I’ll drink to that.I think a lot of us are dealing with this crazy situation however we can, haha.
I’ll drink to that.I think a lot of us are dealing with this crazy situation however we can, haha.
Dr. Bendova in O-Town, "Rocko's Modern Life"NO ONE CARES ABOUT THE DOCTOR OR BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL YOU ONCE KNEW WITH A COINCIDENTAL NAME!!! Please and thank you.
That statement always troubled me, and it reflects poorly on teachers. I always wondered whom taught them how to do? It was not self-taught because they did not have the prior knowledge to do so. As a career and retired army veteran, teaching/training was at the forefront if not the prime fundamental of leadership. not only did you have to do, but it was imperative you had the ability to teach. They were the opposite sides of the same coin one without the other was incomplete. So, a better mantra would be "Those who can do, teach; those can't learn.My Dad liked to say, "Those who can, do; those who can't teach"
I always wanted to say, "or they become a critic" but never did because he was a mean SOB.
Isn’t the “autonomous” three person panel a university thing rather than an athletics thing? If so, not sure what you expect Josh to do, declare that though that might be universally policy the athletic department won’t recognize or enforce the decision? I wouldn’t be surprised if behind closed doors, at least part of Josh wants to see Terrance prevail. But I certainly don’t expect him to commit a fireable offense and give up $1.5M a year — especially when I’m guessing the large majority of schools that might hire him after he was fired have a very similar policy.It should get to this level, I love the UofI, but there has to be more than what the Lawrence PD/DA have used to bring charges. I like Whitman, but needs to go back to the drawing board with the “autonomous” 3 person panel. Due process is due process. This reminds me so much (and I realize it is criminal vs illigal payments) of Dean 34 years ago. When will the UofI stand up and say it’s not enough? He is innocent until proven guilty. There is no “smoking gun” here just one accuser vs an entire bar full of people. The DA can’t find one witness (or in today’s world video) showing them in proximity? Yet the UofI’s precious reputation is more important than his whole future?
So what if he plays and is found guilty do what UNC should have done in 2005 vacate the wins. On the other hand let’s suspend him and cost him millions based (at least on what is public now) very suspect evidence. Yep I can see why he needs to be suspended and still remain in Champaign in classes as he is such a threat. This stinks, if you think I have zero sympathy for a female who is assaulted you’re missing the point. Her time in court will come, TSJ can not regain the next 6 months which will have enormous effects on the rest of his life.
It is my understanding Josh created the panel when he was hired in 2016? That is totally fine, or was totally fine in 2016. Things have changes since then NiL has made this not as simple as suspension and pull the scholarship. The UI needs to admit that the process needs review on these levels:Isn’t the “autonomous” three person panel a university thing rather than an athletics thing? If so, not sure what you expect Josh to do, declare that though that might be universally policy the athletic department won’t recognize or enforce the decision? I wouldn’t be surprised if behind closed doors, at least part of Josh wants to see Terrance prevail. But I certainly don’t expect him to commit a fireable offense and give up $1.5M a year — especially when I’m guessing the large majority of schools that might hire him after he was fired have a very similar policy.
The U of I has been around for more than 150 years, I'm pretty certain it will survive any criticism it receives if Shannon is reinstated.I think too many people are seeing this as TSJ v UI when in reality it’s just him trying to say “don’t make me miss my dream because of this process.” Public has known about this for 2 weeks but it really has been hanging over him for 4 months. Looking at how frail the case against him appears, he has a right to fight it to the end. The TRO is him asking to still continue forward as innocent until proven guilty. At that time the NBA or whoever can decide how to handle it.
those saying this will cause change to UI policy or other institution’s policy on handling these zero tolerance policy are just hyperbole. The policy will most likely stay as is. That is designed to say “when this broad event happens, enact these guidelines.” What TSJ is asking is for his specific scenario to be looked at and ruled on outside of the university. Judge makes a ruling and everyone saves face.
#FreeTSJ
In education, that is often true of the administrator vis-a-vis the teacher as well.I am a lawyer, and this reminds me of a truism our older namesake partner once told me when I was a young associate - that fairly often, the worst lawyer in the courtroom is the judge.
Let's break this down to its simplest terms although that is somewhat laughable because it is far from simple. Josh handed down an indefinite suspension. Proper and part of his job. Can you imagine if he did nothing. So due process requires a independent review by the committee. They uphold because they find there is credible evidence of a serious crime being committed. They did not do any significant fact sensitive investigation but they were not a rubber stamp either. They relied on the charging affidavit. Preponderance of the evidence standard that is probably ok in vast majority of instances. But to get there you have to assume that Douglas County did their job properly and fairly and after doing that Douglas County found credible evidence of a serious crime being committed. Well not credible to properly file the charges there has to be probable cause a serious crime was committed. Think about thatNot understanding your point. A criminal charge is, in fact, "a formal accusation made by a government entity." Straight from Wikipedia (ya, I know, not a lot of time to do legal research tonight). So, saying "It's more than an accusation," to me, really does not make sense. It remains an accusation until is is proven to a jury/judge beyond a reasonable doubt. This particular formal accusation is extremely serious, and the publicly available supporting "evidence" seems very weak. That is the crux of the matter with both the legal proceedings and university policy I believe.
Agree, but if Terrance does not play this year, I will have lost respect for Whitman and Illinois.The least Whitman can do is issue a statement sometime down the road, that Terrance was screwed by an overzealous DA, and a false accusation.Isn’t the “autonomous” three person panel a university thing rather than an athletics thing? If so, not sure what you expect Josh to do, declare that though that might be universally policy the athletic department won’t recognize or enforce the decision? I wouldn’t be surprised if behind closed doors, at least part of Josh wants to see Terrance prevail. But I certainly don’t expect him to commit a fireable offense and give up $1.5M a year — especially when I’m guessing the large majority of schools that might hire him after he was fired have a very similar policy.
