Hear the one about the FSU football player, the crack smoking hooker...

[djegators]

Originally posted by GatorGray:

Originally posted by danoleman:
This was expected. She's going the easy route. She figure if she slings enough mud she can get FSU to settle before the Feds release the results of their Title IX investigation. She knows she won't get a dime from Jameis or TPD. Jameis attorneys have said if she sues him, he will countersue her and the attorneys. They don't want that. Funny how she sues the school but not her alleged rapist.

Considering counter suing is pretty common, I'm not sure why you think this would deter them.

Funny how she sues the school but not her alleged rapist.

She still can. What makes you think that she won't?

Yup...because once they win the case and show the negligence of f$u and tpd, it will support her case v jamie

 

[MJWilliamson]

Originally posted by djegators:

Originally posted by GatorGray:
Ruh Ro:

The suit - a copy of which was obtained by the Tampa Bay Times - also alleges that a second woman "reported being raped by Winston" to a victim's advocate. "The advocate asked if Plaintiff would cooperate with and participate in disciplinary proceedings against Winston," the suit said. "Plaintiff stated that she absolutely would do so."

Was this case also known about by jimbo and not reported as required like the other?

Great question. To me, that would be the only reason it is being brought up in the context of suing FSU.

Best case scenario for Florida fans, and all rivals of FSU? FSU goes to court and loses the suit. Winston pleads the fifth and court documents show the FSU has a history of covering up football player malfeasance in general and sexual assault in particular.

 

[GatorGray]

Originally posted by MJWilliamson:

Originally posted by djegators:

Originally posted by GatorGray:
Ruh Ro:

The suit - a copy of which was obtained by the Tampa Bay Times - also alleges that a second woman "reported being raped by Winston" to a victim's advocate. "The advocate asked if Plaintiff would cooperate with and participate in disciplinary proceedings against Winston," the suit said. "Plaintiff stated that she absolutely would do so."

Was this case also known about by jimbo and not reported as required like the other?

Great question. To me, that would be the only reason it is being brought up in the context of suing FSU.

Best case scenario for Florida fans, and all rivals of FSU? FSU goes to court and loses the suit. Winston pleads the fifth and court documents show the FSU has a history of covering up football player malfeasance in general and sexual assault in particular.

Depending on how far the attorneys stray during the depos, some NCAA stuff could be uncovered as well.

 

[JD Gator]

Originally posted by MJWilliamson:

Originally posted by danoleman:

Originally posted by MJWilliamson:

Originally posted by danoleman:

Originally posted by MJWilliamson:
FSU clearly neglected their Title IX responsibilities for a long time. If she can show that neglect led to her decision to leave FSU due to a hostile environment, she has a chance in her suit.

That's her only chance for a payday that's why she has Title IX attorneys. Clune and Kerr specialize in playing to the media and shaking schools down.

So you agree that FSU neglected their Title IX responsibilities for some long time?

I'll wait until I see the FEDs report. But you can continue to speculate.

Your earlier post suggests otherwise.

 

[alaskanseminole]

FSU President John Thrasher defended the university's response to the allegation Jameis Winston raped a former student and said the school looked forward to its day in court.[/I]
Winston's accuser filed a federal civil lawsuit against the FSU trustees Wednesday alleging the university violated her civil rights by failing to comply with Title IX. The woman stated FSU offered a "clearly unreasonable response" and created a "hostile educational environment."[/I]
"Florida State University is disappointed to learn of this lawsuit," Thrasher said in a statement released by FSU. "The university has not yet been served and will need time to review the complaint fully before we respond in detail.

