Title IX Independent Investigation

[Nutriaitch]

You and me will never agree on this one, so I'll just drop it.

With one exception:

1 hour ago, houtiger said:

Just like at LSU, when Alleva recommended to the incoming president of the university that Miles be terminated for cause in 2013, Alleva could not call that shot, it was over his head. 

 

These 2 situations couldn't possibly be more different from each other.

In 2013 none of this was public knowledge.
Firing Miles only a few months after an extension makes this public knowledge.  Now you're basically inviting in all of the negative press we just saw. Now you're asking the media to open all sorts of FOIA doors, investigative reporting, shining light into dark corners, etc.  And on top of all of that, at this point, you HAVE to prove that you're right.  Because if you're wrong,  Not only did you create this media shitstorm, but you've now created another one for wrongfully terminating Les.

THAT is without a doubt above Alleva's head.

 

compared to Kansas.

This is now plastered all over the media. Coach pretty much has to be fired (a couple of called it in this very thread before it even happened).
Firing Les was not much more than a formality at this point. 
Everyone will have your back on firing him.  Fans, Boosters, media (probably most important one), etc.  
It's the right move.  It's the only move.  Keeping him would have been a huge mistake. 
 

 

[houtiger]

21 minutes ago, Nutriaitch said:

These 2 situations couldn't possibly be more different from each other.

In 2013 none of this was public knowledge.
Firing Miles only a few months after an extension makes this public knowledge.  Now you're basically inviting in all of the negative press we just saw. Now you're asking the media to open all sorts of FOIA doors, investigative reporting, shining light into dark corners, etc.  And on top of all of that, at this point, you HAVE to prove that you're right.  Because if you're wrong,  Not only did you create this media shitstorm, but you've now created another one for wrongfully terminating Les.

THAT is without a doubt above Alleva's head.

A smart person would not fire Miles for cause in 2013 WITHOUT having conducted an extensive investigation and holding a report that answered all of the questions you would expect to have to answer in court, if Miles contested the termination for cause.  You don't terminate for cause unless you know you can prove it in court if you are called on it with a lawsuit.  And if you had the proof, you would terminate him and not worry about investigative reporting, FOIA, or shining lights in dark corners, because you are secure you are doing the right thing.

Taylor Porter law firm did the first investigation, and the do lots of work for LSU, so just home cooking investigation.  They did find several people who said Miles got more involved in selecting student workers in 2012-2013.  But they whitewashed it.

Imagine how much WORSE the black eye will be in a few years (NOW) if the ladies grow up, become mentally more pissed off and stronger, and it comes out, and you knew about it and did nothing!!!  That's exactly where we are now, huge black eye.  Alleva in his memo to Alexander saying they should fire Miles for insubordination (he defied Alleva's order not to be in a room alone with female students), and inappropriate actions, Alleva told Alexander, what will be worse, explaining now why we fired him, or explaining later why we didn't.  Alleva was dead right on that one.  They should have fired him in 2013 and the university would have looked much better than they do now.  FOIA be damned, you have to do the right thing.  LSU didn't and now they have a huge black eye.

[houtiger]

42 minutes ago, Nutriaitch said:

compared to Kansas.

This is now plastered all over the media. Coach pretty much has to be fired (a couple of called it in this very thread before it even happened).
Firing Les was not much more than a formality at this point. 
Everyone will have your back on firing him.  Fans, Boosters, media (probably most important one), etc.  
It's the right move.  It's the only move.  Keeping him would have been a huge mistake. 
 

The issue was not 1) fire him, or 2) keep him.

The issue was fire him for cause (no financial settlement), or reach a mutually agreeable settlement and pay him something to leave.

Firing him for cause and opening the U. to undefined legal jeopardy in a wrongful termination suit, where the defendant knows what happened at LSU and KU does not is very unwise.  Miles holds the Taylor Porter report that said he broke no law.

The lawyers explained that to KU, and they wisely offered Miles $2 mil to go away.  Nice and clean, no court cases, administration does not have to manage lawyers or court dates.  It's the smart play.

