Baylor must really really have something to hide!

1,500 Views | 24 Replies | Last: 2 mo ago by 303Bear
Max Planck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.kwtx.com/2022/11/01/ut-law-professor-makes-recommendations-aimed-helping-baylor-university-sex-assault-victims-settle-pretrial-disputes/
Max Planck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am no legal expert, but why and how does a Judge allow this to happen? Why can't they impose severe financial penalties for not producing the records required?
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"As we've said from the beginning, we need the truth and accountability," Dunnam said Tuesday. "That's what the civil justice system is for. At this point, Baylor has spent tens of millions in resources to hide the truth, and that speaks volumes. We are one step closer to the day in court for these brave young Baylor women, and that cannot come soon enough."

An example of the ongoing dispute, MacRae said, was Baylor's assertion that a PowerPoint slide presentation that Pepper Hamilton prepared for Baylor regents showing general campus attitudes toward sexual assault was privileged work product. According to plaintiffs, it was produced to them on Oct. 7, 2021.

According to MacRae, a PowerPoint slide shared with a client is not protected attorney work product. Pitman ruled that privilege was waived on Aug. 11, 2017.

"Accordingly, that document should have been produced shortly after Aug. 11, 2017, not more than four years later," MacRae said.
Max Planck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
But why does a Judge put up with this delay? Any lawyers out there want to chip in?
OsoCoreyell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Why does anyone listen to any words said by Dunham?
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OsoCoreyell said:

Why does anyone listen to any words said by Dunham?
Why does anyone listen to attorney's public statements from either side. These statements are simply a way of applying pressure to the other side, outside of the courtroom. BU does have a reputation to consider and anything that damages that reputation, as a result of the opposition's statements has to be considered.

Baylor has already hurt their reputation enough without Dunham's help. It certainly looks like they have something to hide and Dunham wants to ride that as far as he can take it.

I'm shocked nobody has paid for billboards near campus alluding to as much.
BornAgain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Paid for by Rising tuition costs.
Max Planck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OsoCoreyell said:

Why does anyone listen to any words said by Dunham?
Please explain.
Max Planck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Max Planck said:

I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.

The Regents wanted to spin this whole thing as "just this problem over here with sportsball" vs "yea its a big problem all across campus and we have been ignoring it for years if not decades".
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

Max Planck said:

I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.

The Regents wanted to spin this whole thing as "just this problem over here with sportsball" vs "yea its a big problem all across campus and we have been ignoring it for years if not decades".
Some big money, powerful people have a lot to lose when the truth finally comes to light
JL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

Max Planck said:

I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.

The Regents wanted to spin this whole thing as "just this problem over here with sportsball" vs "yea its a big problem all across campus and we have been ignoring it for years if not decades".
Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JL said:

Redbrickbear said:

Max Planck said:

I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.

The Regents wanted to spin this whole thing as "just this problem over here with sportsball" vs "yea its a big problem all across campus and we have been ignoring it for years if not decades".
Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.
That is kind of like saying they never violated the letter of the law but did violate the spirit.

Baylor would never have been foolish enough to say that...because they knew it was not factually true...but they did starting with going to talk to the Wall St Journal and in their relations with no less than 3 PR firms help craft the public narrative that it was mainly a "football program issue" and not a general campus and administrative issue.

When it is quite obvious it was a campus wide problem.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
[The Title IX Coordinator Patty Crawford resigned after alleging that Baylor University did not allow her to do her job properly. She claimed that the more she pushed to help the victims, the more resistance she felt from the board of regents....

As early as 2014, KWTX-TV claimed, "the football team may have only played a very minor role in any documented sexual assaults on Baylor students." In a 2016 story, the television station stated, "a closer review of [a 2014 report commissioned by Baylor University officials] reveals years of failures by University officials to fully adopt federal laws and guidelines governing student safety.]
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

JL said:

Redbrickbear said:

Max Planck said:

I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.

The Regents wanted to spin this whole thing as "just this problem over here with sportsball" vs "yea its a big problem all across campus and we have been ignoring it for years if not decades".
Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.
That is kind of like saying they never violated the letter of the law but did violate the spirit.

