We'll see...
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!
NEW: Regents Meeting, Benson Decision, Investigation Report -- Monday, 6/12
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
- Status
Feels like something is happening here. The interesting thing is I believe MMac's hands are clean since he brought it to the attention of his superiors. I foresee:
1) Formal policy change (must be brought forward, even when the accuser is not affiliated with the university in any way
2) Reprimand of how the situation was handled - this is where it gets interesting given that MMac brought it to his bosses attention and then, presumably, followed their direction. Does it fall on RG? Does it fall on Phil D? Do they do anything of consequence, or just hit all 3 with a warning that there is a zero tolerance policy going forward?
This is going to be interesting...
1) Formal policy change (must be brought forward, even when the accuser is not affiliated with the university in any way
2) Reprimand of how the situation was handled - this is where it gets interesting given that MMac brought it to his bosses attention and then, presumably, followed their direction. Does it fall on RG? Does it fall on Phil D? Do they do anything of consequence, or just hit all 3 with a warning that there is a zero tolerance policy going forward?
This is going to be interesting...
Randy.Watson
Well-Known Member
I may be looking at this thru an ugly historical lens, but I can't help but think that we will look back at this incident in a few years as the end of the resurgence.
Mac appears to be a very proud guy who bases a lot of his identity on doing the right thing as it relates to his faith and his career as a coach. I can see a scenario where HCMM takes this very public process as a slight and a questioning of his character and decides to move on after this season.
Again, I may be off base but I would hate to see the rise derailed due to bureaucracy and hand-wringing on the part of the University brass.
Mac appears to be a very proud guy who bases a lot of his identity on doing the right thing as it relates to his faith and his career as a coach. I can see a scenario where HCMM takes this very public process as a slight and a questioning of his character and decides to move on after this season.
Again, I may be off base but I would hate to see the rise derailed due to bureaucracy and hand-wringing on the part of the University brass.
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
This regents aren't there for the best interest of CU is a damn joke. The majority of them went to CU or wants the BEST for CU. Yes, there will be clowns like Jack Kroll, but he is the few. And you don't need a full ass kissing group of regents or else you end up with a situation that nothing is wrong, the University is perfect. Things in life need to be fixed, changed, altered to get better. To disspell the Regents are against CU, a brief background on the 9 Regents:
Irene Griego-Bachelor's and Doctorate from CU-Boulder and CU-Denver respectively with education as her background. Seems to be very middle of road. Never outlandish.
Glen Gallegos-Daughter is a CU-Boulder grad. Charir of athletics committee and capital construction subcomittee. Based off the money CU has put into both I'd say he's on our side. Athletics background and pro-athletics.
John Carson-CU law degrees with athletics being important to a well-rounded education.
Heidi Ganahl-Pro Athletics from Day One of her campaign.
Kyle Hybl-CU Alum. Seems to be looking at money aspect of athletics impact on university and sees football is revenue booster. He knows RG and the job Mac has done are good for CU.
Steve Ludwig-CU alum. Seems to be a fence rider. The guy that will follow the masses.
Sue Sharkey-Mother of two CU alums. Seems to have voted for and been a key member in CUs athletics upgrades. Serves on athletics board.
Linda Shoemaker-Alum with journalism background. Not a lot of info but seems to have been positive for CU athletics upgrades
Jack Kroll-Troll under the bridge.
I believe Gallegos, Carson, Ganahl, Sharkey are all pro athletics.
Kroll-anti
Ludwig, Shoemaker & Griego-Fence with Ludwig less positive, Shoemaker more positive and Griego, no clue!
Hybl-Money which CU is making with George and Mac
This isn't a group out to get CU despite the rhetoric. Maybe Kroll is but the main goal of this group is to see CU thrive. This isn't 2002 any more. Only a couple of these types are trying to set up a political agenda.
