Jump to content
Dogday63

Allegations of rape and cover-up at SDSU

Recommended Posts

On 7/29/2022 at 10:36 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

You don't seem to understand title IX or why it has the protections it does.  It is NOT the legal/justice system.  

Actually, you need to examine Title IX.  It is an important component of all education systems.  It does NOT supercede a persons legal rights.  Every step that you suggest should be/ should have taken only endangers the rights of the victim to a fair outcome.  You're so excited to tilt at windmills that you can't even recognize that your sense of vigilante justice endangers the victim far more than the perpetrator.  The perp needs to have access to all reasonable protection under the law, including not being advertised on campus.  That's how he walks away.  The victim deserves much better than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 10:53 PM, Headbutt said:

Actually, you need to examine Title IX.  It is an important component of all education systems.  It does NOT supercede a persons legal rights.  Every step that you suggest should be/ should have taken only endangers the rights of the victim to a fair outcome.  You're so excited to tilt at windmills that you can't even recognize that your sense of vigilante justice endangers the victim far more than the perpetrator.  The perp needs to have access to all reasonable protection under the law, including not being advertised on campus.  That's how he walks away.  The victim deserves much better than that.

 

Title IX investigations do not limit access to reasonable protection under the law.  That is why they are there.  That is why the burden is preponderance of evidence, not without a shadow of a doubt in those investigations.  I don't think the victims father went to the school with the hope they would do nothing.  Alerting the campus that there was an alleged sexual assault would not have hindered the outcome in a criminal investigation.  It happens all the time on campuses.  Are you saying campuses should stop doing that?  Are you saying that title IX investigations should not occur alongside criminal ones, as they ALMOST ALWAYS do?  This was an outlier, not the norm.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 10:59 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

Title IX investigations do not limit access to reasonable protection under the law.  That is why they are there.  That is why the burden is preponderance of evidence, not without a shadow of a doubt in those investigations.  I don't think the victims father went to the school with the hope they would do nothing.  Alerting the campus that there was an alleged sexual assault would not have hindered the outcome in a criminal investigation.  It happens all the time on campuses.  Are you saying campuses should stop doing that?  Are you saying that title IX investigations should not occur alongside criminal ones, as they ALMOST ALWAYS do?  This was an outlier, not the norm.  

So, like I said, you have no clue regarding the scope of Title IX and how it interacts with an actual legal system.  Actually, I'm not convinced you know how the legal system in this country works   Do some homework and get back to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 11:04 PM, Headbutt said:

So, like I said, you have no clue regarding the scope of Title IX and how it interacts with an actual legal system.  Actually, I'm not convinced you know how the legal system in this country works   Do some homework and get back to us.

Ok bud.  Schools are LEGALLY REQUIRED to open an immediate Title IX investigation if an assault happens on campus.  If this is also reported to the police than those investigations happen right alongside each other.  

By your logic that would infringe on the legal rights of the victim and the accused.  GTFO 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 11:05 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Ok bud.  Schools are LEGALLY REQUIRED to open an immediate Title IX investigation if an assault happens on campus.  If this is also reported to the police than those investigations happen right alongside each other.  

It wasn't on campus, and there was no compelling evidence that it actually happened.  It was apparently taken very seriously by the local PD (as it should), but it was certainly not Title IX fodder.  Just from a procedural standpoint.  I've made this point to you like 100 times.  If you follow the wrong procedure, the perp walks and the victim gets left in the cold.  It's not heartless to take the proper legal approach (no matter how long it takes), it is in the best interest of the victim.  Always.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 11:11 PM, Headbutt said:

It wasn't on campus, and there was no compelling evidence that it actually happened.  It was apparently taken very seriously by the local PD (as it should), but it was certainly not Title IX fodder.  Just from a procedural standpoint.  I've made this point to you like 100 times.  If you follow the wrong procedure, the perp walks and the victim gets left in the cold.  It's not heartless to take the proper legal approach (no matter how long it takes), it is in the best interest of the victim.  Always.

