Everyone Murders

September 7th, 2017 at 11:36 AM ^

Looks like they learned nothing from the Lizzie Siebert scandal.  Per the article:

One week later, according the suit, Doe’s father received a message from University associate vice president for student services Bill Stackman saying: “Notre Dame is not obligated to obtain consent from either Jane or her father prior to providing her name to her rapist. We acknowledge we have received your written and verbal notice forbidding it, however, Notre Dame will proceed today to notify Mr. Roe of the complaint, including its source.”

Seems very heavy-handed to throw in the "including its source" language.  One of the big inhibitors of victims* filing sexual assault claims is that they become PNG on campus when word gets out of who the accusor is.  Notre Dame seems to be saying "tough shit about that - if you don't like it, don't file complaints."

*This isn't to say that a sexual assault did occur here.  But the administration seems excessively callous here.

Joined: 12/14/2010

MGoPoints: 65552

Everyone Murders

September 7th, 2017 at 11:51 AM ^

I think it's more nuanced than that.  Due process includes a right of confrontation, so at some point an accused is allowed to identify the alleged victim, test the evidence against the accused, etc.  If the case proceeds, the accused is going to know the name of the accuser - the accused has rights too (and false accusations do happen, although with less frequency than most believe).  Also, there was a no-contact order issued by the school (per the article) during the pendency of the case.

HOWEVAH, an educational institution is charged with the well-being of all of its students.  And boldly saying "yeah, we're gonna out your daughter for making this accusation" without any provisions for how they're going to protect her from being a campus-wide pariah is just awful.  Much of the student body will side with the athlete pretty much no matter what, and those students can be outright vicious to an accuser, who is already presumably in a fragile state.

And the social media onslaught that can come from outing an accuser can amplify the pariah-effect that comes from accusing a student-athlete.

I don't know the exact right answer as to what Notre Dame should have done, but this statement to the victim's father isn't it. 

 

Joined: 12/14/2010

MGoPoints: 65552

oriental andrew

September 7th, 2017 at 2:24 PM ^

I wonder how much of the fact that notre dame outed the victim's identity has to the do with the fact that she was not yet a student. By the sound of it, she was at Holy Cross during the time of the incident and, by summer, had been accepted to notre dame, but not yet enrolled. 

Of course, maybe that's just a technicality, but it does seem like there is something fishy going on over there.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 56196

GotBlueOnMyMind

September 7th, 2017 at 11:45 AM ^

It could have been worded better/less callously. However, how is the accused supposed to present a defense if he/she does not know who the accuser is? The right to confront the accuser is a central tenet of our legal system for a reason. I understand that, as a private university, Notre Dame can essentially do as it wishes with regards to such proceedings. Regardless, not providing the name of the accuser would be patently unfair to the accused.

Joined: 03/01/2012

MGoPoints: 2349

EastCoast Esq.

September 7th, 2017 at 11:50 AM ^

Did you read the article?

Doe told her father about the assault for the first time, concerned her name would be given to Roe, the lawsuit said. After multiple calls to the Title IX office, Doe’s father and University administrators agreed there would be no action taken until the case of the “second victim” — the girl who reported Doe’s case — was fully investigated.

 

Why does the alleged rapist need the name of the victim if no action is being taken? There's nothing to defend.

Joined: 07/16/2012

MGoPoints: 22979

MI Expat NY

September 7th, 2017 at 12:07 PM ^

It seems Doe's story was originally brought to the Title IX office in support of the second accuser.  If the Title IX office still intended to use that statement in the second accuser's case, then there is action being taken on the basis of Doe's accusation, even though Doe's actual case was not proceeding at the time.  It's not clear that is what's happening (the whole article was difficult to comprehend), but if it is, I can see why the school felt the need to disclose Doe's identity.  

On the other hand, protecting the victim is also a primary responsibility.  I don't know what the answer is or how ND handles it better (other than not allowing the accused to transfer without any record of the charges).  Title IX officials seem like they're in a tough spot.  I get why people say they shouldn't be handling these things, as they're matters for the police, and schools, even when they try their best, just don't seem to do a good job.  But, schools should also be safe, sexual assault free places, and relying on the criminal justice system to make that happen isn't effective either.   

