MSU pres. Resigns

[Spartanmack]

Boy! You sure set us straight!!

wow, you're almost as good at this as MC.

 

[hungry]

this conversation was already pointless, you just made it absurd.

no, I don't think that but yours is a far less plausible explanation for why she ended up with a concussion while not having a broken nose, black eye or half her face shattered than her being drunk and falling off her bar stool, or possibly being pushed after she tried to hit him. I'm not saying it's definitely the latter, just that we don't know for sure. I guess in turd's mind, acknowledging there isn't enough evidence to conclude either way is excuse making and victim blaming.

---She provided her medical records to Outside the Lines showing that she was diagnosed with a concussion, and she said she had bruising on her face and cuts from the fall.----

concussion AND bruising on her face...

http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/...s-michigan-state-spartans-assault-allegations

 

[hungry]

Izzo's other "son," Mateen Cleaves

http://www.abc12.com/content/news/S...en-Cleaves-cleared-to-continue-468043913.html

 

[Spartanmack]

---She provided her medical records to Outside the Lines showing that she was diagnosed with a concussion, and she said she had bruising on her face and cuts from the fall.----

concussion AND bruising on her face...

http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/...s-michigan-state-spartans-assault-allegations

thanks but this has already been mentioned several times and we've all read and seen the OTL reports. nobody is denying any of that. Are you saying that is enough evidence to conclude that she and her witnesses are telling the truth and Walton and witnesses corroborating his story are not? Does your expertise in criminology extend to interpreting the mention of what's in a medical report? If that's the case, then you know something the prosecutor, who has actually seen the evidence, doesn't.

 

[Spartanmack]

Izzo's other "son," Mateen Cleaves

http://www.abc12.com/content/news/S...en-Cleaves-cleared-to-continue-468043913.html

the alleged incident took place 15 years after Mateen graduated - he was 37 at the time. But you're right - it's all on Izzo. What kind of outlaw program is he running?

 

[hungry]

thanks but this has already been mentioned several times and we've all read and seen the OTL reports. nobody is denying any of that. Are you saying that is enough evidence to conclude that she and her witnesses are telling the truth and Walton and witnesses corroborating his story are not? Does your expertise in criminology extend to interpreting the mention of what's in a medical report? If that's the case, then you know something the prosecutor, who has actually seen the evidence, doesn't.

You claimed she got a concussion without any facial bruising. The accuser claims otherwise.

Sbee claims that her injuries are consistent with someone being pushed down

Are you guys medical experts?

 

[hungry]

the alleged incident took place 15 years after Mateen graduated - he was 37 at the time. But you're right - it's all on Izzo. What kind of outlaw program is he running?

Just providing this so that Victors can ask Tom about it while they share diet waters. I'm sure Mateen's troubles are weighing heavily on poor ol' Tom. After all, Tom is the real victim here. All of these people keep piling on him and his former players. Don't they know he has basketball games to win?

 

[hungry]

Ask him about this stuff, too, Vic:

http://thespun.com/news/brenda-tracy-recalls-conversation-she-had-with-tom-izzo

“I spent an hour on the phone with Izzo last April discussing me possibly working with his team. His rhetoric was full of victim blaming. It was upsetting to say the least. I don’t even think he realized how bad it was. I hope he’s sincere when he says he now stands with survivors,” she wrote.

"For the record, we did NOT talk about specific cases. Our discussion was a general one, but I firmly believe his attitude & beliefs regarding consent, victims lying, and placing the onus on women, did & would contribute to a culture that dismisses survivors & protects players."

Sounds like a couple posters in this thread...

Poor ol' Tom.

 

[Spartanmack]

Just providing this so that Victors can ask Tom about it while they share diet waters. I'm sure Mateen's troubles are weighing heavily on poor ol' Tom. After all, Tom is the real victim here. All of these people keep piling on him and his former players. Don't they know he has basketball games to win?

who keeps piling on? so far all we have are knuckleheads trying to link unrelated incidents to make it seem like the athletic department has engaged in massive and pervasive cover-ups. And they're doing so with evidence that doesn't support those claims - cases that have been investigated and closed several years ago with no evidence of any cover-ups or interference from either Izzo or Dantonio. The Walton incident is the only one where we don't know if Izzo acted appropriately or not - it's unclear if he was even aware of it. For someone who is a self-proclaimed expert in criminology, you seem inappropriately bent on convicting Izzo without any actual evidence - other than a girl was diagnosed with a concussion.

 

[hungry]

who keeps piling on? so far all we have are knuckleheads trying to link unrelated incidents to make it seem like the athletic department has engaged in massive and pervasive cover-ups. And they're doing so with evidence that doesn't support those claims - cases that have been investigated and closed several years ago with no evidence of any cover-ups or interference from either Izzo or Dantonio. The Walton incident is the only one where we don't know if Izzo acted appropriately or not - it's unclear if he was even aware of it. For someone who is a self-proclaimed expert in criminology, you seem inappropriately bent on convicting Izzo without any actual evidence - other than a girl was diagnosed with a concussion.

