tell us your relationship to the victim, and what you perceive her to be like?  How much time have you spent around her?  Here's a fact for you Sultan - how someone acts in their public life, and social life, can be quite different than their love life.  If you can't understand that basic piece of armchair psychology, Lord help you.

If you would, since it sounds like you are closely connected to the victim, can you share with us her reasoning as to why she didn't go to police when offered by DPS??  

See, *I* don't know the victim.  I have no clue who she is.  Therefore, I will decline to make any assumptions about her mental state...or insinuate that she is a "crazy bitch"...or assume that she was simply a "woman scored."  And I most certainly would not post such assumptions in a public forum.

Ners, and you know that I know who the accused are in one of these incidents.  I have not made any statements about him either.  I have no idea if he is guilty or not...and neither do you.  The difference is that one of us feels perfectly comfortable about making half-assed assumptions and accusations...and one of us doesn't.

[ChicosBailBonds]

See, *I* don't know the victim.  I have no clue who she is.  Therefore, I will decline to make any assumptions about her mental state...or insinuate that she is a "crazy bitch"...or assume that she was simply a "woman scored."  And I most certainly would not post such assumptions in a public forum.

Ners, and you know that I know who the accused are in one of these incidents.  I have not made any statements about him either.  I have no idea if he is guilty or not...and neither do you.  The difference is that one of us feels perfectly comfortable about making half-assed assumptions and accusations...and one of us doesn't.

Well stated.  The idea that a woman cannot change her mind, especially based on what is going on at the time, is absurd.  What if the guy is calling her names, taking her in a direction she didn't want to go,  etc, etc....of course she can say no and I'd say she is absolutely emotionally stable for doing so.

In fact, a Maryland appeals court has ruled just that.  "Women can say "no" at any time during intercourse, and a man can be convicted of rape if he doesn't stop, Maryland highest court ruled Wednesday."

"The crime of first-degree rape includes post-penetration vaginal intercourse accomplished through force or threat of force and without the consent of the victim, even if the victim consented to the initial penetration," the Court of Appeals wrote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/16/AR2008041602921.html

[mu_hilltopper]

Anyone who thinks Public Safety turned a blind eye/ear to a believable sexual assault victim is deluding themselves.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

Anyone who thinks Public Safety turned a blind eye/ear to a believable sexual assault victim is deluding themselves.  

I disagree and it's proven right here in this thread. Blind eye...you're probably correct but that doesn't mean the DPS officer didn't view things through the same lens that some here view it.  Several guys here basically says it's impossible to start consensual sex and then back out of it.  I'll bet there are many others that feel the same way.  Yet a Maryland court says that absolutely a woman has the right to do this.

Right there that is two conflicting viewpoints on the subject of consensual sex.  A court is saying she can say no at any time.  Others are labeling a woman that does this as not sane, an emotional trainwreck, etc.

Who is to say a DPS officer concluded the same thing..."sorry honey, once you started consensual sex too bad so sad".  I'm not trying to be flip, but just based on the comments on this board alone there are people that believe this to be the case, despite what the courts have ruled.  I don't see how it is any stretch at all that a DPS officer could believe the same thing and just figured once you start there's no going back.

[Jay Bee]

I don't see how it is any stretch at all that a DPS officer could believe the same thing and just figured once you start there's no going back.

It's a stretch unless your agenda is attacking MU.  If the scenario you laid out  were truly the case, I would be appalled and sickened.  Now, if there is a log book that says "girl said they were doing it and she wanted to stop - yeah right!", then let's freak out... but I have not seen it and it's a stretch for any objective, reasonable person, despite that in your mind it may seem likely.   

Nothing has been 'proven right here in this thread'.  There is a huge difference between voicing your opinion on a message board and people who are carrying out duties as an officer. 

[Lennys Tap]

See, *I* don't know the victim.  I have no clue who she is.  Therefore, I will decline to make any assumptions about her mental state...or insinuate that she is a "crazy bitch"...or assume that she was simply a "woman scored."  And I most certainly would not post such assumptions in a public forum.

Ners, and you know that I know who the accused are in one of these incidents.  I have not made any statements about him either.  I have no idea if he is guilty or not...and neither do you.  The difference is that one of us feels perfectly comfortable about making half-assed assumptions and accusations...and one of us doesn't.

You say you make no assumptions, yet you refer to her over and over again in multiple posts as the "victim". Sounds like you're assuming more than anyone else in this whole matter.

[ChicosBailBonds]

It's a stretch unless your agenda is attacking MU.  If the scenario you laid out  were truly the case, I would be appalled and sickened.  Now, if there is a log book that says "girl said they were doing it and she wanted to stop - yeah right!", then let's freak out... but I have not seen it and it's a stretch for any objective, reasonable person, despite that in your mind it may seem likely.   

Nothing has been 'proven right here in this thread'.  There is a huge difference between voicing your opinion on a message board and people who are carrying out duties as an officer. 

Hardly.  I just don't stick my head in the sand.  I question my gov't at times, does that mean I hate the USA?  Please. 

