Loaded4Bear said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

TxRainMkr said:

---

How many of you have daughters who get ripped at the bar until 2 am, go home with a guy and sit on his bed at 3 am, and then she is shocked when she wakes up and sobers up the next morning to find that she had sex, and can become a millionaire?

---

Drunk or not, No Means No.

---

And as sad as this sounds, multiple men could be consensual but no to the last guy means no.

---

Bump, Set , Spike Baby!!!! If you don't have a formal invitation to the gangbang, you are a rapist. Baylor Volleyball millionaires for $1000, Alex!

---

First, you are a complete *******. A low piece of ****, like dog crap on a shoe

Second, you have no idea of any monetary compensation or what it might be going towards


But mainly the First thing I posted

sipembeers said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

canoso said:

---

Reporter said:

---

TxRainMkr said:

---

Lawyers love to sue entities who always settle.

---

The waco based plaintiffs attorney in this case is a sick and demented blood thirsty money grubber. He isn't defending - he's trying to exact a ransom. What a shame.

---

Yet neither his clients nor he appear interested in settling, at least at this point.

Walls closing in?

---

or Baylor does not appear interested in offering anything

---

Exactly. Dunnam has nothing on baylor and they know it.

---

You could be right. We'll see.

Amarillobear said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

canoso said:

---

Reporter said:

---

TxRainMkr said:

---

CLawyers love to sue entities who always settle.

---

The waco based plaintiffs attorney in this case is a sick and demented blood thirsty money grubber. He isn't defending - he's trying to exact a ransom. What a shame.

---

Yet neither his clients nor he appear interested in settling, at least at this point.

Walls closing in?

---

or Baylor does not appear interested in offering anything

---

Maybe these cases are absolutely bogus so the ambulance chaser grouped them together for shock value. Perhaps the Baylor legal team knows they are not really victims thus they are willing to fight them in the courtroom to expose them. Maybe the Baylor legal team settled with the real victims because it was the right thing to do and they are fighting this group of 10 because they are not going to be held hostage by frauds that are represented by a shyster.

---

Anything is possible.

bularry said:

---

Loaded4Bear said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

TxRainMkr said:

---

How many of you have daughters who get ripped at the bar until 2 am, go home with a guy and sit on his bed at 3 am, and then she is shocked when she wakes up and sobers up the next morning to find that she had sex, and can become a millionaire?

---

Drunk or not, No Means No.

---

And as sad as this sounds, multiple men could be consensual but no to the last guy means no.

---

Bump, Set , Spike Baby!!!! If you don't have a formal invitation to the gangbang, you are a rapist. Baylor Volleyball millionaires for $1000, Alex!

---

First, you are a complete *******. A low piece of ****, like dog crap on a shoe

Second, you have no idea of any monetary compensation or what it might be going towards


But mainly the First thing I posted

---

Thank you Sir. Hope all is well with you and the family as well!

canoso said:

---

sipembeers said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

canoso said:

---

Reporter said:

---

TxRainMkr said:

---

Lawyers love to sue entities who always settle.

---

The waco based plaintiffs attorney in this case is a sick and demented blood thirsty money grubber. He isn't defending - he's trying to exact a ransom. What a shame.

---

Yet neither his clients nor he appear interested in settling, at least at this point.

Walls closing in?

---

or Baylor does not appear interested in offering anything

---

Exactly. Dunnam has nothing on baylor and they
know it.

---

You could be right. We'll see.

---

nm

sipembeers said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

canoso said:

---

Reporter said:

---

TxRainMkr said:

---

Lawyers love to sue entities who always settle.

---

The waco based plaintiffs attorney in this case is a sick and demented blood thirsty money grubber. He isn't defending - he's trying to exact a ransom. What a shame.

---

Yet neither his clients nor he appear interested in settling, at least at this point.

Walls closing in?

---

or Baylor does not appear interested in offering anything

---

Exactly. Dunham has nothing on baylor and they know it.

