This should get interesting....see below
spoiler alert: i linked this
This should get interesting....see below
I doubt that this is a good place for rumors, particularly such dark ones. It would be better to wait until anything is substantiated before making us worry. My opinion anyway, I guess you can do what you want. I just think it sucks.
This was extensively discussed three years ago.
Exactly. All the reason to take it down since it is old news.
Actually all discussions were locked on sight.
I'm looking at two threads of significant length that were only eventually unpublished (and not deleted) when the conversation hit "Gibbons is Hitler" vs. "She had it coming" levels: one from when it originally happened, and one from 2011 when Douglas Smith made his comments to the BoR.
The posts were unpublished because they were locked, right? How long did it take for that to happened? I wasn't checking Mgoblog every five minutes, but I did watch this unfold pretty closely at the time and never saw the post you refer to.
I'm not faulting the mods for locking the discussion by the way, but you're misleading people in saying this info has already been given full treatment here.
Has 64 comments and was up for an hour and 42 minutes. I closed the other one, but it had a similar number.
Take this down now, it will already be the hottest topic of the day on RCMB, regardless if true or false
Msu had issues of its own a few years back, with 3 mens bball players accused of a gang rape. If I remember correctly the MSP wanted charges filed but the ADA balked. I would guess the rcmb folks have forgotten all about that.
There was an at length discussion as to whether Gibbons performance under Rich Rod was so poor (Compared to his resurgence under Hoke) because
A. He was stressed with getting his name cleared
B. He was scared to death of Rich Rod
I am envious of your previous blissful ignorance of the situation.
With respect to topics like this, hiding from them because they're embarrassing to the institution seems like a pretty despicable response.
Like this topic hasn't been covered before. Here we go again...until the lock-down.
...from someone on good authority awhile back, but I didn't believe him. I was told it also involved 2 other high profile football players not mentioned in the article. They have since graduated, but still...not good.
As much as I love Michigan, if this story is true, I'm glad its finally getting out. We are NOT PSU and cover up such vile acts.
It got out a long time ago.
within weeks of the alleged date
This is the only good thing about this thread.
Beyond disturbing yes, but arrest does not = guilt. I can only hope this is not a true allegation because the allegations are sickening.
Still, I have defended many people falsely accused of crimes so let us keep this in mind. remember Juwan Howard? He successfully sued a woman who falsely accused him of sexual assault.
Let us hope this is not true but if it is I am curious as to what the DA thought about the case. From 2009 so it took a while for this to get out and I wonder why.
Nice 1 sided story of unsubstantiated SHIT.
As a former victim of rape fraud, knowing how damaging unproven allegations can be I say take this damn thing down ASAP.
The story is from a no-name source, but it's also highly cited and researched. This isn't some girl chasing a star player for a payout. Gibbons was a no-name back in 2009.
None of it is proven. Zero percent of the actual story that involves Lewen or the rape itself is proven whatsoever. It is basically a shotty opinion piece.
by your standard there would never be any reports of alleged crimes until after a judge or jury found the person guilty. That is a ridiculous standard. Like most allegations, it is up to the reader to assess the facts and decide for themselves.
None of it is proven. Zero percent of the actual story that involves Lewen or the rape itself is proven whatsoever. It is basically a shotty opinion piece.
witnesses nor is any evidence presented, just oblique references to players and the alleged victims description of what happened. Since she did not press charges the case is DOA. Mr. Smith is precariously close to libel because he openly condemns Gibbons of a crime when in fact no charges have been levied.
it is not true. Truth is a defense to libel and the standard is only a preponderance of evidence.
People really need to save their indignation and realize that assaults like this happen far too often on college campuses, in military barracks, etc.
Did an assualt happen here? I have no idea, but lets not pretend that such a thing is impossible, just because it involves Michigan football.
But without charges being filed we have no way of knowing. You seem to forget our illustrious history of falsely accusing people of crimes. That bloodly history ought to matter a lot.
No one here knows what happened. Douglas Smith certainly does not, though he acts as he does. The only people who do know are Gibbons and the alleged victim.
Second- This article is an embarrassment to journalism. The pictures they used and the way they cite Gibbons' "Brunette girls" quote serve no other purpose for the story than to increase its inflammatory nature and cast more doubt on Gibbons' character, as if the content of the story wasn't enough.
Third- It sounds to me like the victim was actually treated pretty fairly. She had the support of the school to as great a degree as they could offer. She was given access to councelors and support groups, but they told her accurately that they couldn't do anything unless she pressed charges. She's right in saying there should be laws in place regarding confidentiality in rape cases within the court system, but asking for the school to handle the case behind closed doors and punish Gibbons without a trial just doesn't work.
Regarding your last point, if we ever get to confidentiality in trials for sexual crimes I think it would need to apply both ways. Particularly in cases where the alleged criminal is high-profile or the alleged crime is particularly heinous (this applies to many non-sexual crimes as well), the mere accusation and subsequent judging of public opinion is enough to permanently damage a person's reputation (or even safety) in a severe way even if they are ultimately acquitted.
The only fair balance to that, one enshrined in the 6th amendment and going back at least as far as Roman law, is to give the accused the right to face those bearing witness against them.
While I can understand how it would be humiliating to recount being victimized in a public forum, being on trial for that crime and having to be the target of those accusations would be equally humiliating. I don't see how we could extend confidentiality to one party but not the other fairly without presuming the outcome of the trial (that is, obviously if the accusations are true it would be better if the victim could remain anonymous, but obviously if the accusations are false (or simply incorrect, as eyewitness reports often are) it would be better if the accused could remain anonymous).
Aside from the dog attacking the laser/guys balls, this is the best post in this thread.
I am making a light joke, this is one of the best responses I have seen in a long time. Well reasoned, well explained, based in both law and history/precident. Thank you
Considering I had to double check my recollection of the legal history against Wikipedia, you should not feel at all bad about handing the best post award to the laser-dog vs. balls gif.
But in seriousness, thank you. The topic is one that we rightly have a very visceral reaction to, and it's often hard to separate that reaction when we want to talk about how a fair and neutral legal system should behave. Particularly when "justice" can only provide a "least bad" resolution to a terrible situation. The aphorism "tough cases make for bad law" is frequently proven true, and it's worth remembering that (bringing it back On Topic to appease the No Politics gods, that aphorism can actually be applied to a lot of our criticism of coaching decisions and so forth).
The girl was a student athlete at Michigan as well. I wonder why anybody on here would assume she would just lie and make up a false rape report? I feel bad for the girl that some people on here would question a honor's student and Michigan athlete on rather they were raped cause the accused is a Football player. This is what is wrong with some in our fan base.
Definitely disturbing. I wouldn't be surprised if the post is removed, because the account isn't "confirmed." But the link indicates a terrible catch 22: short of pressing criminal charges, there is very little that the alleged victim can do, and nothing is "proven." Therefore, the incident goes away, and it never happened. I hate reading things like this, but I also hate the idea that such incidents are swept under the carpet. If it happened, I'd want the player suspended. If it didn't happen, I'd want the player exonerated. It appears neither will happen, because, again, the alleged victim isn't willing to press charges.
Gibbons (if this happened) was not dismissed back then, so why would he be punished now?
Wasn't this discussed like years ago? If police investigated, and nothing happened, and all you have is one person saying something, what else is supposed to happen. Pretty filthy for someone to drag two people's name through the mud with unsubstantiated vile accusations.
I have a problem with "trial by public opinion." If you are assaulted, press charges. Our legal system may not be perfect, but it does provide closure. Instead, this will be an open wound this woman will continue to scratch for the rest of her life. I feel bad for her in more ways than one.
I don't ever want to dismiss an accusation, but without a legal investigation this is libel. Accusing a person of something without taking measures to prove that accusation is an unethical act in of itself.
If this did occur that the girl ought to have
press charges. Accusing someone of an atrocious act like rape without pressing charges is to condemn the accused without a fair trial.
This Douglas Smith is a crap journalist. You don't take a side in thus type if situation. You present the known facts and leave it at that. Without a trial to test the veracity of this woman's statement we have no way if getting to the truth.
Maybe you should learn what libel is before you go around making stupid accusations yourself.
haven't been brought on charges is not libel? Hmm.
Per the dictionary: 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion.
