Northwestern fires Pat Fitzgerald after hazing inquiry | Page 12 | Syracusefan.com

Northwestern fires Pat Fitzgerald after hazing inquiry

You had that Doctor for the gymnastics team go unpunished for years.
It's hard for young people to come forward and go through the scrutiny that comes with a trial.
Society has a bad habit of blaming the victims, especially with unscrupulous lawyers.
Yep which is why victims don’t come forward, they get victimized again. And when it’s sports related, everything becomes “It’s Duke Lacrosse again”, even though Duke Lacrosse was an anomaly.
 
Can you get a conviction based solely on he-said he-said evidence? That's a crapshoot. Who is the jury going to believe?

That’s why you have witnesses
 
Yep which is why victims don’t come forward, they get victimized again. And when it’s sports related, everything becomes “It’s Duke Lacrosse again”, even though Duke Lacrosse was an anomaly.
To add to your point, the victim/witness relives the assault every day through the trial and the aftermath. If the perpetrator is convicted, the victim must live in angst fearing the day the perpetrator is released. Every parole opportunity forces the victim to live the incident again. When the perpetrator is released on parole or after completing their sentence, the victim lives in fear again.

And forget about the terror a victim lives in if the perpetrator is not convicted.

I despise what happened at Duke and I despise the real assaults. Both are completely destructive.
 
I’m not buying anything either side is saying. Until players start getting arrested it’s all just a money grab or excuses. Let these players suing go to the police and press charges. Then it gets real.

I mean, I have no doubt that hazing happens in college football. I don’t doubt any of this. But, I also don’t see this the same as Penn State or USA gymnastics.
 
Can you get a conviction based solely on he-said he-said evidence? That's a crapshoot. Who is the jury going to believe?

You can but it would be difficult. The jury would believe whoever is more credible. That said, you typically have more evidence then strictly testimony of two people at any trial.
 
Can you get a conviction based solely on he-said he-said evidence? That's a crapshoot. Who is the jury going to believe?
Criminal liability = beyond a reasonable doubt by a unanimous jury. (Usually 12 people.) Ethically, a prosecutor should not bring a case to court unless they feel pretty certain they can get a conviction.

Civil liability = by a preponderance (generally described as 51%) of the evidence. Often a jury of 6, requiring only 5 votes for the plaintiff.
 
But, I also don’t see this the same as Penn State or USA gymnastics.
I'm not saying this to be argumentative at all, but what is the point of this observation?

Like if one thing is really, really bad, and the other is really, really, really bad, what does comparing accomplish?

Any human being being sexually assaulted is abhorrent and an affront to society, whether the victim is a child, or an adult, or someone in prison.
 
I wonder if a positive from the transfer portal may be the exposure and elimination of hazing, criminal and questionable practices within athletic programs?
 
I wonder if a positive from the transfer portal may be the exposure and elimination of hazing, criminal and questionable practices within athletic programs?
I think so. More options for players mean they can escape bad situations without tanking their careers. Programs have to create and foster environments where players want to stay. I think that’s one of Dino’s strong suits.
 
I wonder if a positive from the transfer portal may be the exposure and elimination of hazing, criminal and questionable practices within athletic programs?
I think that's possible, and at the very least I think it seems to be leading to if not less lying to recruits, more truthful conversations with recruits.
 
Last edited:

Whoa...

recap events GIF
 

This lawyer is a scumbag.

"Upon information and belief" is a very common qualification. It does not we don't believe our clients or we don't have evidence; it just means that we weren't there and we have to go by what our clients are saying. Also dates/times and other small irrelevant information may be innacurate, but the general complaits are.

Guarantee Dan Webb uses the phrase "upon information and belief" too.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
168,200
Messages
4,755,545
Members
5,944
Latest member
cusethunder

Online statistics

Members online
153
Guests online
1,440
Total visitors
1,593


Top Bottom