---

Well, three women didn't even have a lawsuit, and Baylor fell all over themselves to give it up.

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

bularry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

What in my post was critical of the victim?

Nothing.

I simply pointed out that baylor cut another check and the truth stays buried. That has no bearing on the victim so to direct your statement towards me is just stupid.

---

What truth is buried?

---

Seriously??

There are numerous threads that cover this from the day it all started in 2016.

Basically the truth about everything involving sexual assaults on campus.

Keyser Soze said:

---

gobbeldygook said:

---

I do have to wonder what kind of parents would not report their own daughter's rape to either the police or at the very least the judicial affairs office. Jim Barnes begged them to go to someone and they refused. What kind of parents are these to stand on such inaction? It's all our duty to protect society from these monsters.

To answer a former question, no, I do not have children, but was I to be a parent of an assaulted child I would do everything in my power to put those rapists behind bars.

---

She claimed that never happened - very different than Barnes account. No way to know which is correct.

---

Oh there is a way to know and it is known. Barnes and his staff had the girl and her father and mother in the office. All of the staff pleaded with them to go to the police. Barnes handed her the JA number and the phone. The parents aren't stable people. They clearly said they didn't want their daughter to be known as a snitch. If you can imagine that. The daughter made many mistakes and didn't blame any coaches. She just wanted to go back home. She thanked Coach Briles for being such a good and faithful man and she felt terrible all the attention was going on him.

This is all fact and has been put in statements. PH did not tell the BOR the clear truth. Only used truthful words to spin a big lie.

GG1234 said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

gobbeldygook said:

---

I do have to wonder what kind of parents would not report their own daughter's rape to either the police or at the very least the judicial affairs office. Jim Barnes begged them to go to someone and they refused. What kind of parents are these to stand on such inaction? It's all our duty to protect society from these monsters.

To answer a former question, no, I do not have children, but was I to be a parent of an assaulted child I would do everything in my power to put those rapists behind bars.

---

She claimed that never happened - very different than Barnes account. No way to know which is correct.

---

Oh there is a way to know and it is known. Barnes and his staff had the girl and her father and mother in the office. All of the staff pleaded with them to go to the police. Barnes handed her the JA number and the phone. The parents aren't stable people. They clearly said they didn't want their daughter to be known as a snitch. If you can imagine that. The daughter made many mistakes and didn't blame any coaches. She just wanted to go back home. She thanked Coach Briles for being such a good and faithful man and she felt terrible all the attention was going on him.

This is all fact and has been put in statements. PH did not tell the BOR the clear truth. Only used truthful words to spin a big lie.

---

Think back on the timeline. The girl and the parents were in Barnes office April 2013 ... She felt terrible all the attention was going on Briles ...

WHAT ATTENTION? This was a year and a half before Texas Monthly wasn't it? Two years before ESPN/WSJ/DMN. This smells like spin or are you telling us Briles was under the microscope by Baylor in 2013?

Briles only interaction with the girl was when she informed him of her apartment being broken into by his players about a month earlier. She said Briles was short and hurried along the meeting. Briles later didn't even recall meeting with her.

The world did not even know about this until three and a half years later in the fall of 2016 when the WSJ article dropped.

Does sound like spin when there was so little interaction with Briles and it occurred long before the public was questioning this event.

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

---

I think the Thee doth protest too much.

Keyser Soze said:

---

Timbear said:

---

Another great payday to a woman who claimed rape years Later, refused to go to the police after being implored to do so by Briles. His reputation and career are ruined, and she's a millionaires. All this so the BOR can cover up it's corruption.

---

I can't decide which is lower, your level of empathy for other human beings or your knowledge of Title IX and school policies.

---

Actually, it's his football acumen.

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

---

LOL.

No it is an act. Everyone knows it is an act with you. You live on the accomplishments of others from almost 40 years ago and can't let those glory days go. But we all know it is an act and you come across as tough because you know you are safe behind your keyboard.

I don't care to answer your question because it has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THE THREAD. I simply provided facts about another case being settled. Then you decided to attack and call names and have not asked that question to any other posters on this thread.