Okay, Oliver Wendell Holmes, explain to me how writing an article that affirmatively states Gibbons guilt despite lacking entirely physical evidence(thought he says without attribution that semen was on her dress.) other than an arrest record and complaint. That only shows that Gibbons was arrested and that someone made out a complaint about Lewan. That is proof of exactly nothing. Yet, Douglas Smith unequivocally states that Gibbons is guilty of rape. That, my friend, would get a journalist fired from their job even at the Saline Reporter.
Among other things, you're not very good at
Douglas Smith definitively accuses Brendon Gibbons of rape. How does that not fit that definition? Instead of offering up snarky statements, how about you explain to me how Mr. Smith's actions do not at least approach libel? I cannot accuse Brian of being a Buckeye-lover without evidence to support that accusation.
It appears to me that Smith is accusing Gibbons of rape without offering up physical evidence to prove that. He cites--unattributed mind you--evidence(semen on dress, two players filing a report) without offering anything conclusive to prove his assertion. Since Gibbons was never charged we are left to conclude that what happened that night was not deemed worthy of a jury trial by the people involved.
To be successfully sued for libel, an allegedly defamed public figure must demonstrate that the person published a false statement knowing that statement to be false, and that he did so with the intention of maliciously harming the defamed person.
Short answer: no way in hell would he have a winnable case for libel here. Public figures basically never win those types of suits.
I cannot imagine definitively accusing someone of a crime with an article so filled with unknowns.
The alternate is equally unfair. Great Britain has famously stringent libel laws that favor the public persona. Lance Armstrong won a case for libel because the paper couldn't "prove" he had cheated. We've seen how that turned out... As defamation laws have a chilling effect on free speach, it's not surprising which harm this country is more accepting of.
You are wrong, but don't let that stop you from doubling down!
First, you seem to think that if you accuse someone of a crime without their being previously convicted in a court of law constitutes libel. That is insanely incorrect. If what you say is true, it is not libel, whether or not the person has been convicted. Moreover, the standard for proving truth in a civil action is only preponderance of the evidence, whereas to convict someone of a crime they need to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Second, as another poster has noted, where the plaintiff is a public figure he needs to prove that the person making the statement acted with actual malice, knowing that the statement was untrue when made. As a practical matter, that makes it virtually impossible for someone in Gibbons position to win a libel action such as this.
But whatever, you read a dictionary definition. You are totally qualified to give legal advice.
Not that this isn't disturbing, but isn't this old news? I thought I remember hearing about this 2 years ago.
More often than anyone wants to admit. Be careful young men.
I found this part especially disturbing:
"Shortly after the woman reported the rape, she began to receive threats from Gibbons roommate and fellow football player, Taylor Lewan (now an All-American), that he would rape her again if she pressed charges against Gibbons.
The threats were reported by two other football players to the Office of Student Affairs who reported them to the University police"
So two other football players reported Lewan?
Stop stirring up shit.
As well they should have. In so doing, they were a credit to the program.
Thank you. How the $@&% could "two football players told on Lewan" be more disturbing than the possibility that one of our football players raped someone and that another player tried to threaten the victim?
Oh boy, I'm really upset by the fact that someone's friend ratted him out for threatening a girl with rape!....what?!
Am I misunderstanding something?
It's disturbing because it gives the story some credibility.
The author does have attachments with real documents, but he also makes several factual errors and has no citation for backing up the claim that two other football players reported the threats. I won't go so far as to say it didn't happen, but Douglas Smith's credibility is a bowling ball on a thin stilt at this point.
That's not good...
And where is the proof that Lewan made these threats?
When the archives go as far back as June 2013 but they are writing about an incident that occured almost 4 years ago it comes off like they are trying to get exposure by bringing up something negative about a very popular thing in Washtenaw county. Now that doesn't mean that it isn't true, but it's posted a few weeks before a season is about to begin and it really starts to feel like the the site is trying to take advantage of a very bad situation.
It's better to just leave it up so conspiracy types don't get all conspiracy about things. We'll probably have to lock it once people start threatening each other with e-cannons, but for now it'll be open.
We have a legal system that presumes innocence for a reason. Gibbons wasn't charged, let alone convicted. I understand that can be a difficult decision, but I don't have a lot of sympathy for the argument that this was covered up. A rape allegation is extremely damaging--see the end of this article, which presumes guilt--and the level at which that should be publicized is leveling a legal charge.
