theNewGuy
- Dallas, TX
I hope the Judge in the preliminary hearings on the 18th is so moved by the lack of physical that he just drops the case and tells the DA to come back when they actually have some evidence...
TSJ Thread
- Status
sacraig
- The desert
I feel like no, we cannot all agree on that. I, for one, don't feel like we've (the public) been given nearly enough information about what the prosecution does or does not have on TSJ to have an unbiased opinion. The evidence so far (basically just the police affidavit) has holes, but that's not necessarily all the evidence (though it could be). The DA is under no obligation to publicly reveal all her evidence pre-trial.
If he's innocent then this is a real shame and I hope he can clear his name, and soon. If he's not innocent then this is a real shame and he should not play basketball again for the University of Illinois.
And, yes, the Illini basketball fan in me that wants us to win makes me feel very conflicted as it squares off with the rest of me that wants to see charges like these taken seriously and handled in a way that doesn't damage all sexual assault victims and their willingness to come forward.
Were this happening to another team, I'd probably applaud them for doing the responsible thing in spite of their competitive interests. Since it's our team, that's really hard for me, but I probably still feel we are overall handling this well in the absence of more concrete evidence.
My hope is that, if he's eventually cleared of wrongdoing, whenever that is, NBA scouts have seen plenty to inform their draft decisions.
Last edited:
University of Illinois better be reviewing the Duke Lacross case. Playing it safe and suspending TSJ until trial in 2025 may expose University to major liability if he is found innocent.
....In the end, there was no trial—a fact that most people forget. The three players received $20 million each in a settlement with Duke. The university spent more than $100 million between legal fees, settlement costs, and other expenses to move on from the ignominy and preserve its “brand.”....
www.vanityfair.com
....In the end, there was no trial—a fact that most people forget. The three players received $20 million each in a settlement with Duke. The university spent more than $100 million between legal fees, settlement costs, and other expenses to move on from the ignominy and preserve its “brand.”....
Remembering (and Misremembering) the Duke Lacrosse Case
A new documentary fails to illuminate one of the more complex scandals of our time.
theNewGuy
- Dallas, TX
Whatever the case, I hope TJ gets what he rightly deserves.University of Illinois better be reviewing the Duke Lacross case. Playing it safe and suspending TSJ until trial in 2025 may expose University to major liability if he is found innocent.
....In the end, there was no trial—a fact that most people forget. The three players received $20 million each in a settlement with Duke. The university spent more than $100 million between legal fees, settlement costs, and other expenses to move on from the ignominy and preserve its “brand.”....
Remembering (and Misremembering) the Duke Lacrosse Case
A new documentary fails to illuminate one of the more complex scandals of our time.
Luckily most federal judges don't share the same Ideologies of the crazies that you see on social media. Most of them I'm sure have the ability to do their own critical thinking.
This is an EXTREME comparison. This would be comparable if TSJ's offense happened in Urbana, if he was treated to be guilty by the university, the public, media, and if the whole team was suspended. Nothing of that sort has happened here.University of Illinois better be reviewing the Duke Lacross case. Playing it safe and suspending TSJ until trial in 2025 may expose University to major liability if he is found innocent.
....In the end, there was no trial—a fact that most people forget. The three players received $20 million each in a settlement with Duke. The university spent more than $100 million between legal fees, settlement costs, and other expenses to move on from the ignominy and preserve its “brand.”....
Remembering (and Misremembering) the Duke Lacrosse Case
A new documentary fails to illuminate one of the more complex scandals of our time.
The Duke case also had extreme racial undertones. Not saying this case doesn't but in the Duke case it was "privileged white men vs black woman" and the media really took off with that.
I hadn't read the full 284 page doc that @s261 just posted. This part of the Student Athlete Handbook jumped out at me as relevant for the hearing tomorrow:
"In cases involving sexual misconduct or domestic violence, a representative from the University Title IX Office will be appointed as a subject matter expert to advise the Panel but shall not be present for, or participate in, a final vote or decision on a student-athlete’s status.”
TSJ's lawyers are alleging that didn't happen. Which, I think (IANAL) would be bad news for the UIUC defense if that's the case considering it is specifically listed in the student handbook...
"In cases involving sexual misconduct or domestic violence, a representative from the University Title IX Office will be appointed as a subject matter expert to advise the Panel but shall not be present for, or participate in, a final vote or decision on a student-athlete’s status.”
TSJ's lawyers are alleging that didn't happen. Which, I think (IANAL) would be bad news for the UIUC defense if that's the case considering it is specifically listed in the student handbook...
That’s not what the judge is ruling on though. The judge is ruling on whether or not his rights have been violated.
Right, but the judge would be setting a precedent that players (possibly employees) can not have their rights infringed upon even when the charge is very serious. As you say, this judge won’t be weighing the evidence in this particular charge against TSJ.
What happens when an athlete is charged with a similar crime but the evidence is overwhelming that he/she did do it. If they want to keep playing the school has no option until they are convicted? I find it hard to believe this judge is going to find the U if I policy as over reaching.
My point was University of Illinois cannot just take the easy way out.
If they do the "wrong" thing and can be sued for damages (both actual and punitive) by TSJ.
That was my point as well.
RichardKeenesCousin
Richard Keene's Cousin
I hope all of us get what we deserve
That is not true. You get arrested and arraigned and, if you want out of jail pending the trial, you post bond.
The TRO is not so that the criminal process can conclude. It is so the propriety of UI's actions can be considered before irreparable harm occurs to TSJ.Hopefully the judge will include "fairness" as a criteria in making his/her decision on TSJ request for restraining order.
The purpose of restraining order is to prevent and injustice from being done just because the judicial process has not been completed. If TSJ could have his trial next week there would be no need for restraining order.
