Notre Dame investigates academic fraud

[Future]

I agree that is a fair point to bring up because you're talking about a football related issue. And I further agree that it is a major issue impacting all of college sports, including Notre Dame. OTL did a great piece on that very subject this week.

However, I would like to note that just because a disturbed young woman committed suicide does not constitute any sort of proof (or even evidence) that the accused is guilty.

No, it doesn't. The reason I referenced her was that the University never even investigated the incident.

 

[Rogah]

No, it doesn't. The reason I referenced her was that the University never even investigated the incident.

That's just not true. This incident was investigated by campus police and the authorities and the authorities ultimately decided not to press charges and Notre Dame decided the young man involved did not violate their policies.

You know, I think there is a real problem with sexual assault on campus - but I also think the "guilty until proven innocent" attitudes people like you display is equally disturbing. Just because the authorities didn't lock him up and throw away the key doesn't mean the case wasn't investigated. It was investigated by both campus authorities and legal authorities and no wrong doing was found. The fact that the disturbed young woman killed herself doesn't make him guilty.

No offense, but the more you talk about this incident, the more you show you really don't know what happened. As the old saying goes, you're entitled to your own opinions but you're not entitled to your own facts.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

That's just not true. This incident was investigated by campus police and the authorities and the authorities ultimately decided not to press charges and Notre Dame decided the young man involved did not violate their policies.

You know, I think there is a real problem with sexual assault on campus - but I also think the "guilty until proven innocent" attitudes people like you display is equally disturbing. Just because the authorities didn't lock him up and throw away the key doesn't mean the case wasn't investigated. It was investigated by both campus authorities and legal authorities and no wrong doing was found. The fact that the disturbed young woman killed herself doesn't make him guilty.

No offense, but the more you talk about this incident, the more you show you really don't know what happened. As the old saying goes, you're entitled to your own opinions but you're not entitled to your own facts.

I agree with you in an overall sense that many posters on this site are of the shoot first, ask questions later, hang em High and let God sort it out or the guilty until proven innocent brigade.

However, it is likely that if the player was not on the football team, he would have been kicked out of school. Notre Dame is not worse than most but they do tend to have a holier than thou attitude.

 

[Future]

That's just not true. This incident was investigated by campus police and the authorities and the authorities ultimately decided not to press charges and Notre Dame decided the young man involved did not violate their policies.

You know, I think there is a real problem with sexual assault on campus - but I also think the "guilty until proven innocent" attitudes people like you display is equally disturbing. Just because the authorities didn't lock him up and throw away the key doesn't mean the case wasn't investigated. It was investigated by both campus authorities and legal authorities and no wrong doing was found. The fact that the disturbed young woman killed herself doesn't make him guilty.

No offense, but the more you talk about this incident, the more you show you really don't know what happened. As the old saying goes, you're entitled to your own opinions but you're not entitled to your own facts.

Did you not read my OP in this thread? I'll post it again...

After reporting the alleged assault to campus police, Seeberg was told by a friend of the football player: "Don't do anything you would regret. Messing with Notre Dame football is a bad idea." No charges were filed. Notre Dame police didn't interview the player—who was never disciplined by the school or the football program—until five days after Seeberg killed herself. Later, they told the family they weren't sure when they could follow up. "They said they were pretty busy," said Lizzy's mother, Mary, told Henneberger, "because it's football season and there's a lot of underage drinking."

Later...

here eventually was a campus disciplinary hearing for the player accused of sexually assaulting Seeberg in February 2011, but he was found "not responsible." (One of the more damning passages in Henneberger's piece includes a quote from Pat Cottrell, a retired Notre Dame security officer who specialized in sexual assault cases: "Just a regular Joe, if they were working a job on campus, I could go there and say, ‘Hey, I need to talk to you.'" But when an athlete is involved, he said, 'if they don't respond, they don't respond, and that makes it harder to do your job.' Notre Dame's statement said athletes get no special treatment, and police shouldn't in any case have to go through the Athletic Department.")