[Nutriaitch]

4 minutes ago, houtiger said:

A smart person would not fire Miles for cause in 2013 WITHOUT having conducted an extensive investigation and holding a report that answered all of the questions you would expect to have to answer in court, if Miles contested the termination for cause.  You don't terminate for cause unless you know you can prove it in court if you are called on it with a lawsuit.  And if you had the proof, you would terminate him and not worry about investigative reporting, FOIA, or shining lights in dark corners, because you are secure you are doing the right thing.

they ain't just shining light on Miles though.

they shine the light on EVERYTHING when they start digging.  Everybody and Everything.  
you don't invite that scrutiny unless you are 10,000% sure.  and even then, you still may not want to.

 

4 minutes ago, houtiger said:

Imagine how much WORSE the black eye will be in a few years (NOW) if the ladies grow up, become mentally more pissed off and stronger, and it comes out, and you knew about it and did nothing!!!  That's exactly where we are now, huge black eye.  Alleva in his memo to Alexander saying they should fire Miles for insubordination (he defied Alleva's order not to be in a room alone with female students), and inappropriate actions, Alleva told Alexander, what will be worse, explaining now why we fired him, or explaining later why we didn't.  Alleva was dead right on that one.  They should have fired him in 2013 and the university would have looked much better than they do now.  FOIA be damned, you have to do the right thing.  LSU didn't and now they have a huge black eye.

don't get me wrong, in hindsight, yeah we should have done it in 2013 because it was the right thing to do.

my point was because of the can of worms that would open, it becomes much bigger than just athletics and much bigger than Joe Alleva.

[Nutriaitch]

 

3 minutes ago, houtiger said:

Miles holds the Taylor Porter report that said he broke no law.

And?
You can breach a contract without breaking a law.

You can definitely be fired without breaking a law.  I've done it before.

[dachsie]

22 hours ago, houtiger said:

Miles Attorney: What timeframe was this contract in effect?

KU guy:  The contract was in effect from the day it was signed until Miles was terminated for cause.

Miles Attorney:  Did Miles commit any offenses governed by the contract while the contract was in force?

KU guy: No.

Miles guy: So, there are no provable actions or activities engaged in by Miles during the time the contract covered?

KU guy: No.

Miles guy:  Therefore, you have wrongfully terminated Les Miles.

 

The key is when is the contract in effect.  The KU contract was not in effect when the Miles alleged activities took place at LSU.  Therefore, those activities are not covered by the KU contract.  Does the contract say "if you EVER", including in any prior employment?  I doubt that it does.

 

21 hours ago, Nutriaitch said:

Lawyer: what date did this become public knowledge?

KU person: March 2021. 

Lawyer: is that the point at which it became an embarrassment:

KU person: yes

Lawyer: and at the time the embarrassment was brought upon KU, was Miles under this contract?

KU person: yes

Lawyer: no further questions. 

 

you are confusing the alleged acts at LSU themselves with the painting KU in a bad light. 

He did not embarrass KU in 2013. 
That happened early march 2021. 

(allegedly) kissing the girl is not what violated his contract. 
being the lead headline is what breaches the contract. 

and he’s the lead headline now, not back in 2013. 

Y'all should probably let Hatch weigh in on this - he has the experience. 

[houtiger]

3 hours ago, Nutriaitch said:

And?
You can breach a contract without breaking a law.

You can definitely be fired without breaking a law.  I've done it before.

Sure you can breach a contract without breaking the law.  That's not the point.  Miles lawyer quoted the Taylor investigation in his "brush back pitch" to KU.  He's saying, my client (Miles) has a law firm in La. that investigated him and concluded he had not done anything rising to a serious level.

So, do you want to go for the brass ring, fire him for cause, based on years old allegations that were never tested in court, under cross examination.  Remember the Duke Lacrosse situation.

Miles lawyer has an $8 million dollar contract to fight for, and his attorney would get a nice chunk of that.  If you fire Miles for cause, you pretty much guarantee a wrongful termination suit to come after the $8 million.  Negotiate it away, its the American way.