"After a year of selective news leaks and distorted coverage, Florida State looks forward to addressing these meritless allegations in court. Evidence will show that through its confidential Victim Advocate Program, FSU did everything the plaintiff asked for and that the assertions FSU shirked its Title IX obligations are false.[/I]
"In all, the University asked the plaintiff or her attorneys at least nine times over nearly 20 months to give a statement that would enable a Title IX investigation. FSU did not ignore the complainant or its obligations under Title IX.[/I]
"FSU's handling of this matter was driven by the plaintiff's deliberate and informed choice on how to proceed, not by Athletics.[/I]
"The University's victim advocates were at the plaintiff's side within hours of the encounter and continued meeting with or contacting her or her representatives at least 30 times over the ensuing year. Besides offering emotional support and arranging numerous academic accommodations on her behalf, they informed the plaintiff and her attorney five times about the right to pursue a student disciplinary action. The first was in December 2012 -- before the Athletics Department ever became aware of the allegation -- and the last was in December 2013.[/I]
"Then, after the plaintiff hired new attorneys, the University extended the invitation four more times before her attorney finally consented to a Title IX interview in early August, after making FSU wait because they were unavailable in the summer months.[/I]
"The University went to great lengths to protect the rights and integrity of the student conduct code process. It compiled more than 1,000 pages of documents and turned the matter over to a former Florida State Supreme Court judge, who was briefed on all procedures and rules. He held a two-day hearing, heard from the plaintiff, the respondent and 10 witnesses before releasing his decision far earlier than the mandatory deadline of January 5.[/I]
"For many years Florida State University has had excellent victim-centered policies with regard to sexual violence. The University recently conducted an exhaustive review and took additional steps to further ensure it employs the very best practices.[/I]
[/I]"Florida State University does not tolerate sexual violence in any form, regardless of who the alleged perpetrator might be."

FSU President

---------------

I wonder why they were "unavailable" during the summer months, but magically available once football season kicked off? Simiarly they were available right after Oregon lost to Stanford (when the story first broke), came to the podium right after FSU won it's 3rd title and once again the day Winston declares for the draft. Expect the civil suit against Jameis to come on draft day.

 

[MJWilliamson]

Originally posted by alaskanseminole:.

[/I]
"In all, the University asked the plaintiff or her attorneys at least nine times over nearly 20 months to give a statement hat would enable a Title IX investigation. FSU did not ignore the complainant or its obligations under Title IX.[/I]

I think that this is a smoke screen. Unless I misread the Title IX requirements, FSU was required to conduct a timely Title IX investigation, regardless of any other circumstances.

They did not.

 

[djegators]

Originally posted by MJWilliamson:

Originally posted by alaskanseminole:.

[/I]
"In all, the University asked the plaintiff or her attorneys at least nine times over nearly 20 months to give a statement hat would enable a Title IX investigation. FSU did not ignore the complainant or its obligations under Title IX.[/I]

I think that this is a smoke screen. Unless I misread the Title IX requirements, FSU was required to conduct a timely Title IX investigation, regardless of any other circumstances.

They did not.

Yup...didn't help Mizzou much..

The school previously said it didn't act sooner under the 40-year-old Title IX law or more recent U.S. Department of Education instructions because neither Menu Courey nor her parents sought a police investigation and didn't respond to a later request for information. The case was referred to Columbia police in late January after ESPN's "Outside the Lines" raised numerous questions about the university's response.

The Title IX coordinator and local police should have been alerted to Menu Courey's claims in November 2012 after a public records request by her parents produced documents alluding to a possible attack, the report determined. The Title IX coordinator also should have been told about the possible assault nine months earlier when athletics department employees learned about it in a local news story, the law firm concluded




if jimbo and the AD knew of the allegation(s) and did not report to Title IX they are toast....

 

[danoleman]

djegators, I don't think you understand what Title IX is. Jimbo doesn't have anything to worry about. The accuser hired Title IX attorneys soon after her aunt/lawyer went into hiding. This was all planned and expected. We'll know soon if FSU failed it's Title IX duties or not. MJ is speculating but FSU cant discuss the matter publicly. We have no clue what they have told or shown the Feds that are investigating. This suit was actually premature. Looks like they are trying to scare FSU into a settlement before a decision from the Feds come. If the Feds clear FSU, she won't get a penny from FSU. Her other options would be to sue Jameis, which she has a 0% chance of winning or TPD, who is sued so often she would be a great grandma before they finally settle with her.

