UDPride Discussion Forums    
     

Go Back   UDPride Discussion Forums > UDPRIDE SPORTS FORUMS > Mens Basketball

» Log in
User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!
» Advertisement
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #601  
Old 10-08-2015, 03:19 PM
SC_Flyer's Avatar
SC_Flyer SC_Flyer is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,204
Thanks: 816
Thanked 607 Times in 303 Posts
SC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud ofSC_Flyer has much to be proud of
I miss the boring offseason.
Reply With Quote
4 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to SC_Flyer For This Totally Excellent Post:
1903 Flyer (10-08-2015), CE80 (10-08-2015), DGO67 (10-08-2015), UDGutter2 (10-08-2015)
Advertisement
  #602  
Old 10-08-2015, 03:40 PM
CE80 CE80 is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,778
Thanks: 5,498
Thanked 6,255 Times in 3,097 Posts
CE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by SC_Flyer View Post
I miss the boring offseason.
I would wear a T shirt with that printed on it.
Reply With Quote
3 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to CE80 For This Totally Excellent Post:
31770 (10-09-2015), flyerfanatic86 (10-08-2015), SC_Flyer (10-08-2015)
  #603  
Old 10-08-2015, 04:27 PM
ud2's Avatar
ud2 ud2 is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,423
Thanks: 6,783
Thanked 6,122 Times in 4,168 Posts
ud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond reputeud2 has a reputation beyond repute
I was just curious what Ginsberg looked like, a couple of photos:


http://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/USA...an-x-large.jpg


http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/b...l1-850x560.jpg
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to ud2 For This Totally Excellent Post:
FlyerNation23 (10-09-2015)
  #604  
Old 10-08-2015, 05:01 PM
Marysville Flyer's Avatar
Marysville Flyer Marysville Flyer is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,108
Thanks: 954
Thanked 1,748 Times in 790 Posts
Marysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeMarysville Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
So just curious. What happens if he wins the injunction, is allowed to play right away but can't get caught up and pass all of his needed classes.

Would this make him ineligible for 2nd half of the season?
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #605  
Old 10-08-2015, 05:13 PM
Avid Flyer's Avatar
Avid Flyer Avid Flyer is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 8,906
Thanks: 3,535
Thanked 3,787 Times in 1,933 Posts
Avid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
Several posters are stating that DP put himself in this position and is at fault, not the U. I tend to disagree with the last part. The U even though they are following guidelines they surely know how these type cases have gone in court proceeding and still decided to use these guidelines as flawed as they are. So the U in my opinion acted against better judgement using a guideline that even the congress challenged and stated it wasn't law but someones own special interest stated in a letter and sent to the institutions as if was in fact law, threatening the U's if they didn't react accordingly.

So DP and the U both put themselves in there respective positions and each will have to wade through the process.
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to Avid Flyer For This Totally Excellent Post:
31770 (10-09-2015), Flyer 86 (10-08-2015)
  #606  
Old 10-08-2015, 05:16 PM
Avid Flyer's Avatar
Avid Flyer Avid Flyer is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 8,906
Thanks: 3,535
Thanked 3,787 Times in 1,933 Posts
Avid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Marysville Flyer View Post
So just curious. What happens if he wins the injunction, is allowed to play right away but can't get caught up and pass all of his needed classes.

Would this make him ineligible for 2nd half of the season?
Posted via Mobile Device
Was told there was a process in place to keep up to speed so to speak especially since he is in a protected class.

Don't know if the U has internet classes. I mean look at how many classes athletes miss when traveling for games.
Reply With Quote
  #607  
Old 10-08-2015, 05:42 PM
N2663R N2663R is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 2,316
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,488 Times in 763 Posts
N2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Avid Flyer View Post
Several posters are stating that DP put himself in this position and is at fault, not the U. I tend to disagree with the last part. The U even though they are following guidelines they surely know how these type cases have gone in court proceeding and still decided to use these guidelines as flawed as they are. So the U in my opinion acted against better judgement using a guideline that even the congress challenged and stated it wasn't law but someones own special interest stated in a letter and sent to the institutions as if was in fact law, threatening the U's if they didn't react accordingly.

So DP and the U both put themselves in there respective positions and each will have to wade through the process.
Avid, I get your point, but if they did not use their established procedures (like I assume they have used in all previous cases) what procedures or course of action should they have used? In some respects, this is only an issue because DP is fighting it. I don't know if any other students have fought their decisions to this degree. If DP did nothing, sat out until 12/22, rejoined the team, etc. would we still be as vocal.

UD, like everyone else has policies and procedures that they believe are fair and correct. It's only when we challenge those polices and procedures do we find out if they are or not.

Last edited by N2663R; 10-08-2015 at 05:47 PM..
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to N2663R For This Totally Excellent Post:
Avid Flyer (10-08-2015)
  #608  
Old 10-08-2015, 05:50 PM
Atlantic 10 Atlantic 10 is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,711
Thanks: 356
Thanked 419 Times in 304 Posts
Atlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud of
Originally Posted by Avid Flyer View Post
Was told there was a process in place to keep up to speed so to speak especially since he is in a protected class.

Don't know if the U has internet classes. I mean look at how many classes athletes miss when traveling for games.
Beth Flacks dept will get him up to speed
Reply With Quote
  #609  
Old 10-08-2015, 06:31 PM
TA111 TA111 is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 8,071
Thanks: 3,440
Thanked 4,690 Times in 2,510 Posts
TA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Buster Goode View Post
Unfortunately, I can't see where DP's life will be returned to normal (at least in the short-term). If he resumes his college basketball career whether it be here or elsewhere, this cloud will no doubt follow him. You would have to be some kind of strong kid for this not to mentally rattle you. That said, I'd wonder how it would affect his game....
People said the same thing about Kav and it really didn't affect him or the team. I think many tend to over think these things. Most folks don't really care.
Reply With Quote
  #610  
Old 10-08-2015, 07:20 PM
UDDoug UDDoug is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,242
Thanks: 66
Thanked 3,342 Times in 1,988 Posts
UDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Avid Flyer View Post
The U even though they are following guidelines they surely know how these type cases have gone in court proceeding and still decided to use these guidelines as flawed as they are.
How have these gone in court proceedings. The vast majority of these type of law suits have upheld the Hearing Committees. To date, fighting expulsions and suspensions has by and large been a losing battle.
Reply With Quote
  #611  
Old 10-08-2015, 08:09 PM
shocka43's Avatar
shocka43 shocka43 is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: It's hot and there is fire
Posts: 9,351
Thanks: 5,410
Thanked 9,809 Times in 4,072 Posts
shocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond repute
Would think that if an injunction occurs that UD would be required to see that he is caught up in classes as if he was there the entire time...
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to shocka43 For This Totally Excellent Post:
31770 (10-09-2015), Flyer 86 (10-08-2015)
  #612  
Old 10-08-2015, 08:27 PM
T-Bone 84's Avatar
T-Bone 84 T-Bone 84 is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Shiloh, OH
Posts: 8,411
Thanks: 2,350
Thanked 4,993 Times in 2,668 Posts
T-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by rollo View Post
King > Rock Star

Plus, rock stars fade away...Kings only get stronger!
Posted via Mobile Device
So where does this put Obama? He's a rock star who fancies himself to be a king.

Sorry to go off-topic, but I couldn't resist! 😃
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #613  
Old 10-08-2015, 09:31 PM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
Joke that UD is wasting time, money and reputation defending the Federal Government and an over extending Title IX over what's right, due process and a student's well being. I am ashamed of my alma mater. No more beer or Milano's subs at the basketball games for me. Let Obama buy more hot dogs to supplement the UD Treasury.

Last edited by Angry John; 10-08-2015 at 09:37 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #614  
Old 10-08-2015, 10:07 PM
224's Avatar
224 224 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Dayton
Posts: 416
Thanks: 239
Thanked 462 Times in 197 Posts
224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute
Pierre v Univ of Dayton will play out in Judge Thomas Rose's courtroom in U.S. District Court in Dayton tomorrow, 10/9.

No idea how long this process will take, but with his goal to be reinstated and this getting to court rather quickly, I'm thinking we will hear something rather soon.
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to 224 For This Totally Excellent Post:
FLYER5 (10-09-2015)
  #615  
Old 10-08-2015, 10:59 PM
T-Bone 84's Avatar
T-Bone 84 T-Bone 84 is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Shiloh, OH
Posts: 8,411
Thanks: 2,350
Thanked 4,993 Times in 2,668 Posts
T-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond reputeT-Bone 84 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by 224 View Post
Pierre v Univ of Dayton will play out in Judge Thomas Rose's courtroom in U.S. District Court in Dayton tomorrow, 10/9.

No idea how long this process will take, but with his goal to be reinstated and this getting to court rather quickly, I'm thinking we will hear something rather soon.
As the wheels of justice go, this wheel must be on a dragster. That was a pretty fast turnaround! Hopefully, that spells good news for our pre-conference fortunes. And, hopefully, justice (whatever it really is, in this situation) will be served.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to T-Bone 84 For This Totally Excellent Post:
FLYER5 (10-09-2015)
  #616  
Old 10-08-2015, 11:18 PM
hawkoooo's Avatar
hawkoooo hawkoooo is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 2,970
Thanks: 1,007
Thanked 1,763 Times in 928 Posts
hawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond reputehawkoooo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Angry John View Post
Joke that UD is wasting time, money and reputation defending the Federal Government and an over extending Title IX over what's right, due process and a student's well being. I am ashamed of my alma mater. No more beer or Milano's subs at the basketball games for me. Let Obama buy more hot dogs to supplement the UD Treasury.
Post of the year, says me.
Reply With Quote
  #617  
Old 10-08-2015, 11:24 PM
UDEE79's Avatar
UDEE79 UDEE79 is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Beavercreek Ohio
Posts: 3,602
Thanks: 2,977
Thanked 2,415 Times in 1,074 Posts
UDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond reputeUDEE79 has a reputation beyond repute
Dyshon will be the Curt Flood of campus lotharios
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #618  
Old 10-09-2015, 07:25 AM
31770's Avatar
31770 31770 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 445
Thanks: 348
Thanked 158 Times in 83 Posts
31770 is a jewel in the rough31770 is a jewel in the rough31770 is a jewel in the rough
Originally Posted by Angry John View Post
Joke that UD is wasting time, money and reputation defending the Federal Government and an over extending Title IX over what's right, due process and a student's well being. I am ashamed of my alma mater. No more beer or Milano's subs at the basketball games for me. Let Obama buy more hot dogs to supplement the UD Treasury.
YEA! Thanks Obama!!!
Reply With Quote
  #619  
Old 10-09-2015, 07:27 AM
31770's Avatar
31770 31770 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 445
Thanks: 348
Thanked 158 Times in 83 Posts
31770 is a jewel in the rough31770 is a jewel in the rough31770 is a jewel in the rough
Originally Posted by T-Bone 84 View Post
So where does this put Obama? He's a rock star who fancies himself to be a king.