 

Your logic is falling apart.  And you know it.  There is nothing procedurally wrong with opening a title IX investigation for an instance that does not happen on campus but involves students or faculty.  It happens all the time.  It is just not a legal requirement.  There is nothing wrong about alerting the campus.

Your logic, is that opening a title IX investigation or alerting the campus would be denying access to all reasonable protection under the law.  What absolute hogwash.  If that was the case, then it would not be LEGALLY REQUIRED to open one immediately when they happen on campus.  Right?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 11:26 PM, namssa said:

Except that the San Diego Police Department specifically asked SDSU not to start a Title IX investigation as to not interfere with their investigation until their investigation was over.

The bold is not accurate according to everything being reported.  The investigation is still ongoing but SDSU was given the "ok" last month. They "continually asked them to hold off".  This is an outlier. This is not normally how police departments handle cases like this with regards to title IX investigations.  According to the lawyer, the family is very displeased with the police department and their lack of communication.  Sounds like a possible scandal in itself.  

That still does not justify not alerting the campus, and possibly preventing another victim.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 11:19 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

Your logic is falling apart.  And you know it.  There is nothing procedurally wrong with opening a title IX investigation for an instance that does not happen on campus but involves students or faculty.  It happens all the time.  It is just not a legal requirement.  There is nothing wrong about alerting the campus.

Your logic, is that opening a title IX investigation or alerting the campus would be denying access to all reasonable protection under the law.  What absolute hogwash.  If that was the case, then it would not be LEGALLY REQUIRED to open one immediately when they happen on campus.  Right?  

Several years ago, some of you might remember this.  Boise State had a kicker, a  TE and a Safety, all prominent members of the team that were involved in an off campus incident that resulted in a Title IX investigation and their expulsion from the school.  The sex was consensual, but the filming of it was not, on top of that they shared the footage with others.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 7:26 PM, Westish said:

So it might be worth pointing out that while Matt Araiza isn't mentioned specifically in this LA Times article, the lawyer who *is* mentioned as preparing a lawsuit is calling him out specifically on social media.

 

The guy might be a great attorney for all I know. However, his firm appears to have just six attorneys. It's just a guess but the alleged victim could be using that firm mainly because she and her parents couldn't find any large firm in town willing to take it on a contingency basis. Why? Again I'm just spitballing but I would guess because the facts don't align with being able to successfully sue deep pockets SDSU and if Araiza was actually a perpetrator, just how much money do NFL rookie punters earn? One point five per year maybe?

  • Facepalm 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 9:35 PM, Headbutt said:

No, they didn't.  They had allegations.

They probably should have shot somebody immediately so that everyone could feel better.  Deal with the facts later.

Ridiculous. 
 

At the very least, sdsu should have alerted their student body of this, so as to make other women aware.. simple ethics. Didn’t even need to name names. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was my daughter, I'd be very upset with the pace of things too. As an SDSU season ticket holder, assuming Araiza was the now-graduated student who was allegedly involved, at a minimum I'm really disappointed in him.

As to the other players, I'm inclined to think that right now, they should continue to be on the roster but not allowed to play. Two were supposedly freshmen substitutes so if they don't play, few questions will be asked. If it's accurate that a fourth player was a starter, because he has confidentiality rights, unless he's named in a lawsuit, he should simply ride the bench with no explanation given for why he's not playing until SDPD concludes its investigation. If SDPD never acctually concludes its investigation (sarcasm here, wtf SDPD?), I won't feel sorry for that player because it's nobody's fault but his own that he was in that bedroom with what must have been an obviously intoxicated girl if not also a possibly underage one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2022 at 7:56 AM, 4UNLV said:

Ridiculous. 
 

At the very least, sdsu should have alerted their student body of this, so as to make other women aware.. simple ethics. Didn’t even need to name names. 

