Lloyd Tubman

[jauk11]

"I'll take it that neither of you have ever had a class in logic.
Unproven allegations false allegations."

Having to take quite a few math courses in order to get my BSEE at UK I was always taught that < means less than and > means more than, so exactly what does mean? Isn't that a little bit illogical?

 

[LosGatos]

not equal

 

[ktbug]

TT, you know any lawyers who could explain all this???

 

[Tskware]

Originally posted by ktbug:
TT, you know any lawyers who could explain all this???

I know his lawyer, and can confirm the above rumor must be largely true. He is fighting hard, but appears to be an uphill battle to regain admittance.

 

[WildcatGlory69]

I was WildcatVeteran and had to change my name..My info comes direct from Tubman..Just have to trust me..You cannot make up a ridiculous story like what has happened to him.

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by GomezH2O:
sure thing guy with 17 posts

I think he used to have a diff screen name...I'd believe him on this....

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

I, for one, believe you. First, it's what I would expect from some hand-wringing student council, with power that far exceeds their wisdom. Secondly, from the time the story first broke, I never thought Lloyd would be back at UK. I stated that on here many times. Innocent or not, he has a shadow hanging over him in Lexington. There will always be a certain group who will view him as a rapist, regardless of the outcome of his case. It's unfortunate but not a surprise.

 

[Hacksaw Cat]

Originally posted by Ky grandpa:
sure thing guy with 17 posts

The only post you made on this entire thread and you BITCH about someones poet count. Way to go dude. Put a picture of you and some famous UK player or coach to prove you are really a fan or a troll. See how easy that was, post count my azz. Who made you the official post police? Must not be real either, huh.

Go BB

Counting someone's post counts and basing it as a litmus test for knowledge is one of the more moronic things I have encountered on this board, which says a lot as there has been an a$$ton of dumb crap posted on here. Just set them to ignore, makes for easier reading.

That said, I hope Tubman gets to come back as he was not indicted and is a free man. He deserves that.

 

[CatsFanGG24]

Originally posted by WildcatGlory69:
I was WildcatVeteran and had to change my name..My info comes direct from Tubman..Just have to trust me..You cannot make up a ridiculous story like what has happened to him.

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by GomezH2O:
sure thing guy with 17 posts

I think he used to have a diff screen name...I'd believe him on this....

That is who I thought you were and why I said people should listen.

You have been on top of Tubman info since his recruitment.

 

[Cats78]

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by WildcatGlory69:
I was WildcatVeteran and had to change my name..My info comes direct from Tubman..Just have to trust me..You cannot make up a ridiculous story like what has happened to him.

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by GomezH2O:
sure thing guy with 17 posts

I think he used to have a diff screen name...I'd believe him on this....

That is who I thought you were and why I said people should listen.

You have been on top of Tubman info since his recruitment.

Maybe he knows Tubman or whatever but all of you praising him and putting so much trust in him is kind of funny. "Believe him on this"..."he's on top of info", etc lol. I think this is his 3rd screen name because he keeps getting banned. The majority of his posts here and on the b-ball board have been obnoxious, vulgar and flat out embarrassing so I wouldn't put a ton of stock into what he says, but that's up to you, it really doesn't matter either way. If he really is/was in some coaching position with young people, we should all be scared, but if it's Seneca High School we're talking about, it doesn't surprise me, as it's one of the worst schools in the state.

 

[CatsFanGG24]

Originally posted by Cats78:
Maybe he knows Tubman or whatever but all of you praising him and putting so much trust in him is kind of funny. "Believe him on this"..."he's on top of info", etc lol. I think this is his 3rd screen name because he keeps getting banned. The majority of his posts here and on the b-ball board have been obnoxious, vulgar and flat out embarrassing so I wouldn't put a ton of stock into what he says, but that's up to you, it really doesn't matter either way. If he really is/was in some coaching position with young people, we should all be scared, but if it's Seneca High School we're talking about, it doesn't surprise me, as it's one of the worst schools in the state.