What was "proven in this thread" is that some people truly think that a woman cannot say no after saying yes and their own words TIME and TIME again reinforce this.  I'm merely pointing out that even in a court of law that was the viewpoint of some until an appellate court provided some clarity on it.  I'm happy to help those that didn't know that was the case and hopefully their continued approach to belittle someone, a potential sexual assault victim, will stop now since they've been educated on what the law says.

[GGGG]

You say you make no assumptions, yet you refer to her over and over again in multiple posts as the "victim". Sounds like you're assuming more than anyone else in this whole matter.

She was found to be the victim of sexual harrassment.  News reports used that phrase when the story was first reported in March.

Seriously, what a lame response.

[Lennys Tap]

In fact, a Maryland appeals court has ruled just that.  "Women can say "no" at any time during intercourse, and a man can be convicted of rape if he doesn't stop, Maryland highest court ruled Wednesday."

"The crime of first-degree rape includes post-penetration vaginal intercourse accomplished through force or threat of force and without the consent of the victim, even if the victim consented to the initial penetration," the Court of Appeals wrote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/16/AR2008041602921.html

So I can name any appellate or Supreme court ruling ever made and you will believe it and defend it as an example of just and correct thinking. This should be fun.

[Lennys Tap]

She was found to be the victim of sexual harrassment.  News reports used that phrase when the story was first reported in March.

Seriously, what a lame response.

In what court was she found to be the victim of sexual harassment? IIRC, MU found sexual harrassment in the October incident, not the February one, but either way you're being totally disingenuous. She claims to be a "victim" of sexual assault, and referring to her as such gives credence to her claim, a claim that at this point remains unproven in  every way, shape and form.

How the media reports it is irrelevant. Since when are they not capable of inaccuracy or bias?

Finally, calling someone else "lame" when you're so obviously wrong is the epitome of lame.

[ChicosBailBonds]

So I can name any appellate or Supreme court ruling ever made and you will believe it and defend it as an example of just and correct thinking. This should be fun.

Nope...we can agree to disagree on many rulings in the courts, but that doesn't change the fact it's the law of the land.  Isn't that the point? 

You are free to say a woman has no right to say no once you've laid into her, you're free to feel that once you pass Go you collect $200 and everything else that goes with it, you're free to say that the courts are wrong...they often are in my opinion but that doesn't change the fact it is the law.  Unless the courts change their interpretation, precedent has been set.  We're a nation of laws, even the ones we don't agree with.  There are plenty I don't, but somehow I think the judge might get a quick chuckle if I say "sorry judge, I don't agree with that law and believe the thinking is not correct".  That would be a wonderful defense.

[ChicosBailBonds]

In what court was she found to be the victim of sexual harassment? IIRC, MU found sexual harrassment in the October incident, not the February one, but either way you're being totally disingenuous. She claims to be a "victim" of sexual assault, and referring to her as such gives credence to her claim, a claim that at this point remains unproven in  every way, shape and form.

How the media reports it is irrelevant. Since when are they not capable of inaccuracy or bias?

Finally, calling someone else "lame" when you're so obviously wrong is the epitome of lame.

WOW.   So a woman that is raped but never reports it to the police is not a victim because no court found guilt?  Incredible.  I'm not saying this woman was raped, but using a broader example to show how foolish your response was.  Women are raped all the time in this world and never report it.  THEY ARE VICTIMS whether there is a court proceeding or not.

I guess Casey Anthony's child is not a victim, because the court didn't find anyone guilty of murdering her.  

Please, Lenny, describe what constitutes a victim in your mind since apparently a court ruling is attached to it per your last entry.  This ought to be good.

[MUBasketball]

I'm sorry MUBasketball, but the discussion was about Marquette and it was not I that brought the other school into the debate.  But as is ALWAYS the case you ignore who brought it up (not me) and only go after the response.

Why is that?  Why do you not have the intellectual integrity to answer that question?

Better yet, why don't you take a crack at answering the question that was proposed.  Is it worse to have your school have multiple student athletes accused of sexual assault (rape) multiple times, end up being put on the front page of the largest newspaper in the midwest, lose your AD, have the university change a policy because they were in violation of state law for 10 years and had to put their tail between their legs in admitting as such, etc, etc.....or have a recruit that has yet to spend 1 second on campus as a student athlete get a free plane ticket to his native country. 

Come to think of it, since you're a UW-hyphen Milwaukee grad, why don't you go over to their board?  LOL.  Two can play this game if you wish.

I have no idea what happened, so I'm not going to get into a debate about a touchy subject that nobody has the answers to. What happened? I don't know. What happened internally concerning the allegations? I have no idea.

Of course, you assume the worst. And then, to nobody's surprise, comparisons to Crean pop up. You're so predictable it's laughable.

Yes, I am a UWM grad. Whenever I want to discuss UWM hoops, I go over to the UWM board. Makes sense, I think. Or, whenever I want a discussion concerning any team, I go to their respective board. I don't understand why you constantly bring up Crean on here. Move on, I beg you!