This report is going to be detailed and in depth. There is easily at least 8 hours worth of things that are public knowledge they could discuss and I am sure there are at least another 8 hours of things we have not been privileged to. I just want the truth and fair repercussions based off the information provided. IMO, this was the last hole DiStefano could not dig himself out of especially coming out publicly and trying to say he didn't have to report based off his interpretations which is laughable. ALWAYS ERR on the side of caution. Time to let DiStefano finally stab himself in the bowels and let someone cut his head off. Seppuku!
Irene Griego-Bachelor's and Doctorate from CU-Boulder and CU-Denver respectively with education as her background. Seems to be very middle of road. Never outlandish.
Glen Gallegos-Daughter is a CU-Boulder grad. Charir of athletics committee and capital construction subcomittee. Based off the money CU has put into both I'd say he's on our side. Athletics background and pro-athletics.
John Carson-CU law degrees with athletics being important to a well-rounded education.
Heidi Ganahl-Pro Athletics from Day One of her campaign.
Kyle Hybl-CU Alum. Seems to be looking at money aspect of athletics impact on university and sees football is revenue booster. He knows RG and the job Mac has done are good for CU.
Steve Ludwig-CU alum. Seems to be a fence rider. The guy that will follow the masses.
Sue Sharkey-Mother of two CU alums. Seems to have voted for and been a key member in CUs athletics upgrades. Serves on athletics board.
Linda Shoemaker-Alum with journalism background. Not a lot of info but seems to have been positive for CU athletics upgrades
Jack Kroll-Troll under the bridge.
I believe Gallegos, Carson, Ganahl, Sharkey are all pro athletics.
Kroll-anti
Ludwig, Shoemaker & Griego-Fence with Ludwig less positive, Shoemaker more positive and Griego, no clue!
Hybl-Money which CU is making with George and Mac
This isn't a group out to get CU despite the rhetoric. Maybe Kroll is but the main goal of this group is to see CU thrive. This isn't 2002 any more. Only a couple of these types are trying to set up a political agenda.
This report is going to be detailed and in depth. There is easily at least 8 hours worth of things that are public knowledge they could discuss and I am sure there are at least another 8 hours of things we have not been privileged to. I just want the truth and fair repercussions based off the information provided. IMO, this was the last hole DiStefano could not dig himself out of especially coming out publicly and trying to say he didn't have to report based off his interpretations which is laughable. ALWAYS ERR on the side of caution. Time to let DiStefano finally stab himself in the bowels and let someone cut his head off. Seppuku!
I'm hoping that the regents say new polices & procedures & training will be put in place to avoid anything like this again. DeStiff retires, everyone else gets there hands slapped. CU puts this behind them and moves forward. I know, I know, this is pie in the sky thought, but I'm hoping for the best possible outcome and just maybe, logic will prevail.
A lot of overreaction in here. How is any of this a fireable offense on any level, for anybody involved??
Deleted member 807
Guest
The main question I would like to see answered is how a restraining order issued by a judge in Broomfield managed to escape attention from 12/20 thru 1/5?
If the investigators determine that there was some kind of cover-up over Christmas and through the Alamo Bowl, then the university has some explaining to do, along with associated disciplinary measures.
Hopefully the investigators confirm that MacIntyre, George, DiSefano and their direct reports have honestly portrayed the timeline and truely did not know about Tumpkin's restraining order until Jan 5, when the Daily Camera reached out for comment.
I fully expect that the revisions to internal policy and training to be formally approved. Going forward the reporting of any allegation of domestic violence on or off campus campus by students, employees, and non-students must be filed with the Office of Institutional Equity & Compliance.
This story ain't over yet. Truth is a good disinfectant. I sure hope this investigation doesn't drag on and on. According the to Daily Camera, these attorneys are charging the over $1200 per hour, so you know they'd like to keep milking the cash cow dry.
If the investigators determine that there was some kind of cover-up over Christmas and through the Alamo Bowl, then the university has some explaining to do, along with associated disciplinary measures.
Hopefully the investigators confirm that MacIntyre, George, DiSefano and their direct reports have honestly portrayed the timeline and truely did not know about Tumpkin's restraining order until Jan 5, when the Daily Camera reached out for comment.
