Chase Scanlan suspended indefinitely

[Shrmdougluvr]

According to Jovan Miller's Instagram stories (what a way to get information in this day and age), because of Title 9, the accused is basically able to appeal the accusations against themselves, and in the meantime is able to practice while the investigation is undertaken. Maybe that was clear to other people on this board, but I hadn't seen anything laid out as simply as that. If that is true, it helped me understand why he was reinstated so quickly.

You must have missed the dozen or so posts outlining the Title IX process (assuming this is a Title IX issue). Here's the overview, under the existing structure, which began effective this past August (and as Willy75 alluded is currently under review by the Department of Education):

• Title IX does not apply if the incident occurred off campus and was not related to school (e.g., incident at one of those dumpy homes off Euclid during a party on a Friday night).
• A formal complaint must be filed to trigger the investigatory process. This can only be made by an alleged victim. No longer can someone formally complain on behalf of someone else. Except a Title IX Coordinator can bring a formal Title IX complaint on an alleged victim's behalf, but only after they have received an informal complaint (which every university employee has the obligation to bring forward). For that to initially happen, generally the complained of conduct must be severe. It can also occur if a complainant withdraws the formal complaint out of fear.
• There is an informal complaint mechanism, that involves putting in place "supportive measures" for both the complainant and the accused. This also are applied to formal complaints as well.
  • Supportive measures cannot be punitive
• A "grievance process" is used for formal complaints.
  • This is what most would consider to be the investigation.
  • The matter gets referred to a trained investigator who "investigates."
  • Both parties have the opportunity to review the investigators notes and ask questions of the witnesses. This could occur in person via a "hearing" but is more likely to occur in writing, with the investigator going back and forth as a conduit.
  • The investigator completes a report of his her findings.
• A decision maker receives the investigatory report with background materials and makes a determination (i.e., whether either substantial evidence/a preponderance of the evidence shows the complained of acts occur and rise to the level of sexual harassment).
  • This must occur within a "reasonable" time frame, which is not prescribed (unless the policy sets forth a clear timeline).
• Both parties have the right to appeal to yet another individual, but the grounds are limited.
  • New evidence has emerged.
  • Decision maker had a conflict of interest.
  • Procedural irregularity.
• The accused is considered innocent until a decision maker makes a finding to the contrary.
  • Removing the student pre-decision is not an option unless the student poses a danger.

In short, Chase will be back at the University, attending classes, with his financial aid package, unless a finding is made that he committed an act that violated Title IX (assuming that's what's going on here). I do not see how he has a legal right to be with the team, but given his protected class status (i.e., he is Native American), I can imagine the University is being extra careful with respect to prematurely taking any adverse actions. If there is no finding that Chase violated Title IX, then its going to be very interesting to see how his status with the team evolves.

Edit: Sorry about the snark in the first paragraph. I was annoyed that seemingly informed posters have been referencing this process throughout, and a Jovan Miller instagram post has more significance. That's on me.

 

[NineOneSeven]

young men have been known to punch walls. Theres plenty of indications the kid has issues. but a hole in a wall if it was his fist that created it is proof of nothing more than he was angry about something. not saying it’s justified, but it’s not conclusive of anything beyond that.

Yeah, when I was in college I saw some walls punched. Amongst plenty of other objects.

 

[Shrmdougluvr]

Yeah, when I was in college I saw some walls punched. Amongst plenty of other objects.

You probably knew some guys who liked to throw their girlfriends into walls too. I played on a team in college. Not all of my teammates were good guys.

Also, punching a wall could be an act that violates Title IX, if the behavior is "severe and pervasive."

Having said that, I don't know Chase personally, so I couldnt say with any certainty if he is a good guy or not. And I certainly dont know what happened that is being complained of. I do expect his teammates to have much more information than I do though.

 

[Willy75]

You must have missed the dozen or so posts outlining the Title IX process (assuming this is a Title IX issue). Here's the overview, under the existing structure, which began effective this past August (and as Willy75 alluded is currently under review by the Department of Education):

• Title IX does not apply if the incident occurred off campus and was not related to school (e.g., incident at one of those dumpy homes off Euclid during a party on a Friday night).
• A formal complaint must be filed to trigger the investigatory process. This can only be made by an alleged victim. No longer can someone formally complain on behalf of someone else. Except a Title IX Coordinator can bring a formal Title IX complaint on an alleged victim's behalf, but only after they have received an informal complaint (which every university employee has the obligation to bring forward). For that to initially happen, generally the complained of conduct must be severe. It can also occur if a complainant withdraws the formal complaint out of fear.
• There is an informal complaint mechanism, that involves putting in place "supportive measures" for both the complainant and the accused. This also are applied to formal complaints as well.
  • Supportive measures cannot be punitive
• A "grievance process" is used for formal complaints.
  • This is what most would consider to be the investigation.
  • The matter gets referred to a trained investigator who "investigates."
  • Both parties have the opportunity to review the investigators notes and ask questions of the witnesses. This could occur in person via a "hearing" but is more likely to occur in writing, with the investigator going back and forth as a conduit.
  • The investigator completes a report of his her findings.
• A decision maker receives the investigatory report with background materials and makes a determination (i.e., whether either substantial evidence/a preponderance of the evidence shows the complained of acts occur and rise to the level of s e xual harassment).
  • This must occur within a "reasonable" time frame, which is not prescribed (unless the policy sets forth a clear timeline).
• Both parties have the right to appeal to yet another individual, but the grounds are limited.
  • New evidence has emerged.
  • Decision maker had a conflict of interest.
  • Procedural irregularity.
• The accused is considered innocent until a decision maker makes a finding to the contrary.
  • Removing the student pre-decision is not an option unless the student poses a danger.

In short, Chase will be back at the University, attending classes, with his financial aid package, unless a finding is made that he committed an act that violated Title IX (assuming that's what's going on here). I do not see how he has a legal right to be with the team, but given his protected class status (i.e., he is Native American), I can imagine the University is being extra careful with respect to prematurely taking any adverse actions. If there is no finding that Chase violated Title IX, then its going to be very interesting to see how his status with the team evolves.

Well said. The stuff DOE is currently reviewing and will almost certainly change are the enhanced protections for the accused put in by the prior administration, e.g. presence of third parties at a hearing.

 

[relaxer]

young men have been known to punch walls. Theres plenty of indications the kid has issues. but a hole in a wall if it was his fist that created it is proof of nothing more than he was angry about something. not saying it’s justified, but it’s not conclusive of anything beyond that.

A punch does not make a dry wall look like that.

 

[PhatOrange]

A punch does not make a dry wall look like that.

Agreed, that's not a punch. Someone's body did that to the wall. He could've shoved her into it or she could've shoved him into it.

 

[GoSU96]

Well said. The stuff DOE is currently reviewing and will almost certainly change are the enhanced protections for the accused put in by the prior administration, e.g. presence of third parties at a hearing.

Enhanced? How about basic,

 

[Chip]

If this was on Farm Acre, it's possible that my fix it job of masking tape and paint over the hole we created in the wall was just exposed. One more cold case solved.

It was from a body. A drunken body, falling into the wall. I won't name names.

 

[DoctahLexus]

"No more speculating on the wall. This is your final warning - orange79" -DoctahLexus

 

[OrangeXtreme]

"No more speculating on the wall. This is your final warning - orange79" -DoctahLexus

You want me on that wall, you need me on that wall!

 

[Willy75]

Enhanced? How about basic,

Didn’t say I agreed, I don’t and a number of courts don’t. SU and other private schools often argue they can set their own rules under some lesser standard.

 

[DoctahLexus]

Good to see other media figures following the logic of the players supporting Desko.

 

[weedsportwarriors]

You want me on that wall, you need me on that wall!

