Sweeping Sexual Assault Suit Filed Against UT

[Iam4utalways]

They should be discredited for offering a degree in law then

If I'm gonna be charged with a criminal act, with my life in the balance, I don't want a bunch of college kids having anything to do with my defense or prosecution.

If it is something penny ante, then who cares.
But a rape charge, is a huge deal. Any charge that can get a student kicked out of a university is a huge deal.

He/she said you did it, so you must have, pack your bags and go home, that's not the right way.

Each incident is unique to itself, resulting in individuals getting unique disciplinary actions applied to them. No cookie cutter action for such a broad spectrum of sexual misconduct.

There is a right way to handle this, once the truth is discovered, but until the truth is exposed, decisions are based off lies, mistakes should be expected.

Hook them all up to a lie detector, this isn't about jail time, this is about getting to the truth.

 

[drylo]

Anybody who complains about someone who has been accused of a crime that carries a minimum sentence of 8 years in Tennessee having a lawyer has told me all I need to know to immediately discount their ramblings.

 

[BruinVol]

2. How do class schedules get rearranged so that the accused and accuser don't have to see each other? (again, you don't answer the question, only ask it).

So from asking two questions that you don't even answer, neither of which involves the university as an active participant as far as we can see, you conclude that the university "should have handled a lot of this better."

Is there a report saying the school failed to change schedules to keep the accused and accuser from contact with each other?


If so that is 100% part of the very lengthy tough list of protocol that universities must follow in such cases. Hopefully I am confused with this post

 

[BruinVol]

Anybody who complains about someone who has been accused of a crime that carries a minimum sentence of 8 years in Tennessee having a lawyer has told me all I need to know to immediately discount their ramblings.

What if they get the best lawyers at a cheaper rate because they play football?

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Is there a report saying the school failed to change schedules to keep the accused and accuser from contact with each other?


If so that is 100% part of the very lengthy tough list of protocol that universities must follow in such cases. Hopefully I am confused with this post

Yeah, I don't know, Bruin. vol66 is a bit tough to understand with his hypothetical way of responding, but I got the impression that he was saying the schedules WERE changed (in which case(s), I have no idea), but his complaint seemed to be that the accuser had no choice about it while the player did? Don't know, I could be interpreting that wrong, like I said, was very difficult for me to parse meaning out of his reply.

What if they get the best lawyers at a cheaper rate because they play football?

As for that, that's just the way life is. If you're already semi-famous, and have potential to make lotsa $$ in the future, people who provide services (like lawyers) are going to give you good deals in anticipation of possible future reward (whether that means more business from the player in the future, or simply publicity by way of association with a case that's followed more widely than most).

That is just a fact of life, true everywhere, and not just in sports. Fame = advantage ... fortune (or anticipation of fortune) = advantage.

But that has nothing to do with the university's handling of the allegations over the years. So has nothing to do with this case.

 

[drylo]

As for that, that's just the way life is. If you're already semi-famous, and have potential to make lotsa $$ in the future, people who provide services (like lawyers) are going to give you good deals in anticipation of possible future reward (whether that means more business from the player in the future, or simply publicity by way of association with a case that's followed more widely than most).

That is just a fact of life, true everywhere, and not just in sports. Fame = advantage ... fortune (or anticipation of fortune) = advantage.

But that has nothing to do with the university's handling of the allegations over the years. So has nothing to do with this case.

Exactly. If that is the case, that's why. And it has nothing to do with the university.

 

[BruinVol]

Yeah, I don't know, Bruin. vol66 is a bit tough to understand with his hypothetical way of responding, but I got the impression that he was saying the schedules WERE changed (in which case(s), I have no idea), but his complaint seemed to be that the accuser had no choice about it while the player did? Don't know, I could be interpreting that wrong, like I said, was very difficult for me to parse meaning out of his reply.



As for that, that's just the way life is. If you're already semi-famous, and have potential to make lotsa $$ in the future, people who provide services (like lawyers) are going to give you good deals in anticipation of possible future reward (whether that means more business from the player in the future, or simply publicity by way of association with a case that's followed more widely than most).

That is just a fact of life, true everywhere, and not just in sports. Fame = advantage ... fortune (or anticipation of fortune) = advantage.

But that has nothing to do with the university's handling of the allegations over the years. So has nothing to do with this case.

Ok

So it sounds like the accuser had to change their schedule but not the accused. I know the school has to "protect" the accuser from contact with the accused but not sure if it matters who changes what. I would guess the School is fine with that


As far as the lawyer goes. I think it's key if the lawyer is considered a donor. If so that could get tricky

 

[BruinVol]

Exactly. If that is the case, that's why. And it has nothing to do with the university.

