I'm looking at this picture now and I think it's a fake.

Because I wasn't there and didn't see it, there was no way that space ship landed on the moon. Seriously. It hasn't happened since? That was nothing but a bunch of government lawyers who wanted use to believe we were capable of landing on the moon so they could get re-elected.

If I didn't see it, it didn't happen. I only make decisions on FACTS.

Malbec said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

It is truly amazing how some people will willingy twist themselves around an axel just to keep from looking out the windshield.

These texts are just some of the texts that were found. Just some.

Keep twisting yourselves up, *******s. I'm done with the CAB'ers lot.

---

You really think those texts that they transcribed were not the most damning ones they had? Come on man.

---

Considering the mess they made, yeah. I completely believe that. There was no reason for the University to empty every chamber when just releasing enough would do. Remember, everyone was in the same boat. The school had no interest in releasing anything more than they needed to make their point (and it worked).

Robemcdo said:

---

This is simply not true

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

No they didn't

They said the incident was not reported - they made no other comments about the log

---

if someone had called or

visited Judicial Affairs it would be reflected in its records because Judicial Affairs logs each call

Sure looks like thats what you quoted.

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

57Bear said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

" I think calling people liars implies deliberately telling something false. I don't think that happened because they believed it. It was however an incorrect statement. Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

KWTX says that Barnes said that he did call Judicial Affairs
"KWTX has learned the volleyball coach, Jim Barnes, who's no longer at Baylor, maintains he did call Judicial Affairs after he was made aware of the incident, and in a sworn statement obtained by KWTX, Barnes says thought Briles "handled the matter honorably and with the serious attention it deserved."" http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/In-1-page-letter-Briles-denies-cover-up-calls-for-more-transparency-415231143.html

Please provide a source in which " Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

---

from the regents response in Shillinglaw

"Pepper Hamilton found no evidence that anyone, including Coach Briles, notified Judicial

Affairs, BUPD, or anyone else outside of Athletics of the allegation. If someone had called or
visited Judicial Affairs it would be reflected in its records because Judicial Affairs logs each call
and visit. It also sends out internal email notifications about any alleged Title IX or Honor Code
violation. Recent follow-up inquiries found no records showing that anyone McCaw, Coach
Briles, the other coach, or any other member of the Athletics Department reported the 2013
allegation to Judicial Affairs, "

---

Barnes mighta called somebody on their cell phone. Don't think the man would lie about that.

---

Barnes was misinformed by McCraw that the victim must report herself to JA. I believe he did call them to get information about how she should report. He did not report anything.

As I said before, I don't think the asst coaches knowingly tweeted anything they thought was wrong even though it was not accurate.

---

Ok, you've done this like 6 times in a row.

McCaw. His name is McCaw.

---

https://www.baylor.edu/judicial_affairs/index.php?id=64164

McCraw. Her name is McCraw.

NoBSU said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

57Bear said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

" I think calling people liars implies deliberately telling something false. I don't think that happened because they believed it. It was however an incorrect statement. Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

KWTX says that Barnes said that he did call Judicial Affairs
"KWTX has learned the volleyball coach, Jim Barnes, who's no longer at Baylor, maintains he did call Judicial Affairs after he was made aware of the incident, and in a sworn statement obtained by KWTX, Barnes says thought Briles "handled the matter honorably and with the serious attention it deserved."" http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/In-1-page-letter-Briles-denies-cover-up-calls-for-more-transparency-415231143.html

Please provide a source in which " Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

---

from the regents response in Shillinglaw

"Pepper Hamilton found no evidence that anyone, including Coach Briles, notified Judicial

Affairs, BUPD, or anyone else outside of Athletics of the allegation. If someone had called or
visited Judicial Affairs it would be reflected in its records because Judicial Affairs logs each call
and visit. It also sends out internal email notifications about any alleged Title IX or Honor Code
violation. Recent follow-up inquiries found no records showing that anyone McCaw, Coach
Briles, the other coach, or any other member of the Athletics Department reported the 2013
allegation to Judicial Affairs, "

---

Barnes mighta called somebody on their cell phone. Don't think the man would lie about that.

---

Barnes was misinformed by McCraw that the victim must report herself to JA. I believe he did call them to get information about how she should report. He did not report anything.

As I said before, I don't think the asst coaches knowingly tweeted anything they thought was wrong even though it was not accurate.

---

Ok, you've done this like 6 times in a row.

McCaw. His name is McCaw.

---

https://www.baylor.edu/judicial_affairs/index.php?id=64164

McCraw. Her name is McCraw.

---

My bad. He'd called McCaw McCraw in other posts. I didn't realized we'd moved back over to McCraw.

So this is now more evidence of inadequate training instead of a vast conspiracy.

Someone who was told firsthand (and was probably the first one who heard this) was told he had no reporting obligation. What would she have told the many people who heard it second hand? Say Tom Hill? The same thing. So our disciplinary function itself wasn't even knowledgeable of the rules? But all the rest of these people were in a bad conspiracy of silence?

NoBSU said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

57Bear said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

" I think calling people liars implies deliberately telling something false. I don't think that happened because they believed it. It was however an incorrect statement. Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

KWTX says that Barnes said that he did call Judicial Affairs
"KWTX has learned the volleyball coach, Jim Barnes, who's no longer at Baylor, maintains he did call Judicial Affairs after he was made aware of the incident, and in a sworn statement obtained by KWTX, Barnes says thought Briles "handled the matter honorably and with the serious attention it deserved."" http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/In-1-page-letter-Briles-denies-cover-up-calls-for-more-transparency-415231143.html

Please provide a source in which " Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

---

from the regents response in Shillinglaw

"Pepper Hamilton found no evidence that anyone, including Coach Briles, notified Judicial

Affairs, BUPD, or anyone else outside of Athletics of the allegation. If someone had called or
visited Judicial Affairs it would be reflected in its records because Judicial Affairs logs each call
and visit. It also sends out internal email notifications about any alleged Title IX or Honor Code
violation. Recent follow-up inquiries found no records showing that anyone McCaw, Coach
Briles, the other coach, or any other member of the Athletics Department reported the 2013
allegation to Judicial Affairs, "

---

Barnes mighta called somebody on their cell phone. Don't think the man would lie about that.

---

Barnes was misinformed by McCraw that the victim must report herself to JA. I believe he did call them to get information about how she should report. He did not report anything.

As I said before, I don't think the asst coaches knowingly tweeted anything they thought was wrong even though it was not accurate.

---

Ok, you've done this like 6 times in a row.

McCaw. His name is McCaw.

---

https://www.baylor.edu/judicial_affairs/index.php?id=64164

McCraw. Her name is McCraw.

---

And she's still here?

Keyser just told us she and Briles were in a conspiracy of silence.

Robert Wilson said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

57Bear said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

" I think calling people liars implies deliberately telling something false. I don't think that happened because they believed it. It was however an incorrect statement. Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

KWTX says that Barnes said that he did call Judicial Affairs
"KWTX has learned the volleyball coach, Jim Barnes, who's no longer at Baylor, maintains he did call Judicial Affairs after he was made aware of the incident, and in a sworn statement obtained by KWTX, Barnes says thought Briles "handled the matter honorably and with the serious attention it deserved."" http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/In-1-page-letter-Briles-denies-cover-up-calls-for-more-transparency-415231143.html

Please provide a source in which " Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "Some schools do not designate secretaries, janitors, and other hourly staff with mandatory reporting. Coaches and administrators - always reporters. The Garland deposition is the only insight to Baylor policy outside what Keyser has linked from the BU website.

I have read the reporting that suggested that Barnes called JA to find out how to report not that he reported. Calling JA is not the same as making a report.

---

from the regents response in Shillinglaw

"Pepper Hamilton found no evidence that anyone, including Coach Briles, notified Judicial

Affairs, BUPD, or anyone else outside of Athletics of the allegation. If someone had called or
visited Judicial Affairs it would be reflected in its records because Judicial Affairs logs each call
and visit. It also sends out internal email notifications about any alleged Title IX or Honor Code
violation. Recent follow-up inquiries found no records showing that anyone McCaw, Coach
Briles, the other coach, or any other member of the Athletics Department reported the 2013
allegation to Judicial Affairs, "

---

Barnes mighta called somebody on their cell phone. Don't think the man would lie about that.

---

Barnes was misinformed by McCraw that the victim must report herself to JA. I believe he did call them to get information about how she should report. He did not report anything.

As I said before, I don't think the asst coaches knowingly tweeted anything they thought was wrong even though it was not accurate.

---

Ok, you've done this like 6 times in a row.

McCaw. His name is McCaw.

---

https://www.baylor.edu/judicial_affairs/index.php?id=64164

McCraw. Her name is McCraw.

---

My bad. He'd called McCaw McCraw in other posts. I didn't realized we'd moved back over to McCraw.

So this is now more evidence of inadequate training instead of a vast conspiracy.

Someone who was told firsthand (and was probably the first one who heard this) was told he had no reporting obligation. What would she have told the many people who heard it second hand? Say Tom Hill? The same thing. So our disciplinary function itself wasn't even knowledgeable of the rules? But all the rest of these people were in a bad conspiracy of silence?

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

Robert Wilson said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

57Bear said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

" I think calling people liars implies deliberately telling something false. I don't think that happened because they believed it. It was however an incorrect statement. Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

KWTX says that Barnes said that he did call Judicial Affairs
"KWTX has learned the volleyball coach, Jim Barnes, who's no longer at Baylor, maintains he did call Judicial Affairs after he was made aware of the incident, and in a sworn statement obtained by KWTX, Barnes says thought Briles "handled the matter honorably and with the serious attention it deserved."" http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/In-1-page-letter-Briles-denies-cover-up-calls-for-more-transparency-415231143.html

Please provide a source in which " Barnes said he never reported the incident to JA. "

---

from the regents response in Shillinglaw

"Pepper Hamilton found no evidence that anyone, including Coach Briles, notified Judicial

Affairs, BUPD, or anyone else outside of Athletics of the allegation. If someone had called or
visited Judicial Affairs it would be reflected in its records because Judicial Affairs logs each call
and visit. It also sends out internal email notifications about any alleged Title IX or Honor Code
violation. Recent follow-up inquiries found no records showing that anyone McCaw, Coach
Briles, the other coach, or any other member of the Athletics Department reported the 2013
allegation to Judicial Affairs, "

---

Barnes mighta called somebody on their cell phone. Don't think the man would lie about that.

---

Barnes was misinformed by McCraw that the victim must report herself to JA. I believe he did call them to get information about how she should report. He did not report anything.

As I said before, I don't think the asst coaches knowingly tweeted anything they thought was wrong even though it was not accurate.

---

Ok, you've done this like 6 times in a row.

McCaw. His name is McCaw.

---

https://www.baylor.edu/judicial_affairs/index.php?id=64164

McCraw. Her name is McCraw.

---

My bad. He'd called McCaw McCraw in other posts. I didn't realized we'd moved back over to McCraw.

So this is now more evidence of inadequate training instead of a vast conspiracy.

Someone who was told firsthand (and was probably the first one who heard this) was told he had no reporting obligation. What would she have told the many people who heard it second hand? Say Tom Hill? The same thing. So our disciplinary function itself wasn't even knowledgeable of the rules? But all the rest of these people were in a bad conspiracy of silence?

---

Sorry for any confusion. Have been speaking solely of AD McCaw

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

---

On second hand information or information higher ups already knew? Yes, that's what I'm saying. And you'll have to forgive me if I don't take Baylor at their word either. The people writing the message have not proven truthful nor reliable over the last 18 months.

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

---

On second hand information or information higher ups already knew? Yes, that's what I'm saying. And you'll have to forgive me if I don't take Baylor at their word either. The people writing the message have not proven truthful nor reliable over the last 18 months.

---

Your and RW act like this is a rumor off the street they had a hold of.

The victim told her coach she was raped by football players.
The same coach then tells Briles and the AD.

This is not some game of telephone going on here.

At that point what do you think should happen? "Wow, that is serious. You need to get her in here to repeat that story. Sorry, her telling you just does not cut it" ridiculous.

You are just repeating the excuses. One that PH and Baylor rejected but you accept.


And then there is Briles, who said he just want to clear his name, refusing to go forward on that slander suit about this.

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

---

On second hand information or information higher ups already knew? Yes, that's what I'm saying. And you'll have to forgive me if I don't take Baylor at their word either. The people writing the message have not proven truthful nor reliable over the last 18 months.

---

Your and RW act like this is a rumor off the street they had a hold of.

The victim told her coach she was raped by football players.
The same coach then tells Briles and the AD.

This is not some game of telephone going on here.

At that point what do you think should happen? "Wow, that is serious. You need to get her in here to repeat that story. Sorry, her telling you just does not cut it" ridiculous.