Sorry to go off-topic, but I couldn't resist! 😃
Posted via Mobile Device
YEA! Thanks Obama!!!
Reply With Quote
  #620  
Old 10-09-2015, 07:33 AM
31770's Avatar
31770 31770 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 445
Thanks: 348
Thanked 158 Times in 83 Posts
31770 is a jewel in the rough31770 is a jewel in the rough31770 is a jewel in the rough
Originally Posted by Avid Flyer View Post
Several posters are stating that DP put himself in this position and is at fault, not the U. I tend to disagree with the last part. The U even though they are following guidelines they surely know how these type cases have gone in court proceeding and still decided to use these guidelines as flawed as they are. So the U in my opinion acted against better judgement using a guideline that even the congress challenged and stated it wasn't law but someones own special interest stated in a letter and sent to the institutions as if was in fact law, threatening the U's if they didn't react accordingly.

So DP and the U both put themselves in there respective positions and each will have to wade through the process.
This is probably the most sensible post I've read on this abortion of a thread...
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to 31770 For This Totally Excellent Post:
Flyer 86 (10-09-2015)
  #621  
Old 10-09-2015, 08:18 AM
oRed oRed is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 407
Thanks: 16
Thanked 246 Times in 136 Posts
oRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant futureoRed has a brilliant future
Originally Posted by T-Bone 84 View Post
So where does this put Obama? He's a rock star who fancies himself to be a king.

Sorry to go off-topic, but I couldn't resist! 😃
Posted via Mobile Device
too easy... of course someone has to fulfill the role of court jester
Reply With Quote
  #622  
Old 10-09-2015, 12:57 PM
Avid Flyer's Avatar
Avid Flyer Avid Flyer is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 8,906
Thanks: 3,535
Thanked 3,787 Times in 1,933 Posts
Avid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
I feel that UD could come out of this with minimal damage and in the long run actually improve its image. Stick to their line that they followed the guidelines as set forth, but be willing to revisit said guidelines to ensure equal fairness and respect and to all.
Reply With Quote
  #623  
Old 10-09-2015, 01:13 PM
FlyingArrow FlyingArrow is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,214
Thanks: 1,228
Thanked 1,484 Times in 810 Posts
FlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond repute
I would think the University wants Pierre to return almost as much as he wants to return himself. They just want to do it without getting into trouble with Title IX or inviting lawsuits from every other person who has been suspended. What a strange strategy they must be working up. "How do we lose this without looking like we're trying to lose?"
Reply With Quote
5 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to FlyingArrow For This Totally Excellent Post:
College B-Ball Fan (10-09-2015), FLYER5 (10-09-2015), Gazoo (10-09-2015), redbengal (10-09-2015), rollo (10-09-2015)
  #624  
Old 10-09-2015, 01:28 PM
Alberto Strasse's Avatar
Alberto Strasse Alberto Strasse is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Miamisburg OH
Posts: 3,711
Thanks: 2,155
Thanked 2,118 Times in 1,054 Posts
Alberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond reputeAlberto Strasse has a reputation beyond repute
Smile Hire a Lawyer

whose undergraduate degree is from Wright State?
Reply With Quote
  #625  
Old 10-09-2015, 01:29 PM
UDDoug UDDoug is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,242
Thanks: 66
Thanked 3,342 Times in 1,988 Posts
UDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond repute
They are not paying Taft to lose this case.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to UDDoug For This Totally Excellent Post:
flyerfanatic86 (10-09-2015)
  #626  
Old 10-09-2015, 01:36 PM
FlyerNation23 FlyerNation23 is offline
1st Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 130
Thanks: 5
Thanked 140 Times in 60 Posts
FlyerNation23 is just really niceFlyerNation23 is just really niceFlyerNation23 is just really niceFlyerNation23 is just really niceFlyerNation23 is just really nice
Originally Posted by UDDoug View Post
They are not paying Taft to lose this case.
Posted via Mobile Device
Agreed, I think UD wants to win this case and prove the process is not flawed. If this is a true non-biased case (unlike the hearing committee at UD), I think Pierre has the advantage due to lack of evidence but Taft might find some Title 9 law that protects UD.

Would we know by End of day Today if Peirre is allowed back on the team while this plays out? Safe to say this is going to be a long legal battle
Reply With Quote
  #627  
Old 10-09-2015, 01:52 PM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
This is just a theory. Maybe the reason why UD is digging its heels in on Pierre stems from the sexual discrimination lawsuit a couple years ago on those two brothers who were professors over in the Engineering Department. Maybe the fear of the Federal Government over past deeds has made Pierre a scapegoat.
Reply With Quote
  #628  
Old 10-09-2015, 02:10 PM
UDDoug UDDoug is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,242
Thanks: 66
Thanked 3,342 Times in 1,988 Posts
UDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond repute
I doubt it. Pierre isn't being treated differently than other students in similar situations. He probably isn't the only student suspended under similar circumstances in 2015. Just the highest profile.

In today's day and age if you can't convincingly indicate how consent was granted you tend to lose Title IX hearings.

Today's hearing is a preliminary hearing on injunctive/restraining relief. It would be unusual for any decision to be made. I thought I read this was largely to set the stage for a second injunctive hearing to be held in 10 days to two weeks. A decision is more likely to come then or a few days later. I anticipate if injunctive relief is granted that UD will appeal that decision. And it would not be unusual for the judge to defer implementation of the injunctive relief until that appeal is heard.

A bad case scenario is a quick injunction decision, with push for a quick trial as a result. The judge upholds UD around the 5th if December in which case suspension is for second semester. Pierre college career is over as he played say 5 games. Because he isn't injured he can't redshirt.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
3 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to UDDoug For This Totally Excellent Post:
Dillomernda (10-09-2015), FLYER5 (10-09-2015), rollo (10-09-2015)
  #629  
Old 10-09-2015, 03:03 PM
N2663R N2663R is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 2,316
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,488 Times in 763 Posts
N2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond repute
Here we go . . . .


Full docket text:
NOTICE of Hearing on Motion [2] MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order : Motion Hearing set for 10/15/2015 at 1:30 PM in Courtroom 2 - Dayton before Judge Thomas M. Rose. (ep)
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to N2663R For This Totally Excellent Post:
FLYER5 (10-09-2015), mikeymo85 (10-09-2015)
  #630  
Old 10-09-2015, 03:45 PM
lhsgolf19's Avatar
lhsgolf19 lhsgolf19 is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 9,739
Thanks: 218
Thanked 10,037 Times in 2,598 Posts
lhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond reputelhsgolf19 has a reputation beyond repute
Matthew Schwade ‏@FlyerHoops · 1m1 minute ago
In Dyshawn Pierre news, the hearing is set for 10/15 at 1:30 PM in Judge Rose's courtroom to decide TRO motion. UD's response due by 10/14.
Reply With Quote
  #631  
Old 10-09-2015, 03:49 PM
FlyerNation23 FlyerNation23 is offline
1st Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 130
Thanks: 5
Thanked 140 Times in 60 Posts
FlyerNation23 is just really niceFlyerNation23 is just really niceFlyerNation23 is just really niceFlyerNation23 is just really niceFlyerNation23 is just really nice
Originally Posted by lhsgolf19 View Post
Matthew Schwade ‏@FlyerHoops · 1m1 minute ago
In Dyshawn Pierre news, the hearing is set for 10/15 at 1:30 PM in Judge Rose's courtroom to decide TRO motion. UD's response due by 10/14.
What response can UD provide? So we should know by next Thursday if he is allowed back in school?
Reply With Quote
  #632  
Old 10-09-2015, 04:04 PM
rollo's Avatar
rollo rollo is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: RolloCon
Posts: 16,546
Thanks: 16,232
Thanked 15,872 Times in 6,979 Posts
rollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by UDDoug View Post
I doubt it. Pierre isn't being treated differently than other students in similar situations. He probably isn't the only student suspended under similar circumstances in 2015. Just the highest profile.
If Pierre is successful in his lawsuit, I hope every 5'8" kid from Paducah who got booted from UD (or any other kid from any other school) gets in line for their share. And there are plenty. As Mike Allen (Hamilton Co Prosecutor) said today on WLW, these kids have permanent marks on their academic records that will be addressed in job interviews, too.
__________________
I shaved my balls for this?
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to rollo For This Totally Excellent Post:
Gazoo (10-12-2015)
  #633  
Old 10-09-2015, 04:33 PM
College B-Ball Fan College B-Ball Fan is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,033
Thanks: 2,278
Thanked 1,355 Times in 586 Posts
College B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by UDDoug View Post
I doubt it. Pierre isn't being treated differently than other students in similar situations. He probably isn't the only student suspended under similar circumstances in 2015. Just the highest profile.

In today's day and age if you can't convincingly indicate how consent was granted you tend to lose Title IX hearings.

Today's hearing is a preliminary hearing on injunctive/restraining relief. It would be unusual for any decision to be made. I thought I read this was largely to set the stage for a second injunctive hearing to be held in 10 days to two weeks. A decision is more likely to come then or a few days later. I anticipate if injunctive relief is granted that UD will appeal that decision. And it would not be unusual for the judge to defer implementation of the injunctive relief until that appeal is heard.

A bad case scenario is a quick injunction decision, with push for a quick trial as a result. The judge upholds UD around the 5th if December in which case suspension is for second semester. Pierre college career is over as he played say 5 games. Because he isn't injured he can't redshirt.
Posted via Mobile Device
There was a telephone conference today.
Reply With Quote
  #634  
Old 10-09-2015, 04:47 PM
College B-Ball Fan College B-Ball Fan is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,033
Thanks: 2,278
Thanked 1,355 Times in 586 Posts
College B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by FlyerNation23 View Post
What response can UD provide? So we should know by next Thursday if he is allowed back in school?
23, this is a long "process" when a lawsuit gets filed----typically! Honestly in our Federal District Court it typically takes YEARS to get a TRIAL date! That is why the current "process" is in place to allow people to get some "immediate" attention if they can show the "need" to the court!

What has transpired to date is that DP through his attorney's has sued UD and as part of that law suit asked for the court to grant an injunction which would allow the court to grant some "relief" to the Plaintiff (DP) while the case proceeds in court.

The telephone conference today was the initial opportunity for the attorneys on both sides to talk to the judge about the issues (both immediately i.e. the pending motion for an injunction and the "long term implications" of the lawsuit filed by DP against the U). Sure that was accomplished. The next "phase" is for UD to respond in writing to the lawsuit and request for an injunction and then the hearing will take place.

DP through his attorney's filed the law suit and asked for a hearing on there request for an injunction that would allow DP to get back into school while the case proceeds!

That "hearing" has been scheduled now for the 15th. Both sides will have an opportunity to address the court, probably present some evidence i.e. of "harm" let's say that is occurring IF DP is not allowed "immediately" to get back into school, etc. and the court could indeed issue and order (based upon the LAW, title IX LAW, the pleadings filed so far by DP and the responsive pleadings no ordered to be filed in response by UD--through counsel the day before the hearing----so the court can review the universities "position" in preparation for the hearing) at the close of testimony (I doubt it) or rather soon.

Expect DP to be in town from Canada. Expect his attorney Ginsberg to be here for the party from NYC and we may/may not know "immediately" whether the court rules one way or the other-----but it should be rather soon since this is asking for "immediate relief".
Reply With Quote
3 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to College B-Ball Fan For This Totally Excellent Post:
Avid Flyer (10-09-2015), Bucketnight (10-09-2015), San Diego Flyer (10-09-2015)
  #635  
Old 10-09-2015, 05:26 PM
N2663R N2663R is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 2,316
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,488 Times in 763 Posts
N2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by College B-Ball Fan View Post

What has transpired to date is that DP through his attorney's has sued UD and as part of that law suit asked for the court to grant an injunction which would allow the court to grant some "relief" to the Plaintiff (DP) while the case proceeds in court.

