More presumption of guilt

[Derec]

Three University of Oregon basketball players have been suspended from the school and kicked off the basketball team because they were accused of rape. The police have determined that there is not even enough evidence to bring charges, but in these post-dear-colleague times an allegation without evidence is apparently enough to punish male students.

The University of Oregon announced Friday that three men’s basketball players were kicked off the team after they were investigated because of allegations that they raped a female student -- accusations that did not lead to criminal charges.[..]The recent release of a police report brought attention to the allegations. This week the Lane County district attorney’s office declined to file charges against freshman guard Brandon Austin, sophomore guard Dominic Artis and sophomore guard Damyean Dotson. On Friday, university President Michael Gottfredson said Artis, Austin and Dotson, who were suspended last month, would not return to the basketball team.[...]The district attorney said this week that though everyone involved agreed sex took place multiple times one night in early March, interviews with witnesses and the three basketball players contradicted the woman's statements that she objected to the sex acts and was too drunk to offer consent.

Rape allegations against Oregon basketball players roil campus
It's a classic "he said she said" situation with no evidence either way. Since it is impossible to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth nobody should have been punished. Furthermore, the police said that witnesses (other than the accused) contradicted her statements, which certainly should tip the scales in favor of the accused men. But of course, the rape inquisition doesn't care about evidence - the males are presumed guilty.

And of course, the identity of the accused is being plastered everywhere while the identity of the accuser is being protected.

 

[Bronzeage]

The standards required to participate in a college basketball program may not require proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is very likely the actions the players admitted to, may have violated the college's rules and this is why they were expelled.

This sucks for them, but they knew the rules.

 

[laughing dog]

The standards required to participate in a college basketball program may not require proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is very likely the actions the players admitted to, may have violated the college's rules and this is why they were expelled.

This sucks for them, but they knew the rules.

It is sort of ironic that an OP based on jumping to conclusions jumps to conclusions.

 

[Derec]

The standards required to participate in a college basketball program may not require proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

This is not even "preponderance of evidence". It's an uncorroborated allegation contradicted by witnesses.
But let me get your position clear - you are ok with innocent male students being punished just because they have been accused, even if they are actually innocent?

It is very likely the actions the players admitted to, may have violated the college's rules and this is why they were expelled.

University of Oregon has rules against consensual sex?

This sucks for them, but they knew the rules.

Rules being that male students are presumed guilty until proven innocent, and often not even then.

Personally I think that if they are innocent, they should sue both the university and the accuser (hopefully that lifts the veil of anonymity).

- - - Updated - - -

It is sort of ironic that an OP based on jumping to conclusions jumps to conclusions.

What conclusion have I jumped to exactly?

 

[dystopian]

A look, another Derec thread about rape and the conspiracy against men.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

It's a classic "he said she said" situation with no evidence either way

the police said that witnesses (other than the accused) contradicted her statements, which certainly should tip the scales in favor of the accused men

Which is it?

Or are you confused as to what constitutes evidence?

 

[Arctish]

From the linked article:

Oregon Athletic Director Rob Mullens said that within 24 hours of receiving the final police report on April 30, he suspended the three players indefinitely. Though Mullens said he was aware of an investigation during the playoffs, he wasn't sure which of the players were suspects.

“When you read the police report, it’s very clear it’s conduct not befitting of a student athlete at the University of Oregon,” he said at a televised news conference Friday. “Those are not individuals we want representing our organization.”

The university is now independently examining the case, which may lead to the three students' expulsions. He declined to offer details, citing privacy laws guarding student information.

Also,

The case also drew outrage from students because of a Wall Street Journal report stating that Austin had been suspended after a sexual assault last fall at Providence College in Rhode Island where he spent a semester before transferring to Oregon.

It sounds like there was more than enough evidence of student conduct violations to kick them off the team.

 

[repoman]

Well, running a train on a college age girl is not really a good idea. Not to be an asshole, but this reminds me of when I used to listen to Tom Leykis and he talked about talking to girls who had been molested and that when a caller heard that he knew he was likely to be able to have sex with her, because how it destabilized her (charming, huh?). Any young girl who is unstable enough to have sex with 3 guys will have a reasonable risk of freaking out later about it - the molestation may bubble to the surface.

I feel that this is different from a middle aged woman who has naturally ramped up to being a swinger and never was molested.

 

[Derec]

It sounds like there was more than enough evidence of student conduct violations to kick them off the team.

Had the previous allegation actually been proven you might have a point. But since in the brave new world no evidence is needed to punish male students this means nothing.

 

[Derec]

Which is it?

I should have said "sufficient evidence"

Or are you confused as to what constitutes evidence?

University of Oregon and the Obama administration are.
In any case, evidence, such as it is, is in favor of the accused. Yet they got punished. This has everything to do with sexist prejudice and nothing with justice.

 

[Derec]

Well, running a train on a college age girl is not really a good idea.

Good idea or not, it does not make it non-consensual.

Any young girl who is unstable enough to have sex with 3 guys will have a reasonable risk of freaking out later about it - the molestation may bubble to the surface.