I fully expect that the revisions to internal policy and training to be formally approved. Going forward the reporting of any allegation of domestic violence on or off campus campus by students, employees, and non-students must be filed with the Office of Institutional Equity & Compliance.
This story ain't over yet. Truth is a good disinfectant. I sure hope this investigation doesn't drag on and on. According the to Daily Camera, these attorneys are charging the over $1200 per hour, so you know they'd like to keep milking the cash cow dry.
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
DiStefano has overseen and been part of other OIEC violations that weren't reported that were fireable offenses and resignations occurred. He has been a part of many egregious **** ups. Why does he get a free pass off a big ****-up? He deserves to take the brunt of the consequences. Losing DiStefano is good for the University of Colorado. He's just screwed up TOO often.
A couple points of emphasis:
"[A]ny responsible employee 'who witnesses or receives information regarding any possible sexual misconduct prohibited herein is required to promptly report to the Title IX Coordinator or designee all known details about the alleged sexual misconduct,' " Simons wrote last week to Daily Camera reporter Sarah Kuta, quoting from the CU policy. Note that this requirement includes no exceptions based on the identity of the victim or the location of the misconduct.
The penalties for failure to report a violation of the policy range from a warning to termination. In practice, the penalties have been considerable in cases that have become public. For example, David Glimp, a former chair of the school's English Department, stepped down from that post after being found responsible for failing to report an email from John Stevenson, former dean of the graduate school. Stevenson lost that job after being found responsible for "retaliating" against a female professor who alleged gender discrimination in the English Department. The email Glimp failed to report was characterized as "unfortunate" and "in poor taste" by CU lawyers.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but you're bringing up other instances and that's not what's being investigated here.
People are "expecting the worst", yet I haven't seen one of those people mention what the worst actually is... Nobody is getting fired over this and Mac will eventually get his extension approved. From my POV, the worst that will come out of it is the Mac or RG will decide they don't want to put up with this **** show anymore and leave when their contracts are up.
buffsroam
Member
Was this sexual misconduct or just being an ass? Does beating/abusing a spouse/significant other qualify as sexual misconduct?
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
I get your point, but let's be honest, they took courses and are mandatory reporters. They messed up. Simple. Their boss put them in a worse situation by saying it did not need to be reported so they thought they were in the clear and wanted to keep anything from turning ugly.
There are going to be some things from this report that makes Mac and Rick George look a little scummy. Fair or unfair.
The worst is this: CUs athletic department failed to report a fairly clear OIEC violation from their football program (many will argue it's not clear but they have admitted they were in the wrong and shown they were wrong) but were kept from doing so because DiStefano said they did not have to. That means DiStefano is main at fault.
The other issues are exactly what @CleanUndies said. If they tried to quiet the victim and keep this from becoming public/university knowledge as a mandatory reporter anything from a slap on the wrist to being terminated are possibilities. You just don't know!
As said, Mac deserves his extension and to not be fired and at most shown that he erred by not being more compassionate and not reporting to OIEC directly based off his training.
Rick George deserves probably something similar unless there are things that show he was trying to cover it up. Then all bets are off with how Benson and the regents will look at it.
DiStefano. At minimum he should be given a suspension and be on thin ice, but to me this was like the 3 strike rule and I am ready to see him fired because he directed RG and Mac not to report.
We will see. This report is going to be a ****ing novel.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
i'm a little uneasy this meeting was scheduled for Spring Break. there are some practical reason for that.....sure.....but classic CU PR is bury stuff when school isn't in session. do "controversial" stuff 2 weeks after finals when no one is paying attention.
but, i'm just taking the suspicious road.....could be nothing.
but, i'm just taking the suspicious road.....could be nothing.
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
Yes, per the CU OIEC P & P Bylaws this falls directly under that.
2. Engaging in Sexual Misconduct which includes:
Intimate Partner Abuse (including domestic or dating violence): means any act of violence or 9 threatened act of violence6 against a person with whom the individual is or has been involved in a sexual or dating relationship. This includes threats, assault, property damage, and violence or threat of violence to one’s self or to the family members of the sexual or romantic partner when used as a method of coercion, control, punishment, intimidation or revenge. This definition includes intimate partner violence, dating violence, and domestic violence.