The university never even looked into it until after she killed herself. Whether the kid was guilty or not was irrelevant. It was never really investigated, and stuff like that is widespread. Don't rush to judgements about me, b/c I always am skeptical when it comes to college and even pro athletes geting accused of whatever..but I'm not so blind to think that a lack of action doesn't perpetuate the problem.

 

[Rogah]

Did you not read my OP in this thread? I'll post it again...

I was thinking of asking you the exact same question. You said he was accused of rape, which is 100% incorrect. You said the university never even investigted the incident, which is 100% incorrect.

The university never even looked into it until after she killed herself.

You're trying to make it sound like they pulled a Florida State and sat on the thing for months and months. She reported the incident 6 days after it happened and then killed herself 4 days after that. How the hell is the university supposed to conduct a thorough, outright investigation in a 4 day window? You do realize these things take time, right? An investigation was well underway, but the girl killed herself 4 days after reporting it.

He was interviewed by authorities 15 days after she reported it. If you think that is some incredibly inordinate, unusual time frame between reported sexual assault and interviewing the accused, then you just don't know how the system works.

Whether the kid was guilty or not was irrelevant.

Um, do ya know how stupid you sound to say that? Excuse me, but in the country I live, when someone is accused of a crime, I consider the fact of their guilt or innocence extremely relevant.

It was never really investigated, and stuff like that is widespread.

It was investigated as thoroughly as possible given the fact that the accuser, with a history of mental problems, killed herself 4 days after reporting it.

Don't rush to judgements about me,

I am not making any sort of moral judgment about you, I am just (accurately) pointing out you don't really seem to know the facts of this case.

b/c I always am skeptical when it comes to college and even pro athletes geting accused of whatever..but I'm not so blind to think that a lack of action doesn't perpetuate the problem.

A healthy skepticism is a good thing. Presuming someone is guilty until proven innocent, not so much.

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

I was thinking of asking you the exact same question. You said he was accused of rape, which is 100% incorrect. You said the university never even investigted the incident, which is 100% incorrect.
You're trying to make it sound like they pulled a Florida State and sat on the thing for months and months. She reported the incident 6 days after it happened and then killed herself 4 days after that. How the hell is the university supposed to conduct a thorough, outright investigation in a 4 day window? You do realize these things take time, right? An investigation was well underway, but the girl killed herself 4 days after reporting it.

He was interviewed by authorities 15 days after she reported it. If you think that is some incredibly inordinate, unusual time frame between reported sexual assault and interviewing the accused, then you just don't know how the system works.
Um, do ya know how stupid you sound to say that? Excuse me, but in the country I live, when someone is accused of a crime, I consider the fact of their guilt or innocence extremely relevant.
It was investigated as thoroughly as possible given the fact that the accuser, with a history of mental problems, killed herself 4 days after reporting it.
I am not making any sort of moral judgment about you, I am just (accurately) pointing out you don't really seem to know the facts of this case.
A healthy skepticism is a good thing. Presuming someone is guilty until proven innocent, not so much.

 

[Future]

I was thinking of asking you the exact same question. You said he was accused of rape, which is 100% incorrect. You said the university never even investigted the incident, which is 100% incorrect.
You're trying to make it sound like they pulled a Florida State and sat on the thing for months and months. She reported the incident 6 days after it happened and then killed herself 4 days after that. How the hell is the university supposed to conduct a thorough, outright investigation in a 4 day window? You do realize these things take time, right? An investigation was well underway, but the girl killed herself 4 days after reporting it.

He was interviewed by authorities 15 days after she reported it. If you think that is some incredibly inordinate, unusual time frame between reported sexual assault and interviewing the accused, then you just don't know how the system works.
Um, do ya know how stupid you sound to say that? Excuse me, but in the country I live, when someone is accused of a crime, I consider the fact of their guilt or innocence extremely relevant.
It was investigated as thoroughly as possible given the fact that the accuser, with a history of mental problems, killed herself 4 days after reporting it.
I am not making any sort of moral judgment about you, I am just (accurately) pointing out you don't really seem to know the facts of this case.
A healthy skepticism is a good thing. Presuming someone is guilty until proven innocent, not so much.

He was accused of sexual assault and not rape? Is that your point?

They never did a full investigation, good lord. The investigation came from the US Dept of Education, not the university.