The telephone conference today was the initial opportunity for the attorneys on both sides to talk to the judge about the issues (both immediately i.e. the pending motion for an injunction and the "long term implications" of the lawsuit filed by DP against the U). Sure that was accomplished. The next "phase" is for UD to respond in writing to the lawsuit and request for an injunction and then the hearing will take place.

DP through his attorney's filed the law suit and asked for a hearing on there request for an injunction that would allow DP to get back into school while the case proceeds!

That "hearing" has been scheduled now for the 15th. Both sides will have an opportunity to address the court, probably present some evidence i.e. of "harm" let's say that is occurring IF DP is not allowed "immediately" to get back into school, etc. and the court could indeed issue and order (based upon the LAW, title IX LAW, the pleadings filed so far by DP and the responsive pleadings no ordered to be filed in response by UD--through counsel the day before the hearing----so the court can review the universities "position" in preparation for the hearing) at the close of testimony (I doubt it) or rather soon.

Expect DP to be in town from Canada. Expect his attorney Ginsberg to be here for the party from NYC and we may/may not know "immediately" whether the court rules one way or the other-----but it should be rather soon since this is asking for "immediate relief".
Great analysis - I would not be surprised if we got a ruling next Thursday. It's not a complex case, I don't think UD has much, if anything else to add, no one will be harmed if an injunction is granted, time is of the essence, etc. UD is utilizing solid counsel, but that does not mean that they are trying to necessarily fight temporary reinstatement. IMHO They are just making sure this does not blow up in their face both in the short term and long term. If DP gets back on the team, this will die down until the final verdict.
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to N2663R For This Totally Excellent Post:
Flyer 86 (10-09-2015)
  #636  
Old 10-09-2015, 05:36 PM
66flyer 66flyer is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Clayton, OH
Posts: 516
Thanks: 393
Thanked 322 Times in 160 Posts
66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of66flyer has much to be proud of
Bottom line--This whole mess could have been avoided if he'd had a modicum of common sense to keep his fly zipped and remember the Kavanaugh debacle. It could happen to anyone dumb enough to think history won't repeat itself. The stupidity of it is so aggravating. Another black mark on UD.
After all that's happened in the last few years, you'd think eliminating the possibility of getting into trouble would be a big priority with any player.
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to 66flyer For This Totally Excellent Post:
rollo (10-09-2015)
  #637  
Old 10-09-2015, 05:49 PM
momszer's Avatar
momszer momszer is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 602
Thanks: 19
Thanked 220 Times in 115 Posts
momszer has much to be proud ofmomszer has much to be proud ofmomszer has much to be proud ofmomszer has much to be proud ofmomszer has much to be proud ofmomszer has much to be proud ofmomszer has much to be proud ofmomszer has much to be proud of
Talking

So hoopsters should have their junk removed while on scholarship and re-attached after graduating? Is that basically what you're saying? No college athlete is allowed to have sex while enrolled at a school of higher learning. Sounds reasonable to me.
Reply With Quote
4 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to momszer For This Totally Excellent Post:
31770 (10-12-2015), Avid Flyer (10-09-2015), Gazoo (10-12-2015), udflyerhoops2 (10-09-2015)
  #638  
Old 10-09-2015, 06:17 PM
San Diego Flyer's Avatar
San Diego Flyer San Diego Flyer is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas
Posts: 14,788
Thanks: 10,086
Thanked 10,502 Times in 4,704 Posts
San Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
66flyer, really?

There were significant differences between Kavanaugh's situation and Dyshawn's. And I'm not going to say anything more.
Reply With Quote
11 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to San Diego Flyer For This Totally Excellent Post:
31770 (10-12-2015), Atlantic 10 (10-09-2015), Avid Flyer (10-09-2015), College B-Ball Fan (10-09-2015), Flyer 86 (10-09-2015), flyrsmedic (10-13-2015), Gazoo (10-12-2015), Lifelong Flyer Fan (10-09-2015), rollo (10-09-2015), shocka43 (10-09-2015), Townie (10-10-2015)
  #639  
Old 10-09-2015, 06:26 PM
Bucketnight Bucketnight is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Ponte Vedra, Fl
Posts: 500
Thanks: 705
Thanked 533 Times in 214 Posts
Bucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond reputeBucketnight has a reputation beyond repute
It certainly isn't realistic to expect that college students as a whole are not going to have sex. It is obvious that the enforcement of Title IX is grossly unfair.

On the other side, a university should not be expected to be held to the high standards of criminal prosecution when it comes to discipline. That standard is rightly difficult to meet but there is a reason Civil suits do not need to meet it.

The answer lies in between somewhere. I would prefer it be another university's issue that leads to the long term correction but maybe some good can come of this without harming DP.

I definitely preferred reading the worst thing mentioned about the university is that we may have benefitted from "home" crowds in tournament games.
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to Bucketnight For This Totally Excellent Post:
FLYER5 (10-09-2015)
  #640  
Old 10-09-2015, 06:40 PM
College B-Ball Fan College B-Ball Fan is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,033
Thanks: 2,278
Thanked 1,355 Times in 586 Posts
College B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond repute
DP

Originally Posted by N2663R View Post
Great analysis - I would not be surprised if we got a ruling next Thursday. It's not a complex case, I don't think UD has much, if anything else to add, no one will be harmed if an injunction is granted, time is of the essence, etc. UD is utilizing solid counsel, but that does not mean that they are trying to necessarily fight temporary reinstatement. IMHO They are just making sure this does not blow up in their face both in the short term and long term. If DP gets back on the team, this will die down until the final verdict.
You might be surprised how "complex" the pleadings (to be filed by Defense counsel by the 14th) will make this situation look!

I would expect based on the attorney that was hired (Doreen C--TAFT, law) that she is not expecting to do anything other than win at every phase of the case!

The "facts" do matter however and I think personally a number of them favor DP on some levels. As to whether the court should take the step of granting an injunction----who knows!

This ain't easy on any level! Despite what the "facts" look like to all of us or some of us---one way or the other, this is FEDERAL COURT and the attorneys will all relish the opportunity to "WIN"-------that' what they get paid to do!

Trust me, the attorney's representing UD in this case will be in there offices all weekend working, re-working, then re-re-working the pleadings and documents that they will file before the hearing & working on there arguments that will be made to the court! There intention and what they are paid $300--$350---$400.00 an hour or more and hour to do is win. There are several folks who also are a part of this forum that I believe would agree with what I'm saying!

I don't disagree with your hope (i.e.that DP gets back on campus soon) but trust me, IF that happens it won't be because of the defense lawyers lack of effort, expertise, preparation and a dash or more of the LAW!

I personally hope that DP is granted the injunctive relief as requested!

Last edited by College B-Ball Fan; 10-09-2015 at 06:53 PM.. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #641  
Old 10-09-2015, 07:08 PM
ud69's Avatar
ud69 ud69 is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,099
Thanks: 2,201
Thanked 5,170 Times in 2,285 Posts
ud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond reputeud69 has a reputation beyond repute
The Montgomery County Prosecutor decided there was not even a "probable cause" level of evidence that a crime was committed to even present the case to a grand jury.

The UD hearing board, however, decided there was a "preponderance of evidence" (the level of proof needed for conviction) that a sexual assault had taken place. This is an even higher level of proof than "probable cause".

Two groups - one, the prosecutor's office who deals in such matters routinely and two, the UD Hearing Board who has no formal training in the law, come to vastly different determinations.

Even in the Dez Wells case at Xavier, there was considered enough evidence to present the case to the grand jury - which declined to indict Wells.

Will the judge grant the TRO? Who knows.

Last edited by ud69; 10-09-2015 at 07:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to ud69 For This Totally Excellent Post:
Avid Flyer (10-09-2015), San Diego Flyer (10-09-2015)
  #642  
Old 10-09-2015, 07:47 PM
TA111 TA111 is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 8,071
Thanks: 3,440
Thanked 4,690 Times in 2,510 Posts
TA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond reputeTA111 has a reputation beyond repute
This is the beginning stage of proceedings. The Plaintiff asks the court for a TRO pending a preliminary hearing. Essentially DP must show a "likelihood" of success on the merits and irreparable harm if the injunctive relief isn't granted. In this case, the entire issue will initially revolve around the Plaintiff's likelihood of success on the merits based upon the pleadings and any other evidence the court may deem probative. I expect the arguments to resemble those in the Brady case. Fundamental unfairness and flaws in the process, ie, not permitting certain testimony at he admin hearing etc. Having been in some of these battles it is anyone's guess as to which direction this will take. I would expect a relatively quick turnaround and preliminary injunction hearing date set.
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to TA111 For This Totally Excellent Post:
IAFlyer (10-12-2015), San Diego Flyer (10-10-2015)
  #643  
Old 10-09-2015, 07:54 PM
UDDoug UDDoug is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,242
Thanks: 66
Thanked 3,342 Times in 1,988 Posts
UDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond repute
Again while the standard to present to a grand jury is low, prosecutors don't tend to present cases they think they lose at criminal court. The real lens they use is the criminal conviction standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. No one knows what the prosecutor does with a more likely than not standard.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to UDDoug For This Totally Excellent Post:
flyerfanatic86 (10-12-2015)
  #644  
Old 10-09-2015, 07:57 PM
anthonycharles anthonycharles is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,723
Thanks: 928
Thanked 1,409 Times in 577 Posts
anthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by 66flyer View Post
Bottom line--This whole mess could have been avoided if he'd had a modicum of common sense to keep his fly zipped and remember the Kavanaugh debacle. It could happen to anyone dumb enough to think history won't repeat itself. The stupidity of it is so aggravating. Another black mark on UD.
After all that's happened in the last few years, you'd think eliminating the possibility of getting into trouble would be a big priority with any player.
Originally Posted by momszer View Post
So hoopsters should have their junk removed while on scholarship and re-attached after graduating? Is that basically what you're saying? No college athlete is allowed to have sex while enrolled at a school of higher learning. Sounds reasonable to me.
In today's age, if you have as much to lose as Dyshawn and the rest of the guys on the team do, you best be unzipping your pants for a girl who is either your girlfriend or you plan on being your girlfriend. Pretty simple really. Once you graduate, then do as you wish.

I'm sorry, knowing they're plenty of "average Joe's" out there who have been suspended or expelled for equal or lesser, I have a hard time feeling as outraged or sympathetic for Dyshawn as many posters on this board are expressing. If he wan't a potential A-10 player of the year, nobody would care.

If he wins his appeal, great. I will still cheer for him. But I'm not going to pretend he didn't put himself in this position to begin with by making poor decisions.
Reply With Quote
  #645  
Old 10-09-2015, 10:26 PM
Avid Flyer's Avatar
Avid Flyer Avid Flyer is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 8,906
Thanks: 3,535
Thanked 3,787 Times in 1,933 Posts
Avid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
A big factor in DP's favor is how the girls statements have changed and been embellished. At first she said she was not raped but felt it was inappropriate. Then at the review hearing the testimony was that he ripped her clothing off. That constitutes forced sex, opposite of what she originally stated. I have heard from the grapevine that those were not even her words but those helping her case embellished the actions to make it more severe than what was originally reported to the PD and title IX and University officials. I believe Ginsburg also pointed this out in his filing.