Alert them to what?  That there was an alleged sexual assault off campus and the alleged victim, who we actually don't know if they exist or not, was not a student at the university?  If it really happened, it is possible that the assailant(s) may have been students?   Believe me, I'm 100% in agreement with your sentiments on this, but I don't see any way the university failed to react appropriately. 

It certainly appears that the San Diego Police didn't put a high enough priority on the case.  I said appears, we still don't know a lot of the facts.  It's disgusting that something like this would happen, and it's frustrating that it is taking so long to get to the bottom of it, but that's the world we live in.  Even victims can be at risk of litigation if things aren't handled in a specific process.  It's wrong, but it is what it is.

At this point I'm hoping the young lady is getting the help she needs, and that the actual perpetrator(s) live a not so comfy life in a state provided facility for a very long time.  The biggest travesty in all of this will be that once everyone has followed protocols, and dragged it out forever, and finally things are settled as to what happened and by who, they get the slap on the wrist so many criminals enjoy these days.  They/he need to be put away.

  • Like 1
  • OG R-Tard 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2022 at 4:46 PM, Headbutt said:

Alert them to what?  That there was an alleged sexual assault off campus and the alleged victim, who we actually don't know if they exist or not, was not a student at the university?  If it really happened, it is possible that the assailant(s) may have been students?   Believe me, I'm 100% in agreement with your sentiments on this, but I don't see any way the university failed to react appropriately. 

It certainly appears that the San Diego Police didn't put a high enough priority on the case.  I said appears, we still don't know a lot of the facts.  It's disgusting that something like this would happen, and it's frustrating that it is taking so long to get to the bottom of it, but that's the world we live in.  Even victims can be at risk of litigation if things aren't handled in a specific process.  It's wrong, but it is what it is.

At this point I'm hoping the young lady is getting the help she needs, and that the actual perpetrator(s) live a not so comfy life in a state provided facility for a very long time.  The biggest travesty in all of this will be that once everyone has followed protocols, and dragged it out forever, and finally things are settled as to what happened and by who, they get the slap on the wrist so many criminals enjoy these days.  They/he need to be put away.

 They KNEW there was a REAL woman alleging the sexual assault.  The talked to the police department and the father.  They KNEW that the victim was accusing members of the SDSU student body.  Yes, they should have absolutely alerted the campus and community that there was an allegation of sexual assault involving multiple students at an off campus event.  It could have prevented another victim.

I showed how absolutely full of shit your logic was last night.  Rights of the accused would be violated if a Title IX investigation is ran! I would LMFAO if it was not so unfunny.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2022 at 3:46 PM, Headbutt said:

Alert them to what?  That there was an alleged sexual assault off campus and the alleged victim, who we actually don't know if they exist or not, was not a student at the university?  If it really happened, it is possible that the assailant(s) may have been students?   Believe me, I'm 100% in agreement with your sentiments on this, but I don't see any way the university failed to react appropriately. 

It certainly appears that the San Diego Police didn't put a high enough priority on the case.  I said appears, we still don't know a lot of the facts.  It's disgusting that something like this would happen, and it's frustrating that it is taking so long to get to the bottom of it, but that's the world we live in.  Even victims can be at risk of litigation if things aren't handled in a specific process.  It's wrong, but it is what it is.

At this point I'm hoping the young lady is getting the help she needs, and that the actual perpetrator(s) live a not so comfy life in a state provided facility for a very long time.  The biggest travesty in all of this will be that once everyone has followed protocols, and dragged it out forever, and finally things are settled as to what happened and by who, they get the slap on the wrist so many criminals enjoy these days.  They/he need to be put away.

