Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

All in one Tumpkin DV allegation thread - fed judge dismisses lawsuit against CU

wsp4820 said:
The process is as follows:

1. Complainant files a Verified Motion for Protective Order wherein he or she sets forth the facts for why he or she believes a Protective Order is necessary. "Verified" means that the Complainant makes the allegations under oath and the Motion is signed by a notary. As such, the Complainant may be subject to penalty of perjury for making false statements in the Motion.

2. Usually the same day as the Motion is filed, the Complainant will have a hearing before a judge to present the basis for a Protective Order. This is an informal process from an evidentiary prospective, and the judge can ask the Complainant any questions he or she wants.

3. Following review of the Motion and after the temporary hearing, if the judge finds that the party to be restrained presents a credible threat and that there is imminent danger to the Complainant's life and heath, the judge will issue the Temporary Protective Order and schedule a permanent protective order hearing. The TPO typically lasts for 14 days or up until the hearing date.

4. The person to be restrained is personally served with a copy of the TPO and ordered to appear for the permanent hearing.

5. The permanent hearing takes place. If the Complainant does not appear for the hearing, the TPO expires and no Permanent Order will issue. If both parties appear, the judge will hear evidence from both parties. If only the Complainant appears, the judge will hear evidence from the Complainant.

6. After the permanent hearing, the judge makes a finding. If the judge again finds that the person to be restrained presents a credible threat and that there is imminent danger to the life or health of the Complainant, the judge will issue the PPO and make rulings on a number of things depending on the circumstances (are there kids involved, do the parties work or go to school together, etc.). If the judge does not make the required finding, no PPO issues and the TPO expires.

Long way to say that everyone is right. There has to be something credible before a judge will issue the TPO, and the Complainant has to make the allegations under oath and penalty of perjury. However, the person to be restrained has no opportunity at this phase to contest the allegations, and judges are naturally going to err on the side of caution and issue a TPO even when he or she might have some misgivings about the allegations and evidence. It is only after the PPO hearing when you can get a better idea of the state of the case.
Click to expand...
you go, Matlock....
 
Thanks @wsp4820 for a clear expert report on that above. So I think it's safe to say, we should let the process play out here. It's damaging to us either way, but I hope to God this guy didn't do this. Both for the alleged victim, his future and our program.
 
buffaholic said:
So, Digger correct me if I'm wrong, but an ex girlfriend with an axe to grind, could make up allegations of abuse, and a judge would almost certainly grant a TRO, until more information is found.
Click to expand...
This happens. False allegations of physical abuse to the individual or children are common in bad break ups or divorces. It is a negative to a system that is set up to protect the victim.

In the interim, I'm ready for a press release for our new D.C.!
 
reality check?
she says he bit her on more than one occasion. given we all carry cameras most of the time, she certainly would have taken a picture of one of those bite marks (or some of the other damages, like choke marks). If she contacted the police, she would have gathered her evidence too. I'd bet a lot there are no pictures. i think this about screwing him over and looking for some money too.

did anyone explain why she felt it was necessary to come here and get a PO?
 
pcbuff said:
This happens. False allegations of physical abuse to the individual or children are common in bad break ups or divorces. It is a negative to a system that is set up to protect the victim.
Click to expand...
Unless she was raped, then, most of the time, she is victimized a second time by the system.

(Note, general comment on how the system treats rape victims, nothing about this particular case.)
 
cu2x said:
reality check?
she says he bit her on more than one occasion. given we all carry cameras most of the time, she certainly would have taken a picture of one of those bite marks (or some of the other damages, like choke marks). If she contacted the police, she would have gathered her evidence too. I'd bet a lot there are no pictures. i think this about screwing him over and looking for some money too.

did anyone explain why she felt it was necessary to come here and get a PO?
Click to expand...

Maybe she has covered for Tumpkin for years because she loves him?!

Maybe the P.O. is because she has to as a woman to protect herself and not let it be another person That stays silent.

If this happened to my daughter when she was in her 40s I would expect her to not stay silent. Good for her.

It is bad that we cover our coaches/programs asses but not someone that could be our own friend, loved one, etc.

This isn't some jaded 20 year old college student. This woman is still worried how it will affect Tumpkin Long term.
 
DiggerBuffs said:
It is bad that we cover our coaches/programs asses but not someone that could be our own friend, loved one, etc.
Click to expand...
Dude - nobody is covering for Tumpkin. If there's evidence that he did anything like this woman claims, we all hope he gets the most severe penalty and this poor woman is protected. But the possibility, however remote, still exists that she may be out for revenge and going after an innocent man. LET THE PROCESS TAKE ITS COURSE before you hang ANY guy, football coach or janitor.
 
buffaholic said:
Dude - nobody is covering for Tumpkin. If there's evidence that he did anything like this woman claims, we all hope he gets the most severe penalty and this poor woman is protected. But the possibility, however remote, still exists that she may be out for revenge and going after an innocent man. LET THE PROCESS TAKE ITS COURSE before you hang ANY guy, football coach or janitor.
Click to expand...

Completely agree with a person having their day in court.

But people are trying to find holes and evidence against the woman. They aren't giving her the same benefits you talk about.

And we have given plenty of guilty people their day in court or let them walk because of status/money. OJ. The Ramseys. Etc.
 
I know someone inside the AD. That person was able to send me part of the rough draft of the report:

"Our investigation found that the CU football program and staff fosters an atmosphere of violence and disrespect toward women. In order to rectify this culture, it is recommended that the football staff be replaced with an all woman staff, including head football coach and assistant coaching staff."
 
As a further effort to establish equitable opportunities, the team will have 45 / 85 offense and defense specialists on scholarship. The remainder of the scholarships will go to special teams players, most likely, but not necessarily kickers.
 
Good. It was ridiculous to try and hold cu financially responsible for the alleged actions of an employee that did not involve a cu student or another employee and did not take place on campus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top