You are just repeating the excuses. One that PH and Baylor rejected but you accept.


And then there is Briles, who said he just want to clear his name, refusing to go forward on that slander suit about this.

---

This is where I believe you start doing your dishonest thing. Because nothing in your entire post has anything to do with Briles or anyone at Baylor, knowing they had to report 2nd hand info or info already known by their superiors. How they got that second hand info is irrelevant to this point, which is knowing what they were supposed to do with it, if anything. And at no point does PH reject what I'm saying. The only way you can draw that conclusion is by reading into something that isn't there.

I keep seeing a complete lack of training campus wide.

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

---

On second hand information or information higher ups already knew? Yes, that's what I'm saying. And you'll have to forgive me if I don't take Baylor at their word either. The people writing the message have not proven truthful nor reliable over the last 18 months.

---

Your and RW act like this is a rumor off the street they had a hold of.

The victim told her coach she was raped by football players.
The same coach then tells Briles and the AD.

This is not some game of telephone going on here.

At that point what do you think should happen? "Wow, that is serious. You need to get her in here to repeat that story. Sorry, her telling you just does not cut it" ridiculous.

You are just repeating the excuses. One that PH and Baylor rejected but you accept.


And then there is Briles, who said he just want to clear his name, refusing to go forward on that slander suit about this.

---

This is where I believe you start doing your dishonest thing. Because nothing in your entire post has anything to do with Briles or anyone at Baylor, knowing they had to report 2nd hand info or info already known by their superiors. How they got that second hand info is irrelevant to this point, which is knowing what they were supposed to do with it, if anything. And at no point does PH reject what I'm saying. The only way you can draw that conclusion is by reading into something that isn't there.

---

Your "second hand" information is so weak. By your same definition a police report is not acceptable information. Your are making every excuse possible. Refusing to connect microscopic dots is not honest.

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

---

On second hand information or information higher ups already knew? Yes, that's what I'm saying. And you'll have to forgive me if I don't take Baylor at their word either. The people writing the message have not proven truthful nor reliable over the last 18 months.

---

Your and RW act like this is a rumor off the street they had a hold of.

The victim told her coach she was raped by football players.
The same coach then tells Briles and the AD.

This is not some game of telephone going on here.

At that point what do you think should happen? "Wow, that is serious. You need to get her in here to repeat that story. Sorry, her telling you just does not cut it" ridiculous.

You are just repeating the excuses. One that PH and Baylor rejected but you accept.


And then there is Briles, who said he just want to clear his name, refusing to go forward on that slander suit about this.

---

This is where I believe you start doing your dishonest thing. Because nothing in your entire post has anything to do with Briles or anyone at Baylor, knowing they had to report 2nd hand info or info already known by their superiors. How they got that second hand info is irrelevant to this point, which is knowing what they were supposed to do with it, if anything. And at no point does PH reject what I'm saying. The only way you can draw that conclusion is by reading into something that isn't there.

---

And that's all you are going to get from this guy. His passive-aggressive technique is a ruse to make you think he is reasonable. If the language will stretch to bolster a point, he will stretch it. If a strict literal definition is more suitable to him, that's what you get. Every now and then he will throw you a bone. After you have tired of it, you'll turn around and there he sits with the same bone in his mouth, hoping you don't remember it was the one he tossed you to chew on a month or so ago.

Here is the line. If it was "policy" everyone had to have known it. Knowing where something is adjudicated is the same as knowing when you are required to report it. If Baylor adopted a procedure, that means that they trained everyone on it. If a lawyer said it, it's an unadulterated fact. A regent cannot disclose private information including Board meeting discussion, student file data, personnel decisions, financial transactions, contractual non-disclosure obligations and the like; unless they are being sued personally, at which time they are free to use any university information even when they have not been compelled by the court to do so. The university has no obligation to correct errors in the press or in superfluous court filings that are based on interpretations of statements voluntarily made by its regents and administrators, so long as those errors only affect persons who no longer have an affiliation with the university. The university can retain an outside investigator to conduct an extensive investigation into a specific department under the guise of investigating the university as a whole, but only the university's own leadership may produce a report that details the investigation's findings, not the investigator.

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

---

On second hand information or information higher ups already knew? Yes, that's what I'm saying. And you'll have to forgive me if I don't take Baylor at their word either. The people writing the message have not proven truthful nor reliable over the last 18 months.