GREAT MOVIE!!

 

[Powellfan]

You must have missed the dozen or so posts outlining the Title IX process (assuming this is a Title IX issue). Here's the overview, under the existing structure, which began effective this past August (and as Willy75 alluded is currently under review by the Department of Education):

• Title IX does not apply if the incident occurred off campus and was not related to school (e.g., incident at one of those dumpy homes off Euclid during a party on a Friday night).
• A formal complaint must be filed to trigger the investigatory process. This can only be made by an alleged victim. No longer can someone formally complain on behalf of someone else. Except a Title IX Coordinator can bring a formal Title IX complaint on an alleged victim's behalf, but only after they have received an informal complaint (which every university employee has the obligation to bring forward). For that to initially happen, generally the complained of conduct must be severe. It can also occur if a complainant withdraws the formal complaint out of fear.
• There is an informal complaint mechanism, that involves putting in place "supportive measures" for both the complainant and the accused. This also are applied to formal complaints as well.
  • Supportive measures cannot be punitive
• A "grievance process" is used for formal complaints.
  • This is what most would consider to be the investigation.
  • The matter gets referred to a trained investigator who "investigates."
  • Both parties have the opportunity to review the investigators notes and ask questions of the witnesses. This could occur in person via a "hearing" but is more likely to occur in writing, with the investigator going back and forth as a conduit.
  • The investigator completes a report of his her findings.
• A decision maker receives the investigatory report with background materials and makes a determination (i.e., whether either substantial evidence/a preponderance of the evidence shows the complained of acts occur and rise to the level of s e xual harassment).
  • This must occur within a "reasonable" time frame, which is not prescribed (unless the policy sets forth a clear timeline).
• Both parties have the right to appeal to yet another individual, but the grounds are limited.
  • New evidence has emerged.
  • Decision maker had a conflict of interest.
  • Procedural irregularity.
• The accused is considered innocent until a decision maker makes a finding to the contrary.
  • Removing the student pre-decision is not an option unless the student poses a danger.

In short, Chase will be back at the University, attending classes, with his financial aid package, unless a finding is made that he committed an act that violated Title IX (assuming that's what's going on here). I do not see how he has a legal right to be with the team, but given his protected class status (i.e., he is Native American), I can imagine the University is being extra careful with respect to prematurely taking any adverse actions. If there is no finding that Chase violated Title IX, then its going to be very interesting to see how his status with the team evolves.

Edit: Sorry about the snark in the first paragraph. I was annoyed that seemingly informed posters have been referencing this process throughout, and a Jovan Miller instagram post has more significance. That's on me.

No offense taken. I made reference to the fact that previous posts (like the very detailed ones you point out) may have enlightened others on this board sooner than me. Sometimes my eyes glaze over at legalese, and the Miller post helped simplify things for me. Thats all I was trying to point out.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[W'boro'Cuse315]

The One Love Foundation, started by the family of Yeardley Love, is fully backing the SU players. After the initial firestorm, I think members of the media & Lax community are beginning to understand the legal process & why decisions were made.

 

[Ernj]

I'd suggest reading the comments on the instagram account washeduplaxbros under the post about him which is a recent one, make sure to expand all comments because a lot of the stuff is replies to other comments. The allegations are gross but please keep in mind he is innocent until proven guilty.

If the story about his 1st night at Cuse is true, it's no wonder why everyone on the team doesn't like him. Especially if his behavior stayed the same.

 

[TexanMark]

That looks like more than a "fake allegation" like his father said. Nothing fake about a busted wall.

Well without context it means a broken wall. The picture released by Syracuse.com was irresponsible. It was fodder for conspiracy and rash judgement.

I believe in due process. Chase is probably done here at SU as he has been convicted by his Captains. Something obviously happened. Let the responsible parties figure it out and figure out a solution, criminal proceedings, expulsion, etc...