So man up and explain how having/not having a daughter has any bearing on providing facts (or opinions) and why you have not asked that question of every poster on the thread but only the OP and first reply.

boognish_bear said:

---

---

And whoever wrote that tweet misses the biggest part of the text they highlighted.... alleged.

All of this is alleged because there have been no police reports, investigations, or trials and Baylor just keep paying everyone to hope it all goes away.

Just an FYI - the whole thing would have been investigated by Judicial Affairs ..... had someone told them about it.

Keyser Soze said:

---

Just an FYI - the who thing would have been investigated by Judicial Affairs ..... had someone told them about it.

---

Or the police since it was a crime and they should have been the ones doing the investigations. Putting institutions of education in charge of investigating criminal actions and then handing out punishments for it is just flat out stupid and wrong.

cowboycwr said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Just an FYI - the who thing would have been investigated by Judicial Affairs ..... had someone told them about it.

---

Or the police since it was a crime and they should have been the ones doing the investigations. Putting institutions of education in charge of investigating criminal actions and then handing out punishments for it is just flat out stupid and wrong.

---

"and the police" = OK

"or the police" = you don't know squat about Title IX or University policy

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

---

LOL.

No it is an act. Everyone knows it is an act with you. You live on the accomplishments of others from almost 40 years ago and can't let those glory days go. But we all know it is an act and you come across as tough because you know you are safe behind your keyboard.

I don't care to answer your question because it has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THE THREAD. I simply provided facts about another case being settled. Then you decided to attack and call names and have not asked that question to any other posters on this thread.

So man up and explain how having/not having a daughter has any bearing on providing facts (or opinions) and why you have not asked that question of every poster on the thread but only the OP and first reply.

---

I live in reality. I live in truth. I live in TEAM accomplishments and let the late 70's and 1980 versions of "glory days" go in 1985. We had some great Baylor teams of 1985 & 1986 that mirrored the 18-6 run my team experienced. I bowed down to them at that time and let the Baylor record books do the talking from then on.

The only thing I hang my hat on is that the 1980 team remains, nearly 40 years later, THE ONLY MODERN BAYLOR UNIVERSITY FOOTBALL TEAM TO GO UNDEFEATED IN CONFERENCE PLAY!

The 1915 Bears went 7-1 on the season and 3-0 in conference play.
The 1922 Bears went 8-3 on the season and 5-0 in conference play.
The 1924 Bears went 7-2-1 on the season and 4-0-1 in conference play.

The fact that you avoided my question and now say it had no bearing on the thread tells me enough about you and your "character".

I'm not hiding behind a keyboard. My identity is well known. Come see me sometime. I'll buy you a chocolate milk.

Keyser Soze said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Just an FYI - the who thing would have been investigated by Judicial Affairs ..... had someone told them about it.

---

Or the police since it was a crime and they should have been the ones doing the investigations. Putting institutions of education in charge of investigating criminal actions and then handing out punishments for it is just flat out stupid and wrong.

---

"and the police" = OK

"or the police" = you don't know squat about Title IX or University policy

---

Perhaps you should read my whole post instead of just jumping at one part trying to show off.

I said the police because sexual assault is a crime.

Then I added the second sentence showing how title IX should NOT be handled by a university, judicial affairs, a title IX office or any other entity of a university (other than a police department) because I think (and the cases across the country show) that making a university investigate and hand out punishments for this (often investigated by people with no investigation experience) is just stupid.

So Yes I know lots about Title IX and university policy but if you had read past my first 3 words instead of trying to come across as "showing off" you would have understood that I think a university should not be in charge of matters like this.

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

---

LOL.

No it is an act. Everyone knows it is an act with you. You live on the accomplishments of others from almost 40 years ago and can't let those glory days go. But we all know it is an act and you come across as tough because you know you are safe behind your keyboard.

I don't care to answer your question because it has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THE THREAD. I simply provided facts about another case being settled. Then you decided to attack and call names and have not asked that question to any other posters on this thread.