If any of this is true some heads could be rolling, you do not take someones statement and add to it. It must stand on its own. But of course if this is or has been business as usual with on one challenging the hearings, then they did so without even a thought of any repercussions. A source who knows the accuser has stated that she never made those accusations. Let me point out that I do not know who the accuser is nor do I feel the need to know. Only following Ginsburg's assertion in his filing that there are some major discrepancies in her statements from April to the hearing in August.
Reply With Quote
  #646  
Old 10-09-2015, 11:05 PM
N2663R N2663R is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 2,316
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,488 Times in 763 Posts
N2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by College B-Ball Fan View Post
You might be surprised how "complex" the pleadings (to be filed by Defense counsel by the 14th) will make this situation look!

I would expect based on the attorney that was hired (Doreen C--TAFT, law) that she is not expecting to do anything other than win at every phase of the case!

The "facts" do matter however and I think personally a number of them favor DP on some levels. As to whether the court should take the step of granting an injunction----who knows!

This ain't easy on any level! Despite what the "facts" look like to all of us or some of us---one way or the other, this is FEDERAL COURT and the attorneys will all relish the opportunity to "WIN"-------that' what they get paid to do!

Trust me, the attorney's representing UD in this case will be in there offices all weekend working, re-working, then re-re-working the pleadings and documents that they will file before the hearing & working on there arguments that will be made to the court! There intention and what they are paid $300--$350---$400.00 an hour or more and hour to do is win. There are several folks who also are a part of this forum that I believe would agree with what I'm saying!

I don't disagree with your hope (i.e.that DP gets back on campus soon) but trust me, IF that happens it won't be because of the defense lawyers lack of effort, expertise, preparation and a dash or more of the LAW!

I personally hope that DP is granted the injunctive relief as requested!
I get your point. But she is paid to do what UD tells her to do even if she advises otherwise. UD may say (I hope) let's let this first round go (get DP back, appease fans -errrr- big donors) and lets attack this after the season is over and no one is watching.
Reply With Quote
  #647  
Old 10-09-2015, 11:09 PM
rollo's Avatar
rollo rollo is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: RolloCon
Posts: 16,546
Thanks: 16,232
Thanked 15,872 Times in 6,979 Posts
rollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by momszer View Post
So hoopsters should have their junk removed while on scholarship and re-attached after graduating? Is that basically what you're saying? No college athlete is allowed to have sex while enrolled at a school of higher learning. Sounds reasonable to me.
Why do so many of you jock sniffers think everything has to be all-or-nothing? There's obviously some safe ground here...and Pierre knew what he was doing wasn't.
__________________
I shaved my balls for this?
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to rollo For This Totally Excellent Post:
flyerfanatic86 (10-12-2015)
  #648  
Old 10-09-2015, 11:52 PM
Flyer2 Flyer2 is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 702
Thanks: 302
Thanked 330 Times in 192 Posts
Flyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by rollo View Post
Why do so many of you jock sniffers think everything has to be all-or-nothing? There's obviously some safe ground here...and Pierre knew what he was doing wasn't.
I personally prefer panties over jocks to sniff. oh to each his own. She was a "jock" also.

So title IX states that a women or girl cannot make a decision if she has something to drink.

She can keep climbing in bed with him, after potty breaks, and this does not constitute consent.

She has to depend on roommates and friends to tell her that he was inappropriate, but not her.

Of course she did not have enough "balls" to stop the runaway train that this has become.

Prosecutor says bull**** but Title IX says no, This is the Federal Government and we know best. Trust us fools.

So we have some trained peers "members of the debate and geek club" making decisions or doing what they are told to do. I doubt if there are any normal students who have a grasp of reality in that group.

Reminds me of when I was sworn in for the Grand Jury and I was in the bullpen waiting to be called. Before I left I was there when the Judge said "Well Mr. So and So was my jury foreman for the last few months so he/I want him to continue.

I interpreted this to mean no sense in muddying the waters and have a juror question the proceedings.

There is a reason why there a blowup dolls! Talking ones extra.
Reply With Quote
4 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to Flyer2 For This Totally Excellent Post:
Atlantic 10 (10-10-2015), CE80 (10-10-2015), Flyer 86 (10-10-2015), rollo (10-10-2015)
  #649  
Old 10-10-2015, 12:03 AM
Buster Goode Buster Goode is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Fernando Valley, CA
Posts: 3,285
Thanks: 1,215
Thanked 2,164 Times in 1,008 Posts
Buster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by College B-Ball Fan View Post
Expect DP to be in town from Canada.
Wonder if he will be at Tim's.

So folks are we saying there's still a chance Dyshawn will be suited up at the Red & Blue game?
Reply With Quote
  #650  
Old 10-10-2015, 11:10 AM
UDDoug UDDoug is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,242
Thanks: 66
Thanked 3,342 Times in 1,988 Posts
UDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Avid Flyer View Post
A big factor in DP's favor is how the girls statements have changed and been embellished.
Yes and no.

The hearing next week will not retry the facts. It is a restraining/injunctive hearing to determine whether or not the University should be barred from implementing the decision prior to resolution of the court case. As such Pierre's attorneys will present evidence as to how he is harmed if suspended prior to resolution at trial. UD will present testimony as to how they are harmed if the suspension is not enforced, and how in fact Pierre may not be harmed to the extent he asserts. For instance I suspect they may say he can return in December, redshirt and return to basketball as a grad student. He gets a full season and a gig jump start on a grad degree. The judge will weigh those factors and determine if there is too much harm to Pierre to implement the suspension.

The trial on the facts of the case may occur a year or two from now. That may actually be a factor UD brings up next week. If the Hearing Board is upheld at trial the suspension and punishment is without effect.

And when it goes to trial ( if it does ), US District Court is not going to retry the facts of the case. They will try whether UD followed its policies, whether or not Pierre's learning disabilities should have been accommodated, whether the Titke IX investigators were properly trained and whether they conducted their investigation in accordance with policy and without bias. They will rule whether Pierre's vague and non specific answers to the question of how he determined she consented are attributable to his learning disability and that the investigator should have known that and gave him an accommodation to be able to more clearly express his thoughts. US Diatruct Court does not become a new and Improves Hearing Board.

Changes in her testimony will be more focused on whether the investigator appropriately acted on those and presented appropriate testimony to the Hearing Board than the fact they changed.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
3 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to UDDoug For This Totally Excellent Post:
Flyer 86 (10-11-2015), flyerfanatic86 (10-12-2015), IAFlyer (10-12-2015)
  #651  
Old 10-10-2015, 11:35 AM
ClaytonFlyerFan's Avatar
ClaytonFlyerFan ClaytonFlyerFan is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 8,040
Thanks: 8,801
Thanked 8,556 Times in 3,701 Posts
ClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond reputeClaytonFlyerFan has a reputation beyond repute
I have a hunch next weeks hearing does not even happen. UD and DP reach an agreement before said hearing, and he is allowed back.

I have no inside information, knowledge of the case outside of what has been reported in the media, etc......Just a gut feeling, as I drink my red and blue Kool-Aid.
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to ClaytonFlyerFan For This Totally Excellent Post:
BRob2Perryman3 (10-10-2015), Flyer69ers (10-11-2015)
  #652  
Old 10-10-2015, 12:16 PM
Bat'71 Bat'71 is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Naples, Florida
Posts: 3,221
Thanks: 2,629
Thanked 2,248 Times in 1,129 Posts
Bat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond reputeBat'71 has a reputation beyond repute
With all due respect, there is a little more to it than just reinstatement. Without a reversal in the judgement (or a finding that his due process rights were violated or that the whole process was flawed) prior to returning to classes, DP will have the reputation on campus of being a sexual predator and this story line will follow him in virtually any and all televised UD games. IMHO, it will be very difficult for him to go about his daily business on campus and on the court without this following him around.
Reply With Quote
  #653  
Old 10-10-2015, 12:21 PM
BRob2Perryman3 BRob2Perryman3 is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: #FlyerNation
Posts: 2,580
Thanks: 2,275
Thanked 2,309 Times in 1,119 Posts
BRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond reputeBRob2Perryman3 has a reputation beyond repute
I hope you're right Clayton. If im single, and im getting into bed with a female, its for one reason. If im not single i have no reason to be in said bed. This girl cheated on her boyfriend and is suffering from buyer's remorse period.

So he drank alcohol and humped breaking some dumbass university code, so what hes a 21 year old BMOC. Enjoy the benefits. Suspend him the Exhibition and move on.

Only one fact matters, she got in the bed THREE different times. This broad and her friends are ruining a possible banner year.

I am fully confident Dyshawn did nothing wrong other then breaking a code of conduct hes been repeatedly been made aware of. Suspend him a game or two and move on

Dyshawn is being absolutely railroaded here. I feel bad for the guy. I hope he gets back and i will scream and pull for him louder then i ever have everyone.

I got Dyshawns back.
Reply With Quote
  #654  
Old 10-10-2015, 12:47 PM
Atlantic 10 Atlantic 10 is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,711
Thanks: 356
Thanked 419 Times in 304 Posts
Atlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud of
Originally Posted by Bat'71 View Post
With all due respect, there is a little more to it than just reinstatement. Without a reversal in the judgement (or a finding that his due process rights were violated or that the whole process was flawed) prior to returning to classes, DP will have the reputation on campus of being a sexual predator and this story line will follow him in virtually any and all televised UD games. IMHO, it will be very difficult for him to go about his daily business on campus and on the court without this following him around.
Sexual predator come on, two 21 year olds having sex. Wow did anyone read the complaint. By the way both lawyers were on campus last Thursday, DP attorney gathering information with a summons. I was also told that the university lawyers were very timid during this time, I look forward something next week

Last edited by Atlantic 10; 10-10-2015 at 12:52 PM..
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to Atlantic 10 For This Totally Excellent Post:
ClaytonFlyerFan (10-10-2015), jack72 (10-10-2015)
  #655  
Old 10-10-2015, 06:47 PM
Atlantic 10 Atlantic 10 is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,711
Thanks: 356
Thanked 419 Times in 304 Posts
Atlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud ofAtlantic 10 has much to be proud of
Originally Posted by BRob2Perryman3 View Post
I hope you're right Clayton. If im single, and im getting into bed with a female, its for one reason. If im not single i have no reason to be in said bed. This girl cheated on her boyfriend and is suffering from buyer's remorse period.

So he drank alcohol and humped breaking some dumbass university code, so what hes a 21 year old BMOC. Enjoy the benefits. Suspend him the Exhibition and move on.

Only one fact matters, she got in the bed THREE different times. This broad and her friends are ruining a possible banner year.

I am fully confident Dyshawn did nothing wrong other then breaking a code of conduct hes been repeatedly been made aware of. Suspend him a game or two and move on

Dyshawn is being absolutely railroaded here. I feel bad for the guy. I hope he gets back and i will scream and pull for him louder then i ever have everyone.

I got Dyshawns back.
I agree, plus one of the girls didn't want her name mentioned. I wonder why, she didn't want to get mixed up in the bull****
Reply With Quote
  #656  
Old 10-10-2015, 08:26 PM
College B-Ball Fan College B-Ball Fan is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,033
Thanks: 2,278
Thanked 1,355 Times in 586 Posts
College B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by ClaytonFlyerFan View Post
I have a hunch next weeks hearing does not even happen. UD and DP reach an agreement before said hearing, and he is allowed back.