[Nutriaitch]

9 hours ago, houtiger said:

So with all the information that is available to everyone, and a meeting with the best legal minds KU could assemble, the president of the university decided NOT to terminate Miles for cause and forego any payment.  The president of the university decided to pay Miles $2 million as a settlement to end his association with the university.  You can link all the headlines you want, everyone knows that.  But for all the reasons I have stated above, KU did NOT want to enter a courtroom and try to PROVE that Miles was terminated for cause.  They SETTLED and paid Miles $2 million to go away, which is the smart move.

 

ok dude. whatever. 

guaranteed, i would win this case 100% of the time. 

belive what you want, i don’t actually care. 

it clean as day.  i won’t comment again in this thread. 

[Eq4bits]

On 3/5/2021 at 6:31 PM, houtiger said:

OK, so I wanted to know, what is this Title IX.  Is it a university thing, an NCAA thing, or a federal law thing (animal, vegetable, mineral problem LOL).

It's a federal law thing:

 

It Must have had some rewording over the years (i dont believe the ‘term’ sexual harassment was actually used in ‘72 or i could just be having a huge brain fart)Title IX also had to do with parity in sports (if school spends X$ on mens baseball program an equivalent amount has to go to womens softball... we used Title IX to get our HS girls fastpitch team a field built... they were previously playing on a LLBB 14y/o field with sheriff dept crime tape ‘roping off that big azz outfield that was 2x’s deeper than softball allowed

oh yah and soon as title ix passed we females were suddenly allowed to eear jeans to school and not just dresses snd ‘pant suits’ gawd i hated those damn polyester pantsuits! Oh and hot pants too (w/boots & fishnet hose) ! No we eerent hookers that was that late 60s early 70s ‘style’

[Hatchertiger]

F King given "punish work" by OSU:

Quote

The Oregon State Board of Trustees voted 12-2 on Wednesday to place university president F. King Alexander on probation through June 1 as a result of his involvement in the Les Miles scandal at LSU, where he was the president at the time.

...

"President Alexander will be required to review the recommendations of the Husch Blackwell report relevant to OSU policies and practices and provide the Board with a report by June 1 that assesses and seeks to improve any OSU policies, procedures and funding needs for Title IX reporting and survivor support services," the letter stated. "President Alexander also will provide to the Board by June 1 a concrete plan to rebuild trust and relationships with the university community."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/31086399/ex-lsu-president-f-king-alexander-probation-les-miles-scandal

 

P S As an aside the "F" is for Fieldon.  I'll give is parents an "F" for choosing that name.

 

[LSUDad]

F King gone!

 

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/6965847002

[Hatchertiger]

Well, well well. I bet you thought you were sooooooo f king clever with that comment huh? How do you like this dose of "reality"? Stay on the left coast pal, SEC man don't need you around anyhow! 

Quote

What is the SEC missing, that the Pac-12 wasn’t, with its decision? 

Alexander: “I think, probably, reality.”
 

https://www.klfy.com/sports/geaux-nation/former-lsu-president-sec-isnt-seeing-reality-by-moving-forward-with-football/

[houtiger]

Quote

April 2, 2021 -

The Legislature's Senate Select Committee on Women and Children has called for 10 people involved in LSU's handling of sexual misconduct and domestic violence complaints over the past several years to testify at their next committee hearing, set for April 8.

The hearing will be the third time the committee convenes to focus on allegations that LSU bungled responses to rape, dating violence and other types of misconduct on campus when victims tried to report and sought help. So far, the committee has heard from several victims, along with top LSU officials, including interim President Tom Galligan and General Counsel Winston DeCuir Jr.

The committee is now requesting testimony from four LSU Athletic Department officials, four LSU Board of Supervisors officials, LSU's Title IX coordinator and the attorney who conducted LSU's 2013 sexual harassment investigation into former head football coach Les Miles. The agenda notice says the officials "have been invited to attend in person or submit a written statement" by the end of the day on April 6.

