Minnesota football team ends boycott over sexual assault case
Minnesota's university football team have reversed a pledge to boycott games over the suspension of 10 players over an alleged sexual assault.
The team had threatened not to play until the school authorities gave "satisfactory answers".
The university earlier suspended the 10 players without providing any reasons, following an internal inquiry. ( Read more... )
The team had threatened not to play until the school authorities gave "satisfactory answers".
The university earlier suspended the 10 players without providing any reasons, following an internal inquiry. ( Read more... )
Comments 38
Reply
As for the boycott my understanding is that it was because the players were placed on suspension and no reason was given. Like they were not officially told it was pending an outcome of an investigation or hearing.
Reply
OP: Mine main problem is that in no way should the university be investing, holding a trial, hearing or anything of the like for a criminal matter. Those should never be run by private (or public/private) organization.
it's thanks to Title IX, I think.
Reply
Reply
and on a bad day you get the UVA rape hoax which is basically going to follow that fraternity, its members, and the college in general for decades.
tl;dr from experience the politics of young people on campus are complicated because they are young people whose brains have not finished forming.
Reply
Reply
They don't decide whether they go to jail (criminal) or even have to pay money to the victim (civil). They decide what punishments in school such as suspensions or expulsion they should or should not get. They're deciding whether there was a violation of the school's code of conduct, not whether there was a crime. The courts cannot decide this, they have no jurisdiction over it. Even if a court were to find all of them guilty, they could not force the school to expel any of them. In other words, this hearing would happen whether or not there was a criminal investigation and could still happen even if a prosecutor decline to prosecute. Which is good thing ( ... )
Reply
schools have no obligation to report incidences of crime on campuses
this I do have a problem with and honestly not reporting it should make them accessory after the fact or something if there was a crime.
And hopefully, somebody got these idiots together on sexual assault and why they willingness to boycott something like due process is shitty, dumb ass mfs.
I'm annoyed the courts aren't trying it because now we'll never know what really happened. Most of the schools hearing will be sealed, as they often are, and no matter how it turns out there will be finger pointing with no public evidence. Just annoying.
Reply
But.
People who want sexual assaults reported to the police very clearly either do not know or are not thinking of the effect this will have on the victim. Suffice it to say that the criminal justice system can be extremely traumatic to victims, just in the investigation phase, let alone the trial phase, and that should not be sprung on them (because once it is sprung the victim has no control) because a college doesn't want to get cited.
Which is to say, although it is infuriating how self-serving school can be when safeguarding their reputation as "safe", this isn't a situation in which it is solely ethical to ignore the desire and wants of the victim, and I don't think anyone's desire to know what's going on should necessarily trump a victim's desire for an option less harmful to them.
Reply
Reply
A-fucking-men, OP.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment