Orgeron and others dropped from sexual discrimination lawsuit

[Herb]

Former football coach Ed Orgeron among 14 names dropped from LSU sex discrimination lawsuit

 

Koki Riley, Lafayette Daily Advertiser

Wed, January 19, 2022, 8:07 PM·2 min read

 

 

Former LSU football coach Ed Orgeron, along with 13 others, were dropped as defendants from a high-profile sex discrimination case accusing numerous LSU employees of ignoring sexual assault complaints and violating Title IX policies set by the university.

Ten current and former LSU students are plaintiffs in the lawsuit that was originally filed in April of 2021. The amended suit which previously listed 19 defendants was officially trimmed down to five on Wednesday when a judge ordered that the 14 defendants previously named be "dismissed without prejudice."

LSU deputy athletic director Verge Ausberry, senior associate athletic director Miriam Segar, Title IX coordinator Jennie Stewart, associate dean of students Jonathan Sanders and the university's board of supervisors are still named as defendants in the case.

"The judge asked to narrow our complaint down and we analyzed who the relevant parties were," Karen Truszkowski, the plaintiffs' attorney, told The Daily Advertiser on Wednesday. "From a legal perspective, there are certain people, entities that cannot necessarily be held responsible."

When contacted by The Daily Advertiser on Wednesday, an LSU spokesperson declined to comment on the lawsuit.

LSU and Orgeron parted ways after a 6-6 season. The Tigers won the national championship in 2019.

Along with Orgeron, LSU, the Tiger Athletic Foundation, former LSU President F. King Alexander, former AD Joseph Alleva, associate AD Sharon Lewis, assistant director of recruiting operations Keava Soil-Cormier, LSU tennis coaches Julia and Michael Sell, and Orgeron's company, the Rose Boys Finch LLC., among others are no longer defendants in the case.

The edited lawsuit also does not include accusations of the defendants violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which is designed to crackdown on organized crime.

The lawsuit still claims the defendants fostered a "sexually hostile environment against them" that "impeded and effectively denied Plaintiffs’ equal access to educational opportunities and benefits." It also alleges that the plaintiffs faced discrimination based on their sex among other offenses and that the defendants, despite knowing so, did not properly remedy the situation.

Despite no longer being a defendant in the lawsuit, Orgeron is still cited in the case for alleged misconduct. The suit claims that Orgeron did not disclose an alleged rape brought to his attention by LSU's Title IX office and told the boyfriend of one of the plaintiffs to not be upset about the rape because "everybody's girlfriend sleeps with other people," among other offenses.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are requesting a permanent injunction that requires LSU to follow Title IX laws and comply with "recurring external audits of LSU’s Title IX compliance and various damages." They are also seeking damages "in an amount to be determined at trial."

This article originally appeared on Lafayette Daily Advertiser: LSU football: Ed Orgeron dropped from sex discrimination case

[Herb]

It will be interesting to see if this now gets tossed or if the suit is unsuccessful for the plaintiffs. The scope of the suit has been significantly narrowed and something worth watching.

Remember that this case/investigation got coupled with the investigation surrounding Will Wade's "strong @$$ offer" comments and moved to the "IARP", which is the 'Independent Accountability Resolution Process' - the NCAA investigative division that looks into more serious allegations.

Should this investigation crumble (or even prove to be much less significant), would that trigger the overall inquiries into LSU athletics get shifted out of the IARP?

[houtiger]

I see this as making the suit more serious to those still named, not less serious.  Seems like a no-nonsense judge told the plaintiffs to cut the crappy shotgun approach, don't waste the courts time, and let's get down to brass tacks.  Now, everyone is free to FOCUS on Ausberry and Segar.  Based on the info that has come public already, mostly from the Les Miles era, and accusations against Miles himself, I would say the plaintiffs have a very strong case.  I've been surprised that Ausberry and Segar are still at LSU, been surprised for a year.

So, what is most likely?  LSU doesn't need this being dredged up all over again.  It was ugly enough the first time.  I don't see a trial, I see a settlement coming.  OK, we'll fire a few people and pay each plaintiff 100K.  Would that do it?  Maybe an opening bid.  Plaintiffs hold out for more money because they know LSU does not want this in the public eye.  I don't know, maybe I watched too many Perry Mason's when I was a child (actually Perry Mason never settled, he always got his man, or woman).

Then there is the Sharon Lewis suit still out there for gender discrimination and racial prejudice.  That will probably be settled also.

[Nutriaitch]

i haven’t read everything but as a former criminal justice major, i know that typically EVERYBODY is mentioned in initial suit. 

and i mean EVERYBODY. 

then it get whittled down from there. 

so this is normal procedure so far. 

[Herb]

4 hours ago, houtiger said:

I see this as making the suit more serious to those still named, not less serious.  Seems like a no-nonsense judge told the plaintiffs to cut the crappy shotgun approach, don't waste the courts time, and let's get down to brass tacks.

I don't disagree but don't necessarily agree.

The circus platform has been removed and the fat trimmed, so I see the streamlining you are describing. At the end of the day, the hard one the jury has to come to conclude is whether Title IX coordinator Jennie Stewart performed actions that ultimately are concluded to be sexual discrimination against apparent female rape victims.

That one is going to still be an uphill burden to prove with a preponderance of evidence. As a juror, I'd probably struggle with why would a woman in her professional capacities perform actions injurious to the plaintiffs in response to such a top shelf crime that women are continually victimized by. Did a paycheck really push an aspiring professional female to choose patrimony over principle?

If these employees are guilty, I definitely want to see justice for the victims and LSU purged. There is very little doubt in my mind that Guice was a pox on LSU and that he is very likely guilty of raping the women who brought forth the accusations. He was way worse than Cecil Collins and I grieve for any and all of his victims.

However, the (alleged) crimes by Guice need to be separated by any potential transgressions or lack of appropriate action by LSU employees.

Like I stated before, this will be really interesting to watch.