So man up and explain how having/not having a daughter has any bearing on providing facts (or opinions) and why you have not asked that question of every poster on the thread but only the OP and first reply.

---

I live in reality. I live in truth. I live in TEAM accomplishments and let the late 70's and 1980 versions of "glory days" go in 1985. We had some great Baylor teams of 1985 & 1986 that mirrored the 18-6 run my team experienced. I bowed down to them at that time and let the Baylor record books do the talking from then on.

The only thing I hang my hat on is that the 1980 team remains, nearly 40 years later, THE ONLY MODERN BAYLOR UNIVERSITY FOOTBALL TEAM TO GO UNDEFEATED IN CONFERENCE PLAY!

The 1915 Bears went 7-1 on the season and 3-0 in conference play.
The 1922 Bears went 8-3 on the season and 5-0 in conference play.
The 1924 Bears went 7-2-1 on the season and 4-0-1 in conference play.

The fact that you avoided my question and now say it had no bearing on the thread tells me enough about you and your "character".

I'm not hiding behind a keyboard. My identity is well known. Come see me sometime. I'll buy you a chocolate milk.

---

Yes you are hiding.

You know nothing of my character.

I have waited for you to attempt to explain how providing facts has any bearing on having daughters. I have waited for you to explain why you have only asked that question to the OP and one other poster.

So explain what having a daughter has to do with posting a link to a news story or STFU.

NoBSU said:

---

GG1234 said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

gobbeldygook said:

---

I do have to wonder what kind of parents would not report their own daughter's rape to either the police or at the very least the judicial affairs office. Jim Barnes begged them to go to someone and they refused. What kind of parents are these to stand on such inaction? It's all our duty to protect society from these monsters.

To answer a former question, no, I do not have children, but was I to be a parent of an assaulted child I would do everything in my power to put those rapists behind bars.

---

She claimed that never happened - very different than Barnes account. No way to know which is correct.

---

Oh there is a way to know and it is known. Barnes and his staff had the girl and her father and mother in the office. All of the staff pleaded with them to go to the police. Barnes handed her the JA number and the phone. The parents aren't stable people. They clearly said they didn't want their daughter to be known as a snitch. If you can imagine that. The daughter made many mistakes and didn't blame any coaches. She just wanted to go back home. She thanked Coach Briles for being such a good and faithful man and she felt terrible all the attention was going on him.

This is all fact and has been put in statements. PH did not tell the BOR the clear truth. Only used truthful words to spin a big lie.

---

Think back on the timeline. The girl and the parents were in Barnes office April 2013 ... She felt terrible all the attention was going on Briles ...

WHAT ATTENTION? This was a year and a half before Texas Monthly wasn't it? Two years before ESPN/WSJ/DMN. This smells like spin or are you telling us Briles was under the microscope by Baylor in 2013?

---

My apologies I poorly worded that. She LATER thanked him. After it all became public. No spin. Unfortunately the only truth.

Loaded4Bear said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

TxRainMkr said:

---

How many of you have daughters who get ripped at the bar until 2 am, go home with a guy and sit on his bed at 3 am, and then she is shocked when she wakes up and sobers up the next morning to find that she had sex, and can become a millionaire?

---

Drunk or not, No Means No.

---

And as sad as this sounds, multiple men could be consensual but no to the last guy means no.

---

Bump, Set , Spike Baby!!!! If you don't have a formal invitation to the gangbang, you are a rapist. Baylor Volleyball millionaires for $1000, Alex!

---

Certainly this is something that is difficult for the average person to understand. But, if a young woman has decided it is ok for 4 or 5 guys she knows and likes to "hit it" all at the same time and a couple of other guys show up uninvited thinking they are going to share in the bounty, yes as convoluted as that mess is, it is still sexual assault.

All that said, good grief.

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

---

LOL.