If the lawyer is a booster it has everything to do with the university

 

[drylo]

As far as the lawyer goes. I think it's key of the lawyer is considered a donor. If so that could get tricky

Do you even know what the fee arrangements are in any of these cases?

Didn't think so.

Even so, lawyers work pro bono (i.e. for free) all the time--that is strongly encouraged in the legal community. So even if the lawyers work for free for these guys, it's not like that's the only time it happens. I've talked about this before, but the optics of saying athletes can't get pro bono representation when accused of crimes (but non-athletes can) is terrible, so there isn't going to be a problem with that.

 

[BruinVol]

Do you even know what the fee arrangements are in any of these cases?

Didn't think so.

Even so, lawyers work pro bono (i.e. for free) all the time--that is strongly encouraged in the legal community. So even if the lawyers work for free for these guys, it's not like that's the only time it happens. I've talked about this before, but the optics of saying athletes can't get pro bono representation when accused of crimes (but non-athletes can) is terrible, so there isn't going to be a problem with that.

Yes it's a very tricky area for the NCAA or civil law to get into for sure.

Not exactly sure how the NCAA would treat cases where boosters provides free or reduced legal counsel.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Yes it's a very tricky area for the NCAA or civil law to get into for sure.

Not exactly sure how the NCAA would treat cases where boosters provides free or reduced legal counsel.

I strongly suspect the lawyers involved would be extremely careful not to get caught up by the NCAA rules about boosters...them being, you know, lawyers and all. Lawyers are a lot like the kid who plays the whole game of Monopoly with the inside cover of the box sitting in his lap. They pay real close attention to the rule books.

 

[BruinVol]

I strongly suspect the lawyers involved would be extremely careful not to get caught up by the NCAA rules about boosters...them being, you know, lawyers and all. Lawyers are a lot like the kid who plays the whole game of Monopoly with the inside cover of the box sitting in his lap. They pay real close attention to the rule books.

Lol

I hear you

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't it jeff hagood that represented so many of our athletes over the years?

Isn't he an alum and contributor to UT athletics?

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Lol

I hear you

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't it jeff hagood that represented so many of our athletes over the years?

Isn't he an alum and contributor to UT athletics?

You got me, man. No clue.

 

[BruinVol]

You got me, man. No clue.

I am not 100% sure either

I would bet 66 knows

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I am not 100% sure either

I would bet 66 knows

Yep, maybe.

Having read all of 66's statements in this thread, I'm torn between two beliefs about his perspective. On one hand, it would be easy to believe 66 is a Knoxville lawyer or member of the UT faculty/staff who personally knows some of the folks involved in these matters, so has an inside angle that he's carefully trying to hide. On the other hand, his deeply watered-down and oblique statements may just be the result of a disorganized mind applying itself to a complex subject. And I keep wavering between those two suspicions.

*shrug* maybe he does know.

 

[drylo]

On one hand, it would be easy to believe 66 is a Knoxville lawyer or member of the UT faculty/staff who personally knows some of the folks involved in these matters, so has an inside angle that he's carefully trying to hide.

No

On the other hand, his deeply watered-down and oblique statements may just be the result of a disorganized mind applying itself to a complex subject.

Yes

 

[vol81]

Drylo is correct on all counts regarding lawyer involvement. No speculation here.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

What if they get the best lawyers at a cheaper rate because they play football?

That's not how it works. The lawyers usually take the athlete cases like this pro bono because it will often help them land big paying customers in the future.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

I'm like 98% sure that the plaintiffs in the Title IX lawsuit are currently working for free as well. They'll get a cut of the pie if they win or settle though, which is the main reason they'd take on a case like this to begin with.

 

[Kristy*]

Ok

So it sounds like the accuser had to change their schedule but not the accused. I know the school has to "protect" the accuser from contact with the accused but not sure if it matters who changes what. I would guess the School is fine with that


As far as the lawyer goes. I think it's key if the lawyer is considered a donor. If so that could get tricky

I wouldn't imagine an accuser had to change her schedule. I would imagine it more as they were given the opportunity to change their schedules if they felt uncomfortable in any way. Unless the accused are found guilty and punished by the school disciplinary committee, then the school's obligation to the accuser would be to make her learning environment safe/comfortable by reasonable means. Changing the accused's schedule would be a punishment, which (IMO) wouldn't be warranted if he were not found to be in violation of anything.

