MSU pres. Resigns

[Sbee]

again, just come out and admit you're okay with MSU administration covering for guys who rape and beat women in bars, instead of arguing all this bullshit.

we get it. you want your team to win basketball games. whatever they do off the court doesn't matter.

It's amazing that a lawyer could make such a reach to say that the MSU administration covers for people who rape and beat women. All of these incidents are alleged, we haven't had a case of a player being guilty of sexual assault. There are 4 individuals that have charges against them pending but still could be acquitted, all of the other cases, the authorities who were involved decided not to press charges. In the Appling and Payne case, they were cleared by the IC prosecutor, the title IX office, and then the office of civil rights did a review of the title IX investigation and concluded that it was handled properly. To refer to the incident with Payne and Appling, after all of those bodies clearing them, shows the motivation of those throwing out that term.

 

[dubbsco]

Did Izzo really stand up for him? The incident was handled through the legal process, Izzo wasn't involved, attorneys plead it down to littering, not Izzo. He did allow him to travel with the team while it was pending, I don't think that's worth condemning someone, not that big of a deal.

Our wires are crossed on these posts. He's talking about whether or not Izzo really needs to stand up for him, not if he did, that's not the point.

 

[Michchamp]

It's amazing that a lawyer could make such a reach to say that the MSU administration covers for people who rape and beat women. All of these incidents are alleged, we haven't had a case of a player being guilty of sexual assault. There are 4 individuals that have charges against them pending but still could be acquitted, all of the other cases, the authorities who were involved decided not to press charges. In the Appling and Payne case, they were cleared by the IC prosecutor, the title IX office, and then the office of civil rights did a review of the title IX investigation and concluded that it was handled properly. To refer to the incident with Payne and Appling, after all of those bodies clearing them, shows the motivation of those throwing out that term.

grad assistants so broke they're living in their former coaches' basement don't typically have the means to hire the sort of well-connected attorneys that can get "aggravated battery committed in the presence of multiple witnesses" plead down to "littering."

not to mention the exception to standard legal procedure that prohibits travel while charges are pending...

You really don't think it's fucking obvious MSU's athletic department, with Izzo's knowledge, if not at his direction, got Walton out of this jam?

they had nothing to do with it, huh?

Do I have first-hand knowledge or evidence? no. like you, I'm just a guy spouting off on a message board. But that doesn't mean I have to suspend my disbelief and common sense in order to comment on it.

 

[Sbee]

grad assistants so broke they're living in their former coaches' basement don't typically have the means to hire the sort of well-connected attorneys that can get "aggravated battery committed in the presence of multiple witnesses" plead down to "littering."

not to mention the exception to standard legal procedure that prohibits travel while charges are pending...

You really don't think it's fucking obvious MSU's athletic department, with Izzo's knowledge, if not at his direction, got Walton out of this jam?

they had nothing to do with it, huh?

Do I have first-hand knowledge or evidence? no. like you, I'm just a guy spouting off on a message board. But that doesn't mean I have to suspend my disbelief and common sense in order to comment on it.

I'm sure Izzo was made aware, not sure what kind of role he could or would have in the legal process. Walton does have a family, FYI, that could have helped him with legal fees if he didn't have the money himself. I'm sure it's completely out of the realm of possibility that a mother, father, or his two older brothers could have helped him out. Students also have access to legal services through the University.

 

[Spartanmack]

Well crap. If that's the standard, none of us have any credibility.

pump the brakes here a minute. first you ignored 90% of what I posted and are boiling it down to an ancillary, minor point I made. But since you're hyper focused on it, are you saying the credibility of the accuser is unquestionable? is it not worth considering? do we have to pick one side is 100% right and the other 100% wrong?


I can virtually guarantee you if this person was in a bar in AA and a similar situation happened with someone associated with uofm, MC and a couple others here would look at her online posting and would write her off completely for reasons that haven't even been brought up because I don't think they're relevant but they absolutely would.

 

[Spartanmack]

You are usually spot on with posts, but I have to fully disagree with you. Coaches will always think the best of their players, from start to finish. They become like father figures for these athletes, and will always give them the benefit of the doubt, no matter what.

They stand behind their players until they can stand behind them no longer.

In fact, I'd be more surprised if Walton did something, it was confirmed and went to trial, and Izzo DIDN'T stand up for him. That would surprise me.

So maybe he was giving him the benefit of the doubt - we don't know what he knew at the time. And if he did end up being charged with assault but Izzo believed Walton's side of the story, should he not speak on his behalf as a character witness? What if Walton admitted guilt, expressed remorse and asked Izzo to stand up for him - what should he do? Remember, this is all well before the alleged sexual misconduct incident.