No it is an act. Everyone knows it is an act with you. You live on the accomplishments of others from almost 40 years ago and can't let those glory days go. But we all know it is an act and you come across as tough because you know you are safe behind your keyboard.

I don't care to answer your question because it has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THE THREAD. I simply provided facts about another case being settled. Then you decided to attack and call names and have not asked that question to any other posters on this thread.

So man up and explain how having/not having a daughter has any bearing on providing facts (or opinions) and why you have not asked that question of every poster on the thread but only the OP and first reply.

---

Maybe you have a an extremely high level of emotional intelligence that you don't need a shared life experience of being a father to a college-age daughter to understand our concerns. I think it provides a heightened awareness but you must disagree.

Thee also has the experience of having a niece that played sports at Baylor. To see the attitudes on these boards that the Baylor females and especially female athletes are playtoys for our winning football players might be a bit upsetting to him. But you aren't responsible for all the knuckle-draggers who are more concerned about when they can buy another Big 12 Football Champs hat than when we might have another ride the train & dog fighting club for the football assistant coaches to manage.

Your original post wasn't upsetting to me. Another lawsuit and another check. A check to silence not release information. We may differ on the range of evidence that we wish to see, but I share in the disappointment that we will not have testimony, documented communications, and written policies to examine.

Forest Bueller said:

---

Loaded4Bear said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

TxRainMkr said:

---

How many of you have daughters who get ripped at the bar until 2 am, go home with a guy and sit on his bed at 3 am, and then she is shocked when she wakes up and sobers up the next morning to find that she had sex, and can become a millionaire?

---

Drunk or not, No Means No.

---

And as sad as this sounds, multiple men could be consensual but no to the last guy means no.

---

Bump, Set , Spike Baby!!!! If you don't have a formal invitation to the gangbang, you are a rapist. Baylor Volleyball millionaires for $1000, Alex!

---

Certainly this is something that is difficult for the average person to understand. But, if a young woman has decided it is ok for 4 or 5 guys she knows and likes to "hit it" all at the same time and a couple of other guys show up uninvited thinking they are going to share in the bounty, yes as convoluted as that mess is, it is still sexual assault.

All that said, good grief.

---

I agree with you. That is what I said. Uninvited participants to the party are rapists.

If an armored truck crashes on IH35 and you happen to pick up a couple of bags of cash, it is still not your money.

NoBSU said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

---

LOL.

No it is an act. Everyone knows it is an act with you. You live on the accomplishments of others from almost 40 years ago and can't let those glory days go. But we all know it is an act and you come across as tough because you know you are safe behind your keyboard.

I don't care to answer your question because it has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THE THREAD. I simply provided facts about another case being settled. Then you decided to attack and call names and have not asked that question to any other posters on this thread.

So man up and explain how having/not having a daughter has any bearing on providing facts (or opinions) and why you have not asked that question of every poster on the thread but only the OP and first reply.

---

Maybe you have a an extremely high level of emotional intelligence that you don't need a shared life experience of being a father to a college-age daughter to understand our concerns. I think it provides a heightened awareness but you must disagree.

Thee also has the experience of having a niece that played sports at Baylor. To see the attitudes on these boards that the Baylor females and especially female athletes are playtoys for our winning football players might be a bit upsetting to him. But you aren't responsible for all the knuckle-draggers who are more concerned about when they can buy another Big 12 Football Champs hat than when we might have another ride the train & dog fighting club for the football assistant coaches to manage.

Your original post wasn't upsetting to me. Another lawsuit and another check. A check to silence not release information. We may differ on the range of evidence that we wish to see, but I share in the disappointment that we will not have testimony, documented communications, and written policies to examine.

---

What does any of this have to do with why thee felt the need to ask me and the first response on the thread this question? And only us two?

What does any of this have to do with me providing facts in my first post? And only facts?

I made no assumptions, attacks, personal opinions or anything like that.

I provided a link to a news article.

That has zero to do with understanding your concerns or thee's concern.

It also has zero to do with his post because instead of addressing his concerns or yours he went straight to that.

