Duke's Rasheed Sulaimon accused of sexual assault; Coach K and Duke AD knew 10 months ago
Pretty ugly story. Rasheed Sulaimon is accused of sexually assualting 2 women during the 2013-14 academic year. The information eventually got back to the Duke AD and Coach K around March 2014. Coach K dismissed him from the team for "repeatedly struggling to meet the necessary obligations" on January 29th 2015.
These are always tough situations for administrators - you have to protect the student's right while the legal process carries on while also being cognizant of the victim(s) and the general perception if/when the details come out. This is why I was more forgiving of Hoke and co. during the Gibbons situation than his various other failings. At least Duke is handling it well now.
I'm sure Vitale will roast him for this the next time he broadcasts a Duke game.
Did you expect anything less?
UNREAL -all the Duke haters r out in force - can u wait until all the facts r out ? http://t.co/Jcdo2Z5Glm
— Dick Vitale (@DickieV) March 2, 2015He's a Duke slappy, but I have to think a part of him is just saying that before we crucify another college athlete based on limited information, it might be worth pumping the breaks a bit on the pitchfork wagon and see what is actually going on. Yeah, there is some favortism, and on the other side I'm sure there is a fair bit of victim blaming going on, but the general sentiment that before a bunch of yahoos on the internet start passing judgment on very serious charges because they hate a program that wins at basketball, is one htat should probably be followed.
if he hadn't added "all the duke haters r out."
Yeah, but I do think that the vitriol he gets from no-name jerks on the internet whenever Duke comes in the crosshairs probably does get to him.
I don't believe that there was any wrong doing on Coach K's part. As stated above, probably didn't have any concrete evidence so it was a he said, she said. When he did have something he could hang his hat on, he released the kid.
Certainly not a Penn State situation.
So if you hear a person allegedly committed sexually assault TWICE, you don't have an obligation to tell the authorities? Not to mention it is legally required as a Duke employee, like at most universities. No one is asking the AD or the coaches to investigate or make a judgment, but they do need to make sure an investigation happens. And the player can be suspended until it is resolved (especially if there are two accusers--this is more than just a he said, she said when there are two accusers involved).
I've got to assume that it was reported to the proper agencies or authorities. Coach K wasn't the only person in a position of authority to hear about it if it was legit. And if he did hear about it in a gossipy way, how many times a year do you suppose a football coach hears about some co-ed starting trouble (lies or otherwise) with one of his players. It's got to be a regular thing. I can see many immature, spurned co-eds spreading rumors to trash the star player when he breaks up with her, or sleeps with her with no other intentions.
If he did rape this girl that is inexcusable and the player deserves every ounce of punishment and embarrasement he gets. I just think it's a stretch to indite any coach because he hears through the grapevine that his player did this or that. If I was the coach, I'd bring in the player, address the rumor, and if I'm satisfied with his explanation, barring any other evidence, file it to the side.
But what if the victim doesn't want to press charges, for any number of reasons? Then you have one of your players being investigated basically by yourself, with no real evidence except some second-accounts of claims made during a retreat.
It's a very thorny situation, and one that can lead to lots of unintended consequences. But what drives me crazy about this situations is that we tend to view them prematurely retroactively, assuming the worst and then chastising the major players for incompetence or cover-up when it likely isn't that. Is Coach K a squeaky-clean HC? I doubt it. But there are rules in place regarding sexual assaults for a reason, and sometimes it does put pressure on the victim to come forth, which obviously can be stressful and can lead to delayed charges. But on the other hand, nothing would destroy a team's chemsitry, and a coach's duty to everyone involved, more than unilateral policework by assistant coaches regarding every bit of hearsay or rumor.
I'm guessing there is smoke in this situation, but as with Gibbons, a HC can only do so much, and at some point (unfortunately) even if he may suspect something he might not be in a position to initiate an investigation without more solid information.
Meta: Can we stop these rape threads? Nothing productive ever comes out of them.
Every rape thread here:
- "I'm offended that you didn't say rape is bad"
- Conclusions based on unverified information from the internet
- Obligatory conspiracy theory re: coverup
- The accused should be given a fair trial and are innocent until proven guilty
I only have one request for these discussions: Get the fuck rid of the phrase "sexual assault." Somehow that phrase came into use to describe everything from unwanted touching even on body parts like the arm, to actual physical violent rape. Rape is rape. It's very bad.
Maybe it's because well-meaning victim's advocates, in trying to tell women "you don't have to take that shit," defined anything that made women feel uncomfortable as "sexual assault." Maybe it's because people got uncomfortable with the word rape and euphemized it. Maybe it all got lumped together for simplicity.
But "Rasheed Sulaimon is accused of raping a girl" means something a lot different than "Rasheed Sulaimon is accused of sexually assaulting a girl." Chances are it could've had a real effect on how the whole case was treated. "Rape" is serious, ought to be reported immediately, and you don't need to hear details to know that. "Sexual assault" could be an extortion attempt based on getting a little too close on the dance floor, for all anyone knows when they first hear it.
I hate the phrase "sexual assault" and wish it would go away.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Putting the focus on the perpetrator is not intended to protect the presumption of innocence. The presumption of innocence is the same in either case. Rather, putting the focus on the perpretator is intended to put the perpretator on trial rather than the victim (it's a well-meaning idea, and the law is continuing to evolve).
Allow me to give some illustrations.
In early rape law (think like 1800-1950 (I don't want to go back farther but I could)), to prove a rape allegation the state had to show that the victim demonstrated the utmost possible resistance, sometimes defined as beyond physical exhaustion. As the 20th centry progressed, many jurisdictions switched to an earnest resistance standard because utmost was antiquated and new research showed that not all people behaved in the same way when confronted with a rape situation. With these two standards, it became obvious that the (purported) victim was getting put on trial. The state would have to prove that the victim demonstrated either utmost or earnest resistance (jurisdiction dependent) and to do so would look exclusively to the actions of the victim.
I should apologize for responding so late and probably being way off your original point.
Briefly, the law varies widely but "new" research (some newer than others) is proving pretty persuasive. The feminism of the 60s/70s also led to some change.
Couple interesting parallels between this and penn state- coach K got to hang around for his 1000 wins after a sexual assault occured in his program that he knew about. Joepa got to hang around for the win that broke the tie as winningest coach while he knew about a ton of sexual assaults in his own program. The Sandusky case broke literally the week after that win (I think) and this case happened soon after coach K's 1000th win.
At least coach K didnt have knowledge of a TON of rapes for 10 years though. I wonder how this will affect him. I'm guessing it probably won't.
We now have cause to debate whether to post a new story about rape allegations by an athlete because pretty much every day there is a new set of rape allegations against an athlete. There are lots of reasons why this is happening, but this issue will not go away, which is better than in the past, which is when it routinely did.
I'd also like to think that Coach K has zero incentive to keep this quiet. The man has nothing left to prove in the world of basketball and is one of the most respected people in the game. But people said the same thing about Paterno too. This is not a condemnation, but we'll just have to wait until the full picture is out.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
This probably deserves its own thread but I can't start one. UNC got transfer athletes into graduate school so they could be eligible. wow. I would have thought the grad admissions process would have been above this.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2015/02/28/4589708/former-unc-official-pres…
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad