"Indiana University suspends football running back Morgan Ellison for sexual assault"
https://t.co/dudq3I2Oa4
https://t.co/dudq3I2Oa4
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don’t understand the article. No police charges but university decides guilty. Says can’t step foot on campus and out for 2 1/2 years yet is practicing. No word on appeal which might explain. If guilty, why no police involvement? If no police involvement why harsh penalty? I know what it sounds like but would get in trouble for comparing in this climate..."Indiana University suspends football running back Morgan Ellison for sexual assault"
https://t.co/dudq3I2Oa4
If there’s no criminal charges, Ellison should sue the university.
That would be my guess. Case went through university judicial system, not criminal courts.I didn’t read the article.
Did the victim report it to the police?
Or was this a deal where a school actor learned and had to report ala Title IX, so the school had to become the criminal justice system substitute?
This is certainly within the University's right to do and it's also within the victims right to not pursue criminal charges. As a poster pointed out, those criminal charges and court cases can get really messy for the victim whether there is innocence or not. Whether the police ever get involved is not really the issue here. This is a matter of Student Code of Conduct violation through the Sexual Assault Board. It's the Board's opinion only at this point and just because they ruled something occurred in their opinion does not mean it did nor does it mean that anything criminal occurred. My belief is, in court of law, he would likely be found innocent if he could somehow prove it was consensual as he claims, but it would get messy for all parties.I don’t understand the article. No police charges but university decides guilty. Says can’t step foot on campus and out for 2 1/2 years yet is practicing. No word on appeal which might explain. If guilty, why no police involvement? If no police involvement why harsh penalty? I know what it sounds like but would get in trouble for comparing in this climate...
Yep. More than likely his career here is over pending appeal, but the university (as in most cases) leaves the door open to returning as a student to finish a degree after a suspension is served. That's important for many students who go through the university judiciary process, but not so much for scholarship athletes.This is certainly within the University's right to do and it's also within the victims right to not pursue criminal charges. As a poster pointed out, those criminal charges and court cases can get really messy for the victim whether there is innocence or not. Whether the police ever get involved is not really the issue here. This is a matter of Student Code of Conduct violation through the Sexual Assault Board. It's the Board's opinion only at this point and just because they ruled something occurred in their opinion does not mean it did nor does it mean that anything criminal occurred. My belief is, in court of law, he would likely be found innocent if he could somehow prove it was consensual as he claims, but it would get messy for all parties.
Ellison is between a rock and a hard place. He claims it's consensual which means sex occurred. However unless he can somehow prove it was consensual, he can't file criminal charges of fabrication against her, nor can he sue the University in anyway. This will end his tenure as both a student and an athlete at IU.
go SpartansI don’t understand the article. No police charges but university decides guilty. Says can’t step foot on campus and out for 2 1/2 years yet is practicing. No word on appeal which might explain. If guilty, why no police involvement? If no police involvement why harsh penalty? I know what it sounds like but would get in trouble for comparing in this climate...
"when a person is incapable of giving consent due to use of drugs or alcohol"Here is the relevant portion of the student code of conduct:
https://studentaffairs.indiana.edu/student-conduct/sexual-violence.shtml
This is why rules like this only lead to more trouble rather than solving problems. I don’t know what happened so certainly can’t judge either party. But what is obvious it’s all a mess and innocent people will suffer and victims cause won’t get justice"when a person is incapable of giving consent due to use of drugs or alcohol"Here is the relevant portion of the student code of conduct:
https://studentaffairs.indiana.edu/student-conduct/sexual-violence.shtml
By that standard, 99% of current male graduates would have been kicked out of school.
And that, right there, sounds like sanctuary city bullsh!t Nothing against you of course but after reading these posts it sounds eerily similar.But what is obvious it’s all a mess and innocent people will suffer and victims cause won’t get justice
This is certainly within the University's right to do and it's also within the victims right to not pursue criminal charges. As a poster pointed out, those criminal charges and court cases can get really messy for the victim whether there is innocence or not. Whether the police ever get involved is not really the issue here. This is a matter of Student Code of Conduct violation through the Sexual Assault Board. It's the Board's opinion only at this point and just because they ruled something occurred in their opinion does not mean it did nor does it mean that anything criminal occurred. My belief is, in court of law, he would likely be found innocent if he could somehow prove it was consensual as he claims, but it would get messy for all parties.
Ellison is between a rock and a hard place. He claims it's consensual which means sex occurred. However unless he can somehow prove it was consensual, he can't file criminal charges of fabrication against her, nor can he sue the University in anyway. This will end his tenure as both a student and an athlete at IU.
What a wonderful system we have, guilty till proven innocent,This is certainly within the University's right to do and it's also within the victims right to not pursue criminal charges. As a poster pointed out, those criminal charges and court cases can get really messy for the victim whether there is innocence or not. Whether the police ever get involved is not really the issue here. This is a matter of Student Code of Conduct violation through the Sexual Assault Board. It's the Board's opinion only at this point and just because they ruled something occurred in their opinion does not mean it did nor does it mean that anything criminal occurred. My belief is, in court of law, he would likely be found innocent if he could somehow prove it was consensual as he claims, but it would get messy for all parties.
Ellison is between a rock and a hard place. He claims it's consensual which means sex occurred. However unless he can somehow prove it was consensual, he can't file criminal charges of fabrication against her, nor can he sue the University in anyway. This will end his tenure as both a student and an athlete at IU.