I have said nothing of agreeing or disagreeing with you. In fact I have not replied to any of your posts until now.

I have simply wanted thee to explain what having or not having a daughter has to do with posting facts and why he has only asked that question of me and not other posters in this thread.

If your second paragraph is correct he needs to address those posters, not a person who provided a link to a news story.

cowboycwr said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

---

LOL.

No it is an act. Everyone knows it is an act with you. You live on the accomplishments of others from almost 40 years ago and can't let those glory days go. But we all know it is an act and you come across as tough because you know you are safe behind your keyboard.

I don't care to answer your question because it has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THE THREAD. I simply provided facts about another case being settled. Then you decided to attack and call names and have not asked that question to any other posters on this thread.

So man up and explain how having/not having a daughter has any bearing on providing facts (or opinions) and why you have not asked that question of every poster on the thread but only the OP and first reply.

---

Maybe you have a an extremely high level of emotional intelligence that you don't need a shared life experience of being a father to a college-age daughter to understand our concerns. I think it provides a heightened awareness but you must disagree.

Thee also has the experience of having a niece that played sports at Baylor. To see the attitudes on these boards that the Baylor females and especially female athletes are playtoys for our winning football players might be a bit upsetting to him. But you aren't responsible for all the knuckle-draggers who are more concerned about when they can buy another Big 12 Football Champs hat than when we might have another ride the train & dog fighting club for the football assistant coaches to manage.

Your original post wasn't upsetting to me. Another lawsuit and another check. A check to silence not release information. We may differ on the range of evidence that we wish to see, but I share in the disappointment that we will not have testimony, documented communications, and written policies to examine.

---

What does any of this have to do with why thee felt the need to ask me and the first response on the thread this question? And only us two?

What does any of this have to do with me providing facts in my first post? And only facts?

I made no assumptions, attacks, personal opinions or anything like that.

I provided a link to a news article.

That has zero to do with understanding your concerns or thee's concern.

It also has zero to do with his post because instead of addressing his concerns or yours he went straight to that.

I have said nothing of agreeing or disagreeing with you. In fact I have not replied to any of your posts until now.

I have simply wanted thee to explain what having or not having a daughter has to do with posting facts and why he has only asked that question of me and not other posters in this thread.

If your second paragraph is correct he needs to address those posters, not a person who provided a link to a news story.

---

Because people interpret what others post based upon their frame of reference. People of different backgrounds interpret things in different ways. That is what is has to do with his interpretation of your post.

That was a little presumptuous don't you think? What about the Baylor girls that think of the football players as their playtoys?

Let it be noted that a person's level of sympathy for a victim of sexual assault isn't predicated upon having a daughter. All of us have mothers or wives or sisters. Unless you have a daughter that is a victim of the exact same crime and in the exact same manner, you don't "understand" or "sympathize" more than anyone else. It's simply theatrics and nothing more.

Methinks Cowboy is the all hat, no cattle kind.

Malbec said:

---

That was a little presumptuous don't you think? What about the Baylor girls that think of the football players as their playtoys?

---

I don't know that the football players think that way. But we have had some posters that have given me the impression that athletes have this tribute. I believe the Baylorfans term for it was "chippies."

gobbeldygook said:

---

Let it be noted that a person's level of sympathy for a victim of sexual assault isn't predicated upon having a daughter. All of us have mothers or wives or sisters. Unless you have a daughter that is a victim of the exact same crime and in the exact same manner, you don't "understand" or "sympathize" more than anyone else. It's simply theatrics and nothing more.

---

Okay, so should I assume that some posters just have a "lack of theatrics," "just don't give a crap," or "rightly care more about football wins" as compared to sympathy for victims of sexual assault?

NoBSU said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Do either of you Einsteins have a daughter?

---

Yes, three actually, and I can guarantee you they wouldn't be hanging out in some jocks apartment drinking with "a group". Good God Thee, get a grip man. We had some very bad dudes. We had some very stupid women. Talk about a powder keg.