"Notre Dame police never interviewed the player until 5 days after she killed herself." It takes what, a matter of an hour to get to and question the kid. 15 days is absolutely absurd to do that, and if that is the standard, then it furthers my point that institutions' lack of attention is a part of the problem. The initial incidint was in 2010 and he never had a hearing until Feb 2011...that counts as months and months. And Notre Dame never really said anything about the case at all. If that's not sitting on it, I don't know what is.

You're missing my point about his guilt. I'm condemning the university, not him. Whether he was found guilty or innocent, if the investigation was that poorly run, is irrelevant. Colleges, including Notre Dame, have repeatedly failed to follow up on these incidents properly. That doesn't change regardless of what did or did not happen. But the Seeberg case which I am referring to is just another in a long line of botched sexual assault and rape "investigations" at Notre Dame.

The Seeberg case is awful enough, but according to a former school administrator whose own daughter says she was raped 10 years ago, "They"—Notre Dame—"do a poor job in general." The takeaway from the NCR story—written by Melinda Henneberger, a political reporter for theWashington Post and a 1980 Notre Dame graduate—is that Seeberg wasn't the first woman to be put through the university's meat grinder after making a sexual-assault accusation. And judging by Henneberger's reporting, she won't be the last.

There is an established pattern at Notre Dame that started long before Seeberg. You can't look at one specific case and give Notre Dame the benefit of the doubt.
The quotes aren't from that, but the article I'm using refers to this one... http://ncronline.org/news/accountab...tre-dame-campus-leaves-more-questions-answers

"but I also think the 'guilty until proven innocent' attitudes people like you display is equally disturbing" is a judgment about me. You're assuming that I believe in that mantra, which I don't. Fwiw, my entire master's thesis research was geared towards how college athletes - I focused on lacrosse - are judged and persecuted without innocence being assumed. So I don't want to hear that nonsense. I can't stress enough that my point has nothing to do with whether or not the player in this specific case is innocent or not. My sole point is that Notre Dame - and other universities - do not do nearly enough to limit the culture of sexual assault and rape on campuses.

 

[Rogah]

He was accused of sexual assault and not rape? Is that your point?

One of the several points I am making is that you were 100% incorrect when you said he was accused of rape. Sexual assault and rape are not synonymous terms.

They never did a full investigation, good lord. The investigation came from the US Dept of Education, not the university.

The campus did an investigation. The authorities did an investigation.

"Notre Dame police never interviewed the player until 5 days after she killed herself." It takes what, a matter of an hour to get to and question the kid.

Actually, no. It doesn't take "an hour" to do that. It's a major process and a big deal. In the country I live, people accused of crimes have the right to a lawyer and they have the right to remain silent until getting a lawyer.

15 days is absolutely absurd to do that, and if that is the standard, then it furthers my point that institutions' lack of attention is a part of the problem.

15 days to arrange to talk to someone accused of a crime which took place over a week ago is absolutely a standard amount of time in any setting, not just college campuses. You'd have a point if the cops arrived at the scene of the incident that same night and just let him go. But once you're talking about investigating a past event, it is significantly more difficult to talk to the accused than you think.

The initial incidint was in 2010 and he never had a hearing until Feb 2011...that counts as months and months. And Notre Dame never really said anything about the case at all. If that's not sitting on it, I don't know what is.

You think a hearing taking place 5 months after an incident is a long amount of time? What planet are you living on???!? Here in the U.S., that's actually pretty damn quick.

You're missing my point about his guilt. I'm condemning the university, not him. Whether he was found guilty or innocent, if the investigation was that poorly run, is irrelevant. Colleges, including Notre Dame, have repeatedly failed to follow up on these incidents properly. That doesn't change regardless of what did or did not happen. But the Seeberg case which I am referring to is just another in a long line of botched sexual assault and rape "investigations" at Notre Dame.

If you have other incidents, please feel free to present them, because putting forward this particular incident as an example of athletes privilege is epic fail.