I have no inside information, knowledge of the case outside of what has been reported in the media, etc......Just a gut feeling, as I drink my red and blue Kool-Aid.
Don't expect that to happen! UD has to comply with title IX!
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to College B-Ball Fan For This Totally Excellent Post:
rollo (10-10-2015)
  #657  
Old 10-11-2015, 12:49 AM
Buster Goode Buster Goode is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Fernando Valley, CA
Posts: 3,285
Thanks: 1,215
Thanked 2,164 Times in 1,008 Posts
Buster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond reputeBuster Goode has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by ClaytonFlyerFan View Post
I have a hunch next weeks hearing does not even happen. UD and DP reach an agreement before said hearing, and he is allowed back.
I don't think that will happen even though it would be nice. I think we've seen the last of #21
Reply With Quote
  #658  
Old 10-11-2015, 01:26 AM
Flyer2 Flyer2 is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 702
Thanks: 302
Thanked 330 Times in 192 Posts
Flyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer2 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by College B-Ball Fan View Post
Don't expect that to happen! UD has to comply with title IX!
As with any generated government document (IX) probably 200 plus pages there is a lot of double and triple talk. Its all in the interpretation and I'm sure I could keep them confused and reactive. BS to BS.

If the universities, besides UD, had any brains they would challenge the **** thing. Were are the congressman and senators.
Reply With Quote
  #659  
Old 10-11-2015, 10:16 AM
San Diego Flyer's Avatar
San Diego Flyer San Diego Flyer is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas
Posts: 14,788
Thanks: 10,086
Thanked 10,502 Times in 4,704 Posts
San Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by ClaytonFlyerFan View Post
I have a hunch next weeks hearing does not even happen. UD and DP reach an agreement before said hearing, and he is allowed back.

I have no inside information, knowledge of the case outside of what has been reported in the media, etc......Just a gut feeling, as I drink my red and blue Kool-Aid.
You could be just as right as the next guy. That's why they put keys on the board. Lots opinions both ways based on emotion and fully unencumbered with knowledge. There are a number of attorneys on this board who make good points with some legal basis behind them. But those also are not locks as they also point out.

But hopefully we will know what the judge feels this week, and it will break in Dyshawn's favor.
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to San Diego Flyer For This Totally Excellent Post:
TMPH66 (10-11-2015)
  #660  
Old 10-11-2015, 10:25 AM
College B-Ball Fan College B-Ball Fan is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,033
Thanks: 2,278
Thanked 1,355 Times in 586 Posts
College B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Buster Goode View Post
I don't think that will happen even though it would be nice. I think we've seen the last of #21
Buster, you never know BUT I don't think that is true either!
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to College B-Ball Fan For This Totally Excellent Post:
bhflyer5 (10-12-2015)
  #661  
Old 10-11-2015, 10:30 AM
College B-Ball Fan College B-Ball Fan is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,033
Thanks: 2,278
Thanked 1,355 Times in 586 Posts
College B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond reputeCollege B-Ball Fan has a reputation beyond repute
Talking

Originally Posted by ClaytonFlyerFan View Post
I have a hunch next weeks hearing does not even happen. UD and DP reach an agreement before said hearing, and he is allowed back.

I have no inside information, knowledge of the case outside of what has been reported in the media, etc......Just a gut feeling, as I drink my red and blue Kool-Aid.
IMHO, the best case scenario for UD and DP would be that UD mounts a vigorous defense, hires a well respected attorney with a "national" reputation in title IX litigation, the parties make their arguments to the court and the court decides to grant the injunction right?

Do both sides "win" (no questions asked of the U IF that would happen)?

Just sayin'

SDF, you are right on some levels! Lots of speculation!

I hope we all win! U and DP=happy fans too!

Last edited by College B-Ball Fan; 10-11-2015 at 10:30 AM.. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #662  
Old 10-11-2015, 11:12 AM
sheg's Avatar
sheg sheg is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,800
Thanks: 524
Thanked 1,858 Times in 719 Posts
sheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond reputesheg has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Flyer2 View Post
As with any generated government document (IX) probably 200 plus pages .

False. Four words.

"Men bad. Women good."
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to sheg For This Totally Excellent Post:
BRob2Perryman3 (10-11-2015)
  #663  
Old 10-11-2015, 12:52 PM
moville moville is offline
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 848
Thanks: 763
Thanked 949 Times in 324 Posts
moville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant futuremoville has a brilliant future
Nobody wins a fight. Especially this one.
Reply With Quote
  #664  
Old 10-11-2015, 01:45 PM
UDDoug UDDoug is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,242
Thanks: 66
Thanked 3,342 Times in 1,988 Posts
UDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by FlyerNation23 View Post
If this is a true non-biased case (unlike the hearing committee at UD), I think Pierre has the advantage due to lack of evidence.....
A trial in US District Court will not be not be on the facts and evidence of the case. They won't retry the case to judge Pierre's culpability. It will be about whether or not the hearing followed established processes and procedures and whether the investigation was as unbiased/fair as those policies and procedures and Title IX require. If the investigation/hearing was, the judge likely upholds UD even if the judge disagrees with the conclusion of the hearing committee.

Of course Ginsburg and Pierre's legal team is going to use whatever facts and events he can to try to prove the process was improperly conducted.

Last edited by UDDoug; 10-11-2015 at 06:56 PM..
Reply With Quote
5 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to UDDoug For This Totally Excellent Post:
Flyer 86 (10-11-2015), flyerfanatic86 (10-12-2015), IAFlyer (10-12-2015), Phi Psi Flyer '09 (10-13-2015), rollo (10-11-2015)
  #665  
Old 10-11-2015, 02:40 PM
Avid Flyer's Avatar
Avid Flyer Avid Flyer is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 8,906
Thanks: 3,535
Thanked 3,787 Times in 1,933 Posts
Avid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeAvid Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
It won't be hard for Ginsberg's team to show how the story changed from the beginning where even the accuser stated it wasn't rape, then at the hearing it as changed to "he tore/ripped her clothes off". She stated in prior reports she took a shower and washed her clothes. Who washes ripped/torn pants and panties? You either put them in a bag for future evidence or you toss them in the trash. These are the type inconsistencies Ginsburg listed in his filing, noting how the whole story changed multiple times with it finally being embellished to make their case strong and convincing. BTW she never furnished any items as evidence to support her stance.

These are the types of issues that shows the committee had an agenda and presented embellished facts to support their case. Embellishing your case unsupported by evidence clearly flies in the face of unbiased and equal.
Reply With Quote
  #666  
Old 10-11-2015, 04:52 PM
UDDoug UDDoug is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,242
Thanks: 66
Thanked 3,342 Times in 1,988 Posts
UDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond repute
You might be reading too much into what ripped clothes off means. who washes torn clothing?

Perhaps the UD response will show her story much more consistent than Ginsburg portrays and that Pierre was vague and evasive while she was explicit.

I don't put much stock in the no rape statement immediately after the act. Nor do many of the attorneys I have spoken to and read the reports with.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to UDDoug For This Totally Excellent Post:
Flyer 86 (10-11-2015)
  #667  
Old 10-11-2015, 05:34 PM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
I think UDDoug needs to go out and buy a Title IX flag and fly it high from his flagpole at his home. Instead of a "Don't Tread On Us" motto, his would be "Student Boards Rule On Us."
Reply With Quote
  #668  
Old 10-11-2015, 06:27 PM
rollo's Avatar
rollo rollo is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: RolloCon
Posts: 16,546
Thanks: 16,232
Thanked 15,872 Times in 6,979 Posts
rollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Angry John View Post
I think UDDoug needs to go out and buy a Title IX flag and fly it high from his flagpole at his home. Instead of a "Don't Tread On Us" motto, his would be "Student Boards Rule On Us."
I think Angry John needs to read the Title IX report and a couple others in their entirety...with an open mind.
__________________
I shaved my balls for this?
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to rollo For This Totally Excellent Post:
IAFlyer (10-12-2015)
  #669  
Old 10-11-2015, 06:37 PM
Flyer 86's Avatar
Flyer 86 Flyer 86 is offline
General
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 7,170
Thanks: 31,807
Thanked 1,266 Times in 784 Posts
Flyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond reputeFlyer 86 has a reputation beyond repute
why are you attacking, is the because of your handle.... living up to it A John.

Doug is making some sense. Why i lean heavily to Pierre's side in all of this. There are two main facts that might be enough for the judge to keep things as is.

1) perhaps on the third instance of climbing into the bed Pierre was more forceful and did something he shouldn't.

b) along with that, many have said on here that all college athletes, and esp D1 athletes are constantly reminded or told the deal with drinking and sexing with other students while on scholarship. There seem to be some very explicit rules about the other student needing to verbally say the word "yes."

So while i may not agree, and think it's all way too legal. This could come back to bite him, so to speak.

2) Did or did not Title x people follow proper protocols on:

the investigation of both parties, and witnesses?
bring Pierre up to speed on changes in testimony by her?
be impartial overall - as they are investigator, judge and jury to a large degree?
and then there is the learning disability angle. Will that come into play?


Ginsberg needs to answer very forcefully on many of these questions. And get to the root of why is that the UHB/Title 9 folks got to the decision they did, and were their methods reasonable, fair punishment, or was their bias and lack of procedure followed.

Gonna be quite interesting to see where this ends up. Sorry if people with more legal and balanced logic are getting in your way of the outcome. But if does go that way (negative for Pierre) - you'll at least have an inkling why.
Reply With Quote
  #670  
Old 10-11-2015, 06:49 PM
UDDoug UDDoug is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,242
Thanks: 66
Thanked 3,342 Times in 1,988 Posts
UDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond reputeUDDoug has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Angry John View Post
I think UDDoug needs to go out and buy a Title IX flag and fly it high from his flagpole at his home. Instead of a "Don't Tread On Us" motto, his would be "Student Boards Rule On Us."
You appear to mistake trying to explain what US District court does, and what UD"s response is likely to be, with supporting Title IX as it is. Explaining that when others seem to believe that the court is going to "retry" the case isn't waving a Title IX flag.

It's the same thing with Ginsburg's filings. Do you think it's possible that may be embellished, cherry picked and biased? That's what you do when filing this type of case? He raises a lot of issues that need to be addressed, and are definitely issues within these Title IX hearings.

It's entirely possible to read the various reports and come to a different conclusion than that reached by the hearing committee, either on "guilt" or punishment, but understand how the decision may have been reached.

Last edited by UDDoug; 10-11-2015 at 07:00 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #671  
Old 10-12-2015, 08:11 AM
CE80 CE80 is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,778
Thanks: 5,498
Thanked 6,255 Times in 3,097 Posts
CE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond repute
This was in yesterday's Plain Dealer. I hope the link works.

http://plaindealer.oh.newsmemory.com...reid=4f9f41fe5
Reply With Quote
10 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to CE80 For This Totally Excellent Post:
Atlantic 10 (10-12-2015), Avid Flyer (10-12-2015), Bat'71 (10-12-2015), Figgie123 (10-12-2015), jack72 (10-12-2015), mikeymo85 (10-12-2015), NJFlyr71 (10-12-2015), Runnin' Rebel (10-12-2015), San Diego Flyer (10-12-2015), TD Flyer (10-12-2015)
  #672  
Old 10-12-2015, 08:50 AM
N2663R N2663R is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 2,316
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,488 Times in 763 Posts
N2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by UDDoug View Post
You appear to mistake trying to explain what US District court does, and what UD"s response is likely to be, with supporting Title IX as it is. Explaining that when others seem to believe that the court is going to "retry" the case isn't waving a Title IX flag.