So you think they did the right thing in staying completely quiet about 5 of their football players? Letting them continue on their merry little way? And we DO know there was a victim, there's a police report, hospital visit, and rape kit establishing that. I think that SDSU could have done something to alert the female students, even if the PD 'asked them not to investigate'.. which would be ridiculous to do so. If THAT happened, I think everybody involved wanted SDSU to continue on, I mean hey, they were having a good season, and probably just kind of thought it might all go away, why not, they waited this long. But the female athletes that have been pushing for something to be done about these guys aren't going to let it go away quietly, and I don't blame them. They are the ones who have to have a lot of interaction with, and around the football team. They're trying to light a fire under SDSU, the PD, all of them, especially now that they will all be back on campus. And it's a shame they have to do that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 10:53 PM, Headbutt said:

Actually, you need to examine Title IX.  It is an important component of all education systems.  It does NOT supercede a persons legal rights.  Every step that you suggest should be/ should have taken only endangers the rights of the victim to a fair outcome.  You're so excited to tilt at windmills that you can't even recognize that your sense of vigilante justice endangers the victim far more than the perpetrator.  The perp needs to have access to all reasonable protection under the law, including not being advertised on campus.  That's how he walks away.  The victim deserves much better than that.

So many issues. Title IX, as applied here, was a naked power grab by sleazy politicians using XOs to buy votes from a particular voting demographic. Congress never intended it as creating a quasi-judicial bureaucracy without a hint of due process before someone, on the strength of the merest sliver of evidence, the uncorroborated accusation, gets bounced from school.

And there's no remedy upon exhonoration.

And it imposes duties on colleges to do things they're remarkably ill-equipped to deal with.

So the sovereign imposed expenses and liabilities on the States and privately funded entities without giving them funds, as they always do, adequate to the task, all without getting Congress involved with nothing to show for it but political payola.

  • Like 1
  • Facepalm 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2022 at 2:10 PM, USU78 said:

So many issues. Title IX, as applied here, was a naked power grab by sleazy politicians using XOs to buy votes from a particular voting demographic. Congress never intended it as creating a quasi-judicial bureaucracy without a hint of due process before someone, on the strength of the merest sliver of evidence, the uncorroborated accusation, gets bounced from school.

And there's no remedy upon exhonoration.

And it imposes duties on colleges to do things they're remarkably ill-equipped to deal with.

So the sovereign imposed expenses and liabilities on the States and privately funded entities without giving them funds, as they always do, adequate to the task, all without getting Congress involved with nothing to show for it but political payola.

The burden of proof is preponderance of evidence, not merest sliver, an uncorroborated accusation.  Is it perfect?  No.  Has it made campuses safer?  Yes.  

You can tell who the big Milo fans were and Daily wire subscribers are here.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2022 at 7:26 PM, Westish said:

So it might be worth pointing out that while Matt Araiza isn't mentioned specifically in this LA Times article, the lawyer who *is* mentioned as preparing a lawsuit is calling him out specifically on social media.

 

Fwiw, I don't know who Westish is and this isn't an accusation he or she did anything wrong in posting what originally appeared above.

What he or she posted was apparently a tweet by the alleged victim's supposed attorney which, according to a post on the AztecMesa website, was taken down sometime yesterday and replaced by another post which deleted the first name of a well-known former SDSU football player which to my recollection was in the tweet originally posted by Westish. The AM post included what appeared to be a substitute tweet from the alleged victim's supposed attorney. Having just tried to find it, now even THAT apparent tweet seems to have been entirely deleted from the internet.

image.jpeg.8f2bebc9b20604639a6429709252090a.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2022 at 2:26 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 Is it perfect?  No.  Has it made campuses safer?  Yes. 

You've got quite the well developed faith system there. I've been watching Old Main Hill rapist after Old Main Hill rapist come and go and rarely get caught. bHo's new toy hasn't done a dang thing to make undergrad gals safer from undergrad guys. All it's done is further impoverish the tax base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2022 at 2:26 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

The burden of proof is preponderance of evidence, not merest sliver, an uncorroborated accusation.  Is it perfect?  No.  Has it made campuses safer?  Yes.  

You can tell who the big Milo fans were and Daily wire subscribers are here.  

 

You confuse Title IX with the criminal justice system.  Very different.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...