SI: CU Assistant Coach's Victim Seeks Justice

[Liver]

my first instinct is that we will be ok on this whole thing. firstly, it has been made obvious that, at worst, the principals in the matter didn't understand their reporting obligations, and, more likely, they thought they were complying but weren't properly briefed on how to do so.

that's not on the coaching staff. and, as these are rules disseminated from the broader university, i don't think the ad is in a markedly different position than the coaches. thusly, i would argue that if there is blame to be assessed (and i don't concede at this point that there is), then, it should fall upon the administrator tasked with setting policies, communicating them, educating on how they work, and then following through with their enforcement. that would not be the ad or the staff.

don't give up hope yet. we're conditioned to assume the worst. and, the holdup on the contract is mystifyingly wrong. but, bureaucratic procedure still has to follow its own protocols and as i laid it out above, i am highly doubtful that this will land on the plate of the CUAD or the program. that said, i am royally pissed that we decided to **** ourselves right when we are starting to return to standard. the ****ing regent driving the train on this needs to get ****-canned. and it is in the hands of the voters in his district. do your duty, Buff Fans.

 

[You Assholes]

Hiring Bailer's lawyers are bad optics. Now we have to behave differently with the results, or we will be lumped in with them.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Hiring Bailer's lawyers are bad optics. Now we have to behave differently with the results, or we will be lumped in with them.

They were Penn State's lawyers, too?

No. Wait. When Baylor paid them, they worked for Pepper Hamilton.

 

[sockdolager]

From today's Longmont Times Call. This is from the TCline column where readers call in and rant about whatever.

 

[DBT]

These lawyers were hired to find wrong doing and, therefore, they will. Mark my words. The Regents absolutely did not have to do this. If I were RG or Mac I would, without a doubt, be angry at the very least. The Regent from Lakewood said, "In no way should this decision to wait be viewed as an indication that the Board of Regents has determined that any employee violated a policy or that any disciplinary action is warranted. We are simply being prudent." Bull****. They are going to let a third party determine all that. Bastards.

 

[outlandinfan]

From today's Longmont Times Call. This is from the TCline column where readers call in and rant about whatever.


View attachment 22265

Is this a column where everyone gets to say stupid things?

 

[sockdolager]

Is this a column where everyone gets to say stupid things?

Yes it is. It's usually funnier than the comics.

 

[Duff Man]

These lawyers were hired to find wrong doing and, therefore, they will. Mark my words. The Regents absolutely did not have to do this. If I were RG or Mac I would, without a doubt, be angry at the very least. The Regent from Lakewood said, "In no way should this decision to wait be viewed as an indication that the Board of Regents has determined that any employee violated a policy or that any disciplinary action is warranted. We are simply being prudent." Bull****. They are going to let a third party determine all that. Bastards.

Hard to argue when you already have determined the outcome.

 

[outlandinfan]

Nothing is going to happen to Mac or RG

 

[DBT]

Nothing is going to happen to Mac or RG

I don't believe so either but I'll bet the lawyers submit some sort of negative report. Hopefully something to the effect of changing procedures in the future. But I don't trust attornies and, in this case, attornies who have a history of finding wrongful action by the universities they've investigated. Best case is they find no legal wrong doing but find issues with CU's procedural actions and make recommendations for procedural changes in the future. However nothing will take away the hit on Mac's and RG's reps in the minds of many. And that's on the idiotic BoR's.

 

[FChairbanks]

I don't believe so either but I'll bet the lawyers submit some sort of negative report. Hopefully something to the effect of changing procedures in the future. But I don't trust attornies and, in this case, attornies who have a history of finding wrongful action by the universities they've investigated. Best case is they find no legal wrong doing but find issues with CU's procedural actions and make recommendations for procedural changes in the future.

Sounds to me like you've been tainted by the design/review, construction/review process?

 

[DBT]

Sounds to me like you've been tainted by the design/review, construction/review process?

Can't go into details but I've seen good people hurt when "outside interests" have been tasked with investigating things. I know this. The facts will be distorted to fit the agenda, whatever that is and who's that is. For instance, the lawyers have an agenda to protect the victim or to punish others for her sake or to "strike a blow" for domestic violence. The Regents have an agenda to make the University look good and/or to score political points. I don't see anyone in this process except for, maybe, a couple of Regents, who have an agenda to protect the AD.

 

[cu3x]

once again, the femnazis of boulder. an earlier post:

"there is nothing unique about the subject matter. either rules and policies were violated or weren't. in fact bringing in someone with 'subject matter bias', may lead to bad results

If you think a DV expert is needed to implement new stuff, there are many fully qualified Colorado residents who could do the job.

This is what lawyers call a "dog and pony show". Spending the most money, getting the most press, bringing in the best known fault-finders.
A deputy from the Adams County DA's Office could easily figure this out - much less complex than a conspiracy case headed to trial.

Sorry. this is a load of crap"