 

[djegators]

I'm really caught off guard by that, damnoleman, I never expected you to casually dismiss the entire thing as nothing, shocked I am....

 

[Uniformed_ReRe]

I think both parties ultimately want to settle. These press releases are just attempts to drive up or down the final value of the settlement. The woman's attorneys know that the more bad-PR heat they can bring on FSU, the better their negotiating position.

 

[danoleman]

Originally posted by Uniformed_ReRe:
I think both parties ultimately want to settle. These press releases are just attempts to drive up or down the final value of the settlement. The woman's attorneys know that the more bad-PR heat they can bring on FSU, the better their negotiating position.

Exactly and they want a settlement before the Feds make a decision. Because if they clear FSU, she gets nothing. They are on the clock.

 

[Uniformed_ReRe]

Question for anyone with an understanding of Title IX matters:

If the FSU athletic department knew that one of their students was being investigated for an alleged sexual assault that took place off-campus, but they did not know that the accuser was also an FSU student, are they still required to perform a Title IX investigation?

 

[topdecktiger]

Originally posted by Uniformed_ReRe:
Question for anyone with an understanding of Title IX matters:

If the FSU athletic department knew that one of their students was being investigated for an alleged sexual assault that took place off-campus, but they did not know that the accuser was also an FSU student, are they still required to perform a Title IX investigation?


I think the issue is that Florida St did find out it was a student about a month later, so Title IX would probably come into play at that point, at least. The other question would be that since FSU campus police got the initial call, they therefore had knowledge of the situation. Whether or not they would be on the hook for that is also another factor.

 

[Uniformed_ReRe]

Originally posted by djegators:

Originally posted by MJWilliamson:

Originally posted by alaskanseminole:.

[/I]
"In all, the University asked the plaintiff or her attorneys at least nine times over nearly 20 months to give a statement hat would enable a Title IX investigation. FSU did not ignore the complainant or its obligations under Title IX.[/I]

I think that this is a smoke screen. Unless I misread the Title IX requirements, FSU was required to conduct a timely Title IX investigation, regardless of any other circumstances.

They did not.

Yup...didn't help Mizzou much..

The school previously said it didn't act sooner under the 40-year-old Title IX law or more recent U.S. Department of Education instructions because neither Menu Courey nor her parents sought a police investigation and didn't respond to a later request for information. The case was referred to Columbia police in late January after ESPN's "Outside the Lines" raised numerous questions about the university's response.

The Title IX coordinator and local police should have been alerted to Menu Courey's claims in November 2012 after a public records request by her parents produced documents alluding to a possible attack, the report determined. The Title IX coordinator also should have been told about the possible assault nine months earlier when athletics department employees learned about it in a local news story, the law firm concluded




if jimbo and the AD knew of the allegation(s) and did not report to Title IX they are toast....

So schools are required to perform investigations even if both the accuser and accused refuse to cooperate, and the event took place off-campus?

 

[Buddy Green]

Originally posted by djegators:

Originally posted by MJWilliamson:

Originally posted by alaskanseminole:.

[/I]

"In all, the University asked the plaintiff or her attorneys at least nine times over nearly 20 months to give a statement hat would enable a Title IX investigation. FSU did not ignore the complainant or its obligations under Title IX.[/I]

I think that this is a smoke screen. Unless I misread the Title IX requirements, FSU was required to conduct a timely Title IX investigation, regardless of any other circumstances.

They did not.

Yup...didn't help Mizzou much..

The school previously said it didn't act sooner under the 40-year-old Title IX law or more recent U.S. Department of Education instructions because neither Menu Courey nor her parents sought a police investigation and didn't respond to a later request for information. The case was referred to Columbia police in late January after ESPN's "Outside the Lines" raised numerous questions about the university's response.

The Title IX coordinator and local police should have been alerted to Menu Courey's claims in November 2012 after a public records request by her parents produced documents alluding to a possible attack, the report determined. The Title IX coordinator also should have been told about the possible assault nine months earlier when athletics department employees learned about it in a local news story, the law firm concluded




if jimbo and the AD knew of the allegation(s) and did not report to Title IX they are toast....