Those who have been summoned include:

• LSU Athletic Director Scott Woodward
• Head Football Coach Ed Orgeron
• Executive Deputy Director of Athletics Verge Ausberry
• Senior Associate Athletic Director Miriam Segar
• LSU Board of Supervisors member and former chairman James Williams
• LSU Board of Supervisors member Ronnie Anderson, who was replaced this week on the board
• LSU Board of Supervisors Executive Director Jason Droddy
• LSU's former General Counsel Tom Skinner
• LSU Title IX coordinator Jennie Stewart
• Taylor Porter attorney Vicki Crochet

Woodward was initially slated to testify March 26, but the seven-hour hearing ended before he began. Orgeron was summoned after a 74-year-old Superdome security guard, Gloria Scott, testified at the last hearing that former LSU star running back Derrius Guice sexually harassed her in 2017. Scott said that Orgeron called her in the aftermath of the incident, asked her to forgive Guice and told her that Guice wanted to apologize to her

In interviews with attorneys from Husch Blackwell, Orgeron denied ever speaking to Scott. Lawyers from that firm probed dozens of sexual misconduct cases on LSU's campus and released their report last month. Orgeron reiterated this week that he did not remember such a conversation.

https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/legislature/article_006b57d6-93cc-11eb-9905-e77cdcbc35d2.html

It appears to me that a non-employee (Guice) can harass an employee, and legally the employer (Superdome) has the responsibility to stop the harassment.

For a one-time incident, I don't think anyone will fault the superdome people, who had no recourse.

For Orgeron, this gets sticky.  But his legal liability seems mostly to arise if he lied under oath.  If he says he did not remember the conversation about Guice with Ms. Scott, it is hard to prove that he does remember it and he's lying.  I notice before congress, a lot of people testifying "don't recall", and they don't get prosecuted.

Let's assume that Orgeron did speak with Ms. Scott (and since then he forgot).  I don't see where LSU had a legal problem regarding Guice if Guice was not there as part of an official LSU event that Guice was participating in.  Guice was there as a private citizen, and as such had no official tie to LSU, other than the fact that he was on their football team, but was not representing the football  team in any official capacity when the incident occurred.

So, in close proximity to the bowl game, what was O supposed to do?  Guice apparently copped to the offense if O offered Ms. Scott to have Guice apologize.  O tried to something, but Ms. Scott was not satisfied, she wanted to propose her penalty, missing the bowl game.  From O's perspective, this is the kid's last game before going into the NFL draft, and if he missed that game and it got out why (NFL teams would have certainly asked Guice to explain), that could have cost Guice some draft position and a lot of money, which Guice eventually slipped a couple of rounds and cost himself some money.

Who is to say the O made a mistake, considering Guice had one game left as a Tiger before entering the NFL draft, and perhaps his draft position was already in jeopardy?  Clearly Guice behavior was rude and vulgar, but it could be argued that it was the Superdome's responsibility to protect their employee.

From O's perspective, given that Guice behavior was NOT as part of the LSU football team at an official LSU football event that Guice was participating in, that O's responsibility was in an unofficial capacity.  I am not sure the Title IX office had an official role to play in this one.  If Guice had another season to play, then next year I could see him missing the first game on O's personal call, no reason given.

[Hatchertiger]

I haven't read much detail about the indecent itself. Did the security guard call the police or formally report the incident with them?

Edited April 5, 2021 by Hatchertiger

[houtiger]

1 hour ago, Hatchertiger said:

I haven't read much detail about the indecent itself. Did the security guard call the police or formally report the incident with them?

Apparently not.   Edited to add, this happened in Dec. 2017 at a state championship high school football game at the Superdome.

Quote

 

Scott was shocked, she said. Guice kept making vulgar comments while rubbing his body up and down, from his chest to his genitals. She said she asked Guice to move away and leave her alone, but he refused. He had a big grin on his face, she said, and his friends were on his sides, laughing. This went on for a few minutes, Scott said. She felt degraded.

She complained to LSU athletic department administrators, the school’s student accountability director, and directly to Guice’s head coach, Ed Orgeron. Nothing happened, she said. Guice, who despite being accused of sexual misconduct three times before this incident, was never disciplined by the school.