 

Joined: 07/24/2008

MGoPoints: 8641

EastCoast Esq.

September 7th, 2017 at 12:35 PM ^

I don't buy that. There's no evidence that they were even pursuing the second case:

 

Stackman also said “no rock has been left un-turned” when describing the University’s investigation of the second case against Roe,” according to the suit. Doe and her dad reached out to this student, the suit said, and found she had not been contacted by the Title IX office since April.

 

Joined: 07/16/2012

MGoPoints: 22979

MI Expat NY

September 7th, 2017 at 12:55 PM ^

Again, the article isn't especially clear, but the date of disclosure of Doe's name seems to have happened in May.  And it's unclear when the "since April" statement was made, but seemingly before June.  So I don't see any basis to say that the investigation into the second accuser's story wasn't happening.  

I've always had the impression that these Title IX procedures aren't like criminal proceedings in that the Title IX office doesn't play the role of the prosecutor.  After the accusor gives her story, I could see there being some time before the Title IX office contacts her again while they investigate.    

 

Joined: 07/24/2008

MGoPoints: 8641

GotBlueOnMyMind

September 7th, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^

As long as the allegationof the sexual assault against Doe was not being taken into consideration in the case being heard, then no, her name should not have been given. If it was being used as evidence as proof of his proclivity to commit such acts however, then yes, her name should be given.

Joined: 03/01/2012

MGoPoints: 2349

evenyoubrutus

September 7th, 2017 at 11:37 AM ^

This is why Michigan never even considered Kelly. This kind of stuff follows him everywhere. Wasn't there suspicion he tried to cover up a murder committed by his star runningback at CMU?

Joined: 11/04/2008

MGoPoints: 178367

MI Expat NY

September 7th, 2017 at 11:49 AM ^

Say what?  Did CMU's star RB actually committ a murder?  Was there a murder and there's suspician that the star RB did it and Kelly helped him get away with it?  

Maybe I just forgot about this story since it's at least 10 years old, but that's a pretty salacious remark to throw out there without a little more detail.  

Joined: 07/24/2008

MGoPoints: 8641

guthrie

September 7th, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^

But he embroiled himself in controversy explaining why several CMU players may have perjured themselves trying to protect a teammate.

"For example, a number of them were African-Americans that had been in that culture of violence, and they're taught to look away," Kelly said in the Sept. 22, 2005, edition of the Detroit Free Press. "You don't want anything to do with it. Get out of there. You don't say anything to anybody.

"That is a culture that they are immersed in. When they come here, their first reaction is to react the way they've been taught to react in their culture and in their environment. That's difficult."

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-12-08/news/0912070751_1_cmu-cen…

Joined: 09/23/2009

MGoPoints: 2322

taut

September 7th, 2017 at 1:13 PM ^

Dumb for him to say it like that, but the "no snitching" thing is very real in certain neighborhoods. A friend is a Detroit cop and it can be almost impossible to get a witness for some things that were witnessed by dozens of people.

Joined: 12/01/2015

MGoPoints: 1057

G. Gulo of the Dale

September 7th, 2017 at 12:45 PM ^

While it took me far more time than "two minutes"--I'm perhaps less skilled at the googles--I only came across one player who really fits the description.  One article suggested that he had been suspended from the team since Feb. of 2016 for an undisclosed violation of team rules and was likely not going to suit up for ND again.

In the comment box of an article on his transfer, there was a suggestive post by a reader that mentioned that the player "would have transfered to Baylor had Briles not been fired" (paraphrase).  The player was not incredibly "high profile."  Perhaps I'll leave it at that.  Not a good look for his current team.

Joined: 04/01/2013

MGoPoints: 6802

lilpenny1316

September 7th, 2017 at 11:44 AM ^

ND fires Brian Kelly before another bowl-less season is over.

Baylor fires whoever their coach is that just lost to Liberty.

Baylor hires Brian Kelly because everyone loves irony.

ND collects $2.65 million from the CFP revenue distribution pool because everyone loves a rigged system.

Why would ND ever change what they're doing when they pocket millions despite being a mediocre, hypocritical outfit.

Joined: 11/19/2009

MGoPoints: 61859