Also, FWIW, the cries of "cover-up" don't really mesh with the fact that this was pretty well publicized at the time:
I was wondering what happened with this. I had 2 good friends at that party
Did they give you any kind of information about this incident?
As with almost all of these cases, we don't know what happened.
Pressing charges in a sexual assault case is not for the faint of heart, but being wrongly accused of sexual assault is terrible too.
Moral of the story: I don't think we can come to any conclusions, and we should reserve the possibility of sympathy for all sides.
I agree. I'd only add that it seems like a lot of people have the impression that false rape accusations are commonplace (I don't think you're saying that). That's not really supported by any evidence. If anything, vastly more rapes go unreported/unprosecuted than are falsely reported.
That said, the guy at Washtenaw Watchdog completely overreached when he calls Gibbons a rapist even though it hasn't been proven. Extremely unethical, IMO.
It certainly seems rape is far more likely to be unreported than falsely reported - everything I've ever seen says that. That said, I sure as hell wouldn't want to be the poor bastard who is falsely accused.
It happened to me on campus at the end of 1988. Police tracked me down after two weeks because I tried to get in touch with the girl again. They interviewed me, her, her friends, her past growing up in Miami. 3 weeks later (just before x-mas and finals) they met with me and informed me that the D.A. was not going to press charges because her friends corroborated my story and her past indicated similar accusations. They advised me to take more precautions when hooking up with drunk and horny ladies.
She threw herself all over me at a frat party and begged me to take her home. Luckily her friends were with her and witnessed her behavior, but she was evidently so hammered that she woke up the next morning and screamed rape.
I did nothing wrong other than using poor judgement in hooking up with someone who was too drunk. If anybody was raped it was me that night. And once again, her roommate was in the room and like the other girls out with her that night, the roommate also corroborated my side.
But it screwed me and my finals studying, and there's sort of a guilt by association, like "you must be sort of guilty if you were even accused." No! Not guilty at all! Just false accusations pure and simple.
It sucked big time.
So whenever I hear a story about this sort of thing, whether it be Kobe, Tyson, or Gibbons, I always give them the benefit of the doubt.
The other people on your list were not. I'd think you'd want to safeguard your innocence against association with more dubious cases.
Kobe wasn't? Check your facts. Kobe's case was dropped. He later settled a civil suit. Nothing criminal. And I don't necessarily think settling a civil case means guilt. Many times people/parties settle just to be done with the constant he said/she said. And Kobe could write a check no problem.
Tyson is another story. I'm not saying he was innocent, i'm just saying that when the allegations initially came out, before anything was decided, I gave them the benefit of the doubt - just like our legal system does.
To be exonerated requires an investigation that finds no evidence of wrongdoing (maybe even: an investigation that does find evidence establishing that there was no wrongdoing). You were investigated and exonerated, according to your account. Kobe was not exonerated. Gibbons was not exonerated. Their innocence or guilt remains in question. Yours, by your account, does not.
I've heard this quite a bit but I'm not sure why they're assumed to be mutually exclusive or even how they're related? False accusations can be fairly common, while at the same time actual cases go heavily unreported/prosecuted.
They're not mutually exclusive and that wasn't my point. Your hypothetical is possible, but not supported by the available statistics.
My point was that actual rape is a much bigger problem than the miniscule incidence of false reports. I was simply pushing back against the narrative that men requently have their lives ruined by predatory jezebels.
If you are going to support your argument condeming Gibbons with references to "statistics" please cite. Think about bias when looking at who performed these "studies", and why peer review and the scientific method is important in research. Also think about how reluctanct people are to come to the defense of accused "rapist" when making your argument, or publish any research suggesting that false rape accusations are a problem in society.
This article is a perfect example, in my legal opinion, of why laws were created against libel. When an article with defamatory overtones is published, a news source may be guilty of libel in a civil trial if they acted negligently. Negligence being defined here as not using standard journalistic procedures to investigate both sides of the story. If a jury believes the story is untrue, by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely untrue than not, it is my understanding that the writer of the this story and his employer may held liable for damages; and enhanced damages if malicious intent is demonstrated.
In fact, he said it was "completely unethical" to call Gibbons a rapist.
This story is at least 3 years old... in before the delete.
supposedly discussed 3 years ago. I have no idea if it is true or not, but lets not pretend like our program is above such things. Just look at some of the most hallowed instiutions in our society to see numerous examples of this kind of behavior (both underlying conduct and the cover-up).
Remember Brian Banks had his life ruined by a false rape charge that sent him to jail for 5 years when he had an USC scholarship for football.
Not saying it isn't a horrible crime but sometimes the guy could be wrongly accused too
I believe that was a similar situation as well in that the victim/accuser was good friends with the accused.
As the overwhelming majority of rape victims are.
No charges happened. So basically we're posting opinion pieces from a website no one's heard of that impune our players for a crime.
Is the OP the editor of this site or the author of the article?
What is the legal standard to establish libel? He is basically stating, without a ton of evidence, that Gibbons raped that girl. He has to be treading a fine line with an article phrased the way this one is
...as a practical matter. A defense to libel is truth, so the case would turn into a trial about what happened, which Gibbons would presumably want no part of even if he's innocent.
but the author of the article is just citing the police report for much of his article and so is not actually creating the libel.
Assuming (big assumption) that the woman made everything up (I am NOT saying that she did) and filed a fake police report, Gibbons could sue her for libel, but that is just an insane thing for him to do.
and he'd have to prove she was maliciously lying. Proving that she was lying would make a fine start. But if he could do that, you would think he'd have sued her by now. Defamation lawsuits are a pain in the ass to win, but they're still worth pursuing if somebody is going around provably falsely accusing you of heinous crimes.
So if the alleged victim's stated reason (or at least partial reason) for not pursuing charges is a desire to not relive the events publicly, what kind of person does that make Dr. Smith for stirring all this up again a couple years after all involved have presumably started trying to put this behind them?
please delete. This article is from years ago and has no new evidence. It's just being released now that the season is upon us.
ESPN loves to break stories like this, but even they won't run this because no charges were ever filed.
Pretty awful to drag something like this from years ago that was apparently looked into by the authorities at the time. The disturbing part is that you knew this would stir shit up by posting it. In before delete
LOL INB4 THE LOCK
So were the names of Gibbons and Lewan thrown around two years ago? I just remember articles about a "football player" involved.
The names aren't in that article. I remember deducing from some Mgoblog staff post that the player was Gibbons, but it was never outright said and Lewan's name was never mentioned.
I knew both of those names, and I was far from an insider at the time.
My wishes for health and wholeness goes out to all involved.
Completely agree with everything you said.
The only way any good could come of this is if the University evaluates their policies to see if they can improve the services offered to victims.
Another problem is simply the limits of human knowledge. I fear that sounds glib, but I always think about it in these cases. I'd like to think of myself as very sympathetic to victims of sexual assault, but I also think that a decision-maker is faced with a very tough choice when met with Person A saying she's a victim, Person B saying otherwise, physical evidence that could go either way, and no witnesses, which is almost always the set of facts.
The purveyor of the website in question is Douglas Smith, who is the same individual who made these comments to the Board of Regents two years ago:
Um, you can be disturbed by the situation (it's disturbing content!) without having an opinion about the guilt or innocence of the accused.
This is why a lot of us cringed at his cute 'think about brunette girls' comment after the Sugar Bowl.......................Also, I wonder if Gibbons and Keith Appling know each other
...especially when this site started hawking shirts glorifying him and his comment.
Because being the subject of a rape accusation of unknown veracity once means you should never ever be allowed to make any reference, however inexplicit, to your sexuality ever again?
As others point out, the article is a terrible piece of journalism. It portrays the story according to the alleged victim as fact without giving definite proof. Look, I don't what happened and without video, nobody knows exactly what happened. Maybe he's guilty. Maybe she just totally crazy or vindictive for some reason. Both scenarios happen ALL the time. There's the recent story about the football player, Brian Banks, who was falsely accused and convicted of rape. He was only exonerated since the "victim" was taped admitted to her lie. Then there was the story just a couple days ago about a girl who lied about an assault by her own father. He was convicted as well and sits rotting in prison while she now owns up to the truth and tries to free him. How many more men are imprisoned for similar false accusations?
