OT: Rich Rod fired at Arizona...

[WhereistheDove?]

We think we're so modern and enlightened. We're no different than the people of Salem, Mass. back in the 1680's with their witch hunts. All it takes is an accusation of racism or infidelity and you are history. Your life is ruined.

It's really scary.

We need to stop this talking point. I'd hazard that the number of truly innocent people whose lives are ruined by false accusations is nearly non-existent. I've seen coworkers go down for this stuff and it wasn't surprising for any of them to say the least.

 

[J187Money]

Section 3 in this article talks about that (likens it to Petino situation):

great roundup.

 

[BlueMAB]

We need to stop this talking point. I'd hazard that the number of truly innocent people whose lives are ruined by false accusations is nearly non-existent. I've seen coworkers go down for this stuff and it wasn't surprising for any of them to say the least.

Arguing that everyone who makes an accusation is telling the truth, is as crazy as arguing that everyone who makes an accusation is lying.

I'm NOT defending the comparison to the Salem witch hunts, that's a silly analogy, but "nearly non-existent" is a huge stretch.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Sorry, hard to get the tenor of that, especially in this post where everything seems to be met with derision and we're one step away from some of these guys talking about "men's rights".

Just stop.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Arguing that everyone who makes an accusation is telling the truth, is as crazy as arguing that everyone who makes an accusation is lying.

I'm NOT defending the comparison to the Salem witch hunts, that's a silly analogy, but "nearly non-existent" is a huge stretch.

It’s so en vogue in the era of #metoo to assume every accusation is true. Obviously I don’t know exactly what happened here (and if he did do what he’s accused of, no sympathy from me), but something smells bad here to me.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Arguing that everyone who makes an accusation is telling the truth, is as crazy as arguing that everyone who makes an accusation is lying.

I'm NOT defending the comparison to the Salem witch hunts, that's a silly analogy, but "nearly non-existent" is a huge stretch.

That's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that when an organization like this feels there is enough to fire someone or otherwise act in such a way, there's almost certainly at least sufficient smoke behind the acquisition for them to make that determination. The idea being propagated by some people on there that he's been proven innocent is complete nonsense.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Just stop.

At least those posters have enough self-awareness to know I'm talking about them.

 

[BlueMAB]

That's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that when an organization like this feels there is enough to fire someone or otherwise act in such a way, there's almost certainly at least sufficient smoke behind the acquisition for them to make that determination. The idea being propagated by some people on there that he's been proven innocent is complete nonsense.

OR

There's a completely different reason for the termination.

 

[Rocktheworld]

It was just a joke and I agree with everything you wrote.

Dude gets triggered incredibly easily; I mean look at that follow-up post. Pay him no mind

 

[WhereistheDove?]

OR

There's a completely different reason for the termination.

Not sure I agree with that. I said before and still contend that it's likely his performance played some role in this, though I'd doubt it's completely one or the other.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

At least those posters have enough self-awareness to know I'm talking about them.

How dare someone question whether accusations of sexual harassment are true in 2018!!!

 

[BlueMAB]

Not sure I agree with that. I said before and still contend that it's likely his performance played some role in this, though I'd doubt it's completely one or the other.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the fact remains, that they acknowledge that their investigation turned up nothing. It's not his fault she didn't cooperate, and to hold that against him (IMO) is wrong.

I still contend that generally speaking, our society generally treats the accused as guilty until proven innocent. Just because many turn out to be guilty, doesn't mean the accuser shouldn't still have the burden of proof IMO.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Not sure I agree with that. I said before and still contend that it's likely his performance played some role in this, though I'd doubt it's completely one or the other.

You’re position on this, with all due respect, is a complete joke.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the fact remains, that they acknowledge that their investigation turned up nothing. It's not his fault she didn't cooperate, and to hold that against him (IMO) is wrong.

I still contend that generally speaking, our society generally treats the accused as guilty until proven innocent. Just because many turn out to be guilty, doesn't mean the accuser shouldn't still have the burden of proof IMO.

He very well may have done everything he’s accused of. When his accuser turns over evidence and we see the text messages from the players my mind will change. Until then, I’m not going to convict him.

Who would ever think that’s a controversial stance?

 

[WhereistheDove?]

You’re position on this, with all due respect, is a complete joke.

With the reasoning being that I don't agree with your POV.... got it, thanks for your valuable criticism.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the fact remains, that they acknowledge that their investigation turned up nothing. It's not his fault she didn't cooperate, and to hold that against him (IMO) is wrong.

I still contend that generally speaking, our society generally treats the accused as guilty until proven innocent. Just because many turn out to be guilty, doesn't mean the accuser shouldn't still have the burden of proof IMO.

It acknowledged that it was unable to prove her claims but that other information turned up that led them to this decision. If I don't turn up sufficient evidence to fire for cause, that doesn't mean I didn't turn up anything that would make the administrators believe the accuser enough to move on. Let's also qualify that the burden of proof of proof shouldn't be on the accuser here because she didn't bring the administrative action. It should be on her in the civil case.

 

[BlueMAB]

Let's also qualify that the burden of proof of proof shouldn't be on the accuser here because she didn't bring the administrative action. It should be on her in the civil case.

I still contend that generally speaking, our society generally treats the accused as guilty until proven innocent. Just because many turn out to be guilty, doesn't mean the accuser shouldn't still have the burden of proof IMO.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

I mean I agree with what you said, though statistically the vast majority of accusations are true. Not sure how those are mutually exclusive quotes though. The university learning of her accusation is what sparked this but she doesn't have any connection to their investigation and doesn't have any burden of proof there. The burden is on the University to weigh what information they have to determine if it was credible enough to move on from him. They obviously did that. This is not a criminal case though and there's no burden of beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[DoctorWho85]

Please come to UCONN as an OC Rich Rod

 

[BlueMAB]

I mean I agree with what you said, though statistically the vast majority of accusations are true. Not sure how those are mutually exclusive quotes though. The university learning of her accusation is what sparked this but she doesn't have any connection to their investigation and doesn't have any burden of proof there. The burden is on the University to weigh what information they have to determine if it was credible enough to move on from him. They obviously did that. This is not a criminal case though and there's no burden of beyond a reasonable doubt.

That's your assumption. The fact they decided to fire him doesn't convince me of anything other than they wanted to fire him. I'll have to agree to disagree on that.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

That's your assumption. The fact they decided to fire him doesn't convince me of anything other than they wanted to fire him. I'll have to agree to disagree on that.

I mean the release flat out came out and said that they became aware of information that they decided it was best to go in a different direction. I won't make an assumption as to the level of information they needed to make the decision because I plainly don't know.

 

[BlueMAB]

That's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that when an organization like this feels there is enough to fire someone or otherwise act in such a way, there's almost certainly at least sufficient smoke behind the acquisition for them to make that determination. The idea being propagated by some people on there that he's been proven innocent is complete nonsense.

I don't agree that "there's almost certainly at least sufficient smoke".

Not sure I agree with that. I said before and still contend that it's likely his performance played some role in this, though I'd doubt it's completely one or the other.

I agree with you there. The allegation/lawsuit is embarrassing to the university, but if he was coming off a CFP performance I have to wonder if the decision to move on would have been made. But...we don't know what they found, we only know they agreed to pay his buyout. It's unlikely it was completely one or the other.

I mean the release flat out came out and said that they became aware of information that they decided it was best to go in a different direction. I won't make an assumption as to the level of information they needed to make the decision because I plainly don't know.

Maybe I'm not understanding, but this sure seems to contradict what you wrote in the first quote above.

Saying they "came up with information", could literally mean whatever they want it to mean. And paying him his buyout, so that they very likely never have to disclose what that information is, just isn't enough to convince me of anything more than they wanted him out.

I have a feeling some of that buyout goes to the accuser and his lawyers, and we don't hear anything else on it.