I would argue it’s even simpler than that. With a judge ruling Illinois has to reinstate him, it clears Illinois from any of the blowback of reinstating him themselves.I think too many people are seeing this as TSJ v UI when in reality it’s just him trying to say “don’t make me miss my dream because of this process.” Public has known about this for 2 weeks but it really has been hanging over him for 4 months. Looking at how frail the case against him appears, he has a right to fight it to the end. The TRO is him asking to still continue forward as innocent until proven guilty. At that time the NBA or whoever can decide how to handle it.
those saying this will cause change to UI policy or other institution’s policy on handling these zero tolerance policy are just hyperbole. The policy will most likely stay as is. That is designed to say “when this broad event happens, enact these guidelines.” What TSJ is asking is for his specific scenario to be looked at and ruled on outside of the university. Judge makes a ruling and everyone saves face.
#FreeTSJ
I had a neurosurgeon there at Carle (I think) named Dr Harms. He was great!Yeah...sorry. I started this after the Judge Lawless reveal. So, pin it on me I guess.
Oooooh...I just now thought of another one!! Judge Gallows?
this has been my take on this since it was announced last week .I would argue it’s even simpler than that. With a judge ruling Illinois has to reinstate him, it clears Illinois from any of the blowback of reinstating him themselves.
It’s court of public opinion legal chess and honestly it’s kind of genius.
Probably the crux of what I said but in wayyy fewer words.I would argue it’s even simpler than that. With a judge ruling Illinois has to reinstate him, it clears Illinois from any of the blowback of reinstating him themselves.
It’s court of public opinion legal chess and honestly it’s kind of genius.
In his own statement, TJ says they (he and friends) spent the entire evening after the football game at the bar. The game wasn't over until 10pm. It's a 6 1/2 hour drive. I think we can safely assume they were not home at 4:30 am the next day.Regarding Hobson’s statement about the 4:30 return to Champaign. It’s unclear whether this is leaving Lawrence at 4:30 or arriving at 4:30. When was the ICON event mentioned? If it was at say 8AM, then it means they arrived back at 4:30. If it was at noon, who knows?
It's *possible* I guess. There are two ways of looking at it. The first is that all you really have to do in an affidavit or complaint is establish probable cause (the 'more likely than not' 50+1 standard). The other way of looking at it is that you jam all the info in there that you can to make your case as strong as possible. I knew prosecutors who would have complaints that were a paragraph long and some that had complaints that were pages and pages long (in Wisconsin, we would do complaints and preliminary hearings as opposed to grand juries and indictments).Would it be reasonable/typical for the DA to have stronger evidence than they have made public so far?
Hate to be technical but what the have is probable cause for the issuance of an arrest warrant. That is not a full blown determination of probable cause a crime was committed. There is a differenceIt's *possible* I guess. There are two ways of looking at it. The first is that all you really have to do in an affidavit or complaint is establish probable cause (the 'more likely than not' 50+1 standard). The other way of looking at it is that you jam all the info in there that you can to make your case as strong as possible. I knew prosecutors who would have complaints that were a paragraph long and some that had complaints that were pages and pages long (in Wisconsin, we would do complaints and preliminary hearings as opposed to grand juries and indictments).
I was a little bit in between, where I wouldn't put EVERYTHING in there but I'd make sure I had my bases covered. And honestly, I don't know why anyone wouldn't err on the side of too much info without overloading it.
So yes, it is possible but it would seem strange, given the high profile, to hold that sort of evidence back.
I wouldn't want to speculate but...I am going to speculate LOL. I suspect the case is crap.
I can’t be the only one that went to My Cousin Vinny from this right? Jerry Gallow? I said Jerry Callo!Yeah...sorry. I started this after the Judge Lawless reveal. So, pin it on me I guess.
Oooooh...I just now thought of another one!! Judge Gallows?
I don't believe the U of I board is in cahoots with TSJs camp and this lawsuit is all for show to avoid any public scrutiny to reinstating him if that's the implication. The university is going to defend its processes vigorously for institutional reasons that are bigger than one case or athlete.I would argue it’s even simpler than that. With a judge ruling Illinois has to reinstate him, it clears Illinois from any of the blowback of reinstating him themselves.
It’s court of public opinion legal chess and honestly it’s kind of genius.
I can’t be the only one that went to My Cousin Vinny from this right? Jerry Gallow? I said Jerry Callo!
The word suspension is frowned upon in this type of situation,it’s more likely administrative leave with pay until the conclusion of the case unless the employee somehow clearly violated some work rules related to the charges.Suspension is more of a punishment without being found guilty yet which most likely requires the employee to get back pay if he/she was found not guilty or the charges later dropped.I don't believe the U of I board is in cahoots with TSJs camp and this lawsuit is all for show to avoid any public scrutiny to reinstating him if that's the implication. The university is going to defend its processes vigorously for institutional reasons that are bigger than one case or athlete.
As an aside, in the government employment context, a government employer can and would likely indefinitely suspend its employee under similar circumstances as TSJ is facing. I.e. only facing a charge and potential for imprisonment on such a serious charge. This is not the same exact scenario obviously. I'm just saying that this type of suspension does occur even if you are presumed innocent in criminal court. It's not typically viewed as discipline but more like an interim measure while the criminal case plays out.