Nah, I'm just posting stuff on this relatively unknown msg board. If I was hell bent on convicting Izzo, then I'd be going elsewhere.

Besides, Tom is just a victim in all of this. Can't you see that?

If all of this is new and everyone's already seen/heard this then why did Walton and Payne get cut/suspended from their most recent jobs? Thing is, very few people knew about any of this stuff, because it happened (or didn't happen) at MSU. Few people outside of Michigan and MSU fans would've even noticed this stuff...until ESPN did their OTL report. I wonder if Payne and Walton's employers knew about this stuff? I'd ask about Appling's employer, but yeah, he's in prison...

 

[Michchamp]

who keeps piling on? so far all we have are knuckleheads trying to link unrelated incidents to make it seem like the athletic department has engaged in massive and pervasive cover-ups. And they're doing so with evidence that doesn't support those claims - cases that have been investigated and closed several years ago with no evidence of any cover-ups or interference from either Izzo or Dantonio. The Walton incident is the only one where we don't know if Izzo acted appropriately or not - it's unclear if he was even aware of it. For someone who is a self-proclaimed expert in criminology, you seem inappropriately bent on convicting Izzo without any actual evidence - other than a girl was diagnosed with a concussion.

every Spartan is a criminal defense attorney now...

 

[hungry]

every Spartan is a criminal defense attorney now...

And medical experts

And they were present at these non-incidents.

They know more than all of us on these topics.

 

[hungry]

Thing is, prosecutors these days won't risk their win-loss %, so they will only press charges where they are absolutely certain they will get a conviction, which requires a beyond a reasonable doubt conclusion. That's a very high standard and rightly so. The justice system was set up this way, because they'd rather see 100 guilty people go free than 1 innocent get convicted.

Us normal citizens aren't held to this high standard. Neither is Izzo. We can base our conclusions on less proof than what would be required for a conviction. We can look at these things and make up our own minds, reasonable cause, preponderance of the evidence, whatever we like.

 

[tinselwolverine]

The justice system was set up this way, because they'd rather see 100 guilty people go free than 1 innocent get convicted.

This is commonly attributed to Benjamin Franklin. Sir William Blackstone wrote something similar to this around the same time, he is quoted as using the number of guilty as 10.

 

[Spartanmack]

every Spartan is a criminal defense attorney now...

And medical experts

And they were present at these non-incidents.

They know more than all of us on these topics.

you're the ones drawing conclusions here...

 

[Spartanmack]

Thing is, prosecutors these days won't risk their win-loss %, so they will only press charges where they are absolutely certain they will get a conviction, which requires a beyond a reasonable doubt conclusion. That's a very high standard and rightly so. The justice system was set up this way, because they'd rather see 100 guilty people go free than 1 innocent get convicted.

Wow, you really are an expert in criminal justice. Must be from that civics class everyone took in high school - no doubt reinforced over several seasons of Law & Order. We can now officially count you among the great legal minds that post on DSF - you earned it with this post.

Us normal citizens aren't held to this high standard. Neither is Izzo. We can base our conclusions on less proof than what would be required for a conviction. We can look at these things and make up our own minds, reasonable cause, preponderance of the evidence, whatever we like.

yep, but anyone who disagrees with your conclusion based on rather light evidence is victim blaming, excuse making, or whatever you like...

 

[Spartanmack]

Ask him about this stuff, too, Vic:

http://thespun.com/news/brenda-tracy-recalls-conversation-she-had-with-tom-izzo

“I spent an hour on the phone with Izzo last April discussing me possibly working with his team. His rhetoric was full of victim blaming. It was upsetting to say the least. I don’t even think he realized how bad it was. I hope he’s sincere when he says he now stands with survivors,” she wrote.

"For the record, we did NOT talk about specific cases. Our discussion was a general one, but I firmly believe his attitude & beliefs regarding consent, victims lying, and placing the onus on women, did & would contribute to a culture that dismisses survivors & protects players."

Sounds like a couple posters in this thread...

Poor ol' Tom.

she does sound like a couple posters in this thread but not the ones you're thinking...

Is this more of your preponderance of evidence? Someone who is not an investigator, has no training, doesn't know Izzo, hasn't seen the evidence, hasn't seen the case files, hasn't talked to Walton, or the investigators or the prosecutors. But she survived a horrendous attack at the hands of other people 2,000 miles away and 15 years prior, so she has more credibility than the professionals who actually investigated the case and she could hear in his voice, over the phone that Izzo knew and covered it up and is now just trying to save his own ass?

I have to say, it's a valiant effort but this is easily the weakest argument you've made for your prejudice so far.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Edit: Nevermind. This thread is dead and I should leave it alone.

 

[Spartanmack]

Then they should try disagreeing without victim blaming or excuse making.

Too late. Can you find an actual example of either?

 

[Gulo Blue]

Too late. Can you find an actual example of either?

In the deleted part where I quoted you, what you wrote could be read 2 ways. It could be read the way you intended, or it could be read as though you were asserting that everyone that disagrees with hungry is victim blaming or excuse making. I ran with the second, then realized something like this was likely.