Unfortunately, there's no good answer here. Many sexual assaults occur and there's not adequate evidence to convict. That may happen frequently. Also unfortunately, innocent people are often charged and convicted of sexual offenses without any solid evidence. Even if they aren't convicted, their lives are ruined.
It's entirely likely that there was not adequate evidence to charge in this case. It's best not to spread hearsay which may by itself ruin innocent lives or possibly lead to charges and conviction of an innocent person.
The OP is a very obvious Buckeye (check his posting history...notably his apologetics concerning Urban Meyer) posting a shitty piece of "journalism" about a story from several years ago that, contrary to "Dr." Smith's allegations, received a fair amount of press in the mainstream media.
If this does indeed get left up, I fully expect a cold, frosty glass of "shut the fuck up" to be served to the next twit who whines about the mods tinfoil-hat style.
But... but... the OP calls UM "we" and the Bucks "them" in all his posts!
Takes just under 30 seconds to uncover his secret identity. He hit his 100 points and launched this dynamite into the mgoblog pond.
So another RDT scenario isn't it?
You don't even need to look at his posting history, just look at his name. Whose this "em" he's attempting to keep "honest"?
Just why is this thread still open? Please, Brian, Seth, or whoever, please lock and delete this.
INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. Witch-hunting based on "public" opinion is despicable.
Can we all agree on this statement, and move on with our lives?
Rape is a terrible crime that has terrible consequences for its victims. There is a significant disconnect between the incidence of rape and the progress of rape through the legal system. Far too often, victims of rape don't feel safe or comfortable to report their assault, or to try to press charges. These victims, feeling they are choosing the better of two terrible options, receive no justice, and that is terrible. Less often, but sometimes, false accusations are made against innocent people. This is also a terrible thing, which likewise has the ability to ruin lives.
In the present situation, we don't know into which of these injustices we are discussing, or whether this is a situation that falls into the potentially less blameworthy but equally life-altering realm of a difference in understanding between two parties as to the nature of a sexual encounter. At this point, it still very much matters, but it is also not worth continuing to discuss. The authorities did not press charges, which proves nothing about the facts of that night but is indicative of the reason this conversation is moot: there simply isn't enough evidence. Continuing to debate this will not allow us to make any progress. We simply don't have enough information (and will never have enough information) to draw conclusions. Casting stones upon any of the parties involved at this point is irresponsible and has the potential to add insult to injury. It isn't a satisfying conclusion, but it is the only reasonable one.
You're missing a big point:
Reform in how we deal with sexual crimes, both on campus and off, is necessary in order to aid victims in achieving justice.
That's the big take-away of this article.
I'm not saying he was guilty or not but I heard about this story while still on campus and from everything I heard the victim did everything that a rape victim is supposed to do if they want to report and was intimidated by members of the football team. Nobody ever disuputed he was in the room with the victim, just whether it was rape. I have no idea what actually happened, but to pretend like he wasn't treated differently by this fanbase because he was a michigan football player is pretty naive.
Except didn't everyone hate Gibbons as a player back then? He was horrendous.
That's the problem I am having. To think that there won't be hypocrisy is naive but the responses are worse than I would have expected. It reminds me of the ND rape case in which the girl ended up killing herself. The more I live the more I believe that man is not worth saving.
Well, that is enough for me. Lock them up and throw away the key. Obvously your investigative skills should be valuable on the open market.
I have no idea either, but I'm not going to propose that I do, or insinuate guilt.
Would someone bring this up now? I personally believe this was posted purposely for other reasons other than feedback. Rape is terrible, but nothing came of it so what can we do. Please delete!"
I smell BS. First off I remember Gibbons in 2009 most fans would arrest him on sight if we had the power back then. The lady met him at the party per the article but then goes on to say she didn't press charges because she thought of him as a friend......
Rapes not something to play with. One reason is because as soon as the charges are filed you're guilty until proven..... well you always have a cloud over your head guilty or not.
Take this shit down..no need for it..
was reported well or not, it could have run in any newspaper, at the time this originally occurred. But only if the police report on it had become public. The fact that Gibbons was arrested and there is a record of his arrest on some charge, would have been sufficient to at least run that story and subsequent follow-up on it. He was apparently arrested for something, which isn't clear.