College athletes who transfer twice can play, for now, after a judge sets aside NCAA transfer rule
College athletes who were denied the chance to play immediately after transferring a second time can return to competition, for now.apnews.com
I've finally had the chance to read TJ's TRO pleadings and the documents attached to UIUC's motion to remove the case to Federal court. As nearly as I can tell, UIUC has not yet filed a reply concerning the TRO.
Full disclosure, I am a retired lawyer, and I feel at least a little over my head here. I think TJ has a decent chance of prevailing on the argument that his rights have been effectively abrogated permanently (i.e., too long to matter) without receiving any sort of due process in the review.
My concerns are twofold:
1) Not an awful lot of due process seems possible here. UIUC can give him a hearing where he is entitled to present evidence and require witnesses to testify under oath, but at the end of the day, there are precious few witnesses he can call that really matter. He cannot compel the alleged victim, or her friend, or anyone else in Kansas to appear and testify. That leaves him with a bunch of documents like police reports and witness statements. These are all hearsay, and I confess I really don't know how they come in or if they can be kept out. If they are kept out, one might argue the alleged victim is the one being denied due process.
2) More basically, after reading the reports and statements, I think TJ has close to zero chance of getting the Kansas court to dismiss this case unless either the DA or the alleged victim have a major change of heart. It looks to me like the documents, once verified by their signers, establish probable cause that TJ committed the charged offenses. If that is the case, I see no way of keeping this case from a jury (many months from now) absent a plea agreement.
We know what the alleged victim alleges. The following facts support those allegations:
A) Her phone (and presumably TJ's phone) and The Jayhawk's video records show they were in the same room at the same time.
B) While the video records do not prove he did anything, they likewise do not prove he did not do anything. There are times when both are in the room and off camera at the same time.
C) TJ has a very distinctive appearance. That makes her identification of him that much more credible. She says she remembers he had dreadlocks and that two of them are dyed different colors.
D) By far the most important is this: While her friend did not see anything happen, she states that as soon as they left the bar, the alleged victim burst into tears and said she had been sexually assaulted. The victim's conduct throughout is not inconsistent with what can reasonably be expected from a victim under similar circumstances.
This leaves us with a "he said; she said" set of facts and no good way to tell who is and is not telling the truth. That is exactly why we have juries. Once the case gets to the jury, there is no good way to know who will win, but we can be pretty sure it will not get to a jury before the NBA draft. Even assuming TJ plays for the rest of the Illini season, it is hard to imagine any NBA team using a first round draft pick on someone who might be in prison for the remainder of the following season.
TLDR: TJ may be entitled to a much better hearing process than he has received so far, but I find it hard to imagine he will be drafted in any event.
Full disclosure, I am a retired lawyer, and I feel at least a little over my head here. I think TJ has a decent chance of prevailing on the argument that his rights have been effectively abrogated permanently (i.e., too long to matter) without receiving any sort of due process in the review.
My concerns are twofold:
1) Not an awful lot of due process seems possible here. UIUC can give him a hearing where he is entitled to present evidence and require witnesses to testify under oath, but at the end of the day, there are precious few witnesses he can call that really matter. He cannot compel the alleged victim, or her friend, or anyone else in Kansas to appear and testify. That leaves him with a bunch of documents like police reports and witness statements. These are all hearsay, and I confess I really don't know how they come in or if they can be kept out. If they are kept out, one might argue the alleged victim is the one being denied due process.
2) More basically, after reading the reports and statements, I think TJ has close to zero chance of getting the Kansas court to dismiss this case unless either the DA or the alleged victim have a major change of heart. It looks to me like the documents, once verified by their signers, establish probable cause that TJ committed the charged offenses. If that is the case, I see no way of keeping this case from a jury (many months from now) absent a plea agreement.
We know what the alleged victim alleges. The following facts support those allegations:
A) Her phone (and presumably TJ's phone) and The Jayhawk's video records show they were in the same room at the same time.
B) While the video records do not prove he did anything, they likewise do not prove he did not do anything. There are times when both are in the room and off camera at the same time.
C) TJ has a very distinctive appearance. That makes her identification of him that much more credible. She says she remembers he had dreadlocks and that two of them are dyed different colors.
D) By far the most important is this: While her friend did not see anything happen, she states that as soon as they left the bar, the alleged victim burst into tears and said she had been sexually assaulted. The victim's conduct throughout is not inconsistent with what can reasonably be expected from a victim under similar circumstances.
This leaves us with a "he said; she said" set of facts and no good way to tell who is and is not telling the truth. That is exactly why we have juries. Once the case gets to the jury, there is no good way to know who will win, but we can be pretty sure it will not get to a jury before the NBA draft. Even assuming TJ plays for the rest of the Illini season, it is hard to imagine any NBA team using a first round draft pick on someone who might be in prison for the remainder of the following season.
TLDR: TJ may be entitled to a much better hearing process than he has received so far, but I find it hard to imagine he will be drafted in any event.
This is a fact. Any other team/program and we would crushing their whole administration for not pulling the scholarship immediately. That's the nature of fandom. I hope for the best for TJ(and our team), but let's not pretend that our view isn't through O & B glasses.
Can't/Won't be frustrated regardless of which way the decision goes.
It depends. Presumably the judge would at most be ruling that TSJ's rights were infringed because he was not granted whatever due process is required by Title IX and/or university policies. Assuming the required due process is straightforward, the end result could still be a legally-valid suspension. But it's possible that the required due process is not feasible for the university (i.e. they can't compel witnesses such as the victim to appear for TSJ to confront), in which case their hands might indeed be tied.
- Status