It's the same thing with Ginsburg's filings. Do you think it's possible that may be embellished, cherry picked and biased? That's what you do when filing this type of case? He raises a lot of issues that need to be addressed, and are definitely issues within these Title IX hearings.

It's entirely possible to read the various reports and come to a different conclusion than that reached by the hearing committee, either on "guilt" or punishment, but understand how the decision may have been reached.
Before UDDoug's recent posts, I felt pretty confident that DP/Ginsberg would win the day in their upcoming hearing on the 15th. But, if UDDoug is correct in his assessment (and I unfortunately think he is) and the only topic in question is whether DP was treated fairly from a policy/procedural standpoint (and not the actual facts of the incident), I am not very confident.

Having read some, but not all of the court documents this is all that I could come up with from a laymen's perspective:
- Was there enough evidence for UD to push this case through the Title IX system? Since it was not 99.9% obvious one way or the other, probably so.
- Did UD accommodate DP's learning disability appropriately throughout the process?
- Why did UD skip an entire academic semester before empaneling a UHB and deciding the case? Was this unfair to DP?
I'm sure DP/Ginsberg will come up with some other points as well.

Doug, any thoughts?
Reply With Quote
  #673  
Old 10-12-2015, 08:51 AM
San Diego Flyer's Avatar
San Diego Flyer San Diego Flyer is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas
Posts: 14,788
Thanks: 10,086
Thanked 10,502 Times in 4,704 Posts
San Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
The TRO is Dyshawn's best shot at playing a full 15/16 season. After reading that article, I am both sick and seething at the same time, if that's even possible.
Reply With Quote
  #674  
Old 10-12-2015, 09:04 AM
NJFlyr71's Avatar
NJFlyr71 NJFlyr71 is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ Beach Livin'
Posts: 3,226
Thanks: 1,484
Thanked 1,912 Times in 1,082 Posts
NJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond reputeNJFlyr71 has a reputation beyond repute
Pretty scary .... welcome to justice in a PC environment ... yes some people commit assault and that needs to be held as a crime. But went 2 people seemingly agree to continue to engage in the actions that a sensible person viewing the behavior would interpret as 'consenting and in agreement' then only when one feels remorse is there a 'crime' that is pretty scary.

It appears that only one person is held to the higher standard rather than an even handed approach. Only one makes a stupid mistake but the other commits a crime.
Reply With Quote
  #675  
Old 10-12-2015, 09:19 AM
Gazoo's Avatar
Gazoo Gazoo is offline
General
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 6,562
Thanks: 5,139
Thanked 5,432 Times in 2,372 Posts
Gazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by FlyerNation23 View Post
Agreed, I think UD wants to win this case and prove the process is not flawed. If this is a true non-biased case (unlike the hearing committee at UD), I think Pierre has the advantage due to lack of evidence but Taft might find some Title 9 law that protects UD.

Would we know by End of day Today if Peirre is allowed back on the team while this plays out? Safe to say this is going to be a long legal battle
Lest we forget, UD is one of the largest private recipients of federal research $$$. You think UD's basketball team is more important than that? Nope. They're going to try to put forth a strong case to avoid getting on the bad side of the big $$. They'll throw DP, Miller, and the whole athletic department under the bus if it is deemed necessary.

Originally Posted by anthonycharles View Post
In today's age, if you have as much to lose as Dyshawn and the rest of the guys on the team do, you best be unzipping your pants for a girl who is either your girlfriend or you plan on being your girlfriend. Pretty simple really. Once you graduate, then do as you wish.

I'm sorry, knowing they're plenty of "average Joe's" out there who have been suspended or expelled for equal or lesser, I have a hard time feeling as outraged or sympathetic for Dyshawn as many posters on this board are expressing. If he wan't a potential A-10 player of the year, nobody would care.

If he wins his appeal, great. I will still cheer for him. But I'm not going to pretend he didn't put himself in this position to begin with by making poor decisions.
I still don't understand this thinking.

anthonycharles, explain something to me. Let's say he goes out on a date with her and nothing happens (they keep their clothes on). And another. And another. 6 months later DP takes her out for some drinks and dinner, and FINALLY makes the move. They're both fully consenting. The next morning she mentions to her friends that "things got a little out of hand last night" and they report it to the coaches, who take it the Title IX route. Her boyfriend at another school and unapproving parents find out so she freaks out. After she changes her story a couple times, DP is kicked out of the university.

And you think that's ok. He should have just kept it in his pants.

Now, we can work backward from 6 months to a 1 night stand, but, it's a very slippery slope. Either the basketball players have to keep it in their pants all the time for 4 years or risk this. And since every last one of them is going to "risk this" at some point in those 4 years can't we conclude it's just an unreasonable policy?
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to Gazoo For This Totally Excellent Post:
IAFlyer (10-12-2015)
  #676  
Old 10-12-2015, 10:41 AM
Chris R's Avatar
Chris R Chris R is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 13,583
Thanks: 1,835
Thanked 17,094 Times in 5,099 Posts
Chris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond repute
The circumstances beyond mere time dilation have also changed however in your example. Risks have been mitigated, current or past boyfriends properly vetted, relationships deepened, trust and commitments strengthened, and overall best practices followed to create an environment of long lasting success in the relationship. Chances are high you have met the other person's family, grown close to her parents and siblings, shared holidays together, established a meaningful level of trust and mutual respect for one another, joined hands in many life successes and commiserated in one's arms at life's darkest moments. More than that, as time goes on, you develop a habit of wanting to treat the other person in a manner that the other person's parents would wish you to treat that person, not in the manner your impulses would like. The longer relationships develop, the less and less impulses steer the bond. Its apples and oranges.

Whether the comfort safety zone for greatest odds of success starts at six months or a year or two years I dont know. But we know its not one night. A sense of proportion and scale has to matter. Relationships evolve and grow tighter the longer they advance because both sides have skin in the game. No pun intended. When folks are simply looking for a quickie, the whole point is to avoid investment. Without an ounce of sacrifice, there's a pound of baggage that comes with it.

I dont see many similarities. There are no guarantees in any relationship but you exponentially improve the odds when an actual loving heartfelt relationship exists in the first place. The chances you walk out of the funeral for the other person's grandmother 18 months into the relationship and they pull you aside and say, "listen, forgot to tell you, Ive had a boyfriend at Bubble Gum State for 2yrs and you shouldnt have forced yourself on me last night" is somewhere between slim and none and slim just walked out of the funeral parlor.
__________________

Hot shooting hides a multitude of sins.
Make everyone else's "one day" your "day one".
Reply With Quote
3 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to Chris R For This Totally Excellent Post:
anthonycharles (10-12-2015), Flyer 86 (10-12-2015), UDEE79 (10-12-2015)
  #677  
Old 10-12-2015, 10:52 AM
DGO67 DGO67 is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,333
Thanks: 346
Thanked 733 Times in 474 Posts
DGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond reputeDGO67 has a reputation beyond repute
I think her scream came a little late and to the wrong person (people?), and should result in exoneration of DP.
The big issue, as mentioned by the King, is how does DP take his place in class with such a late start? Would the NCAA see this as a violation of academic policy (favoritism)? Is there a precedent for this situation? How does a transfer help DP anyway...where ever you go you bring yourself!
Scrap everything and turn pro? Up side, you become an NBA star and live happily ever after. Downside, you sell used cars or shoes.
Reply With Quote
  #678  
Old 10-12-2015, 10:53 AM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
Yes Rollo, I have read many parts of Title IX and interpretations of it. I do not like its overreach from its original intent. No way should it be involved in discipline, Student Boards, Student Codes, involving non athletic males and having more power than "The Bill of Rights" and the "Constitution".

I talked to a golfing buddy on Saturday, who happens to be an attorney and has served on a local college board. He also knows Judge Rose. I asked him his opinion on the matter. Here are some general things he said: 1. The courts usually rule in favor of the schools in these matters when it comes to student codes and rules. 2. Judge Rose is a competent and good Federal District Judge. 3. He is a stickler that demands that all i's are dotted and t's crossed.

I do think the odds are stacked against Pierre. His only hope would be the following: 1. UD did not dot all of its i's and have all it's crossed. Maybe the 5 month delay of the Student Board deciding Pierre's fate gets him off of the hook. 2. An injunction is granted, which leads to a long trial and then works it way up the Federal Court ladder on dealing with constitutionality of the law .

In my opinion, this is a bad law that tramples on a person's constitutional rights. It also has gone beyond its original intent. I am bothered that anybody in there right mind would cheer for UD to win in court by upholding this horrible part of the Title IX law. These jokers are probably fans of old Judge Roland Friesler.

Last edited by Angry John; 10-12-2015 at 10:58 AM..
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to Angry John For This Totally Excellent Post:
Flyer 86 (10-12-2015), rollo (10-12-2015)
  #679  
Old 10-12-2015, 11:48 AM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
I agree 98% with what Chris is saying about sex, relationships and one night strand's. Great advise a parent should teach their children.The only major problem here is this philosophy should not be enforced by rules and laws. History has proven that legislating morality does not work.
Reply With Quote
3 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to Angry John For This Totally Excellent Post:
CE80 (10-12-2015), CJ2etc (10-12-2015), Sarge (10-12-2015)
  #680  
Old 10-12-2015, 11:51 AM
Gazoo's Avatar
Gazoo Gazoo is offline
General
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 6,562
Thanks: 5,139
Thanked 5,432 Times in 2,372 Posts
Gazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Chris R View Post
The circumstances beyond mere time dilation have also changed however in your example. Risks have been mitigated, current or past boyfriends properly vetted, relationships deepened, trust and commitments strengthened, and overall best practices followed to create an environment of long lasting success in the relationship. Chances are high you have met the other person's family, grown close to her parents and siblings, shared holidays together, established a meaningful level of trust and mutual respect for one another, joined hands in many life successes and commiserated in one's arms at life's darkest moments. More than that, as time goes on, you develop a habit of wanting to treat the other person in a manner that the other person's parents would wish you to treat that person, not in the manner your impulses would like. The longer relationships develop, the less and less impulses steer the bond. Its apples and oranges.

Whether the comfort safety zone for greatest odds of success starts at six months or a year or two years I dont know. But we know its not one night. A sense of proportion and scale has to matter. Relationships evolve and grow tighter the longer they advance because both sides have skin in the game. No pun intended. When folks are simply looking for a quickie, the whole point is to avoid investment. Without an ounce of sacrifice, there's a pound of baggage that comes with it.

I dont see many similarities. There are no guarantees in any relationship but you exponentially improve the odds when an actual loving heartfelt relationship exists in the first place. The chances you walk out of the funeral for the other person's grandmother 18 months into the relationship and they pull you aside and say, "listen, forgot to tell you, Ive had a boyfriend at Bubble Gum State for 2yrs and you shouldnt have forced yourself on me last night" is somewhere between slim and none and slim just walked out of the funeral parlor.
Ah, I see. So you're saying if this girl had a bond of friendship that had been building over the course of many months, maybe even years . . . let's just say for argument's sake lasting the length of time that DP was dating someone else. . . then this COULD HAVE been the culmination of many months of building trust. Let's just say they lived in the same building and spent many weekends over the last couple of years going to Tim's with a group of friends. . . then it's a different story. What if they knew each other so well that they had each other's phone numbers, and had been texting friendly banter for a long time. . . that would make this less of a 1 night stand and more of a case of long time friends changing their relationship. But still you say, DP should have kept it in his pants.