---

Your and RW act like this is a rumor off the street they had a hold of.

The victim told her coach she was raped by football players.
The same coach then tells Briles and the AD.

This is not some game of telephone going on here.

At that point what do you think should happen? "Wow, that is serious. You need to get her in here to repeat that story. Sorry, her telling you just does not cut it" ridiculous.

You are just repeating the excuses. One that PH and Baylor rejected but you accept.


And then there is Briles, who said he just want to clear his name, refusing to go forward on that slander suit about this.

---

This is where I believe you start doing your dishonest thing. Because nothing in your entire post has anything to do with Briles or anyone at Baylor, knowing they had to report 2nd hand info or info already known by their superiors. How they got that second hand info is irrelevant to this point, which is knowing what they were supposed to do with it, if anything. And at no point does PH reject what I'm saying. The only way you can draw that conclusion is by reading into something that isn't there.

---

Your "second hand" information is so weak. By your same definition a police report is not acceptable information. Your are making every excuse possible. Refusing to connect microscopic dots is not honest.

---

How can it be weak when second hand information is what this whole conversation was about?!?! Making every excuse possible? What does that even mean? You are starting to sound like X on here and that's not a good thing.

Malbec said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

---

On second hand information or information higher ups already knew? Yes, that's what I'm saying. And you'll have to forgive me if I don't take Baylor at their word either. The people writing the message have not proven truthful nor reliable over the last 18 months.

---

Your and RW act like this is a rumor off the street they had a hold of.

The victim told her coach she was raped by football players.
The same coach then tells Briles and the AD.

This is not some game of telephone going on here.

At that point what do you think should happen? "Wow, that is serious. You need to get her in here to repeat that story. Sorry, her telling you just does not cut it" ridiculous.

You are just repeating the excuses. One that PH and Baylor rejected but you accept.


And then there is Briles, who said he just want to clear his name, refusing to go forward on that slander suit about this.

---

This is where I believe you start doing your dishonest thing. Because nothing in your entire post has anything to do with Briles or anyone at Baylor, knowing they had to report 2nd hand info or info already known by their superiors. How they got that second hand info is irrelevant to this point, which is knowing what they were supposed to do with it, if anything. And at no point does PH reject what I'm saying. The only way you can draw that conclusion is by reading into something that isn't there.

---

And that's all you are going to get from this guy. His passive-aggressive technique is a ruse to make you think he is reasonable. If the language will stretch to bolster a point, he will stretch it. If a strict literal definition is more suitable to him, that's what you get. Every now and then he will throw you a bone. After you have tired of it, you'll turn around and there he sits with the same bone in his mouth, hoping you don't remember it was the one he tossed you to chew on a month or so ago.

Here is the line. If it was "policy" everyone had to have known it. Knowing where something is adjudicated is the same as knowing when you are required to report it. If Baylor adopted a procedure, that means that they trained everyone on it. If a lawyer said it, it's an unadulterated fact. A regent cannot disclose private information including Board meeting discussion, student file data, personnel decisions, financial transactions, contractual non-disclosure obligations and the like; unless they are being sued personally, at which time they are free to use any university information even when they have not been compelled by the court to do so. The university has no obligation to correct errors in the press or in superfluous court filings that are based on interpretations of statements voluntarily made by its regents and administrators, so long as those errors only affect persons who no longer have an affiliation with the university. The university can retain an outside investigator to conduct an extensive investigation into a specific department under the guise of investigating the university as a whole, but only the university's own leadership may produce a report that details the investigation's findings, not the investigator.

---

I've noticed. I've wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt in the past but I think now the jokes on me.

Yet we have a long series of events showing a clear pattern of deliberately avoiding Judicial Affairs. When convenient the "didn't know to report" line gets pulled out.

You just can't claim ignorance of the rules when you behave as is you know them

At the end of the day, you either get to believe that several otherwise good people (including people not on Keyser's list, who had no ties to football) were part of a nasty conspiracy of silence, or believe that Baylor did not have adequate training and processes giving them sufficient clarity on what to do with dated allegations that were widely known. Some of these people got it second hand, some of them got it first hand but far removed from the event. NONE, not one, of them reported this in the way we are now told they all should have. Some of them (Hill and Yeary) paid with their jobs and reputations, others got hit with a nasty PR campaign over this event (Briles, Ian). Others rolled out relatively unscathed or are likely still around. But the fact remains that out of a large group of people, none of them did what we are now told was proper protocol.