So there is that. A police report is a public record but it is not evidence that a crime has been committed or that someone is guilty of an allegation. It is simply a statement that something occurred that could result in a criminal charge if the allegation is found to be supported by corroborating witnesses, details and evidence or the willingness of a victim to press charges based on that after investigation.
There are several complications in this story: The two people principally involved were both scholarship athletes, both were friendly, they were on campus when the incident occurred, and the incident itself is clouded by circumstances surrounding their friendship, alchohol consumption and ultimately the question of consent. And, of course, there is the belief that because Gibbons was a Michigan football player that no one wanted to pursue justice on behalf of the victim. This story offers no evidence on that contention.
Based on this account of what occurred, there is no question the woman involved has suffered emotionally and perhaps otherwise. She has apparently been traumatized and this explains why this author chose to make her story public because she has apparently been denied justice through conventional means, even if any supporting physical evidence from the alleged assault would no longer be available or valid, unless it was somehow preserved. And this would only be evidence supporting her report of sexual contact, not the issue of consent or unwilling participation.
Now, this is not to excuse conduct which again is complicated by the circumstances surrounding the incident itself, and the woman's decision not to press her case, probably because she felt itimidated by the impact of going forward. Unfortunately, that was the only way to make her case meaningful and pursuit-worthy then. Today, it is merely public fodder for the internet grist mill.
I don't know what the current staff is supposed to do to Gibbons based on this. They were weren't here when this happened. Again, I am not excusing what has been alleged, I am simply trying to look at it from a journalistic or legal standpoint. I'm not sure what Hoke could do about this at this point, if suspension on principal is warranted.
One thing I do know, now out for good, this story will not go away immediately.
Read the goddamn thread. The guy who wrote this crap clearly has an axe to grind and this probably no longer has anything to do with the alleged victim. You come awfully close in your post to assuming guilt.
Furthermore, this story DID receive mainstream news coverage around the time of the incident.
Thre current staff should do exactly nothing about this piece of garbage from what appears to be a tinfoil-hat blog.
but I assume it is what you claim. Taking that into account, he has made the story public regardless of the veractiy of the allegations supporting the rape contention. Is it rape? Should it have been investigated, did campus authorities avoid the issue and conveniently cover-up, was an overzealous and high profile Michigan football player involved in a campaign of intimidation against the alleged victim, that cemented her decision not to press charges, this is what is being alleged in this story.
I've followed Michigan football for a long time. Longer than the background of this story. And I don't recall this being published anywhere before. And if examining something from the standpoint of its relevance then and now based on the framework of the facts and how I structure my thoughts, seems to bother your sense of conviction about this matter, I don't give a shit. This is about public relations at this point, how it plays among the rival fan bases, and how it will be churned into negativity whether the facts are true or not. For the sake of debate, it matters not one iota.
But pulling apart the story, shredding its detail into morsels of fact and fiction, is the only way I know how to parse accounts like this, and hold them up to light, and see if they have merit or not. This is, in fact, the way it's done in court.
So, if you don't like it, too bad. Your POV is no more relevant than mine.
It's come up several times over the last few years, largely at the behest of this same individual.
From the best we can tell, all of these things were evaluated nearly four years ago by the proper authorities. Records exist that indicate that the police took and filed several reports. Gibbons was arrested. Charges were never filed, to some extent because the alleged victim didn't press charges.
People aren't upset because this is being discussed. They're upset because it's already been discussed numerous times.
My POV is that none of us, including the OP, know shit about this and Douglas Smith doesn't know much more. You seem to act as if you know something more than the rest of us. You don't, and actually you know less. I don't give a fuck if you "don't recall." There's a link IN THIS THREAD posted on annarbor.com about this.
In other words, this appears to be a heavy helping of mental masturbation on your part with a side of sheer laziness.
This story by itself has very little relevance now. I don't give a shit what rival fan bases think. Why do you assume more than like 50 people will find this story? It was posted on a backwater bitchy blog by someone no one cares about.
The court of public opinion is always the biggest issue. One part of your post which stuck out to me was the way in which you are looking at it. Wouldn't an ethical standpoint be just as important? If it is, then should this not be brought back to the surface and reexamined as to finally clear the air. Perhaps that has been done but the way the supposed victim spoke that seems contradictory.
...but in practice the best way to bring this to the surface and re-examine it would be to have a trial, which the alleged victim doesn't want, so (and I mean this literally) I don't know what one does now.
*Meaning, Gibbons and the girl were in the fraternity house together.
It was the night following the 2009 Ohio game where anyone attending the game could hear the O-H-I-O going around the stadium.
Not going to conjecture about whether it was rape or not. For those of you who are totally rejecting the entire story ... Gibbons did say that he was with the girl.
The fraternity (that Gibbons was not a member of) that it happened in was put on probation by its national organization.
I've got one phrase to enter into this discussion. Duke Lacrosse.
Douglas Smith is posting this stuff all over the place. I ran across it in the commnets section here:
No need to let this guy grind his ax here.
I'll say it, the title of this thread sucks.
After all of the ridiculousness of this thread and all the ire it raises, your comment made me chuckle. Cheers!
We'll never know what happened and I feel bad for everyone involved but it seem pretty clear that the "author" has an agenda. Not the same guy but one of the top hits on Douglas Smith reveals that he's "quite simply, the finest short-story writer Canada has ever produced in the science fiction and fantasy genres." Seems appropriate.
This thread should be deleted.
The fact that mgoblog is giving this guy more traction is absurd! If you follow his tracks, he has written an article about a 4 year old matter and is pasting it in every empty comment field he can find on the internet. Maybe I'll go write an "expose" about Barry Bonds using steroids and paste my link on every baseball message board. mgoblog is better than giving this guy more hits...that is all he wants.
How did the OP lose all his points? This is of most interest to me in this thread...
But I think being an obvious troll warrants the revokation of the ability to create trolly threads
How's Bolivia this time of year?
Edit- I guess there's really no need for anyone to comment on this. It just looks absolutely horrible.
do you feel good about posting this, man? you're just trying to get a reaction and in the process you're causing a fuss that doesn't need caused. it was addressed previously and the propery authorities were involved. no one is going to praise you for being a vigilante. go do something more productive, anything.
The OP is a fucking sparty troll who likes to dig up old shit on Michigan players.
He's a Bucknut troll. Read his previous postings for a full throated defense of Tressell, Urban, Hyde, Bell, Pryor, etc. and gems such as "Ohio's offense will be impossible to stop this year."
Sparty trolls will accept your apologies.
Is a troll. If you look at his previous comments, he's a buckeye troll, most recently ripping on Clark while defending Hyde and Meyer. As soon as he gets 100 points, he posts this. He's a troll who should visit Bolivia.
Edit: meant to post this in reply to the comment above.
I had a feeling after reading that.
This Gibbons thing was never proven. But hyde striking a woman was with video evidence.
was published august 08, nearly two weeks ago. this is an obvious attempt to by Douglas Smith to drum up some page views and it reeks of the ol Ace Williams. i am in the camp that believes a discussion could be warranted (i, for one, knew about some sexual assault story but never knew these allegiations involved gibbons), but let's please elimenate the link to the "washtenaw watch blog."
to get rid of all mentions of "I think of brunettes" on this website.
And to get rid of that t-shirt.
The OP claims to suddenly have become disturbed now, by a four-year-old unproven, thoroughly discussed event that occurred long before Hoke ever came to UM. Yet, his prior posts reveal a consistent pattern of NOT being disturbed by anything that Myer's players have done and are now doing. For example,
If she swung at him first then that's self defense (also, not thinking about the welfare of the female victim, he says: : Good news for OSU fans is that they're loaded at RB).
And these statements from the OP--who ironically calls himself "keep em honest"-- are among my personal favorites:
As you read through this poster's other recent contributions below, it should be completely obvious why he is here. He lies, distorts and tries to divert attention from from an avalanche of bad press for Meyer and Ohio. For example,
He's already in bolivia. Mods, dispose of this sad little man once and for all.
That was awfully open-ended.
Please dump this mods.... The OP is right in saying it is highly disturbing... I don't care how valid or invalid it is, just dump it.