And the response by your BOR was to "cry". Sheesh.

---

I wasn't talking to you. My post was to the Einsteins posting by the screen names Timmy and Cowboy.

I agree 100% with your first paragraph. I think "MY" BOR was a little bit more than crying.

---

And I will ask again for the 3rd time. What in any of my posts had been critical of the victim?

Posting a link to a news article and pointing out that Baylor settled another lawsuit is not negative, mean, victim shaming or any other type of attack towards the victim. It was nothing but providing facts. I said nothing about the victim. So man up and answer the question of why you have felt to include me in your attack.

---

I asked a simple yes or no question. You never answered the question. Who said anything about being critical of the victim?

Attack? You called asking that question an attack? I'm playing softball with you.

Let me ask the question one more time without generously labeling you with the Einstein monicker. I obviously made an assumption you guys were intelligent. Do you and Timmy have a daughter?

---

Yes calling another poster is an attack. But you can't get beyond acting like a tough guy and throwing out attacks while hiding behind your keyboard.

If you weren't assuming I was being critical of the victim then what does having a daughter or not have anything to do with posting a link to a news article.

Because it doesn't.

---

You must be one of those soft, millenial snowflakes I keep hearing about. Are you?

Tough guy act? It is no act. I'm a tough *****willow.

You still can't answer the question and at this point, I would not believe your reply even if you did answer.

I never considered myself tough but if I compare myself to you I am:


A mushroom cloud laying MFer MFer
Superfly TNT
Guns of the Navarone

---

LOL.

No it is an act. Everyone knows it is an act with you. You live on the accomplishments of others from almost 40 years ago and can't let those glory days go. But we all know it is an act and you come across as tough because you know you are safe behind your keyboard.

I don't care to answer your question because it has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THE THREAD. I simply provided facts about another case being settled. Then you decided to attack and call names and have not asked that question to any other posters on this thread.

So man up and explain how having/not having a daughter has any bearing on providing facts (or opinions) and why you have not asked that question of every poster on the thread but only the OP and first reply.

---

Maybe you have a an extremely high level of emotional intelligence that you don't need a shared life experience of being a father to a college-age daughter to understand our concerns. I think it provides a heightened awareness but you must disagree.

Thee also has the experience of having a niece that played sports at Baylor. To see the attitudes on these boards that the Baylor females and especially female athletes are playtoys for our winning football players might be a bit upsetting to him. But you aren't responsible for all the knuckle-draggers who are more concerned about when they can buy another Big 12 Football Champs hat than when we might have another ride the train & dog fighting club for the football assistant coaches to manage.

Your original post wasn't upsetting to me. Another lawsuit and another check. A check to silence not release information. We may differ on the range of evidence that we wish to see, but I share in the disappointment that we will not have testimony, documented communications, and written policies to examine.

---

What does any of this have to do with why thee felt the need to ask me and the first response on the thread this question? And only us two?

What does any of this have to do with me providing facts in my first post? And only facts?

I made no assumptions, attacks, personal opinions or anything like that.

I provided a link to a news article.

That has zero to do with understanding your concerns or thee's concern.

It also has zero to do with his post because instead of addressing his concerns or yours he went straight to that.

I have said nothing of agreeing or disagreeing with you. In fact I have not replied to any of your posts until now.

I have simply wanted thee to explain what having or not having a daughter has to do with posting facts and why he has only asked that question of me and not other posters in this thread.

If your second paragraph is correct he needs to address those posters, not a person who provided a link to a news story.

---

Because people interpret what others post based upon their frame of reference. People of different backgrounds interpret things in different ways. That is what is has to do with his interpretation of your post.

---

Which again has nothing to do with the OP.

The OP was a link to a news story and was facts.

Baylor Settled a case. Fact

Baylor paid/wrote a check. Fact

The truth of what went on at Baylor around this whole sexual assault problem does not come out. Fact

None of that can be interpreted any other way other than those basic facts.

For anyone to interpret anything in that then they are adding things that was not in my post.