[GGGG]

In what court was she found to be the victim of sexual harassment? IIRC, MU found sexual harrassment in the October incident, not the February one, but either way you're being totally disingenuous. She claims to be a "victim" of sexual assault, and referring to her as such gives credence to her claim, a claim that at this point remains unproven in  every way, shape and form.

How the media reports it is irrelevant. Since when are they not capable of inaccuracy or bias?

Finally, calling someone else "lame" when you're so obviously wrong is the epitome of lame.

Lets see....   Either I'll use the term how the media uses it....or I will go with Lennys....

I think I'll stick with the media.   (They have less bias than Lennys.)

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't understand why you constantly bring up Crean on here. Move on, I beg you!

I DIDN'T BRING HIM UP SUNSHINE.  Someone else did   http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=27353.msg312101#msg312101   

Again, focus your energy on the person that actually BROUGHT HIM UP.   Please, I beg you!!!

[Lennys Tap]

WOW.   So a woman that is raped but never reports it to the police is not a victim because no court found guilt?  Incredible.

I guess Casey Anthony's child is not a victim, because the court didn't find anyone guilty of murdering her. 

Please, Lenny, describe what constitutes a victim in your mind since apparently a court ruling is attached to it per your last entry.  This ought to be good.

WOW is right. Cayley Anthony is most certainly a victim. Her dead (duct taped) body established that. None of the jurors denied her victimhood, only that the state failed to prove Casey Anthony did it.


Who's the victim here? Whoever is telling the truth. Annointing the accuser in a he said/she said situation with that status automatically is dangerous. It's how the Duke lacrosse case spun out of control.

I'm curious as to how you define "victim". Does merely making accusations make it so?

[ChicosBailBonds]

So you admit a court ruling isn't the qualifier needed to make someone a victim.  Good....progress.

Do you also admit that there are women throughout this country that are sexually assaulted and convinced not to go to authorities, or choose not to go to authorities but are victims nonetheless?   

[Lennys Tap]

Lets see....   Either I'll use the term how the media uses it....or I will go with Lennys....

I think I'll stick with the media.   (They have less bias than Lennys.)

Let's see.... Is there any chance that the sex between the accuser and the accused was consensual? If so, would that mean that the accuser was the perpatrator and the accused was the victim? Most definitely.

I have no bias in this matter whatsoever. I have no way of knowing whether the sex was forced or consensual. Therefore I have no idea who the victim is in this sordid, sad story. Neither does TMJ, the Tribune or you. But I do know that words mean something and carry implications. When you annoint an accuser with unqualified victimhood you damn the accused with guilt.

[Lennys Tap]

So you admit a court ruling isn't the qualifier needed to make someone a victim.  Good....progress.

Do you also admit that there are women throughout this country that are sexually assaulted and convinced not to go to authorities, or choose not to go to authorities but are victims nonetheless?  

No "progress" needed. I never said that a court ruling was necessary to prove whether or not there was a victim. I'll make this so simple you can't twist it or misunderstand it. There is a victim in all he said/she said cases. That would be whoever is telling the truth. Just how do you know who that is in this case?

Do I admit that victims of sexual assault (and other crimes) sometimes elect not to go to the authorities? Of course. When did I ever say otherwise and what does it have to do with this case?

[GGGG]

I have no bias in this matter whatsoever. I have no way of knowing whether the sex was forced or consensual. Therefore I have no idea who the victim is in this sordid, sad story. Neither does TMJ, the Tribune or you. But I do know that words mean something and carry implications. When you annoint an accuser with unqualified victimhood you damn the accused with guilt.

You know what I just realized?  **NERS** also referred to her the victim.  He brought it up in the question he asked me...

LOL, get off you're high horse....what a joke...

[Hoopaloop]

Another reference to the Duke case.  Shameful that some of you continue to lump the Duke LAX stripper/prostitute situation as some comparison to a regular co-ed at Marquette.  Anything to justify the team and actions.  Anything to pretend this didn't happen and the university, teams, players were just whislin dixie and it's a crazed coed's fault.  I hope she sues and wins plenty from MU the way the university has handled this.  It would also put some of you with the bunker mentality to open your eyes.

In the Duke case a woman was hired to perform a service.  She had a highly questionable background and it spun out of control because a bunch of professors and race baiters couldn't wait to play the card that white, priviledged young men were doing harm to an African American woman at a private university.

There are no similarities at all between that case and Marquette's situation.  The victim was a female student at Marquette.  A tuition paying member of the student body.  She was not hired off the street to strip for the LAX team or the basketball team.  She was at Marquette to get an education.  Her transgression was to be intimate in the past with a member(s) of an athletic team at MU.  Past actions do not mean a free ride in the sack whenver the athlete wants.  It doesn't even mean a free ride if the she says it's cool and then decides midcourse that the ride is over.  It's OVER right then and there.

The continued smearing of these women is terribly sad.  Anything to win.  Anything to protect the student athlete.  These women aren't victims, they asked for it.  Once they started, they should finish.  Duke Lacrosse.  Victims are those found to be victims only in the eyes of a court.  What is wrong with you people?

MU screwed up.  They failed.  Miserably.  Our athletic director is now gone.  The university broke the damn law and did so for a decade.  What are people failing to understand here?