It's clear, everyone wants to believe the worst about him - you claim that you want to wait until the evidence comes out but you continually find fault with izzo's actions despite not knowing the details.

 

[Spartanmack]

I'd rant online if someone assaulted me and it was buried for a fucking decade.

this is almost as intelligent as MC's posts. well said. I guess we are done here.

 

[dubbsco]

So maybe he was giving him the benefit of the doubt - we don't know what he knew at the time. And if he did end up being charged with assault but Izzo believed Walton's side of the story, should he not speak on his behalf as a character witness? What if Walton admitted guilt, expressed remorse and asked Izzo to stand up for him - what should he do? Remember, this is all well before the alleged sexual misconduct incident.

It's clear, everyone wants to believe the worst about him - you claim that you want to wait until the evidence comes out but you continually find fault with izzo's actions despite not knowing the details.

You and Sbee have completely whiffed on what my intentions are of the post. Matt doesn't feel like Izzo should have to do any standing him for him, that he's "just another guy that's graduating from MSU." I am saying that coaches, NOT JUST IZZO, seem to owe a loyalty to their players and will tend to fall on the sword for their players until they can no longer.

I did not say whether or not he did. I have an issue with Matt's logic in his post, not about the overall situation. Please stop straw manning what our two-post topic was about.

But this conversation on this thread has seemingly run its course. I do have doubts about what's going on, specifically with Walton's story and what was known around the team. You don't have doubts, and will be critical with ANYONE taking the other side. That's about as far as we can go with this.

Edit: Don't even feel like going there anymore, not worth it. (last sentence removed)

 

[Spartanmack]

grad assistants so broke they're living in their former coaches' basement don't typically have the means to hire the sort of well-connected attorneys that can get "aggravated battery committed in the presence of multiple witnesses" plead down to "littering."

not to mention the exception to standard legal procedure that prohibits travel while charges are pending...

You really don't think it's fucking obvious MSU's athletic department, with Izzo's knowledge, if not at his direction, got Walton out of this jam?

they had nothing to do with it, huh?

Do I have first-hand knowledge or evidence? no. like you, I'm just a guy spouting off on a message board. But that doesn't mean I have to suspend my disbelief and common sense in order to comment on it.

You do in order to lie and twist facts to misrepresent what was actually going on. First, he wasn't a grad assistant and second, he wasn't living with izzo at the time. But more importantly, let's not overblow this - you don't need Jeffrey Feiger and Johnny Cochran to get a misdemeanor assault case with conflicting witness testimony pled down to a lesser charge. That happens ALL THE TIME, even in cases that don't involve athletes. As a lawyer you should and probably do know that - clearly you're just being completely dishonest. You have to be in denial to believe and say that.

 

[Spartanmack]

Everything else aside it would have made zero sense for Izzo to cover for Walton even if he had any kind of knowledge at all about any incidents. There was nothing to be gained. His eligibility was over as a player and he wasn't even technically on the coaching staff. Just a guy getting a little introduction to the world of coaching while he finished his degree. Certainly a little bad publicity perhaps if any of it happened the way some alleged and it comes out, but again I doubt worth covering anything up to avoid it.

You and Sbee have completely whiffed on what my intentions are of the post. Matt doesn't feel like Izzo should have to do any standing him for him, that he's "just another guy that's graduating from MSU." I am saying that coaches, NOT JUST IZZO, seem to owe a loyalty to their players and will tend to fall on the sword for their players until they can no longer.

I did not say whether or not he did. I have an issue with Matt's logic in his post, not about the overall situation. Please stop straw manning what our two-post topic was about.

But this conversation on this thread has seemingly run its course. I do have doubts about what's going on, specifically with Walton's story and what was known around the team. You don't have doubts, and will be critical with ANYONE taking the other side. That's about as far as we can go with this.

Edit: Don't even feel like going there anymore, not worth it. (last sentence removed)

that's not how I read Matt's post and thus not how I read your response. To me, Matt is looking at the cost/benefit analysis of Izzo covering something up and saying it doesn't make sense. I think he is saying it doesn't make sense that Izzo would risk his reputation to influence an investigation, lie to the university admin, title ix office or interfere in any other way for Walton who he has little to gain from for taking that risk. I don't think his point is that Izzo should have no sense of loyalty to him - he's simply saying the risk to his reputation isn't worth engaging in a cover-up and/or interfering with an investigation. If he thought Izzo owed him no loyalty he probably would have criticized him for not tossing him aside immediately after hearing about the incident. I believe and certainly hope Izzo would come to the same conclusion - that his reputation isn't worth breaking rules and laws - if it involved even the best player or prospect who still had eligibility. Matt's point is that it makes even less sense for a guy in Walton's position. Look at what he did when Mateen was accused a couple years ago. He's got a much deeper and longstanding relationship with Cleaves than just about any other player in his career.

That doesn't mean izzo didn't do that, but it does mean it's less or even unlikely. I never said I don't have doubts and I've clearly said we don't know enough about the Walton incidents and we need more information - at the risk of sounding like a broken record, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and wait for actual evidence to suggest he did.

 

[Michchamp]

..., let's not overblow this - you don't need Jeffrey Feiger and Johnny Cochran to get a misdemeanor assault case with conflicting witness testimony pled down to a lesser charge. That happens ALL THE TIME....

I thought you said "we're done here"...

not sure what planet you live on. it doesn't happen " ALL THE TIME" that a black man who beats the shit out of a white woman in public (she was diagnosed with a concussion) pleads down to "littering" and walks away by paying a ticket.

You know what happens ALL THE TIME??? he gets the book thrown at him and goes to jail for 3 months, 6 months, or more.

 

[Spartanmack]

I thought you said "we're done here"...

not sure what planet you live on. it doesn't happen " ALL THE TIME" that a black man who beats the shit out of a white woman in public (she was diagnosed with a concussion) pleads down to "littering" and walks away by paying a ticket.

You know what happens ALL THE TIME??? he gets the book thrown at him and goes to jail for 3 months, 6 months, or more.

when did I say that? was it before or after you made yet another really stupid comment?

And yeah, it does happen all the time when there are conflicting eyewitness accounts that misdemeanors get pled down to something even smaller. ALL THE TIME.

And here's something that may surprise you - concussions don't only happen from assaults. That doesn't prove anything. As far as I can tell, no one is disputing she fell off her bar stool which easily could have resulted in a concussion, the dispute is about what caused her to fall - this gets back to the conflicting eyewitness accounts.

Again, if Walton were a michigan basketball player being accused of assault by a white, MAGA hat wearing, anti-BLM white woman (like Ashley Thompson) and her friends, you'd be going way further than I am and saying Walton was an obvious victim of a bunch of racist white women. You wouldn't give her even a shred of credibility. I'm not saying anything close to that of course but I am saying there are conflicting accounts and no hard evidence for either person's story.

 

[Michchamp]

when did I say that? was it before or after you made yet another really stupid comment?

And yeah, it does happen all the time when there are conflicting eyewitness accounts that misdemeanors get pled down to something even smaller. ALL THE TIME.

And here's something that may surprise you - concussions don't only happen from assaults. That doesn't prove anything. As far as I can tell, no one is disputing she fell off her bar stool which easily could have resulted in a concussion, the dispute is about what caused her to fall - this gets back to the conflicting eyewitness accounts.

Again, if Walton were a michigan basketball player being accused of assault by a white, MAGA hat wearing, anti-BLM white woman (like Ashley Thompson) and her friends, you'd be going way further than I am and saying Walton was an obvious victim of a bunch of racist white women. You wouldn't give her even a shred of credibility. I'm not saying anything close to that of course but I am saying there are conflicting accounts and no hard evidence for either person's story.

stop ranting on the internet. makes you less credible.

 

[hungry]

Edited

 

[Spartanmack]

stop ranting on the internet. makes you less credible.

it's called stating facts. you should try it some time.

 

[Gulo Blue]

it's called stating facts. you should try it some time.

"it's called..."

What's the origin of this response? It's a thing, but I don't know where it came from.

 

[hungry]

Those weren't facts

 

[hungry]

Pretty crazy. I never once even thought of finding out anything about Grant Perry's accuser so as to discredit her. I think there's a word or phrase for that...

 

[Spartanmack]

Pretty crazy. I never once even thought of finding out anything about Grant Perry's accuser so as to discredit her. I think there's a word or phrase for that...

laziness, probably.

 

[Spartanmack]

Those weren't facts

concussions don't only happen from assault is not a fact?

Her having a concussion doesn't prove Walton assaulted her isn't a fact?

charges don't get pled down all the time isn't a fact?

the existence of conflicting witness accounts isn't a fact?

you could argue that mc might not use her politics to discredit her if she was making these accusations about someone from the wolverine basketball program, but you'd have to be pretty dumb to believe it.

Maybe you just don't know what a fact is - seems surprising for a prison guard or whatever it is you do to claim to have expertise in these types of things to not know what a fact is.