 

[Future]

One of the several points I am making is that you were 100% incorrect when you said he was accused of rape. Sexual assault and rape are not synonymous terms.
The campus did an investigation. The authorities did an investigation.
Actually, no. It doesn't take "an hour" to do that. It's a major process and a big deal. In the country I live, people accused of crimes have the right to a lawyer and they have the right to remain silent until getting a lawyer.
15 days to arrange to talk to someone accused of a crime which took place over a week ago is absolutely a standard amount of time in any setting, not just college campuses. You'd have a point if the cops arrived at the scene of the incident that same night and just let him go. But once you're talking about investigating a past event, it is significantly more difficult to talk to the accused than you think.
You think a hearing taking place 5 months after an incident is a long amount of time? What planet are you living on???!? Here in the U.S., that's actually pretty damn quick.
If you have other incidents, please feel free to present them, because putting forward this particular incident as an example of athletes privilege is epic fail.

Semantics...they;re synonymous in terms of this argument.

Fine...I'll say they did an "investigation." I don't think they came even close to actually performing due diligence, and they never even looked into the phone records of the threats Seeberg received.

But after she did, the same friend of the player who'd left her alone with him sent her a series of text messages that scared her as much as the player himself had. "Don't do anything you would regret," he wrote. "Messing with Notre Dame football is a bad idea." Over the next 10 days, Lizzy became convinced he was right about that.

15 days is far too long, they talked to Shembo's friend down the hall 13 days before that. The whole thingt was made worse by the fact that Notre Dame bars police from the athletic department.

The player wasn't hard to find on the practice field each afternoon, so what were investigators waiting for?

They never even tried to interview him, so there is nothing to suggest that he wasn't going to respond until he had his lawyer....

But a former Notre Dame Security Police officer who specialized in sexual assault cases said such delays are not quite as inexplicable as they might seem, since the university effectively makes it more difficult to investigate student athletes by barring police from going through the athletic department. "That's an order," said Pat Cottrell, who before he retired in 2009 was with Notre Dame Security Police for 19 years, and with the South Bend Police Department for 20 years before that. "Just a regular Joe, if they were working a job on campus, I could go there and say, 'Hey, I need to talk to you.' " But when an athlete is involved, he said, "if they don't respond, they don't respond, and that makes it harder to do your job." Notre Dame's statement said athletes get no special treatment, and police shouldn't in any case have to go through the Athletic Department.

To me, that's a pretty clear reference to athlete privilege.

On a college campus, 5 months is painfully slow.

I already posted a link with other references...but just google it. ND has historically been so bad that the Dept. of Education investigated their entire approach towards how the school handles sexual assault cases and reform was part of the settlement. If that doesn't suggest a pattern of this sort of thing - without the mention of specific cases - I don't know what does.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

TREAD LIGHTLY
​

One person has already been banned due to personal attacks.
I have cleaned up additional posts by other users with personal attacks.
Next personal attack gets you banned.
enough is enough with the personal attacks.

 

[Rogah]

Semantics...they;re synonymous in terms of this argument.

That's one of the most ridiculous things written in this forum in quite some time. You're just making crap up at this point so why don't you just say he was accused of murder? Then you can really lay into Notre Dame for not questioning an accused murderer. You're totally making stuff up so why not just go all the way?

First you said he was accused of rape but I had to take you to school and learn ya that that isn't true. So now you're saying rape and sexual assault are the same thing and the difference is semantics, which is pretty ridiculous in its own way.

Newsflash: Out here in the real world, the urgency of any investigation is going to be proportional to the allegations. Even if you believe every single word this woman said (which is stupid considering how many contradictory statements there are) then what you have is, at the very worst, a minor case of sexual assault, not a rape - and yes, there is a huge difference beyond the two (not just semantics). In the real world, campus police and South Bend police and Indiana State Police and the FBI and CIA and INTERPOL aren't going to drop every single thing they're doing because some woman reported "6 days ago, an athlete fondled my breast and when I told him to stop, he stopped, but only because his cell phone rang not because he wanted to stop."

I already posted a link with other references...but just google it.

Ah yes, the ole "I'm right and you're wrong and if you don't believe me, just google it" response. Sorry, but it does not fall upon me to support a statement you are trying to make when I disagree with you. If you have a point, feel free to present it on your own.