I am not praising...he probably got banned because he hates UL and it gets to him...IDK

On the topic of Lloyd Tubman, he and SluggerCat have been right and know what they are talking about.

 

[Cats78]

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by Cats78:
Maybe he knows Tubman or whatever but all of you praising him and putting so much trust in him is kind of funny. "Believe him on this"..."he's on top of info", etc lol. I think this is his 3rd screen name because he keeps getting banned. The majority of his posts here and on the b-ball board have been obnoxious, vulgar and flat out embarrassing so I wouldn't put a ton of stock into what he says, but that's up to you, it really doesn't matter either way. If he really is/was in some coaching position with young people, we should all be scared, but if it's Seneca High School we're talking about, it doesn't surprise me, as it's one of the worst schools in the state.

I am not praising...he probably got banned because he hates UL and it gets to him...IDK

On the topic of Lloyd Tubman, he and SluggerCat have been right and know what they are talking about.

I understand but what exactly have they been proven to be right about?

 

[CatsFanGG24]

Originally posted by Cats78:

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by Cats78:
Maybe he knows Tubman or whatever but all of you praising him and putting so much trust in him is kind of funny. "Believe him on this"..."he's on top of info", etc lol. I think this is his 3rd screen name because he keeps getting banned. The majority of his posts here and on the b-ball board have been obnoxious, vulgar and flat out embarrassing so I wouldn't put a ton of stock into what he says, but that's up to you, it really doesn't matter either way. If he really is/was in some coaching position with young people, we should all be scared, but if it's Seneca High School we're talking about, it doesn't surprise me, as it's one of the worst schools in the state.

I am not praising...he probably got banned because he hates UL and it gets to him...IDK

On the topic of Lloyd Tubman, he and SluggerCat have been right and know what they are talking about.

I understand but what exactly have they been proven to be right about?

First off, calling Tubman to UK during his recruitment...when he was a Penn State commit etc...called his visits to UK...

Then I believe WV called his position during fall camp and how he was placed in the Bud Dupree type position instead of strictly a down DE, was confirmed after.

They also had a few nuggets on the case and the GJ decision.

If they are never right about another subject, they still have known insider knowledge on Lloyd Tubman - you can believe it if you want, that's up to you.

 

[Cats78]

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by Cats78:

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by Cats78:
Maybe he knows Tubman or whatever but all of you praising him and putting so much trust in him is kind of funny. "Believe him on this"..."he's on top of info", etc lol. I think this is his 3rd screen name because he keeps getting banned. The majority of his posts here and on the b-ball board have been obnoxious, vulgar and flat out embarrassing so I wouldn't put a ton of stock into what he says, but that's up to you, it really doesn't matter either way. If he really is/was in some coaching position with young people, we should all be scared, but if it's Seneca High School we're talking about, it doesn't surprise me, as it's one of the worst schools in the state.

I am not praising...he probably got banned because he hates UL and it gets to him...IDK

On the topic of Lloyd Tubman, he and SluggerCat have been right and know what they are talking about.

I understand but what exactly have they been proven to be right about?

First off, calling Tubman to UK during his recruitment...when he was a Penn State commit etc...called his visits to UK...

Then I believe WV called his position during fall camp and how he was placed in the Bud Dupree type position instead of strictly a down DE, was confirmed after.

They also had a few nuggets on the case and the GJ decision.

If they are never right about another subject, they still have known insider knowledge on Lloyd Tubman - you can believe it if you want, that's up to you.

Yeah, he may know Tubman or whatever, but I'll never take an "adult" who acts the way he does seriously. That's up to you too. A few nuggets on the case and position stuff? What is proven that he's said about the case? Nothing exactly earth shattering and let's be honest, we're talking about a guy who has never played a down of college football and probably never will. I'll consider the source when they claim to have info or whatever but honestly this guy isn't some savior. I know reports are that he is/was talented, but we'll be fine. Who knows whether he did something wrong or did not. I understand no indictment, but no one really knows what happened, including some idiot who was an asst coach for his high school and Danny who calls into KSR. Time to let it go.

 

[jauk11]

Pretty strong statements from someone that probably doesn't know much more about him than the rest of us.. I didn't find anything wrong about him defending Tubman if he thought he was innocent, and surely don't know how you can deduce he is such a loser from his posts, pretty ridiculous to me..

 

[Cats78]

Originally posted by jauk11:
Pretty strong statements from someone that probably doesn't know much more about him than the rest of us.. I didn't find anything wrong about him defending Tubman if he thought he was innocent, and surely don't know how you can deduce he is such a loser from his posts, pretty ridiculous to me..

I'm not even referring his posts about Tubman. He made several other posts about other things. There's a reason he's on his 3rd screen name.

 

[GD4UK]

This is one of the reasons we can't get anywhere with our football team. The student review board members have probably never even been to a football game. If this holds true, I will never give one more dime to my alma mater, which is UK.
They suck. I would personally enjoy kicking their pompous asses.

 

[fuzz77]

Originally posted by GD4UK:
This is one of the reasons we can't get anywhere with our football team. The student review board members have probably never even been to a football game. If this holds true, I will never give one more dime to my alma mater, which is UK.
They suck. I would personally enjoy kicking their pompous asses.

BS, how many players have had to go before the SRB?

UK is far from the only institution that is taking a hard line on what is the hottest topic on college campuses today. Fact is most crap that student/athletes do at school gets swept under the rug...except when it comes to this topic...especially when it goes public.

 

[Beavis606]

^ Unless you play QB at Florida or FSU.

 

[wyldecat]

If Tubman not allowed back I hope he sues, wins and beats he'll out of UK. C Hayes certainly not treated like this. Same charges. Where the hell is Barnhart? He should have some impact. If Stoops wants him I hope he gets back on team. Kid deserves a break. Hope he wins millions if not readmitted. This from a sixty year supporter and fan. Further. What message does this send to recruits? How can others welcome convicted felons and we turn away kids who don't even have indictment against them

This post was edited on 4/13 8:09 PM by wyldecat

 

[BBBLazing]

Originally posted by wyldecat:
If Tubman not allowed back I hope he sues, wins and beats he'll out of UK. C Hayes certainly not treated like this. Same charges. Where the hell is Barnhart? He should have some impact. If Stoops wants him I hope he gets back on team. Kid deserves a break. Hope he wins millions if not readmitted. This from a sixty year supporter and fan. Further. What message does this send to recruits? How can others welcome convicted felons and we turn away kids who don't even have indictment against them

This post was edited on 4/13 8:09 PM by wyldecatKids who don't even have indictment(sic) against them. Pretty high bar there. There is no lawsuit here. Whether he raped the girl or not, no one knows. But everyone needs to quit saying he was wrongfully accused. Just as there was not enough evidence to indict him, there was not enough evidence to say he didn't do it. This thread should die and let the world go on. BTW, a grand jury has to find, in addition to probable cause that a crime was committed, further probable cause that the accused committed it. Some people have said that it was enough to find that a crime was committed, regardless of who committed the crime, to indict. This is not true.

 

[fuzz77]

Originally posted by wyldecat:
If Tubman not allowed back I hope he sues, wins and beats he'll out of UK. C Hayes certainly not treated like this. Same charges. Where the hell is Barnhart? He should have some impact. If Stoops wants him I hope he gets back on team. Kid deserves a break. Hope he wins millions if not readmitted. This from a sixty year supporter and fan. Further. What message does this send to recruits? How can others welcome convicted felons and we turn away kids who don't even have indictment against them

This post was edited on 4/13 8:09 PM by wyldecat

I don't know how many times it has to be stated...he has zero grounds upon to sue. Nobody has a right to be admitted. No one certainly has a right to an athletic scholarship. Thousands of kids every year apply for admission and are rejected.
I think all UK football fans want LT to get a second chance but this may be the single most inopportune time in history to be associated with any kind of sexual assault.
As for recruits...if they are making their choice based on what will happen if they get in trouble...do you want those recruits? I think we've seen with the Air-Soft pistol and bar fighting incidences that there is some leniency with regards to kids getting in trouble.

 

[johnnyrockets]

The way some of you prioritize football over human life is pretty shocking. If what has been posted is true and Tubman is not allowed back into UK, he will transfer to another D-1 school and have the opportunity to a) get a free education and b) play professional football. If he were let back in, a woman who believes he raped her would have to go to school every day with the knowledge that someone SHE BELIEVES RAPED HER is also on campus. I mean, come on. Can any of you with kids imagine having a kid in that situation?

It sucks for us as fans, and it sucks to some degree for Tubman. That said, the university's first priority is the safety and wellbeing of the students, not the W/L record of the football team.

As to the Chuck Hayes comparison, for better or worse (probably better), the spotlight on campus sexual violence is a hell of a lot brighter in 2015 than in 2005. Context matters.

 

[WildcatGlory69]

Bingo..

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Originally posted by Cats78:
Maybe he knows Tubman or whatever but all of you praising him and putting so much trust in him is kind of funny. "Believe him on this"..."he's on top of info", etc lol. I think this is his 3rd screen name because he keeps getting banned. The majority of his posts here and on the b-ball board have been obnoxious, vulgar and flat out embarrassing so I wouldn't put a ton of stock into what he says, but that's up to you, it really doesn't matter either way. If he really is/was in some coaching position with young people, we should all be scared, but if it's Seneca High School we're talking about, it doesn't surprise me, as it's one of the worst schools in the state.

I am not praising...he probably got banned because he hates UL and it gets to him...IDK

On the topic of Lloyd Tubman, he and SluggerCat have been right and know what they are talking about.

 

[JHB4UK]

Originally posted by wyldecat:
C Hayes certainly not treated like this. Same charges.

Different situation, different era. The issue of sexual assault and domestic violence on college campuses and by football players is one of the most talked about controversies over the last 12 months starting with Ray Rice.

Chuck Hayes was accused of rape after his senior season in basketball and at UK was completed FWIW. Things might have been different for him if it was during his very first semester on campus, like Tubman.

 

[TheFolker]

Originally posted by BBBLazing:

Originally posted by wyldecat:
If Tubman not allowed back I hope he sues, wins and beats he'll out of UK. C Hayes certainly not treated like this. Same charges. Where the hell is Barnhart? He should have some impact. If Stoops wants him I hope he gets back on team. Kid deserves a break. Hope he wins millions if not readmitted. This from a sixty year supporter and fan. Further. What message does this send to recruits? How can others welcome convicted felons and we turn away kids who don't even have indictment against them

This post was edited on 4/13 8:09 PM by wyldecatKids who don't even have indictment(sic) against them. Pretty high bar there. There is no lawsuit here. Whether he raped the girl or not, no one knows. But everyone needs to quit saying he was wrongfully accused. Just as there was not enough evidence to indict him, there was not enough evidence to say he didn't do it. This thread should die and let the world go on. BTW, a grand jury has to find, in addition to probable cause that a crime was committed, further probable cause that the accused committed it. Some people have said that it was enough to find that a crime was committed, regardless of who committed the crime, to indict. This is not true.

You don't have to prove innocence in this country especially when there isn't even a trial.

 

[BBBLazing]

Originally posted by TheFolker:

Originally posted by BBBLazing:

Originally posted by wyldecat:
If Tubman not allowed back I hope he sues, wins and beats he'll out of UK. C Hayes certainly not treated like this. Same charges. Where the hell is Barnhart? He should have some impact. If Stoops wants him I hope he gets back on team. Kid deserves a break. Hope he wins millions if not readmitted. This from a sixty year supporter and fan. Further. What message does this send to recruits? How can others welcome convicted felons and we turn away kids who don't even have indictment against them

This post was edited on 4/13 8:09 PM by wyldecatKids who don't even have indictment(sic) against them. Pretty high bar there. There is no lawsuit here. Whether he raped the girl or not, no one knows. But everyone needs to quit saying he was wrongfully accused. Just as there was not enough evidence to indict him, there was not enough evidence to say he didn't do it. This thread should die and let the world go on. BTW, a grand jury has to find, in addition to probable cause that a crime was committed, further probable cause that the accused committed it. Some people have said that it was enough to find that a crime was committed, regardless of who committed the crime, to indict. This is not true.

You don't have to prove innocence in this country especially when there isn't even a trial.

If you want to sue someone for being wrongfully accused you most definitely have to prove innocence.

 

[TheFolker]

Originally posted by BBBLazing:

Originally posted by TheFolker:

Originally posted by BBBLazing:

Originally posted by wyldecat:
If Tubman not allowed back I hope he sues, wins and beats he'll out of UK. C Hayes certainly not treated like this. Same charges. Where the hell is Barnhart? He should have some impact. If Stoops wants him I hope he gets back on team. Kid deserves a break. Hope he wins millions if not readmitted. This from a sixty year supporter and fan. Further. What message does this send to recruits? How can others welcome convicted felons and we turn away kids who don't even have indictment against them

This post was edited on 4/13 8:09 PM by wyldecatKids who don't even have indictment(sic) against them. Pretty high bar there. There is no lawsuit here. Whether he raped the girl or not, no one knows. But everyone needs to quit saying he was wrongfully accused. Just as there was not enough evidence to indict him, there was not enough evidence to say he didn't do it. This thread should die and let the world go on. BTW, a grand jury has to find, in addition to probable cause that a crime was committed, further probable cause that the accused committed it. Some people have said that it was enough to find that a crime was committed, regardless of who committed the crime, to indict. This is not true.

You don't have to prove innocence in this country especially when there isn't even a trial.

If you want to sue someone for being wrongfully accused you most definitely have to prove innocence.

I don't see anybody suggesting suing his accuser but the university for taking unwarranted punitive action against him for something there is no proof occurred.

 

[GD4UK]

There are females out there that purposefully set up guys for this kind of charge. It happened to my own son. And I have a daughter and my spouse was a rape victim. Truth is young women these days are crazy as hell and they know how to use their resources to get what they want. You guys bemoaning the problem of sex crimes, etc. on campus are delusional. The woman who accused Tubman of this is a sex criminal herself if her accusations weren't proven to be true, which they weren't. But she will have no action taken against her. Typical.

 

[johnnyrockets]

Originally posted by GD4UK:
There are females out there that purposefully set up guys for this kind of charge. It happened to my own son. And I have a daughter and my spouse was a rape victim. Truth is young women these days are crazy as hell and they know how to use their resources to get what they want. You guys bemoaning the problem of sex crimes, etc. on campus are delusional. The woman who accused Tubman of this is a sex criminal herself if her accusations weren't proven to be true, which they weren't. But she will have no action taken against her. Typical.

Agree with the first sentence you wrote, which is why there is a move away from "no means no" and towards "yes means yes."

As for the rest, are you really suggesting that rape victims are "sex criminals" if they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they were raped? Because that seems pretty absurd. There's a difference between "accusations not proven to be true" and "accusations proven to be untrue," right?

 

[Cats78]

Originally posted by GD4UK:
There are females out there that purposefully set up guys for this kind of charge. It happened to my own son. And I have a daughter and my spouse was a rape victim. Truth is young women these days are crazy as hell and they know how to use their resources to get what they want. You guys bemoaning the problem of sex crimes, etc. on campus are delusional. The woman who accused Tubman of this is a sex criminal herself if her accusations weren't proven to be true, which they weren't. But she will have no action taken against her. Typical.

Yeah, we get it, there are women that falsely claim rape and it's terrible that they aren't held accountable. It happens, we know.

That being said, you're insane if you don't think that women getting raped on college campuses is not a huge problem and always has been. Douche bag college kids have been getting away with rape for years and frankly it's about time it's being taken more seriously.

 

[fuzz77]

Originally posted by GD4UK:
There are females out there that purposefully set up guys for this kind of charge. It happened to my own son. And I have a daughter and my spouse was a rape victim. Truth is young women these days are crazy as hell and they know how to use their resources to get what they want. You guys bemoaning the problem of sex crimes, etc. on campus are delusional. The woman who accused Tubman of this is a sex criminal herself if her accusations weren't proven to be true, which they weren't. But she will have no action taken against her. Typical.

Frankly GD, you're an idiot.
Nobody including the Grand Jury has said that the woman's claims weren't true. They said in essence that her claim couldn't be proven.
We only know what happened in the Ray Rice incident because there was a camera that captured the event. We only know that the cop in SC murdered the man he had stopped for a broken tail light because there was a camera there to catch what actually happened. The rape at Vanderbilt could have never been prosecuted without the video evidence.

How do you know your son was set up? Was that proven or was the girl's claim simply not provable?
Was anyone prosecuted in the rape of your wife and daughter? If not, why?

Given you attitude I'd say there's a 99% chance that you are lying about your wife, son and daughter because anyone who has truly had a member of their family raped wouldn't make such stupid comments.

 

[Beavis606]

Originally posted by fuzz77:

Nobody including the Grand Jury has said that the woman's claims weren't true. They said in essence that her claim couldn't be proven.

How does a university expel a student -- any student, not just Tubman -- without proof? How do you impose any form of discipline for any offense if there is no proof?





This post was edited on 4/14 3:35 PM by Beavis606

 

[fuzz77]

Originally posted by Beavis606:

Originally posted by fuzz77:

Nobody including the Grand Jury has said that the woman's claims weren't true. They said in essence that her claim couldn't be proven.

How does a university expel a student -- any student, not just Tubman -- without proof? How do you impose any form of discipline for any offense if there is no proof?


This post was edited on 4/14 3:35 PM by Beavis606

How did the Brown and Goldman families win a judgment of $33 million against OJ for murders where he was found innocent? Because criminal and civil actions have differing burdens of proof.

The university isn't a court of law. You have no right of attendance or admittance. He was removed when the charges were filed and he has to appeal that decision for him to be re-admitted. Frankly, they don't need a reason to deny the appeal. They can simply feel that it would be better that he go elsewhere.

Regardless of the decision that the SRB would make there would be unhappy people. Woman's groups would say to allow him back would be insensitive to the women on campus and discourage other women from reporting other rapes and sexual assaults.

 

[jmalone7us]

Originally posted by fuzz77:

Originally posted by Beavis606:

Originally posted by fuzz77:


Nobody including the Grand Jury has said that the woman's claims weren't true. They said in essence that her claim couldn't be proven.

How does a university expel a student -- any student, not just Tubman -- without proof? How do you impose any form of discipline for any offense if there is no proof?



This post was edited on 4/14 3:35 PM by Beavis606

How did the Brown and Goldman families win a judgment of $33 million against OJ for murders where he was found innocent? Because criminal and civil actions have differing burdens of proof.

The university isn't a court of law. You have no right of attendance or admittance. He was removed when the charges were filed and he has to appeal that decision for him to be re-admitted. Frankly, they don't need a reason to deny the appeal. They can simply feel that it would be better that he go elsewhere.

Regardless of the decision that the SRB would make there would be unhappy people. Woman's groups would say to allow him back would be insensitive to the women on campus and discourage other women from reporting other rapes and sexual assaults.

The difference is OJ went to trial. There was enough evidence to take him to trial. No evidence to even go to trial in Tubmans case. Shut the hell up and pay your bet to Brady. Your word means nothing here.

 

[johnnyrockets]

Originally posted by Beavis606:

Originally posted by fuzz77:

Nobody including the Grand Jury has said that the woman's claims weren't true. They said in essence that her claim couldn't be proven.

How does a university expel a student -- any student, not just Tubman -- without proof? How do you impose any form of discipline for any offense if there is no proof?





This post was edited on 4/14 3:35 PM by Beavis606

Think about it from the University's standpoint. You essentially have 3 options:

1) Refuse to allow Tubman back into school. Result: take some heat from football fans and maybe lose some football games you may not have lost.

2) Ask the woman in question to leave school. So laughable not worth discussing, but included for completeness.

3) Allow Tubman back into school and back on team. Result: woman on campus forced to attend school and share a campus with someone she believes to have raped her. Potential downstream effects include her carrying her mattress around with her until graduation, the NY Times or some other newspaper doing a national story on how at UK, football matters more than safety, and other nationally bad press for the university at a time when the federal government is investigating over 100 universities for their failure to protect adequately female students from sexual assault on their campuses. God freaking forbid Tubman ever do anything else (or even be accused of doing anything else), because if you want to see a lawsuit...

There aren't any good options above, but #1 is clearly the least intolerable.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

Originally posted by fuzz77:

Originally posted by GD4UK:
There are females out there that purposefully set up guys for this kind of charge. It happened to my own son. And I have a daughter and my spouse was a rape victim. Truth is young women these days are crazy as hell and they know how to use their resources to get what they want. You guys bemoaning the problem of sex crimes, etc. on campus are delusional. The woman who accused Tubman of this is a sex criminal herself if her accusations weren't proven to be true, which they weren't. But she will have no action taken against her. Typical.

Frankly GD, you're an idiot.
Nobody including the Grand Jury has said that the woman's claims weren't true. They said in essence that her claim couldn't be proven.
We only know what happened in the Ray Rice incident because there was a camera that captured the event. We only know that the cop in SC murdered the man he had stopped for a broken tail light because there was a camera there to catch what actually happened. The rape at Vanderbilt could have never been prosecuted without the video evidence.

How do you know your son was set up? Was that proven or was the girl's claim simply not provable?
Was anyone prosecuted in the rape of your wife and daughter? If not, why?

Given you attitude I'd say there's a 99% chance that you are lying about your wife, son and daughter because anyone who has truly had a member of their family raped wouldn't make such stupid comments.

This is somewhat true, but not really accurate. The Grand Jury does not deal in whether or not it can be proven. The Grand Jury merely judges if there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. They do not consider whether they think the prosecutor can prove or win the case, just whether there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. It is an extremely low standard. I can't imagine that a University would, or should, have a lower standard than that.

For me the issue is whether or not he is being screened in a manner that is consistent with how the rest of the student body and prospective students are screened.

 

[Beavis606]

Funny that you mention the girl who carried her mattress around campus. It was later proven that she falsely accused a male student who had done nothing wrong (but was kicked out of school nonetheless).
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[loucatfan]

Why not have the courage to do the right thing here?

There was no evidence that a rape occurred. Otherwise believe me Ray's office would have prosecuted it.

Don't punish the lady for filing a false report.

Don't cowardly punish Tubman for having a false report filed against him just to CYA. Have the courage to do the right thing.

I asked a long time prosecutor what his finest moments were as a prosecutor. He said " The people I did not prosecute. You see in this office public pressure, media pressure and enemies all try to get you to prosecute someone they don't like based upon little or no evidence . I never succumbed to that to be a hero of the press and I am proud of that. Not sure how the guys and gals that do sleep at night."

 

[fuzz77]

Originally posted by cat_in_the_hat:

Originally posted by fuzz77:

Originally posted by GD4UK:
There are females out there that purposefully set up guys for this kind of charge. It happened to my own son. And I have a daughter and my spouse was a rape victim. Truth is young women these days are crazy as hell and they know how to use their resources to get what they want. You guys bemoaning the problem of sex crimes, etc. on campus are delusional. The woman who accused Tubman of this is a sex criminal herself if her accusations weren't proven to be true, which they weren't. But she will have no action taken against her. Typical.