<snip>

In his interview with Husch Blackwell, Orgeron denied having direct communications with Scott. Orgeron said Senior Associate Athletic Director Miriam Segar “told us about the incident,” and Segar, Deputy Athletic Director Verge Ausberry and an attorney for the Baton Rouge law firm Taylor Porter “did an investigation.” But Orgeron said he himself “was not sure happened.”

<snip>

Husch Blackwell investigators did not contact Scott about her complaint, nor was she aware that LSU had documented it. She learned about it after her granddaughter saw a reference to it on Twitter and recognized the unnamed 70-year-old woman in the report as her grandmother.

Even more painful than the experience itself, Scott said, is how LSU athletic department officials handled her complaint. They told her that Guice was probably just kidding, that he came from a broken home and that she should just accept his apology. 

When she demanded he face discipline by sitting out the Citrus Bowl, Scott said, school officials ignored her and then ultimately called her to say nothing would happen. It was her word against his.

“I felt that not playing in that game would hurt him more than anything,” Scott told USA TODAY. “Because if it was my son or my grandsons, and I knew he did that, and they were playing sports, I personally myself would make sure they didn’t play.

“I didn’t think I was asking too much.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2021/03/26/coach-orgeron-lied-says-grandmother-harassed-lsu-football-player/7016148002/

 

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by houtiger

[Nutriaitch]

here is what y’all appear to not be taking into consideration 

 

What is a clear cut title ix violation, or something that is strongly frowned upon, or is a suspendable offense, or is even a fireable offense may NOT necessarily be against state law. 

 

Example: Guice’s behavior above. 
Call the police and say someone spoke dirty and crudely to you.  You will get laughed at because it is not a “crime” to do so.

Is it an offense that is (or at least should be) punishable in some way for an LSU football player?  I think so.

If any person of authority at LSU knows it happened, they are required to follow Title IX protocols. Not doing so is a violation. There is no grey area here. 
Not doing so will not get you arrested in Louisiana.
It can (maybe even will) get you suspended, fired, probation, etc.  

Hell, O knowing this happened and not punishing Guice is a punishable offense. Not close to arrestable though  

As LSU fans, the legal aspect is at best peripheral info. 
Because heads can roll (or other penalties) without any laws being broken and no arrests being made. 

 

[Nutriaitch]

17 hours ago, houtiger said:

Apparently not.   Edited to add, this happened in Dec. 2017 at a state championship high school football game at the Superdome.

 

this line (to me) is an issue

17 hours ago, houtiger said:

Orgeron said Senior Associate Athletic Director Miriam Segar “told us about the incident,” and Segar, Deputy Athletic Director Verge Ausberry and an attorney for the Baton Rouge law firm Taylor Porter “did an investigation.” But Orgeron said he himself “was not sure happened.”

 

if you know an “incident” happened (or even is alleged to have happened) involving any team member, let alone the biggest star on your roster, you HAVE TO know what happened.  You make it a point to know. 

Saying “so and so handled that” is simply inexcusable on something of this magnitude. 

 

[Nutriaitch]

20 hours ago, houtiger said:

Let's assume that Orgeron did speak with Ms. Scott (and since then he forgot).  I don't see where LSU had a legal problem regarding Guice if Guice was not there as part of an official LSU event that Guice was participating in.  Guice was there as a private citizen, and as such had no official tie to LSU, other than the fact that he was on their football team, but was not representing the football  team in any official capacity when the incident occurred.

 

unfortunately, that’s not how life works though. 

Fair or not, you are representing LSU every time you step out of the house.  That is part of the price you pay to be a superstar in college athletics. 

And yes, LSU bears some responsibility (not necessarily by law) here the moment they become aware of it. 