 

[Future]

That's one of the most ridiculous things written in this forum in quite some time. You're just making crap up at this point so why don't you just say he was accused of murder? Then you can really lay into Notre Dame for not questioning an accused murderer. You're totally making stuff up so why not just go all the way?

First you said he was accused of rape but I had to take you to school and learn ya that that isn't true. So now you're saying rape and sexual assault are the same thing and the difference is semantics, which is pretty ridiculous in its own way.

Newsflash: Out here in the real world, the urgency of any investigation is going to be proportional to the allegations. Even if you believe every single word this woman said (which is stupid considering how many contradictory statements there are) then what you have is, at the very worst, a minor case of sexual assault, not a rape - and yes, there is a huge difference beyond the two (not just semantics). In the real world, campus police and South Bend police and Indiana State Police and the FBI and CIA and INTERPOL aren't going to drop every single thing they're doing because some woman reported "6 days ago, an athlete fondled my breast and when I told him to stop, he stopped, but only because his cell phone rang not because he wanted to stop."
Ah yes, the ole "I'm right and you're wrong and if you don't believe me, just google it" response. Sorry, but it does not fall upon me to support a statement you are trying to make when I disagree with you. If you have a point, feel free to present it on your own.

It's like context is totally lost on you. "In terms of this argument" means that ND should be investigating sexual assault cases immediately, regardless of how severe they are.

And b/c you're too lazy to google....

There was a woman who in 1974 accused six Notre Dame football players of gang-raping her. She was hospitalized and spent a month in psychiatric care, but that didn’t stop a university administrator from calling her “a queen of the slums with a mattress tied to her back.” There was the 17-year-old St. Mary’s student who in 1976 was raped by three men, two of whom had been accused in the 1974 case. The men were caught in the act. The woman says her resident assistant brought her to a top St. Mary’s official, who informed her one of the men had raped another St. Mary’s student. After that, she tells Henneberger, “I was told to shut up and mind my own business.”

and

The Seeberg case is awful enough, but according to a former school administrator whose own daughter says she was raped 10 years ago, "They"—Notre Dame—"do a poor job in general."

Beyond that...I think the statistic is that something like 90% of sexual assaults at universities, including rape, go unreported. The fact that people belittle the effects of assault that isn't rape, to the point of saying that they don't need to be investigated with any urgency, perpetuates that problem. Then, that is accompanied by both administrators and players saying threatening things along the lines of "don't mess with ND football...or else." Ranking, so to speak, sexual assault cases is appalling. One girl getting felt up at a party could be just as scarred as a girl who gets raped. Minimizing some vs. the others, especially on college campuses, is a colossal mistake.

 

[Rogah]

It's like context is totally lost on you. "In terms of this argument" means that ND should be investigating sexual assault cases immediately, regardless of how severe they are.

Which they did.

And b/c you're too lazy to google....

LOLOLOLOL

My friend, the fact that you have to go back 40 years to find an example that supports your point really hurts the point you are feebly trying to make moreso than supporting it.

Beyond that...I think the statistic is that something like 90% of sexual assaults at universities, including rape, go unreported.

Stats like that make no sense. If 90% of assaults are unreported, then how the heck do you know how many there are?

The fact that people belittle the effects of assault that isn't rape, to the point of saying that they don't need to be investigated with any urgency, perpetuates that problem. Then, that is accompanied by both administrators and players saying threatening things along the lines of "don't mess with ND football...or else."

Now you're just back to making stuff up. Some random ******* sending a threatening text is nowhere near the lines of an administrator sending threatening texts.

Ranking, so to speak, sexual assault cases is appalling. One girl getting felt up at a party could be just as scarred as a girl who gets raped. Minimizing some vs. the others, especially on college campuses, is a colossal mistake.

Sorry, but that is what our system of laws does. Get off your soapbox and join us in the real world. There are varying degrees of assault, there are varying degrees of theft, there are varying degrees of manslaughter. Heck, there's even varying degrees of murder. To say "ranking degrees of assault is appalling" shows a phenomenal ignorance of how the law works.

 

[jobberone]

It is obvious some can't debate this without problems arising. This thread has served its purpose and is being closed before the staff has to ban more.