LeQuint Allen is Back

[buffalorange]

I have access to all of the court papers. It does not look to me like we are missing much of anything with regards to what happened. LaQuint punched a guy in the face and he lost a tooth and the back of his head was injured requiring stitches and staples. This was after the guy punched LaQuint twice. The guy didn't even show up at the hearing. SU did not consider self defense in this case because SU does not look at the conduct of others, only the conduct of the person being charged. It is hard to believe that SU actually uses that standard. The punishment was initially imposed by a single SU student whose decision was affirmed by the SU appeals board and then the Dean of Students. SU says the goal of the suspension is not to punish -but to be educational. Yet, they refuse to even consider self-defense or the actions of the other person. How can that possibly be educational. LaQuint has a chance here. There is room to find that this was arbitrary and capricious, which is the standard on an Article 78 proceeding.

So you're saying he has a puncher's chance?

More seriously, a few years ago SU threw major punishments at Alpha Chi Ro fraternity. A court overturned the SU decision and was critical of SU's disciplinary process. Hopefully, LeQuint gets a more rational judgement in a real court of law vs. the kangaroo variety described by sabach.

 

[shandeezy7]

I'm a former prosecutor; I'm surprised at a statement this--we'll say "clear"--regardless of the facts. Really, I'm pretty surprised he said anything other than, "What happened between the Defendant--Mr. Allen--and the University is between those parties and out of this Office's hands. We handled our portion of the case and came to a fair and just resolution." This case sounds like it was some BS.

Merits of the case aside, the next time DA Fitzpatrick replies to a question posed to him with “no comment” will be the first time.

 

[orangenauburn]

I'm guessing she had no clue what kind of blowback there would be here. Reality check time...

FAFO

 

[David321]

Here’s an interesting twist; according to NYS business law an employer cannot discriminate and or discipline an employee for an offense that is sealed. Once the ACOD hits the sixth month mark, that record is then sealed. How can they legally punish him after that?

 

[CuseMan4]

Tbh, it’s one thing to be saying all this stuff on Twitter. Which the university probably just wants this to blow over but we all gotta keep up the pressure. But it’s another thing if you get a bunch of athletes, regular students on campus, coaches, citizens of the town outside the chancellors building until something is done about this. It’s been a whole day and I’ve had several comments on this matter but I still can’t believe they thought this was a fair punishment. I’m legitimately baffled

 

[Cuse181]

Here’s an interesting twist; according to NYS business law an employer cannot discriminate and or discipline an employee for an offense that is sealed. Once the ACOD hits the sixth month mark, that record is then sealed. How can they legally punish him after that?

Except he’s not an employee…

 

[jgeorge322]

Except he’s not an employee…

isn't that an interesting question... the answer is not always clear.

 

[orangenauburn]

Except he’s not an employee…

Except, it could be argued, that he is. Especially if he has received NIL. And one could make an argument that once he signed a contract of scholarship for athletic services, in which the university profits from, he is an employee.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

You acknowledge you probably do not have all the facts to date, yet you have enough information to pen all this to the Chancellor? This story literally broke last night and it hasn't even been 24 hours. The information thus far is based on one student's standpoint c/o of a lawsuit that is yet to be publicly available. Would you be doing this for the 3rd string RB? I'd at least be curious to hear the other student's version of events before I go to bat for either side. Maybe results from a FOIL request would shed some light on this.

I’d do this for any student, athlete or not if it were publicized as heavily as this is. If there is mitigating info it will come out in discovery. If not this is egregious. The fact SU hasn’t penned a statement (even if it were milquetoast) is asinine. Explain to the public the review process and the history of the review board at SU. If you believe in the system as it stands - stand up for it. You can do that without revealing anything else.

From everything I’ve heard from friends in the AD, he was shafted. Granted they are probably looking at this with bias towards LeQuint - but the sheer number of people surrounding the program who are supporting him tells you there’s probably something slightly rotten in Denmark.

 

[Cuse181]

isn't that an interesting question... the answer is not always clear.

It’s pretty clear, he’s registered as a student, he was disciplined by the board that handles the student code of conduct…

 

[UpstateSM]

Why do I think that Mrs. Beck would be leading that march.

I’d follow Ms. Jaime to the gates of hell if she asked me to politely

 

[Orangezoo]

I’d do this for any student, athlete or not if it were publicized as heavily as this is. If there is mitigating info it will come out in discovery. If not this is egregious. The fact SU hasn’t penned a statement (even if it were milquetoast) is asinine. Explain to the public the review process and the history of the review board at SU. If you believe in the system as it stands - stand up for it. You can do that without revealing anything else.

From everything I’ve heard from friends in the AD, he was shafted. Granted they are probably looking at this with bias towards LeQuint - but the sheer number of people surrounding the program who are supporting him tells you there’s probably something slightly rotten in Denmark.

Just to tack on I'm hoping for 2 things-

1- The Dean of Students recognizes this decision is was not commensurate and walks this back before a judge rules as such(but if it takes the court so be it).

2- An independent review of all the decisions made over the past xx years is completed alongside making sure that any other harsh decisions made for athlete or non athlete are corrected if necessary.

Something like this is rarely a one off. Usually it's a sign of a problem and one that is overdue being addressed.

 

[shandeezy7]

Except, it could be argued, that he is. Especially if he has received NIL. And one could make an argument that once he signed a contract of scholarship for athletic services, in which the university profits from, he is an employee.

Except current law says that he’s not. There’s ongoing challenges to it, but legally he is not an employee of the university, nor would any court recognize him as such.

 

[sdhall01]

Merits of the case aside, the next time DA Fitzpatrick replies to a question posed to him with “no comment” will be the first time.

That is totally fair. I don't reside in the jurisdiction; things very well may be different in NY.

 

[David321]

Except he’s not an employee…

That’s a grey area now.

 

[hoopsupstate]

LaQuint gave SU and out by offering probation, working with youth, etc. I’m sure LaQuint didn’t come up with this lawsuit on his own. Calmer heads should prevail with a settlement that appeases both sides. Just too much bad PR in this to not get settled out of court.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

That’s a grey area now.

It's not.

 

[Cuse181]

It's not.

At all, in fact even if he was an employee, he is still also registered as a student therefore he is still subject to the code of conduct.

 

[cusefan88]

LaQuint gave SU and out by offering probation, working with youth, etc. I’m sure LaQuint didn’t come up with this lawsuit on his own. Calmer heads should prevail with a settlement that appeases both sides. Just too much bad PR in this to not get settled out of court.

He's winning the PR battle big-time.

 

[Chip]

I’d follow Ms. Jaime to the gates of hell if she asked me to politely

Or impolitely.

 

[GoSU96]

Like said earlier, SU should just default.

Answering affidavits; record to be filed; default. The body or officer shall file with the answer a certified transcript of the record of the proceedings under consideration, unless such a transcript has already been filed with the clerk of the court. The respondent shall also serve and submit with the answer affidavits or other written proof showing such evidentiary facts as shall entitle him to a trial of any issue of fact. The court may order the body or officer to supply any defect or omission in the answer, transcript or an answering affidavit. Statements made in the answer, transcript or an answering affidavit are not conclusive upon the petitioner. Should the body or officer fail either to file and serve an answer or to move to dismiss, the court may either issue a judgment in favor of the petitioner or order that an answer be submitted.

 

[David321]

Greg Schiano is going to have a field day with this on the recruitment trail.

 

[kcsu]

Soooo supposedly Allen was punched first and he punched back (as any normal person would do). The literal Syracuse legal system pretty much threw the case out because they thought it was a nothing. Then the university thinks that equates to a year long suspension.

I swear the day the Syracuse administration and AD office, somehow garner enough power to combine for ONE, singular brain cell. It will be a miracle

The fact

love her

 

[kcsu]

Chancellor if anyone wants to let Kent know how we feel. And be sure
to let him know who this will effect your donations to the school this year.
For some reason, they won't let me put his email address in.

I reached out to John and so did three others

 

[baggerbob]

That’s a terrible idea. However, I do wonder why students are passing judgement on students in this day and age? Especially in a situation where an event has legal implications.

I certainly didn’t send my kid to college to have other students potentially kick her off campus.

The student judicial board should have been shut down years ago.
Students have no business passing judgements on other students.