Brady Hoke under fire

Submitted by DennisFithian on August 29th, 2022 at 9:44 PM

 

"What was reported to have happened should never happen," Hoke said. "Ever. It shouldn't happen to anyone. What has been important to us is that anyone who violates or violated the law or university policies, they'll be held accountable."


 

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/sdsu-coach-brady-hoke-ad-leave-news-conference-amid-questions-about-alleged-rape-by-former-players-225410967.html

Jonesy

August 30th, 2022 at 3:43 PM ^

More like sdsu immediately started an investigation and then the sdpd said to stop as it could mess up their investigation and the names of the accused weren’t even known by the university until this civil suit. Can’t exactly blame the coach or university when they were doing what the cops told them to do.

mooseman

August 29th, 2022 at 9:51 PM ^

I didn't think Taco Bell was part of the TB12 Program.

 

Edit: Flippant comment regarding the typo. Not intended to make light of the subject matter.

Blue@LSU

August 29th, 2022 at 9:53 PM ^

I haven't seen anything substantive suggesting Hoke knew anything about this situation. It seems like there is more criticism of the way the university handled the investigation/delayed its own investigation. 

Double-D

August 30th, 2022 at 8:44 AM ^

What’s being said to the public from her side is disgusting.

They seem to be waging a public campaign. Is it because they felt they were getting nowhere?  Is it to leverage the civil suit?

These cases are truly just awful searching for the truth. I’m sure we all are hoping for justice. 

bronxblue

August 30th, 2022 at 11:12 AM ^

I think that's more an indictment of the criminal system in a lot of cities than anything this individual is doing.  She went to the hospital afterwards and sat for a rape kit (which is incredibly invasive) and then spoke to police and even recorded a conversation with the punter wherein he told her to get an STD test.  I'm not sure how long it takes for detective to investigate the matter but they've had months to do so and still haven't announced whether or not they're planning on filing charges, which seems like a pretty long time given the fact that, again, they have a clear evidence of there at least being a sexual encounter as well as (I assume) a plethora of DNA evidence from the rape kit.  

I see the civil suit being filed as more a push by the woman to get the investigation back into gear.

XM - Mt 1822

August 30th, 2022 at 11:23 AM ^

something big is 'off', and i have no idea what it is.  SDPD would investigate this in nothing flat.  DNA doesn't take a year to get back. having sex with an underage person is basically what is called a strict liability crime - if the act happened, you're (euphemistically) guilty and not knowing the age isn't a defense, and at that point you'd generate a criminal filing. 

and as you point out, going through what is called a 'SANE' (sexual assault nurse exam) exam would be just miserable for any victim. 

i would imagine that the young lady involved would be able to FOIA her own reports, even if the at-large public might be barred from getting the reports for other reasons.  

 

bronxblue

August 30th, 2022 at 8:48 AM ^

From what I've read it appears that SDSU knew about the criminal investigation around the time of the incident but didn't initiate their own Title IX one because the SD police asked them to wait.  The insinuation is that Hoke and the AD likely knew there had been an incident involving some players at the very least.  

This is different than the Gibbons situation in that the inciting incident occured before Hoke ever came to UM, but there's now a pattern wherein Hoke and his AD sort of ignore sexual assault situations surrounding valuable players until they are forced to act.

grumbler

August 30th, 2022 at 1:39 PM ^

It's different from the Gibbons case in that the student misconduct board was unable to proceed with their case because the victim refused to cooperate.  It wasn't until late in the first semester of Gibbons's that the Title IX instructions were updated to require the school to conduct hearings even without witness cooperation.  Gibbons was found to have violated the student conduct code (not a crime) and. when his appeal was denied. kicked out of school.

Comparing what this woman allegedly suffered to Gibbons's violation of the code for student conduct does her a grave mis-service, as does comparisons between Hoke's failure to kick Gibbons off the team for a conduct code violation and his failure to at least suspend players credibly accused of the crime of rape.

The university is also to blame for failing to exercise due diligence and conduct a Title IX investigation.  They could coordinate with the SD police to ensure that, for instance, witnesses were interviewed by both agencies simultaneously, but the university had to obligation to its students to identify and expel sexual predators at the earliest opportunity.

DarkWolverine

August 30th, 2022 at 7:54 PM ^

My memory is fuzzy, but in 2018 didn’t a Circuit Court rule the UM processes being used were illegal? Would that have meant Gibbons and others that received discipline under an illegal process been able to sue the University? Perhaps that happened? Because Gibbons was disciplined under a process that was ruled illegal, it is unfair to assume he deserved his punishment. As we know, the University changed the policy because of the court ruling. 

MeanJoe07

August 29th, 2022 at 10:05 PM ^

Whale, there's been some accountability and some of that. And we teach toughness in that area. When the tough are going you gotta a be the accountable guy in there. We gotta, ah, execute, the, uh, toughness, and you can hear that some. When the players are doing that you know they're being the young men certainly that we want, ah, representative of the program. And uh, there's no place for the type of gang or any of the sexualz, uh, misconduct. We don't have some that, we certainly can't have it, not in our, ah, programs.  - Brady Hole

mackbru

August 29th, 2022 at 11:49 PM ^

In fairness, it's hard to know exactly what to think re Hoke's role when the "investigation" seems so murky. There haven't been charges, right?

DennisFranklinDaMan

August 30th, 2022 at 12:00 AM ^

I like Brady Hoke -- and from what I've heard, his players (including at Michigan) have always adored him. Yes, he was overmatched at Michigan, but I still believe he's a good guy. Hope it doesn't turn out he knew about this and turned away. That would, obviously, affect my opinion of him.

Decatur Jack

August 30th, 2022 at 12:05 AM ^

I realize I'm going to probably get massively downvoted for this, but it sounds like San Diego police asked the athletic dept not to get involved, which is perfectly reasonable. The AD basically said that the cops told them not to investigate because it could have a negative impact on the police's own investigation. I don't see anything wrong with that.

"They didn't act fast enough." From the athletic dept's perspective, a lot of this sounded like gossip and hearsay until the civil suit actually dropped. How were they supposed to know what is and what's not true? What, are you supposed to just cut and expel a player (or group of players) the moment you hear a rumor? That sounds like it could easily backfire.