Baylor would never have been foolish enough to say that...because they knew it was not factually true...but they did starting with going to talk to the Wall St Journal and in their relations with no less than 3 PR firms help craft the public narrative that it was mainly a "football program issue" and not a general campus and administrative issue.

When it is quite obvious it was a campus wide problem.
But all those years where Baylor reported zero problems
whitetrash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JL said:

Redbrickbear said:

Max Planck said:

I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.

The Regents wanted to spin this whole thing as "just this problem over here with sportsball" vs "yea its a big problem all across campus and we have been ignoring it for years if not decades".
Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.
The media sure did and the BOR absolutely relied on that as a scapegoat.

60 minutes Sports had an interview with David Garland, Regents Ron Murff, Kim Stevens, Dennis Wiles and Neal Jeffrey, and Reagan Ramsower where they entirely focused on Baylor football.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:

JL said:

Redbrickbear said:

Max Planck said:

I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.

The Regents wanted to spin this whole thing as "just this problem over here with sportsball" vs "yea its a big problem all across campus and we have been ignoring it for years if not decades".
Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.
The media sure did and the BOR absolutely relied on that as a scapegoat.

60 minutes Sports had an interview with David Garland, Regents Ron Murff, Kim Stevens, Dennis Wiles and Neal Jeffrey, and Reagan Ramsower where they entirely focused on Baylor football.
Yep,

Someone needs to find the whole video....but yea....Baylor Regents make sure to never say that it was only a football issue.

But boy oh boy do they work hard to leave you with that impression.

I remember that Ron Murff specifically mentions the figure of "17 women raped by football players and 4 of them were gang rapes". He of course does not give any figures on the amount of women raped or sexuality assaulted outside the football program.


Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I generally struggle whether we need universities in the criminal policing business. It is an interesting legal theory debate on whether universities should be responsible for the behavior of their students off campus.
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Harrison Bergeron said:

I generally struggle whether we need universities in the criminal policing business. It is an interesting legal theory debate on whether universities should be responsible for the behavior of their students off campus.
Yes, but only if criminal lawyers/investigators are running the investigation or if there's a mechanism to get police involved.

The extent of the University's involvement should be strictly communications. "Hi police, we have sexual assault claim, it's in your arena now".

Issues with investigations would be within the state or county, not the university.

Now this is going to be met with "but women don't want criminal involvement". To that I say it's a criminal accusation and you don't have a choice, and its the right things to do.
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Harrison Bergeron said:

I generally struggle whether we need universities in the criminal policing business. It is an interesting legal theory debate on whether universities should be responsible for the behavior of their students off campus.


That is a great question.

But it is irrelevant to whether Baylor gets to stonewall discovery in the suit. The law probably should be something different, but the law is that BU had a duty to protect female students. Pepper Hamilton clearly advised the board that BU was failing at that duty.

But we all know what Pepper Hamilton's conclusions were; the documents that are at issue are the facts that gave rise to those conclusions. Facts, however, are never privileged. That is why the Judge and the special masters keep hammering the school about what it is hiding. Basically, BU's legal position is just stubbornly stupid.

The thing I don't get is why the school doesn't make this go away by writing the checks.



Max Planck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Still begs the question though, why does a Judge let Baylor drag their feet so long without hitting them with major financial penalty's for not producing the records on a timely basis?
Max Planck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not one lawyer on here can answer the question?
Max Planck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No one?
303Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Max Planck said:

Still begs the question though, why does a Judge let Baylor drag their feet so long without hitting them with major financial penalty's for not producing the records on a timely basis?
Not sure at the state level, but imposing sanctions can sometimes be more trouble than it's worth, and also difficult if there is a cognizable reason a party is resisting disclosure/compliance with discovery.

Haven't followed the proceedings that closely (honestly lost interest a year or two ago - pretty sure nothing material is likely to ever become public at this point), but since Baylor had a law firm do most/all of the investigation, there is likely a privilege and/or attorney work product defense on almost everything that is being asked for.

It was smart for the university to handle it the way they did. Unless their goal was to be transparent.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.