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.OsoCoreyell said:
Why does anyone listen to any words said by Dunham?
Please explain.OsoCoreyell said:
Why does anyone listen to any words said by Dunham?
And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.Max Planck said:
I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
Some big money, powerful people have a lot to lose when the truth finally comes to lightRedbrickbear said:And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.Max Planck said:
I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
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 said:And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.Max Planck said:
I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
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".
That is kind of like saying they never violated the letter of the law but did violate the spirit.JL said:Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.Redbrickbear said:And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.Max Planck said:
I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
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".
But all those years where Baylor reported zero problemsRedbrickbear said:That is kind of like saying they never violated the letter of the law but did violate the spirit.JL said:Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.Redbrickbear said:And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.Max Planck said:
I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
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 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.
The media sure did and the BOR absolutely relied on that as a scapegoat.JL said:Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.Redbrickbear said:And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.Max Planck said:
I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
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".
Yep,Doc Holliday said:The media sure did and the BOR absolutely relied on that as a scapegoat.JL said:Baylor never said it was just a problem inside the athletic department.Redbrickbear said:And probably the extent to which sexual assault was a massive campus wide problem vs just a problem inside the athletic department.Max Planck said:
I suspect Baylor is covering up certain actions by certain regents.
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".
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.
Yes, but only if criminal lawyers/investigators are running the investigation or if there's a mechanism to get police involved.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.
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.
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.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?