IMO, the more reasonable interpretation is clearly that Baylor did not have adequately training and processes to provide them with clarity. But, if you want to hunker down and protect the institution in the moment and hang a few people, you handle this the way we handled it.

Also keep in mind, this is all based on the best evidence (often strongly characterized) that could mustered in support of the BOR's actions, and it still leaves you with a weak presentation. Just imagine if another side was able to do its own factual investigation. Hoo wee boy.

ColomboLQ said:

---

Malbec said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yes, this is the one where Art was supposed to go to judicial affairs with an old allegation known to many other Baylor people who also didn't go to judicial affairs. So much so that we had to fire him.

---

Everyone that knew and did not report this is gone.

Briles
Ian
Shillinglaw
Hill
Barnes
Barnes' Assisant
Baylor Chaplin

---

There were a whole lot more people that knew about this than those you listed. In fact, there were lots of people who knew about it way before Barnes knew and before he told everybody in the AD.

---

Sorry worded that poorly. Should have said everyone who had a duty to report that knew.

Everyone on that list had a first hand account from the victim or victim's coach. I have no idea what the rules on rumors and obligations of others are. I doubt you do either. I think the questions are fair, it's just not an excuse for others that knew and should have reported.



You know this, but for other's sake

Barnes was given misinformation from McCraw about reporting to JA.

Hill seems the best definition of collateral damage as he was simply spoke to Barnes briefly about this when Barnes was on his way to tell McCaw & Briles.

PH concluded Briles definitely knew of the obligation to report to JA as there was other case(s) of alleged SA being handled by them.

Also, the football players harassed the victim and floated false stories of her willing participation. Two even broke into her apartment. No telling what all the other people knew.

---

That is absolutely not true. They concluded he knew JA had jurisdiction and authority. They made no conclusion about him knowing he needed to report something about an incident given to him when other people at the University, including his superiors, already knew about it.

---

Nope

"Under Title IX and Clery, a University must have campus policies and procedures for the reporting and investigation of reported sexual assaults. This is in addition to any criminal law enforcement action a victim may seek. Many university employees have reporting responsibilities and if they learn of a reported sexual assault, they must share the report with the designated official on campus. In 2013, Athletic Department coaches and staff should have reported the incident to one of three places: the University's Title IX Coordinator (then the VP of Human Resources), Judicial Affairs, or the Baylor University Police Department, all of whom would have been in a position to assist the victim and take responsive action. While a victim may choose where or how to report a sexual assault, once informed of the report, athletics personnel may not exercise discretion to not report."

baylor.edu

---

You really like reading into things that aren't there. I've always wanted to believe you are not trying to purposefully be deceitful in your posts but now I am not so sure.

---

Let me make sure I am following you. I believe you are sticking hard to the Sgt Shultz defense

The knew of an allegation of gang rape.
They knew JA had jurisdiction and where to report.

But you are saying they did not know they had an obligation to report - even though Baylor said they had no discretion not to report.

---

On second hand information or information higher ups already knew? Yes, that's what I'm saying. And you'll have to forgive me if I don't take Baylor at their word either. The people writing the message have not proven truthful nor reliable over the last 18 months.

---

Your and RW act like this is a rumor off the street they had a hold of.

The victim told her coach she was raped by football players.
The same coach then tells Briles and the AD.

This is not some game of telephone going on here.

At that point what do you think should happen? "Wow, that is serious. You need to get her in here to repeat that story. Sorry, her telling you just does not cut it" ridiculous.

You are just repeating the excuses. One that PH and Baylor rejected but you accept.


And then there is Briles, who said he just want to clear his name, refusing to go forward on that slander suit about this.

---

This is where I believe you start doing your dishonest thing. Because nothing in your entire post has anything to do with Briles or anyone at Baylor, knowing they had to report 2nd hand info or info already known by their superiors. How they got that second hand info is irrelevant to this point, which is knowing what they were supposed to do with it, if anything. And at no point does PH reject what I'm saying. The only way you can draw that conclusion is by reading into something that isn't there.

---

And that's all you are going to get from this guy. His passive-aggressive technique is a ruse to make you think he is reasonable. If the language will stretch to bolster a point, he will stretch it. If a strict literal definition is more suitable to him, that's what you get. Every now and then he will throw you a bone. After you have tired of it, you'll turn around and there he sits with the same bone in his mouth, hoping you don't remember it was the one he tossed you to chew on a month or so ago.