First of all, you have no evidence she was molested, and if she was it's not the accused boys' fault. Second, freaking out about a gang bang later does not make it non-consensual.
This reminds me of the Hofstra false rape allegation. Luckily, the buys videoed the encounter, so they could prove their innocence. But it is still pretty messed up that in today's day and age men are increasingly required to prove their innocence, rather than the other way around.

I feel that this is different from a middle aged woman who has naturally ramped up to being a swinger and never was molested.

It should not matter either legally or vis-a-vis college administration or being on a basketball team.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Well, running a train on a college age girl is not really a good idea.

This.

Derec, in this case you're in the wrong. While it doesn't seem to be rape it doesn't sound like good behavior, either.

 

[Derec]

Derec, in this case you're in the wrong. While it doesn't seem to be rape it doesn't sound like good behavior, either.

How am I in the wrong? I did not offer an opinion on whether it is "good behavior" or not. But I do not think college administrators should be arbiters of "good behavior" of their adult students and punish them for behavior they deem "bad", even if it is consensual. If the sexual encounter was consensual, then the girl is just as "guilty" of "bad behavior" as the guys. Should she be punished as well?

 

[laughing dog]

What conclusion have I jumped to exactly?

How about
"Since it is impossible to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth",
" Furthermore, the police said that witnesses (other than the accused) contradicted her statements, which certainly should tip the scales in favor of the accused men" and
"But of course, the rape inquisition doesn't care about evidence - the males are presumed guilty."
for starters.

 

[Derec]

What conclusion have I jumped to exactly?

How about
"Since it is impossible to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth",
" Furthermore, the police said that witnesses (other than the accused) contradicted her statements, which certainly should tip the scales in favor of the accused men" and
"But of course, the rape inquisition doesn't care about evidence - the males are presumed guilty."
for starters.

They were suspended from the university and kicked off the basketball team even though a police investigation found no probable cause to bring charges and even though a police spokesman said there were witnesses contradicting the allegation. So, no, I was not jumping to conclusions about presumed guilt.

 

[fromderinside]

How am I in the wrong? I did not offer an opinion on whether it is "good behavior" or not. But I do not think college administrators should be arbiters of "good behavior" of their adult students.

These so called adult students are under contract with the schools and the athletic department. Both have moral clauses and behavior constraints.

Absent anything else the athletes were drinking, dipped their sticks, knew the girl was drunk, indirectly evidenced when one of the players apologized.

From the last sentence of a story by an OU athletic department apologist newspaper, the Eugene Register Guard we have:

In a different transcribed phone conversation, Dotson told the victim he was sorry. He said what he did was inappropriate and he would never do it again. He also “mentioned he would not want anyone to do that to his mom or sister.”

Yassir these boys are innocent in mind and spirit ......NOT!!

Good Job Oregon Athletic Department.

Weak try Derec.

 

[Derec]

These so called adult students are under contract with the schools and the athletic department. Both have moral clauses and behavior constraints.

Against consensual sex?

Absent anything else the athletes were drinking, dipped their sticks, knew the girl was drunk, indirectly evidenced when one of the players apologized.

So both the guys and the girl were drinking. Why isn't she being punished as well? She had sex with people who were drunk after all. But I guess it's ok if you're a woman.

 

[fromderinside]

Against consensual sex?

Absent anything else the athletes were drinking, dipped their sticks, knew the girl was drunk, indirectly evidenced when one of the players apologized.

So both the guys and the girl were drinking. Why isn't she being punished as well? She had sex with people who were drunk after all. But I guess it's ok if you're a woman.

Oh?

She's a member of the UO basketball team? The team that represents UO. The one that was told by their coach they are representatives of UO who should behave accordingly?

Edit Repeating your cannard after I specifically pointed out UO athletes have a contract with UO that is more than just a student contract.

 

[laughing dog]

What conclusion have I jumped to exactly?

How about
"Since it is impossible to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth",
" Furthermore, the police said that witnesses (other than the accused) contradicted her statements, which certainly should tip the scales in favor of the accused men" and
"But of course, the rape inquisition doesn't care about evidence - the males are presumed guilty."
for starters.

They were suspended from the university and kicked off the basketball team even though a police investigation found no probable cause to bring charges and even though a police spokesman said there were witnesses contradicting the allegation. So, no, I was not jumping to conclusions about presumed guilt.

You are incorrect. The police said there were witnesses that contradicted her story, which is not the same. You assumed the contradictions are about the alleged rape. You assumed the reason(s) for the dismissal. As others have shown, the players violated team policy about drinking, and, at least one of the players tacitly admitted his guilt about the sexual conduct.

 

[Derec]

You are incorrect. The police said there were witnesses that contradicted her story, which is not the same. You assumed the contradictions are about the alleged rape.

If she is contradicted about any part of her testimony that casts doubts on her

You assumed the reason(s) for the dismissal. As others have shown, the players violated team policy about drinking, and, at least one of the players tacitly admitted his guilt about the sexual conduct.

If he admitted his guilt about any non-consensual sexual conduct he'd have been arrested. As to drinking, show me the policy against the drinking. And since the girl was drinking and has sex as well, why isn't she being suspended as well? Remember, the boys weren't just punished by the basketball team but also by the university at large.