 

[upperdeck]

really it could have been done 2 months ago as well, it could have been a helmet slammed into a wall. it would have been 2 guys wrestling.

 

[Mareiniss]

This Brent Axe column is, IMO, way off base. He says, "the five Orange captains did more to address what was best for the team than the Syracuse authority figures above them."

He obviously knows that the coach, AD and school officials have to respect all parties' federally-guaranteed legal rights to confidentiality and due process. I see it is a cheap shot from someone who should (and probably does) know better.

Axe: Syracuse captains did more to address Scanlan situation than any authority figures

Brent Axe writes about the five captains of the Syracuse men's lacrosse team setting the best example during a turbulent time for the program.

www.syracuse.com

 

[BillSU]

You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline! I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think you are entitled to!

I am a lacrosse fan but do not follow it closely. I know we have 11 national championships, more than any other program in the country and that this entire scenario is taking too long and wasting a lot of everyone's time. Instead of playing lacrosse and being one of the best teams in the nation because we win more games than anyone else, we're trying to find out who or what created a big depression in a wall. Now we know that the players are taking a stand for someone who was possibly thrown into a wall by Chase Scanlan.

I'm sure coach Desko knows everything that happened and has met and discussed the entire matter with JW and they have to deal with the legal issues guaranteed and confidentiality.

I think what should happen here is the person who committed the crime should stand up and say, “You're goddamn right I did!” and get this entire issue over with. I mean how stupid is this?

Kick Scanlan out, but do something that resolves the matter. Then go kick the crap out of ND, captains!

 

[EuclidBred]

This Brent Axe column is, IMO, way off base. He says, "the five Orange captains did more to address what was best for the team than the Syracuse authority figures above them."

He obviously knows that the coach, AD and school officials have to respect all parties' federally-guaranteed legal rights to confidentiality and due process. I see it is a cheap shot from someone who should (and probably does) know better.

Axe: Syracuse captains did more to address Scanlan situation than any authority figures

Brent Axe writes about the five captains of the Syracuse men's lacrosse team setting the best example during a turbulent time for the program.

www.syracuse.com

Disagree. If he spoke with the captains and heard their side of this story (and other stories out there), Desko should have cut bait right there and then. Dismissed for violation of team rules. Easy.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Disagree. If he spoke with the captains and heard their side of this story (and other stories out there), Desko should have cut bait right there and then. Dismissed for violation of team rules. Easy.

Again under the new Title 9 regulations that doesn't seem to be an option until the investigation has been completed.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline! I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think you are entitled to!

I am a lacrosse fan but do not follow it closely. I know we have 11 national championships, more than any other program in the country and that this entire scenario is taking too long and wasting a lot of everyone's time. Instead of playing lacrosse and being one of the best teams in the nation because we win more games than anyone else, we're trying to find out who or what created a big depression in a wall. Now we know that the players are taking a stand for someone who was possibly thrown into a wall by Chase Scanlan.

I'm sure coach Desko knows everything that happened and has met and discussed the entire matter with JW and they have to deal with the legal issues guaranteed and confidentiality.

I think what should happen here is the person who committed the crime should stand up and say, “You're goddamn right I did!” and get this entire issue over with. I mean how stupid is this?

Kick Scanlan out, but do something that resolves the matter. Then go kick the crap out of ND captains!

They should order a Code Red on Scanlan.

 

[ForCuseSake]

This Brent Axe column is, IMO, way off base. He says, "the five Orange captains did more to address what was best for the team than the Syracuse authority figures above them."

He obviously knows that the coach, AD and school officials have to respect all parties' federally-guaranteed legal rights to confidentiality and due process. I see it is a cheap shot from someone who should (and probably does) know better.

Axe: Syracuse captains did more to address Scanlan situation than any authority figures

Brent Axe writes about the five captains of the Syracuse men's lacrosse team setting the best example during a turbulent time for the program.

www.syracuse.com

This doesn’t surprise me.

Axe has been a touch hole since his Coach P crusade.