Krombopulos_Michael
- Aurora, Illinois (that’s a suburb of Chicago)
Oxford comma supporters: assemble
TSJ Thread
- Status
There are problematic ways to attack an accuser's (or any witness for the matter) credibility. There are also non-problematic ways to attack someone's credibility. And there is A LOT of gray area.
@BryceHopkinsPeacock is streaming live from the court room. A good reason more than ever to subscribe.
.....kidding, rehabbing this ACL is driving me wild
The point of this TRO is the opposite of preserving the status quo. To issue a mandatory injunction. Which requires meeting a higher burden and is generally disfavored.
Peacock is streaming live from the court room. A good reason more than ever to subscribe.
.....kidding, rehabbing this ACL is driving me wild
hope they brought a good sketch artist
the way i took a second to think about how fast i could get peacock up… lolPeacock is streaming live from the court room. A good reason more than ever to subscribe.
.....kidding, rehabbing this ACL is driving me wild
I practiced law for 40+ years.
A basic rule is that you lead with your best argument and spend most of your time on that argument. The first count of TJ's complaint sounds in Title IX, and that is where they spend the bulk of their argument. If they lose on Title IX, IMHO their arguments in the alternative get successively weaker as you go down the list.
Other lawyers have gone into some detail concerning the problems with TJ's Title IX theory, and I think they have it right insofar as they go. But I think UIUC's slam dunk winner argument on Title IX has been ignored so far. Title IX has only one purpose, and that is to prevent sexual discrimination/harassment in college athletics. TJ's complaint does not and cannot allege that he has in any way, shape or form been the victim of sexual discrimination or harassment. Without that premise, I see no way to successfully argue that Title IX has anything to do with this case.
A basic rule is that you lead with your best argument and spend most of your time on that argument. The first count of TJ's complaint sounds in Title IX, and that is where they spend the bulk of their argument. If they lose on Title IX, IMHO their arguments in the alternative get successively weaker as you go down the list.
Other lawyers have gone into some detail concerning the problems with TJ's Title IX theory, and I think they have it right insofar as they go. But I think UIUC's slam dunk winner argument on Title IX has been ignored so far. Title IX has only one purpose, and that is to prevent sexual discrimination/harassment in college athletics. TJ's complaint does not and cannot allege that he has in any way, shape or form been the victim of sexual discrimination or harassment. Without that premise, I see no way to successfully argue that Title IX has anything to do with this case.
Last edited:
Ransom Stoddard
Ordained Dudeist Priest
- Bloomington, IL
I read this way too quickly at first....
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
A classic example is if I were to ask you who your heroes are and you respond:
“My dad, Brad Underwood, and my uncle.”
Are you just someone who likes the Oxford Comma? Or are you Tyler Underwood and your two heroes are your dad and your uncle?
I would think not. He's got to be Switzerland on this one.
"starts at 1:30" doesn't necessarily mean "ball will be tipped at 1:30"
It's possible that hearings are hearings and can last however long it needs to last.
Usually there’s many hearings all put together for time slot. So there could be 30+ hearings for the 1:30 docket and they go numerically in order from the case #
The Duke lacrosse players had a great case against nifong and Durham County. They did not have anywhere near as strong a case against Duke. Without knowing all the facts a reasonable conclusion the cases would be similar if everything goes Shannon's way. The settlement was confidential but there is plenty of talk out there the number Duke paid was 60M. 20M per player
Here you’re asking for a panel to make an assessment of whether the person charged is guilty or innocent. Who wants to sign up for this panel? Not everyone all at once now. Make sure your umbrella policies are in place.Look man, I don’t want to go in circles about legal technicalities pertaining to this case … IANAL, and I have tried not to opine to much on that. Is the below not our disagreement here? If not, you’re just being argumentative and trying to come across as the smartest guy in the room.
I do not believe a charge, in and of itself, should immediately halt a person’s life. And I believe organizations like the DIA should start with the presumption that TSJ is innocent. They could then of course use the evidence available to decide if that presumption is rational. For example, Ray Rice was legally innocent until convicted, but there was video evidence that he slammed his wife down in an elevator … that’s a perfectly reasonable “trigger” to remove the presumption of innocence. On the flip side, I believe an organization can rationally decide the evidence (so far) for the charge is so weak as to allow for the legal process to play out before reprimanding the individual … and I think this case warrants that. I don’t care what organizations have done in recent history - I’m just stating my opinion. If your organization’s individual adamantly maintains his innocence and the available charge details do NOT look convincing, I do NOT believe he should be temporarily punished for as-of-yet unknown evidence that MIGHT make it look worse.
At the end of the day, I really don’t have that strong of an opinion on what the DIA should ACT on, given our culture’s climate and legal realities on which I’m not an expert - and I have said previously that I’m glad I don’t have to make this decision. I’m merely giving my personal moral opinion, and I’m taking issue with some who seem to be talking down to others as if they’re just “not getting it” because they prefer an approach where Illinois has TJ’s back for now.
To end on a lighter note, this resembles a debate on the Oxford Comma … no objectively right answer, as it’s a stylistic choice that removes OR adds ambiguity depending on context, but one side is acting way more smug about their subjective opinion being like “more informed,” lol.
The early game went to OT?
Is anyone monitoring Coleman’s Twitter account?
If he is indeed there, he wouldn’t be able to use his phone I believe.
Thanks for the argument. I've trusted that there is some subtlety in the scope of Title IX that makes this all workable beyond discrimination. If there's not, and this comes down to the legal system inserting themselves into a school policy, then I'd need someone to explain to me how this isn't a stunt.
That's not to say that TJ isn't being harmed, but that his beef unfortunately wouldn't be with the University.
That is the beauty of the temporary restraining order. It gets the U of I off the hook. The court is the fall guy if TSJ is found guilty later.
- Status