Well, look at that, what a coincidence. All of that appears to be true.

"The complainant said the group went to the apartment of the suspect. They found the suspect, who was a friend to all of them, in his apartment, along with his roommate"

"talked about going to brunch the next day with the whole group."

So yes, I agree that the training (and human decency) would lead a reasonable person in DP's shoes to NOT pick up a random chick in the bar and drag her home stumbling drunk, but that's not what happened. So I think it's your example that's apples and oranges, not mine.

No matter what, there has to be a "first time" for there to be the type of long term relationship trust in this sort of act, as you're describing. And no matter what, that first time must come with this kind of risk. And no matter what, it's unreasonable to assume that basketball players are going to accept 4 years of chaste.

So I just don't understand how someone can say it's ok / safe for the basketball players to be in a long term relationship but not ok to have a "first time" encounter. You can't get to long term without passing through the gate the first time.
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to Gazoo For This Totally Excellent Post:
CE80 (10-12-2015), Flyer 86 (10-12-2015)
  #681  
Old 10-12-2015, 12:00 PM
224's Avatar
224 224 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Dayton
Posts: 416
Thanks: 239
Thanked 462 Times in 197 Posts
224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute224 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by CE80 View Post
This was in yesterday's Plain Dealer. I hope the link works.

http://plaindealer.oh.newsmemory.com...reid=4f9f41fe5
Having read this, it almost seems like the rules are tailored to who can cry 'Wolf!' first and the loudest. Since the male didn't show enough remorse, that was actually taken into account? What a joke.

In this same case, with the same facts, had he said he was sexually assaulted would the outcome be the same for the female accuser? I don't think so.

What happens if the norm becomes to preemptively accuse your one night stand partner of sexual assault out of fear 4 weeks later they may do the same to you? Use it as a defense mechanism. I recognize that likely won't become "the norm", but had Pierre accused her given the same facts would she have been suspended?

Last edited by 224; 10-12-2015 at 12:05 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #682  
Old 10-12-2015, 12:19 PM
Chris R's Avatar
Chris R Chris R is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 13,583
Thanks: 1,835
Thanked 17,094 Times in 5,099 Posts
Chris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond repute
Gazoo, their definition of friendship and my definition of friendship are not necessarily congruent. That's where our interpretations diverge. What they label friends I would label acquaintances. Friends show up at your grandmother's funeral. Acquaintances go to Tims with you.
__________________

Hot shooting hides a multitude of sins.
Make everyone else's "one day" your "day one".
Reply With Quote
  #683  
Old 10-12-2015, 12:26 PM
shocka43's Avatar
shocka43 shocka43 is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: It's hot and there is fire
Posts: 9,351
Thanks: 5,410
Thanked 9,809 Times in 4,072 Posts
shocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond reputeshocka43 has a reputation beyond repute
The purpose isn't to challenge the constitutionality and foundation of Title IX...it is the fact that UD appears to have not followed their own rules/procedures/policies that are in place to allegedly meet the standards set forth in Title IX.

Thousands of meaningful one night relationships occur each weekend at colleges across teh country...regardless of what your personal opinion is of them...it doesn't grant a free pass for someone to allege sexual assault because of outside factors that don't include the actual incident. Buyers remorse, pregnancy, fear because you cheated, rumors flying, etc...yes...those are outcomes of choices and I preach that if you are responsible for dealing with the outcomes of choices...unfortunately in this case...something that happens very frequently on college campuses, doesn't mean that there is a free pass for a sexual assault claim because you shagged a girl that isn't your long term and you aren't married to...give that argument a rest. I supposed Joe Education major should have understood the same thing when he got in the bag last weekend to?
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to shocka43 For This Totally Excellent Post:
Atlantic 10 (10-12-2015), Avid Flyer (10-13-2015)
  #684  
Old 10-12-2015, 12:50 PM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
I agree Schocka43. 100% of Ginsburg's attack for now is going after UD's failure to properly follow their own procedures under Title IX. This is the dotting the i's and crossing the t's. Going after the constitutionality of the law could be used in an appeal type of approach later on down the road.
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to Angry John For This Totally Excellent Post:
Flyer 86 (10-12-2015)
  #685  
Old 10-12-2015, 01:48 PM
springborofan springborofan is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Springboro
Posts: 2,415
Thanks: 2,208
Thanked 2,761 Times in 1,129 Posts
springborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond reputespringborofan has a reputation beyond repute
A point that no one is making is that Title IX law is silent on the specifics on this topic. What HAS changed is the interpretation of that law by overzealous (and politically correct) bureaucrats who are forcing Universities to develop draconian and, frankly, illegal policies to be in compliance. This "Dear Colleague letter"sent from the assistant secretary of the office of civil rights within the Dept. Of Education is the foundation for all this. NO NEW LAW WAS PASSED. it is overreach! Who made her Queen of the land?..

THAT is what pi$$es me off the most. Happy reading...

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/lis...4-title-ix.pdf
Reply With Quote
3 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to springborofan For This Totally Excellent Post:
Avid Flyer (10-13-2015), Bat'71 (10-13-2015), CE80 (10-12-2015)
  #686  
Old 10-12-2015, 03:16 PM
FlyingArrow FlyingArrow is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,214
Thanks: 1,228
Thanked 1,484 Times in 810 Posts
FlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond reputeFlyingArrow has a reputation beyond repute
That's just... crazy. I wonder if the lawyers and administrators required to comply (or even just read) all of that might drive up the cost of higher education.
Reply With Quote
  #687  
Old 10-12-2015, 03:31 PM
N2663R N2663R is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 2,316
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,488 Times in 763 Posts
N2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond reputeN2663R has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by shocka43 View Post
The purpose isn't to challenge the constitutionality and foundation of Title IX...it is the fact that UD appears to have not followed their own rules/procedures/policies that are in place to allegedly meet the standards set forth in Title IX.
Originally Posted by Angry John View Post
I agree Schocka43. 100% of Ginsburg's attack for now is going after UD's failure to properly follow their own procedures under Title IX. This is the dotting the i's and crossing the t's. Going after the constitutionality of the law could be used in an appeal type of approach later on down the road.
Guys, I agree that this is what will be argued on Thursday. But please explain where and how UD did not follow its own rules/procedures/policies. I need some examples??
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to N2663R For This Totally Excellent Post:
rollo (10-12-2015)
  #688  
Old 10-12-2015, 04:02 PM
CE80 CE80 is offline
General of the Air Force
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,778
Thanks: 5,498
Thanked 6,255 Times in 3,097 Posts
CE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond reputeCE80 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by springborofan View Post
A point that no one is making is that Title IX law is silent on the specifics on this topic. What HAS changed is the interpretation of that law by overzealous (and politically correct) bureaucrats who are forcing Universities to develop draconian and, frankly, illegal policies to be in compliance. This "Dear Colleague letter"sent from the assistant secretary of the office of civil rights within the Dept. Of Education is the foundation for all this. NO NEW LAW WAS PASSED. it is overreach! Who made her Queen of the land?..

THAT is what pi$$es me off the most. Happy reading...

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/lis...4-title-ix.pdf
So why does this Title IX, Dear Colleague letter, just deal with sexual violence? What about your plain old everyday violence? No sex involved. What would happen if a female student went around beating up just men? Or a man beating up only on women? Or what about a man just beating up on men? Or a woman only beating up other women? Wouldn't that make the school environment discriminatory? It would be okay if a man or woman beat up on both sexes. That would be non-discriminatory.
Reply With Quote
  #689  
Old 10-12-2015, 05:20 PM
udflyerhoops2's Avatar
udflyerhoops2 udflyerhoops2 is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 528
Thanks: 289
Thanked 382 Times in 154 Posts
udflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond reputeudflyerhoops2 has a reputation beyond repute
Another random thought...Wouldn't this make for a great college experience?

Male student, "You wanna?"

Female student, "yeah."

Male student, "You sure?"

Female student, "yeah."

Male student, "You aren't going to call the Title IX office when we're done are you? I mean, I'm cool with this and i want to be with you but I won't if you might be having even the slightest bit of hesitation. "

Female student, "No I'm not gonna talk to anyone else, I want to be with you."

Male student, "Ok, but only if you're positive you're cool and not gonna call them."

Female student, "You know what? Nevermind...you just couldn't stop talking."
Reply With Quote
4 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to udflyerhoops2 For This Totally Excellent Post:
Atlantic 10 (10-12-2015), Chris R (10-12-2015), Flyer 86 (10-12-2015), jack72 (10-12-2015)
  #690  
Old 10-12-2015, 05:54 PM
rollo's Avatar
rollo rollo is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: RolloCon
Posts: 16,546
Thanks: 16,232
Thanked 15,872 Times in 6,979 Posts
rollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond repute
The difference between Royalty and serfdom is the ability to see things from another's point of view. I have that ability...hence, the 'King' stuff!

So lot too long ago, coeds around campus would get loaded and taken advantage of only to have to complete the walk of shame worrying about reputation, pregnancy, STD's, etc...meanwhile the men across campus only had to worry about whether or not she'd show up at his porch the next day.

Then the feminists got mad and fought long and hard for Title IX...so now women are somewhat protected from males...and males now have something a little more serious to worry about the next day...or week...or month.
__________________
I shaved my balls for this?
Reply With Quote
  #691  
Old 10-12-2015, 06:21 PM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
Rollo, two wrongs do not make a right.
Reply With Quote
  #692  
Old 10-12-2015, 07:04 PM
rollo's Avatar
rollo rollo is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: RolloCon
Posts: 16,546
Thanks: 16,232
Thanked 15,872 Times in 6,979 Posts
rollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond reputerollo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Angry John View Post
Rollo, two wrongs do not make a right.
True, but to the feminists, any legislation that makes the men sweat and think about their actions moves the pendulum their direction. And that's what Title IX is all about...evening out the playing field.

Title IX isn't about rape or harassment, it's about power. Denying its legitimacy or arguing how it's unfair to basketball players - whose need to get laid somehow needs to be promoted and encouraged - will get you nowhere in this political climate.
__________________
I shaved my balls for this?
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to rollo For This Totally Excellent Post:
springborofan (10-12-2015)
  #693  
Old 10-12-2015, 07:26 PM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
Personally, I have no love for the PC feminist liberal crowd nor do I like the far right Tea party types. I am a common sense middle of the road type. Conservative on some issues and mainstream liberal on others. Might lean slightly more conservative as a whole. Too many things have become too political and extreme without compromise.
Reply With Quote
  #694  
Old 10-12-2015, 08:34 PM
Chris R's Avatar
Chris R Chris R is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 13,583
Thanks: 1,835
Thanked 17,094 Times in 5,099 Posts
Chris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond reputeChris R has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by shocka43 View Post
The purpose isn't to challenge the constitutionality and foundation of Title IX...it is the fact that UD appears to have not followed their own rules/procedures/policies that are in place to allegedly meet the standards set forth in Title IX.