[LSUDad]

This ones gonna leave a mark! 
 

https://www.wbrz.com/news/lsu-recordings-reveal-payout-was-discussed-after-derrius-guice-harassment-accusations?fbclid=IwAR0VOllxE0lf1W_uBGQJRuz8VYm5tfWS2w5ut9kiRxSTP71IOv971BGgFDk

[houtiger]

1 hour ago, LSUDad said:

This ones gonna leave a mark! 

https://www.wbrz.com/news/lsu-recordings-reveal-payout-was-discussed-after-derrius-guice-harassment-accusations?fbclid=IwAR0VOllxE0lf1W_uBGQJRuz8VYm5tfWS2w5ut9kiRxSTP71IOv971BGgFDk

That conversation sounds like Ms. Scott blackmailing LSU.  Either you suspend Guice for the game, or you pay me $100K if you let him play or else I will go public with my story about Guice.  Actually, the way Ms. Segar "clarifies" the point, sounds like she is walking Ms. Scott into a blackmail situation.  Segar "clarifies" so there is no misunderstanding what is going on, which LSU may need if that got into court.  LSU released the recording, so LSU had recorded the call. 

[Nutriaitch]

2 minutes ago, houtiger said:

That conversation sounds like Ms. Scott blackmailing LSU.  Either you suspend Guice for the game, or you pay me $100K if you let him play or else I will go public with my story about Guice.  Actually, the way Ms. Segar "clarifies" the point, sounds like she is walking Ms. Scott into a blackmail situation.  Segar "clarifies" so there is no misunderstanding what is going on, which LSU may need if that got into court.  LSU released the recording, so LSU had recorded the call. 

the way i read it, it’s not even Scott. 

it’s this Williams guy, and it sounds like it’s on his own and not her. 

[houtiger]

4 hours ago, Nutriaitch said:

unfortunately, that’s not how life works though. 

Fair or not, you are representing LSU every time you step out of the house.  That is part of the price you pay to be a superstar in college athletics. 

And yes, LSU bears some responsibility (not necessarily by law) here the moment they become aware of it. 

LSU offered to have Guice apologize to Ms. Scott, whether it was O that made the offer or someone else.  So, what we are discussing is does Ms. Scott get to demand what she wants and LSU has to do it, or does O also have a say in making the punishment fit the crime, so to speak. 

The incident occurred on 12/9.  We don't know when Ms. Scott spoke to LSU, when O was made aware of an allegation.  I wonder when Guice was no longer a student at LSU?  He was still a member of the football team until after the bowl game.

So, part of the issue is what should the severity of the punishment have been?  Then we have Ms. Scott's demand for $100K and was she looking to shake LSU down, which they have the tape.

[houtiger]

12 minutes ago, Nutriaitch said:

the way i read it, it’s not even Scott. 

it’s this Williams guy, and it sounds like it’s on his own and not her. 

There is no way he is operating outside of Ms. Scott's authority.  He is acting as her agent in this deal, that is clear.  He knows what she wants and what she is threatening to do if LSU does not meet her demand.

[Herb]

18 minutes ago, houtiger said:

He is acting as her agent in this deal, that is clear. 

But was it a "strong ass offer"?

[Nutriaitch]

52 minutes ago, houtiger said:

There is no way he is operating outside of Ms. Scott's authority. 

and you know this how?

Scott is on record saying she never asked for money. 
Segar is on tape stating that Scott never asked for money. 

Verge is on tape pretty much calling the dude out on his didley-poo. 

I would say odds weigh very heavily on him being someone taking advantage of an old lady’s trust to try to score a payday. 

Quote

He is acting as her agent in this deal, that is clear.  He knows what she wants and what she is threatening to do if LSU does not meet her demand.

and?

because no (non lawyer, non family me ever) schmuck would ever possibly take advantage of the situation would they?

this dude is probably the shadiest character in the whole deal. 

and that’s a deal that includes:

• an associate AD that intentionally deleted incriminating text messages tied to a Title IX inquiry
• a head coach that once literally tried to poach kids directly from a school dealing with Katrina aftermath
• a player with multiple serious sexual issues

and this cat claiming to be an AAU rep for Nike takes the cake.

Verge sniffed him out and called him on it.

want to know what else gives it away?
Guice didn’t sit. LSU didn’t pay. She didn’t go to press.

Translation: this dude was completely full of shyte.