 

[Kristy*]

They should be discredited for offering a degree in law then

Just because someone understands how something works doesn't give them the ability to implement their understanding. Basically, the school would not have access to the alleged off-campus crime scene. And even if they did have access to it, they wouldn't have the tools to run all the proper tests on their findings. That should be solely on the local police departments and why Title IX works better in theory than application. In these cases, the schools' information can come from the accuser, the accused, and possible witnesses. With only that information (he-said/she-said), how are they qualified to thoroughly investigate and be expected to discipline appropriately?

 

[Kristy*]

. . .

AJ Johnson and Michael Williams were charged with a crime. That means the DA decided there was enough evidence to go to a grand jury.

They are awaiting trial.

School Tract

AJ Johnson was suspended from the football team but remained in school, was around the football program and graduated.

Michael Williams was dismissed from the football program or in UT's own words...June 1, 2015

Yet he was still enrolled in school. Not sure if he graduated.

What we don't know is what University hearings took place that allowed Williams, who Butch Jones dismissed from the football team, to remain in school while charged with two counts of aggravated rape.

We also don't know what hearings took place, whether they were delayed to allow AJ Johnson to not only remain in school, be around the football team, and graduate.

Or if in either case, any hearings took place at all. Was the accuser afforded all the players were or did she just throw her hands up and say, football players...no one will believe me?

. . .

66, I feel like you need a little help with the timeline of Johnson/Williams. They were accused in November 2015. They were immediately suspended from the football team.

"The university initially held off on its own campus investigation at the request of the Knoxville Police Department, according to the judge's order.

University officials [later] brought charges against Johnson in May 2015 based on the findings of their own investigation."

Their case was sent to the grand jury in December of 2015. But they were not indicted until Feb. 2016. By this time, Johnson had already graduated

"Now that he is no longer a student, Johnson is no longer subject to the university's jurisdiction, according to the three-page order obtained by The Tennessean that was issued Monday by administrative law judge Katrice Jones Morgan, who also serves as assistant dean for student affairs and director of diversity and inclusion at UT."

At no point after that was Williams associated with the football program. As far as him being allowed to remain in school, I can't answer. He was already enrolled in spring classes when he was indicted. Did he attend school beyond the spring semester?

 

[vol66]

That's a lot of words for two simple questions:

1. How do the accused players get access to attorneys, and do the accusers also have access? (you don't answer this question, you just ask it); and

2. How do class schedules get rearranged so that the accused and accuser don't have to see each other? (again, you don't answer the question, only ask it).

So from asking two questions that you don't even answer, neither of which involves the university as an active participant as far as we can see, you conclude that the university "should have handled a lot of this better."

A lot of what? Only thing I see in your response is a lot of superfluous words.

Not trying to be mean or nasty, just pointing out that you're making no sense. Perhaps you're an insider who can see things the rest of us can't, but if so, you're not doing a very good job of sharing your unique viewpoint. As a result, you come across as biased against the institution without valid reason.

If I knew the answers I wouldn't be asking the questions.

You can bet someone in a different position than I will be asking.

If it gets that far and it probably won't.

 

[vol66]

66, I feel like you need a little help with the timeline of Johnson/Williams. They were accused in November 2015. They were immediately suspended from the football team.

"The university initially held off on its own campus investigation at the request of the Knoxville Police Department, according to the judge's order.

University officials [later] brought charges against Johnson in May 2015 based on the findings of their own investigation."

Their case was sent to the grand jury in December of 2015. But they were not indicted until Feb. 2016. By this time, Johnson had already graduated

"Now that he is no longer a student, Johnson is no longer subject to the university's jurisdiction, according to the three-page order obtained by The Tennessean that was issued Monday by administrative law judge Katrice Jones Morgan, who also serves as assistant dean for student affairs and director of diversity and inclusion at UT."

At no point after that was Williams associated with the football program. As far as him being allowed to remain in school, I can't answer. He was already enrolled in spring classes when he was indicted. Did he attend school beyond the spring semester?

Thanks for the help.

 

[vol66]

Yep, maybe.

Having read all of 66's statements in this thread, I'm torn between two beliefs about his perspective. On one hand, it would be easy to believe 66 is a Knoxville lawyer or member of the UT faculty/staff who personally knows some of the folks involved in these matters, so has an inside angle that he's carefully trying to hide. On the other hand, his deeply watered-down and oblique statements may just be the result of a disorganized mind applying itself to a complex subject. And I keep wavering between those two suspicions.

*shrug* maybe he does know.

I'm not a lawyer and I don't work for UT. I'm asking questions that interest me that I would think the other side would ask for the sole purpose of trying to be fair to that side. There are plenty here that have the backs of the other side.