Here is the line. If it was "policy" everyone had to have known it. Knowing where something is adjudicated is the same as knowing when you are required to report it. If Baylor adopted a procedure, that means that they trained everyone on it. If a lawyer said it, it's an unadulterated fact. A regent cannot disclose private information including Board meeting discussion, student file data, personnel decisions, financial transactions, contractual non-disclosure obligations and the like; unless they are being sued personally, at which time they are free to use any university information even when they have not been compelled by the court to do so. The university has no obligation to correct errors in the press or in superfluous court filings that are based on interpretations of statements voluntarily made by its regents and administrators, so long as those errors only affect persons who no longer have an affiliation with the university. The university can retain an outside investigator to conduct an extensive investigation into a specific department under the guise of investigating the university as a whole, but only the university's own leadership may produce a report that details the investigation's findings, not the investigator.

---

I've noticed. I've wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt in the past but I think now the jokes on me.

---

It takes a while, but you end up in a loop. I've probably gone around it too many times at this point. The ride doesn't get any better.

It is also interesting that when Keyser gets stuck on a factual or logical point, that's when the mud slingers show up.

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

Keyser Soze said:

---

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

---

That question doesn't even make sense.

I could know that JA adjudicates a variety of things (including the given example of underage drinking or pot), without that indicating anything about how much I have been trained regarding reporting policies that would apply to the volleyball player scenario (or the reporting policies regarding any other scenario). Just knowing that a body adjudicates something does not indicate anything about what you have to report to whom nor under what circumstances.

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

---

That question doesn't even make sense.

I could know that JA adjudicates a variety of things (including the given example of underage drinking or pot), without that indicating anything about how much I have been trained regarding reporting policies that would apply to the volleyball player scenario.

---

So you agree the University should know about pot and drinking, just not rape.

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

---

That question doesn't even make sense.

I could know that JA adjudicates a variety of things (including the given example of underage drinking or pot), without that indicating anything about how much I have been trained regarding reporting policies that would apply to the volleyball player scenario.

---

So you agree the University should know about pot and drinking, just not rape.

---

Way to miss the point. When did you quit beating your wife, Keyser?

Keyser Soze said:

---

Yet we have a long series of events showing a clear pattern of deliberately avoiding Judicial Affairs. When convenient the "didn't know to report" line gets pulled out.

You just can't claim ignorance of the rules when you behave as is you know them

---

Here are the rules Keyser: If you can avoid reporting an incident, avoid it. If we don't have to say drinking and sex was going on, we won't. Help us with that. If there is no report, it didn't happen and all the Baptists are happy. You know this has always been the Baylor way.

So, if the "victim" doesn't want to file a report, nothing JA can do about it. If the victim's parents don't want to report, nothing JA can do about it. Police don't write a report and give a kid a warning, nothing JA can do about it. Apartment manager doesn't want to report a little grass, nothing JA can do about it. Store clerk doesn't want to report shoplifting if you bring back the stuff, nothing JA can do about it. Masseuse doesn't want to report exposure if the guy apologizes, nothing JA can do about it. And Baylor made it clear, if there's nothing JA can do about it, we don't want a record of it. In the words of the infamous RR, "Don't ever put anything to me in writing!"

And, if JA can do something about, it's going to be something bad enough that you will know that JA doesn't want to have to do anything about it any more.

From the girl's T9 petition

"Contrary to statements made by those with knowledge of Plaintiff's sexual

assault, neither Plaintiff nor her parents ever indicated that they did not want to report the assault
to Judicial Affairs or the police. Instead, Plaintiff and her parents were told that it was too late for
criminal charges and they begged Plaintiff's head coach and the assistant volleyball coach to tell
them what, if anything, Baylor could do about the sexual assault. "

From Shillinglaw

"The victim's coach went back to McCaw, who incorrectly told the coach it was up to the

victim to take action. McCaw told the coach that if the student did not press charges there was
nothing else they could do"

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

---

That question doesn't even make sense.

I could know that JA adjudicates a variety of things (including the given example of underage drinking or pot), without that indicating anything about how much I have been trained regarding reporting policies that would apply to the volleyball player scenario.

---

So you agree the University should know about pot and drinking, just not rape.

