So guilty despite the facts is your rule. He is a man so because cavemen hit cavewomen with a club....BK is guilty...by association. Got it. Fortunately in the USA...that is not how the law works.
Bobby Knight under Investigation by FBI
- Thread starter MWes11
- Start date
So guilty despite the facts is your rule. He is a man so because cavemen hit cavewomen with a club....BK is guilty...by association. Got it. Fortunately in the USA...that is not how the law works.
Wow. Excellent logic, you must have gone to a super awesome University to learn that drivel.
Women have been using their bodies for a gained edge ever since the beginning of time.
Now I'll use your logic, all women are hoe's. Guilty as charged.
Amazing how stupid people have become in this country.
Good job, Dr. H.
In case anyone still fails to connect the dots, the WAPO dug up this old story because Knight was a Trump surrogate.
It's not anymore complicated than that.
In case anyone still fails to connect the dots, the WAPO dug up this old story because Knight was a Trump surrogate.
It's not anymore complicated than that.
"By then, Knight was generating national headlines for his endorsement of Trump for the Republican presidential nomination.
"Wearing his trademark red sweater, the coach appeared with Trump on April 27, 2016, at a rally at the Indiana state fairgrounds. In his remarks, Knight praised Trump but also repeated verbatim many of the stories and jokes he had delivered in his NGA lecture the previous summer.
"Trump has since credited Knight with helping him to win the GOP primary in Indiana on May 3, 2016."
How did I know I would find something like that if I took the time to read the article?
"Wearing his trademark red sweater, the coach appeared with Trump on April 27, 2016, at a rally at the Indiana state fairgrounds. In his remarks, Knight praised Trump but also repeated verbatim many of the stories and jokes he had delivered in his NGA lecture the previous summer.
"Trump has since credited Knight with helping him to win the GOP primary in Indiana on May 3, 2016."
How did I know I would find something like that if I took the time to read the article?
Hopefully JPScott's head doesn't explode but....we have discovered Occam's Razor.
For the record, Jerry Sandusky was investigated and they found no evidence of wrongdoing either long before they finally nailed him. Personally, I do have a hard time believing all these women made this up. But, personal opinion is a far cry from evidence to bring charges.
Actually I agree Occam's Razor explains quite nicely why you seem so intent defending Knight over this. Knight is a Trump surrogate and you seem to want to defend Trump at all costs, so you're willing to twist yourself in a pretzel and abandon logic to do so.
Let's revisit what your apparent claims are. As someone who claims to work in the 'security business' (whatever that means, if you were an actual security expert I assume you'd say so) you seem to make the claim that intelligence services have their interiors entirely blanketed with surveillance.
Given this assumption, it stands to follow that any untoward actions taken by Knight would certainly have been recorded and preserved. Thus any investigation would certainly have found video evidence and the fact that the FBI didn't seem to have any, supports your claims of Knight's innocence in the matter.
But this belief brings a couple of problematic issues:
First, if they indeed have complete video coverage, yet it took the FBI a full year to investigate, then that seems to suggest that the FBI was basically conducting an investigation for solely political purposes, as they would have had proof Knight was innocent all along for which they never revealed having. And as you've suggested, the conspiracy doesn't end there as the Washington Post is also in on it, trying to score political points on a bogus investigation etc. etc.
So now you have a huge conspiratorial plot at least involving three large organizations (the NGA, the FBI and the Washington Post), over a relatively minor complaint about a washed up basketball coach.
Secondly, if it was true that every inch of the internal compound was covered by surveillance, why would numerous staffers willingly come forward to make false claims that they were (or witnessed) harrassment by Knight? Seems that would be a sure way to get yourself fired, to make a claim which you know would easily be contradicted by the video. Yet numerous employees went ahead and made these claims anyway.
Again, something doesn't add up, IF one assumes what you seem to claim, i.e. that video surveillance is comprehensive throughout the compound.
Third, also keep in mind that these allegations were made over two full years ago. This was just after Trump announced his candidacy, but well before Bobby Knight came out as a public supporter of his. So if this was a big conspiracy to derail Trump, it was amazingly prescient to set this up ahead of time. Yet even that doesn't make sense as the Post didn't publish this story until well after the election. If the intention was to derail Trump why didn't the Post publish this sooner? Nothing seems to add up, again if you view this as some grand conspiracy.
You are right, I don't work in the security industry and am not an expert in these matters, but I actually have been in a number of secure facilities (both corporate and governmental, including military) and my experiences, along with more importantly my common sense suggests that once you've made it inside the perimeter, while one can expect that surveillance is enhanced, it's generally not comprehensive.
But since you're the expert, keep digging down your rabbit hole. Maybe someday you'll be able to present a compelling argument that actually passes the smell test.
Last edited:
Maybe only one had the idea and the others joined the bandwagon for completely different reasons.
If you suspend your personal dislike of Knight those reasons become quite plausible and obvious. Most of them explained because this forum is possibly the only one on this planet that is still chewing over such a nonevent.
Last edited:
Regardless of the facts involving this case.....Bobby Knight always has and always will.....suck.
Oh, goodness gracious, tell me you didn't just analogize this to Jerry Sandusky. Let's be clear: one guy was accused of raping children, the other guy was accused of patting an adult woman on the ass. These are NOT remotely comparable things.
Look, I despise Knight too, and I also dislike his right wing politics, but some of you guys are plainly allowing you biases to influence your take here. The allegations here were decidedly minor, the brief investigation found nothing to pursue, and the whole thing was dropped years ago--this is mostly a non-story.
And the only reason ESPN gave it all this coverage this week is because they're desperate for clicks and knew folks like y'all would fall for it and act like it's a big deal if they pretended like it was a big deal.
Last edited:
All women belong in the possessive form to a gardening tool?
Sorry, couldn't resist. I spent 10+ years reading thousands of words a day to find gems like this. Yep, grammar humor is what I'm reduced to. Sigh.
- Now back to the regularly scheduled ideological pissing match in a thread about a common enemy named Knight who USED to unite us Cats fans. F'n politards - from the 20-year-old university snowflake to the 65 year-old member of the Cult of Hannity - ruin even harmless sports hate these days.
Now, this guy. He gets it.
Its funny that the same folks who cry that women are treated as objects or that Knight must have patted them on their butt and should be jailed......are the same fools who make excuses for a religion (Islam) that forces women to wear a burkah or hijab and formally treats them as chattel. So any of you who are in that camp who are knee jerk reflexively believing Knight did this are hypocrites.
First of all, I highly doubt that Preacher meant to claim that what Sandusky did was on the same level as what Knight was accused of doing. Of course they're not.
But Preacher's analogy is an apt one, in that simply because authorities investigate and either fail to find sufficient evidence or choose not to prosecute does not necessarily mean the person is innocent. The fact that Sandusky's crime was so much more serious actually makes Preacher's analogy more powerful IMO.
This thread is interesting to me in part because there's a number of different aspects to this issue, none of which can be neatly placed into a particular box based on ideological beliefs etc.
For example I think there's at least three different questions (probably more), which people could rate their beliefs on a scale of 1-10.
A.) What is the seriousness of Knight's 'crime' ?
I would personally put it at maybe a 2. As mentioned it's nowhere near other crimes such as what Jerry Sandusky did etc. But it's not nothing either. I already stated I was surprised that the FBI spent so much time and effort on this investigation, as at the end of the day it was highly unlikely they would have any type of prosecutorial case, and even if they did the crime itself was relatively minor.
To me this is more something a HR Manager might have to deal with. Unfortunately for the agency, Knight wasn't an employee, otherwise they could fire him. But as a invited guest speaker, about the most they could do is withhold payment and never invite him back.
B.) What is the likelihood Knight was guilty?
On this I would rate it high, probably an 8. This based on the fact that so many people reported incidents at the time and were witnessed by others as well.
But also Knight's history of physical and verbal abuse and attempts at intimidation play an important part in believing that these things are likely true.
C.) What is the newsworthiness of the story?
On this I would say about a 3 or 4. It's not the most important news of the day, but it is certainly newsworthy, primarily because Knight is one of the all-time leaders in college basketball coaching victories.
I'd imagine that if John Wooden, or Dean Smith or Adolph Rupp or Mike Krzyzewski etc. were accused of such things, it would be news as well.
I would personally put it at maybe a 2. As mentioned it's nowhere near other crimes such as what Jerry Sandusky did etc. But it's not nothing either. I already stated I was surprised that the FBI spent so much time and effort on this investigation, as at the end of the day it was highly unlikely they would have any type of prosecutorial case, and even if they did the crime itself was relatively minor.
To me this is more something a HR Manager might have to deal with. Unfortunately for the agency, Knight wasn't an employee, otherwise they could fire him. But as a invited guest speaker, about the most they could do is withhold payment and never invite him back.
B.) What is the likelihood Knight was guilty?
On this I would rate it high, probably an 8. This based on the fact that so many people reported incidents at the time and were witnessed by others as well.
But also Knight's history of physical and verbal abuse and attempts at intimidation play an important part in believing that these things are likely true.
C.) What is the newsworthiness of the story?
On this I would say about a 3 or 4. It's not the most important news of the day, but it is certainly newsworthy, primarily because Knight is one of the all-time leaders in college basketball coaching victories.
I'd imagine that if John Wooden, or Dean Smith or Adolph Rupp or Mike Krzyzewski etc. were accused of such things, it would be news as well.
Others can disagree but I doubt the newsworthiness is related to Knight's association with Trump. As I noted previously, the fact that these events and the accusations occurred prior to any known association between Knight and Trump, along with the timing of the release well after the election, suggests that politics really isn't at play.