Frankly GD, you're an idiot.
Nobody including the Grand Jury has said that the woman's claims weren't true. They said in essence that her claim couldn't be proven.
We only know what happened in the Ray Rice incident because there was a camera that captured the event. We only know that the cop in SC murdered the man he had stopped for a broken tail light because there was a camera there to catch what actually happened. The rape at Vanderbilt could have never been prosecuted without the video evidence.

How do you know your son was set up? Was that proven or was the girl's claim simply not provable?
Was anyone prosecuted in the rape of your wife and daughter? If not, why?

Given you attitude I'd say there's a 99% chance that you are lying about your wife, son and daughter because anyone who has truly had a member of their family raped wouldn't make such stupid comments.

This is somewhat true, but not really accurate. The Grand Jury does not deal in whether or not it can be proven. The Grand Jury merely judges if there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. They do not consider whether they think the prosecutor can prove or win the case, just whether there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. It is an extremely low standard. I can't imagine that a University would, or should, have a lower standard than that.

For me the issue is whether or not he is being screened in a manner that is consistent with how the rest of the student body and prospective students are screened.

Semantics. Again, in this case there was no question about what happened. The only disputed evidence was her word that she had said "no" and had asked him to stop. That wasn't going to change. With no other evidence the prosecution isn't going to push for an indictment. Not doing so leaves the door open to allowing for charges later if somehow a video or perhaps a witness stepped forward and could collaborate one story or the other.

As for screening...I'm sure that Tubman was/will be screened in the same fashion as all others who are required to go before the SRB to gain admittance.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

Originally posted by fuzz77:

Originally posted by cat_in_the_hat:

Originally posted by fuzz77:



Frankly GD, you're an idiot.
Nobody including the Grand Jury has said that the woman's claims weren't true. They said in essence that her claim couldn't be proven.
We only know what happened in the Ray Rice incident because there was a camera that captured the event. We only know that the cop in SC murdered the man he had stopped for a broken tail light because there was a camera there to catch what actually happened. The rape at Vanderbilt could have never been prosecuted without the video evidence.

How do you know your son was set up? Was that proven or was the girl's claim simply not provable?
Was anyone prosecuted in the rape of your wife and daughter? If not, why?

Given you attitude I'd say there's a 99% chance that you are lying about your wife, son and daughter because anyone who has truly had a member of their family raped wouldn't make such stupid comments.

This is somewhat true, but not really accurate. The Grand Jury does not deal in whether or not it can be proven. The Grand Jury merely judges if there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. They do not consider whether they think the prosecutor can prove or win the case, just whether there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. It is an extremely low standard. I can't imagine that a University would, or should, have a lower standard than that.

For me the issue is whether or not he is being screened in a manner that is consistent with how the rest of the student body and prospective students are screened.

Semantics. Again, in this case there was no question about what happened. The only disputed evidence was her word that she had said "no" and had asked him to stop. That wasn't going to change. With no other evidence the prosecution isn't going to push for an indictment. Not doing so leaves the door open to allowing for charges later if somehow a video or perhaps a witness stepped forward and could collaborate one story or the other.

As for screening...I'm sure that Tubman was/will be screened in the same fashion as all others who are required to go before the SRB to gain admittance.

It's not semantics at all. The standard of proof for a Grand Jury is pretty low. What standard is being used by the University? Is it acceptable to you that they can use any standard they choose, or do you believe that since they are publically funded, they should have to use some generally accepted standard when they judge someone who is already attending school, or someone who is seeking admittance? I don't want to put words in your mouth, but you seem to be fine with them enforcing any arbitrary standard they choose. As a tax payer, I'm not okay with that. If your scenario is correct and there is no evidence at all to support gilt or innocence, then what standard was used to deny admittance? I think the standard should be consistent, transparent, and subject to scrutiny. I would like to know what standard, that people would deem to be reasonable, that could be used to deny admission, in the scenario you paint where there is no evidence, and it is merely one person's word against another's.

This post was edited on 4/14 8:22 PM by cat_in_the_hat