Because the restraining order doesn't get served to the school or AD or anyone beside Tumpkin. So we would need to know exactly when and where Tumpkin was served and who he notified of the restraining order. I don't see how there is any burden on CU to follow the personal lives of every employee. They acted on the information they had at the time and stayed prudent to discover all the facts in the case before making any decisions.
Normally I would agree, it's not CU's responsibility to proactively look to see if any employees are being served restraining orders on a regular basis, that's not practical. However, in this case CU was made aware of the allegations weeks before the order was issued so they should have been at least keeping an eye on the situation.
Edit: I still don't believe this rises to any sort of fireable offense on CU's part, but if Dr Phil is the collateral damage from this investigation, I won't be too broken up about it.
I don't know enough about restraining orders to understand how they would do that.
I am just hoping something productive comes from all of this. If you ask me this is about as complicated an issue as the school could face: she wasn't an employee, she didn't want to get the cops involved, she didn't live in Colorado, etc. Hopefully the firm comes back with some sound advice on how to approach this in the future and expands on different circumstances that could come out of issues involving domestic violence.
I did a little googling and from what I find out (and remember the laws could be different in Colorado), a civil restraining order is NOT public record unless it is violated. From what I can tell, the only ways the AD would know that Tumpkin had a restraining order would be if he violated that restraining order, was served while he was at work AND someone saw and asked, or he told them. The other way would be for the AD to keep checking the Broomfield county clerk for a restraining order being filed, which I'm not sure they would have the initiative to do based on the actions of Tumpkin's girlfriend.
I think Tumpkin got what he deserved (fired and almost no chance of getting another job), but it really feels like CU is making this much harder than it needs to be. Between the quotes to the press and 7 hours of testimony, that just seems way harder than it needs to be. They should have just had the lawyers review the current policy, identify gaps or deviations and present a recommendation and be done with it. I'm sure there is some room for improvement on how we handle employees in this type of situation, but I don't think the regents are properly equipped to define that improvement.
I think Tumpkin got what he deserved (fired and almost no chance of getting another job), but it really feels like CU is making this much harder than it needs to be. Between the quotes to the press and 7 hours of testimony, that just seems way harder than it needs to be. They should have just had the lawyers review the current policy, identify gaps or deviations and present a recommendation and be done with it. I'm sure there is some room for improvement on how we handle employees in this type of situation, but I don't think the regents are properly equipped to define that improvement.
I don't either to be honest, but the Daily Camera figured it out and they weren't privy to the initial allegations Tumpkin's girlfriend made to Mac back in December as far as I know. So it looks bad when CU claims they had no idea until the Camera story comes out.
vinniew_11
Well-Known Member
They have investigative reporters that do nothing but run names of public people just to get stories. That's how news of sports figures transgressions are reported before an official team announcement. And they pay for information. They let clerks know there is money to be made if a name that is recognizable comes across their desk to let them know.
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
I don't believe the regents have it for athletics, and I believe they will do the right thing for the university as a whole. The outlier is Kroll. He will run to the press and put himself ahead of the university. Heck, he already threw his girlfriend under the bus without understanding the full consequences of power of the press. He's in a pool he doesn't yet have the skills to understand fully, and that is the outlier that makes me nervous in this whole deal.
Regents should not have hired the same attornies that investigated ****bailer. Just human nature alone will meld the two cases together in their minds. They will investigate CU in the context of that case. That's why I think the Regents are idots unless they allow anyone accused of wrongdoing to view the report and have the opportunity to have their own investigators or attornies prepare a rebuttal. Then what do you have? A trial.
This is the Daily Camera we're talking about, not Spotlight. Even still, I would expect CU to be doing its diligence after they are made aware of an allegation like this. Maybe it's unreasonable to expect CU to have found out about this before a local paper did, but it still looks bad that they only reacted after the Camera story.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
I could see DiStef getting reprimanded and then shrinking back into his spineless, athletics-aloof former self.
- Status