It goes further than that. While Its not exactly clear when they exactly reported it to the Title IX compliance dept, it is clear that the first step taken was the AAD and Fisher called an attorney on behalf of Winston, arranged for the attorney to get the police report and then met with the two outside the presence of the accuser. When a student accuses another student of a crime or a violation of the code of conduct, the school is required to be "neutral" in the matter. Its not remotely acceptable for the school to meet with one party and arrange for legal representation. It's important to keep in mind that the Title IX Director quit over this. And then the AD and President both left. Not to mention two straight years of significant coaching staff changes.

The fact that Winston wasn't immediately suspended pending criminal and school investigation, and the fact that it didn't go public for ten months, tells anyone with a brain all they need to know regarding FSU's intentions.

 

[danoleman]

Buddy Green with his lies again. You have a nice safe platform to spread your bogus Incarcerated Bob type rhetoric here. Bascially you are saying anybody that left FSU in the last two years left because of Winston?? You are a fool. The President received a huge pay increase to go to Penn St. Our old AD Randy Spetman was about as incompetent as you'll find an AD. He didnt just leave, he was "reassigned" and pretty much fired. You know this stuff but you choose to come to a gator board and pollute it with ridiculous non sense like this.

 

[MJWilliamson]

Originally posted by Uniformed_ReRe:

So schools are required to perform investigations even if both the accuser and accused refuse to cooperate, and the event took place off-campus?

My understanding of Title IX requirements are this; once a University is aware that there are charges of a sexual assault by a University student against a university student, they are required to conduct a timely Title IX investigation.

FSU knew in mid January the name of the accuser and the accused. Both were identified as FSU students. FSU chose NOT to conduct a Title IX investigation until nearly two years later.

 

[djegators]

Originally posted by MJWilliamson:

Originally posted by Uniformed_ReRe:

So schools are required to perform investigations even if both the accuser and accused refuse to cooperate, and the event took place off-campus?

My understanding of Title IX requirements are this; once a University is aware that there are charges of a sexual assault by a University student against a university student, they are required to conduct a timely Title IX investigation.

FSU knew in mid January the name of the accuser and the accused. Both were identified as FSU students. FSU chose NOT to conduct a Title IX investigation until nearly two years later.

A-4. When does OCR consider a school to have notice of student-on-student sexual violence?


Answer: OCR deems a school to have notice of student-on-student sexual violence if a
responsible employee knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known,
about the sexual violence. See question D-2 regarding who is a responsible employee.
A school can receive notice of sexual violence in many different ways. Some examples of
notice include: a student may have filed a grievance with or otherwise informed the
school's Title IX coordinator; a student, parent, friend, or other individual may have
reported an incident to a teacher, principal, campus law enforcement, staff in the office of
student affairs, or other responsible employee; or a teacher or dean may have witnessed
the sexual violence.


The school may also receive notice about sexual violence in an indirect manner, from
sources such as a member of the local community, social networking sites, or the media.
In some situations, if the school knows of incidents of sexual violence, the exercise of
reasonable care should trigger an investigation that would lead to the discovery of
additional incidents. For example, if school officials receive a credible report that a
student has perpetrated several acts of sexual violence against different students, that
pattern of conduct should trigger an inquiry as to whether other students have been
subjected to sexual violence by that student. In other cases, the pervasiveness of the
sexual violence may be widespread, openly practiced, or well-known among students or
employees. In those cases, OCR may conclude that the school should have known of the
hostile environment. In other words, if the school would have found out about the sexual
violence had it made a proper inquiry, knowledge of the sexual violence will be imputed
to the school even if the school failed to make an inquiry. A school's failure to take
prompt and effective corrective action in such cases (as described in questions G-1 to G-3
and H-1 to H-3) would violate Title IX even if the student did not use the school's
grievance procedures or otherwise inform the school of the sexual violence.