---

Are you purposefully trying to miss the point or do you really have trouble with reading comprehension?

Keyser Soze said:

---

From the girl's T9 petition

"Contrary to statements made by those with knowledge of Plaintiff's sexual

assault, neither Plaintiff nor her parents ever indicated that they did not want to report the assault
to Judicial Affairs or the police. Instead, Plaintiff and her parents were told that it was too late for
criminal charges and they begged Plaintiff's head coach and the assistant volleyball coach to tell
them what, if anything, Baylor could do about the sexual assault. "

From Shillinglaw

"The victim's coach went back to McCaw, who incorrectly told the coach it was up to the

victim to take action. McCaw told the coach that if the student did not press charges there was
nothing else they could do"

---

Sounds like a poorly trained staff.

Easy to see how we reported 0 sexual assaults for so many years.... an admin who didn't want to know the truth and a faculty and staff that was completely untrained

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

---

That question doesn't even make sense.

I could know that JA adjudicates a variety of things (including the given example of underage drinking or pot), without that indicating anything about how much I have been trained regarding reporting policies that would apply to the volleyball player scenario.

---

So you agree the University should know about pot and drinking, just not rape.

---

Are you purposefully trying to miss the point or do you really have trouble with reading comprehension?

---

I understand his point fine, I just find it exceptionally weak -

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

---

That question doesn't even make sense.

I could know that JA adjudicates a variety of things (including the given example of underage drinking or pot), without that indicating anything about how much I have been trained regarding reporting policies that would apply to the volleyball player scenario.

---

So you agree the University should know about pot and drinking, just not rape.

---

Are you purposefully trying to miss the point or do you really have trouble with reading comprehension?

---

I understand his point fine, I just find it exceptionally weak -

---

Your responses to his posts seem to suggest otherwise.

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

---

That question doesn't even make sense.

I could know that JA adjudicates a variety of things (including the given example of underage drinking or pot), without that indicating anything about how much I have been trained regarding reporting policies that would apply to the volleyball player scenario.

---

So you agree the University should know about pot and drinking, just not rape.

---

Are you purposefully trying to miss the point or do you really have trouble with reading comprehension?

---

I understand his point fine, I just find it exceptionally weak -

---

Your responses to his posts seem to suggest otherwise.

---

When a dead body is found on the floor do your really even need the seminar to call officials?

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

If they didn't know to report to Judicial Affairs why did they deliberately keep other issues away from Judicial Affairs?

---

That question doesn't even make sense.

I could know that JA adjudicates a variety of things (including the given example of underage drinking or pot), without that indicating anything about how much I have been trained regarding reporting policies that would apply to the volleyball player scenario.

---

So you agree the University should know about pot and drinking, just not rape.

---

Are you purposefully trying to miss the point or do you really have trouble with reading comprehension?

---

I understand his point fine, I just find it exceptionally weak -

---

Your responses to his posts seem to suggest otherwise.

---

When a dead body is found on the floor do your really even need the seminar to call officials?

---

I think X took over your keyboard again.

JusHappy2BeHere said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

From the girl's T9 petition

"Contrary to statements made by those with knowledge of Plaintiff's sexual

assault, neither Plaintiff nor her parents ever indicated that they did not want to report the assault
to Judicial Affairs or the police. Instead, Plaintiff and her parents were told that it was too late for
criminal charges and they begged Plaintiff's head coach and the assistant volleyball coach to tell
them what, if anything, Baylor could do about the sexual assault. "

From Shillinglaw

"The victim's coach went back to McCaw, who incorrectly told the coach it was up to the

victim to take action. McCaw told the coach that if the student did not press charges there was
nothing else they could do"

---

Sounds like a poorly trained staff.

Easy to see how we reported 0 sexual assaults for so many years.... an admin who didn't want to know the truth and a faculty and staff that was completely untrained

---

The best training in the world wouldn't matter if the culture in place was that football was above the law.

We KNOW Briles hid things from JA at will. We know he directed others to, as well. We also know Briles had essentially set up a system where he was the last to know things.

In any case, people can blame "training" but to do so, you have to say you acted in good faith. The guy clearly didn't forward a report from a student/staff member in need, and then turned a blind eye to it.

I don't know about you, but a normal human being, when told someone under their purview potentially raped someone, will want to know what happened and probably not stop until something is found out -unless they enjoyed being in the dark.