Thousands of meaningful one night relationships occur each weekend at colleges across teh country...regardless of what your personal opinion is of them...it doesn't grant a free pass for someone to allege sexual assault because of outside factors that don't include the actual incident. Buyers remorse, pregnancy, fear because you cheated, rumors flying, etc...yes...those are outcomes of choices and I preach that if you are responsible for dealing with the outcomes of choices...unfortunately in this case...something that happens very frequently on college campuses, doesn't mean that there is a free pass for a sexual assault claim because you shagged a girl that isn't your long term and you aren't married to...give that argument a rest. I supposed Joe Education major should have understood the same thing when he got in the bag last weekend to?
I agree with all of this. But, it doesn't mean you still shouldn't have known better.

Its like walking alone down a dark alley in the worst section of town at 2am where the drug lords and gang bangers live, while wearing a shiny Rolex and Armani suit. That you got jumped and robbed doesn't mean you broke a law. You were allowed to be there and the court will side on your behalf. But man were you dumb and between us and the fencepost, you shoulda known better.

I'm merely pointing out the difference between being right in a courtroom and being right between the ears. Oftentimes they are not in lock-step and I think its fair to make the distinction. What % of accountability you parse those two pieces, I dont know.

What I do know is if my mother knew I was walking down the worst dark alley in town at 2am with a Rolex and Armani suit, she would have beaten me over the head just as soon as my skull fracture healed from the beating I took at the hands of the gang-banging robbers.
__________________

Hot shooting hides a multitude of sins.
Make everyone else's "one day" your "day one".
Reply With Quote
Mad Props to Chris R For This Totally Excellent Post:
shocka43 (10-13-2015)
  #695  
Old 10-12-2015, 09:22 PM
anthonycharles anthonycharles is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,723
Thanks: 928
Thanked 1,409 Times in 577 Posts
anthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Gazoo View Post
anthonycharles, explain something to me. Let's say he goes out on a date with her and nothing happens (they keep their clothes on). And another. And another. 6 months later DP takes her out for some drinks and dinner, and FINALLY makes the move. They're both fully consenting. The next morning she mentions to her friends that "things got a little out of hand last night" and they report it to the coaches, who take it the Title IX route. Her boyfriend at another school and unapproving parents find out so she freaks out. After she changes her story a couple times, DP is kicked out of the university.

And you think that's ok. He should have just kept it in his pants.

Now, we can work backward from 6 months to a 1 night stand, but, it's a very slippery slope. Either the basketball players have to keep it in their pants all the time for 4 years or risk this. And since every last one of them is going to "risk this" at some point in those 4 years can't we conclude it's just an unreasonable policy?
But none of that happened. In this case, from reading the police report, it looks to me that Dyshawn picked the wrong girl to have a one night stand with. Again, I still have no idea what really happened. But assuming Dyshawn is the innocent victim in all of this and is 100% in the right in terms of truth, he put himself in a position for something like this to happen. He needs to know better and so does everyone else on the team. There needs to be a tremendous amount of trust nowadays with whomever you're hooking up with. I'm sure if you asked Dyshawn himself he'd admit to making poor decisions in this entire scenario.

As for the policy, the University put it in place to cover their ass. In today's climate, I don't blame them. Like it or not, universities went decades turning a blind eye to sexual assault cases. Because of this, the federal gov't stepped in and now things are overly sensitive. I would love to see a medium balance, but for some reason that seems difficult in today's society.

It is up to the individual not to put themselves in the position where something like this can come up. Yes, you are seeing this more and more come up. However, how do 99% of football and basketball players throughout the country not find themselves in a similar situation? They make better decisions.
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to anthonycharles For This Totally Excellent Post:
Alberto Strasse (10-12-2015), GoFlyer (10-12-2015)
  #696  
Old 10-12-2015, 09:23 PM
Angry John Angry John is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Troy, Ohio
Posts: 301
Thanks: 105
Thanked 287 Times in 110 Posts
Angry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud ofAngry John has much to be proud of
Same principal applies to the young lady for going into Pierre's bedroom and climbing into his bed. Sure, she should not be forced to do things against her will, but it is not very smart to jump into bed with a guy who is not your boyfriend. Both individuals were irresponsible, but only one person is being punished. Kind of like getting the death penalty for a parking ticket.
Reply With Quote
3 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to Angry John For This Totally Excellent Post:
31770 (10-13-2015), anthonycharles (10-12-2015), GoFlyer (10-12-2015)
  #697  
Old 10-12-2015, 09:39 PM
anthonycharles anthonycharles is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,723
Thanks: 928
Thanked 1,409 Times in 577 Posts
anthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond reputeanthonycharles has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Angry John View Post
Same principal applies to the young lady for going into Pierre's bedroom and climbing into his bed. Sure, she should not be forced to do things against her will, but it is not very smart to jump into bed with a guy who is not your boyfriend. Both individuals were irresponsible, but only one person is being punished. Kind of like getting the death penalty for a parking ticket.
I agree with this. However it is my understanding she is no longer at UD. If that isn't true, she should be held to the same standards considering she is also a UD athlete. My main issue with all of this is nobody would give a rat's ass about any of this if it didn't involve the star player of the basketball team. It seems some fans are more concerned about how this is going to affect the season or Archie's future rather than doing what is right or wrong. I read the police report like most everyone else did and I still don't know what happened. She says one thing, he says another. From her perspective, it makes me feel uncomfortable with Dyshawn's actions. From his perspective, I'm thinking what is the big f'ing deal. Nothing happened.

I have no clue and am done talking about it. The season can't get here fast enough and I just hope the others on the team stay out of trouble because this kind of nonsense 3 yrs in a row is embarrassing. Reading about this lawsuit in the national news is embarrassing. It is embarrassing for DP, the accuser and the university and they all bear some responsibility.
Reply With Quote
4 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to anthonycharles For This Totally Excellent Post:
Alberto Strasse (10-12-2015), FLYER5 (10-13-2015), GoFlyer (10-12-2015), TerryK_67 (10-13-2015)
  #698  
Old 10-13-2015, 08:14 AM
steve steve is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,785
Thanks: 401
Thanked 1,735 Times in 1,009 Posts
steve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Chris R View Post
I agree with all of this. But, it doesn't mean you still shouldn't have known better.

Its like walking alone down a dark alley in the worst section of town at 2am where the drug lords and gang bangers live, while wearing a shiny Rolex and Armani suit. That you got jumped and robbed doesn't mean you broke a law. You were allowed to be there and the court will side on your behalf. But man were you dumb and between us and the fencepost, you shoulda known better.

I'm merely pointing out the difference between being right in a courtroom and being right between the ears. Oftentimes they are not in lock-step and I think its fair to make the distinction. What % of accountability you parse those two pieces, I dont know.

What I do know is if my mother knew I was walking down the worst dark alley in town at 2am with a Rolex and Armani suit, she would have beaten me over the head just as soon as my skull fracture healed from the beating I took at the hands of the gang-banging robbers.
The comparison you're trying to make is not even close..
Reply With Quote
  #699  
Old 10-13-2015, 08:25 AM
steve steve is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,785
Thanks: 401
Thanked 1,735 Times in 1,009 Posts
steve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond reputesteve has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by anthonycharles View Post
But none of that happened. In this case, from reading the police report, it looks to me that Dyshawn picked the wrong girl to have a one night stand with. Again, I still have no idea what really happened. But assuming Dyshawn is the innocent victim in all of this and is 100% in the right in terms of truth, he put himself in a position for something like this to happen. He needs to know better and so does everyone else on the team. There needs to be a tremendous amount of trust nowadays with whomever you're hooking up with. I'm sure if you asked Dyshawn himself he'd admit to making poor decisions in this entire scenario.

As for the policy, the University put it in place to cover their ass. In today's climate, I don't blame them. Like it or not, universities went decades turning a blind eye to sexual assault cases. Because of this, the federal gov't stepped in and now things are overly sensitive. I would love to see a medium balance, but for some reason that seems difficult in today's society.

It is up to the individual not to put themselves in the position where something like this can come up. Yes, you are seeing this more and more come up. However, how do 99% of football and basketball players throughout the country not find themselves in a similar situation? They make better decisions.
Tremendous amount of trust? You mean like the beautiful union known as "marriage" where close to half still end in divorce? Look, DP did NOT put himself in a bad situation...I'd be more than thrilled to know that: 1) he did NOT get abusive in any such way with this lady, and 2) he used a condom..

For years, the main issue with sex, underage, out of wedlock, etc. and still to this day, is about safe and protected sense..You'd like to think these kids and, more importantly, their parents feel that their kids are being responsible people because they do not let their emotions override their sense of responsibility and realize a quick stop to the nearest UDF is the prudent move prior to a night of drinking, carousing, hooking up, etc..

Now all of a sudden we need to worry about the potential emotions/reactions of a young lady and how she should/will react to a mutual night of "scoring" for both? These young adults are at the height of their sexual adventures, they're on their own, and within hundreds of feet/yards of people (boy and girls both) that arouse them and excite them.
Reply With Quote
2 UDPriders Offer Mad Props to steve For This Totally Excellent Post:
Flyer 86 (10-13-2015), Gazoo (10-13-2015)
  #700  
Old 10-13-2015, 08:25 AM
Gazoo's Avatar
Gazoo Gazoo is offline
General
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 6,562
Thanks: 5,139
Thanked 5,432 Times in 2,372 Posts
Gazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond reputeGazoo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by anthonycharles View Post
But none of that happened. In this case, from reading the police report, it looks to me that Dyshawn picked the wrong girl to have a one night stand with. Again, I still have no idea what really happened. But assuming Dyshawn is the innocent victim in all of this and is 100% in the right in terms of truth, he put himself in a position for something like this to happen. He needs to know better and so does everyone else on the team. There needs to be a tremendous amount of trust nowadays with whomever you're hooking up with. I'm sure if you asked Dyshawn himself he'd admit to making poor decisions in this entire scenario.

However, how do 99% of football and basketball players throughout the country not find themselves in a similar situation? They make better decisions.
What do you mean, none of that happened? This is NOT a simple 1 night stand. These 2 clearly knew each other well, hung out together frequently, knew each other well enough to text frequently, go to bars together, etc. They've probably been hanging out for months!! That's not a 1 night stand where you can't remember the girl's name in the morning.

And how do 99% of other players not find themselves in this situation: because it's only a relatively small population of females that are crazy.

Originally Posted by rollo View Post
So lot too long ago, coeds around campus would get loaded and taken advantage of only to have to complete the walk of shame worrying about reputation, pregnancy, STD's, etc...meanwhile the men across campus only had to worry about whether or not she'd show up at his porch the next day.

Then the feminists got mad and fought long and hard for Title IX...so now women are somewhat protected from males...and males now have something a little more serious to worry about the next day...or week...or month.
rollo, did you sip water from the wrong well and have your mind poisoned? Look at the language you use above: girls would get taken advantage of, girls complete the walk of shame, girls have to worry about their reputation. You've been poisoned to believe girls are automatically the victims and men are automatically the evil conquerors. Men spread their seed with impunity and infect women with STD's while women are helpless to stop them. It sounds to me like you've bought the lie.

This isn't the 1940's. It's been a loooong time since girls were innocent little flowers, afraid of the Baptist minister and the scarlet letter. It certainly hasn't been true in the last 30 years on college campuses. Maybe Title IX had something to do with that, but, I would argue MTV had more of an impact.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement System V2.6 By   Branden

     
 
Copyright 1996-2012 UDPride.com. All Rights Reserved.