As far as I can tell, the Post story was appropriate. They wrote up a single article relating events that happened based on recently released public documents. It was indeed newsworthy given Knight's reputation and the fact that intelligence agencies (among many other institutions) are grappling with sexual harrassment issues etc.
I also think it's appropriate that ESPN picked up the story (again based on Knight's coaching stature).
As far as the idea that those on this board shouldn't be discussing this, I firmly disagree with this. IMO it's certainly appropriate that it be discussed on a board like this (given Knight's coaching stature but also the historic rivalries and issues between Knight and Kentucky over the years), especially during this time of year when virtually nothing else is going on in UK basketball. Have you looked at some of the other topics? One thread is talking about how much of an improvement we can expect from Jonny David now that he's a year older.
Bottom line of all of this is that people can have different viewpoints on the different aspects of this story that doesn't have to fall into an ideological box. For example, just because something thinks Knight is likely guilty doesn't necessarily mean that they believe it's a huge deal, or that the crime is serious etc.
Last edited:
UK90, I compared the investigations and not the situations. Both were investigated and no charges filed. That was the ONLY point I was making. Just because no charges are filed doesn't mean it didn't happen. The poster I replied to was trying to argue that when charges aren't filed it probably means nothing happened.
BTW, we discuss lot of stories like this one. And, some think that unless charges were filed, it is a non-story. The same is true of the kid at Duke who was accused of assault. NO I am not comparing sexual assault to what RMK allegedly did. I am only comparing the 2 situations that have a commonality.
People are driven to extremes by irrational hatred/dislike. This thread is a prime example. I'd say there are several in this thread that would lie about Knight to cause him embarrassment or even injury. Public figures, or even the richer than you neighbor, are lightning rods for that kind of evil. Women are not exempt.
You never noticed? I didn't and don't have the time to key a post equal in length to Scott's to explain it any further to a preacher. Of all people you should know this.
Good catch. Must have been a weekend poast after the botil slowlie disipeered.
I guess now it is a federal offense to be a scumbag. Hope so. Maybe he can share a cell with all the UL athletic dept.
What's funny is the video evidence of him physically assaulting a player by choking them and he isn't in prison. I love that the law applies to all citizens equally.
Assault and battery, and he only got fired. Justice was served...
Assault and battery, and he only got fired. Justice was served...
The straw that broke the camel's back & led to his firing was when Knight verbally assaulted and grabbed a student on campus. This wasn't on video and Knight denied it.
This was not the most serious or well-documented altercation Knight had, but it broke IU's zero tolerance agreement they had made with the coach after numerous other issues. (Including as you mentioned choking his own player, something else Knight denied doing, until video evidence proved otherwise.)
Last edited:
There were many "witnesses" who claimed that Michael Brown was on his knees, hands up, begging don't shoot. As we all now know that was a lie. Supposed eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable....and often agenda driven. The military has become a huge laboratory for social engineering and experimentation that has spun into a narrative of the "military rape culture." We see the same thing on campuses across America. Guys falsely accused of sexual assault and having a hard time disputing it because the "judges" are predisposed to believing that the guy is guilty.
Fortunately there are increased use of video surveillance in the public areas over most university campuses that investigators can refer to in order to validate hesaidshesaid. UK for example is installing a couple thousand cameras around campus, in public areas, inside and out. Video analytics and the low cost of camera technology has allowed this to happen.
So with BK....despite the ill informed view of some who earlier weighed in, there would be a very high likelihood that movement of BK would have been recorded through much of the public areas inside that govt installation. In the bathrooms or possibly offices and more private areas....no. But certainly enough video evidence of BK and of course the accusers could easily be pulled from their NVR to watch their behavior pre-post interaction and also there could be an audio record. Video analytics allows for a recorded event to be flagged, for example, if a woman's scream, yelling, etc... not just if a gunshot is heard. Keep in mind....you may be recorded no matter where you are especially in a public venue.
Fortunately there are increased use of video surveillance in the public areas over most university campuses that investigators can refer to in order to validate hesaidshesaid. UK for example is installing a couple thousand cameras around campus, in public areas, inside and out. Video analytics and the low cost of camera technology has allowed this to happen.
So with BK....despite the ill informed view of some who earlier weighed in, there would be a very high likelihood that movement of BK would have been recorded through much of the public areas inside that govt installation. In the bathrooms or possibly offices and more private areas....no. But certainly enough video evidence of BK and of course the accusers could easily be pulled from their NVR to watch their behavior pre-post interaction and also there could be an audio record. Video analytics allows for a recorded event to be flagged, for example, if a woman's scream, yelling, etc... not just if a gunshot is heard. Keep in mind....you may be recorded no matter where you are especially in a public venue.
Last edited:
Oh wow. That makes the picture much clearer. So assaulting his athletes was just a walk in the park for this guy. Glad we have people who sell and smoke Mary Jane in jail instead of Bob Knight.
Mercy me.