Rules like what? This isn't a case of IU applying some arbitrary standard. They're complying with Title IX and directives issued by the U.S. Department of Education. If an allegation of sexual violence is reported to a school's Title IX coordinator, they're required to investigate. Here, the investigation obviously led to some inculpatory findings. And, unlike criminal court proceedings, proof beyond a reasonable doubt isn't the standard.This is why rules like this only lead to more trouble rather than solving problems. I don’t know what happened so certainly can’t judge either party. But what is obvious it’s all a mess and innocent people will suffer and victims cause won’t get justice
What a wonderful system we have, guilty till proven innocent,
seems a little medieval.
Finally, with respect to the definition of sexual violence (and consent) that someone cited in a link above, that again is consistent with federal guidelines. In the context of drugs and alcohol, it's really not that complicated. If someone's incapacitated, they can't give consent.
Well I agree, Turney, that having a drink doesn't necessarily render someone incapable of giving consent. But intoxication, as I understand it, is a very different story.Also, drinking/being drunk doesn't automatically equate to incapacitated either. By IU code of conduct, incapacitated refers to being unable to communicate and comprehend facts, which frequently can occur due to alcohol/drugs.
Can’t argue with you there at all. Not sure how anyone can look at what has transpired and say “this was fair to any party”. Reflection of unintended consequences.And that, right there, sounds like sanctuary city bullsh!t Nothing against you of course but after reading these posts it sounds eerily similar.But what is obvious it’s all a mess and innocent people will suffer and victims cause won’t get justice
So the system that IU has in place established Ellison to be guilty enough to warrant an almost three year suspension from the university. Meanwhile, the actual court of law couldn't establish enough evidence to even pursue charges...boy, talk about a kangaroo court!!Indiana Daily Student had a multi part article about this topic, one part of which discussed Title Nine investigations from the guys perspective. Basically, from what I read, if you allow yourself to be put in the position that they are investigating you (the guy) you're usually going to end up losing.
I'm glad that we haven't gone the route of Michigan State and Penn State and gone full on cover up and/or protect the athlete & program at all costs... That's a Major positive.
I'm not at all thrilled with the approach of "guilty until proven innocent"... (that's a discussion for the Water Cooler however).
All that said, it sounds like an imperfect system worked as well as it could and protected those it was designed to protect from both the guy imposing themselves on the girl and potentially an entire portion of the University covering it up (see Michigan $tate).
The University is at least attempting to do the right thing. Hopefully, they did...
Huge difference between “at least attempting to do the right thing” and covering up. Innocent until proven is tied extremely close. Covering up is an entirely different issue.Indiana Daily Student had a multi part article about this topic, one part of which discussed Title Nine investigations from the guys perspective. Basically, from what I read, if you allow yourself to be put in the position that they are investigating you (the guy) you're usually going to end up losing.
I'm glad that we haven't gone the route of Michigan State and Penn State and gone full on cover up and/or protect the athlete & program at all costs... That's a Major positive.
I'm not at all thrilled with the approach of "guilty until proven innocent"... (that's a discussion for the Water Cooler however).
All that said, it sounds like an imperfect system worked as well as it could and protected those it was designed to protect from both the guy imposing themselves on the girl and potentially an entire portion of the University covering it up (see Michigan $tate).
The University is at least attempting to do the right thing. Hopefully, they did...
I agree with much of what you've said, 76. I feel compelled to weigh in, though, on this "guilty until proven innocent" phrase that I'm hearing a lot lately.Indiana Daily Student had a multi part article about this topic, one part of which discussed Title Nine investigations from the guys perspective. Basically, from what I read, if you allow yourself to be put in the position that they are investigating you (the guy) you're usually going to end up losing.
I'm glad that we haven't gone the route of Michigan State and Penn State and gone full on cover up and/or protect the athlete & program at all costs... That's a Major positive.
I'm not at all thrilled with the approach of "guilty until proven innocent"... (that's a discussion for the Water Cooler however).
All that said, it sounds like an imperfect system worked as well as it could and protected those it was designed to protect from both the guy imposing themselves on the girl and potentially an entire portion of the University covering it up (see Michigan $tate).
The University is at least attempting to do the right thing. Hopefully, they did...
Huge difference between “at least attempting to do the right thing” and covering up. Innocent until proven is tied extremely close. Covering up is an entirely different issue.
So the system that IU has in place established Ellison to be guilty enough to warrant an almost three year suspension from the university. Meanwhile, the actual court of law couldn't establish enough evidence to even pursue charges...boy, talk about a kangaroo court!!
I won't be one bit surprised if Morgan doesn't sue the pants off of Indiana University!!!!!!!!
If the school followed the Title IX protocol, he would have absolutely no case.So the system that IU has in place established Ellison to be guilty enough to warrant an almost three year suspension from the university. Meanwhile, the actual court of law couldn't establish enough evidence to even pursue charges...boy, talk about a kangaroo court!!
I won't be one bit surprised if Morgan doesn't sue the pants off of Indiana University!!!!!!!!
Actually, in Indiana, a victim has no "right to not pursue criminal charges." It's strictly up to the Monroe County Prosecutor whether charges are filed or not. There are many reasons why the prosecutor may not file charges, and we don't know what they are. The statute of limitations on an offense like the one alleged in the article is quite long...so it's certainly possible that the case still gets filed somewhere down the road. They may have already decided that they won't. We don't know.
He can't "file criminal charges of fabrication against her" either. If the prosecutor believed he could prove either case against either one beyond a reasonable doubt, the prosecutor can file the charges. Ellison certainly can sue the university, if he believes the university violated one of his Constitutional Rights, including his right to Due Process. We don't know what process they used to resolve this allegation, but it's probably above board. Hard to say for sure though, without a transcript of the proceeding.
You are correct technically, however the artificial standards and moving goal posts being implemented (like consent isn’t consent if drinking and similar) muddies the waters drastically making clear cut decisions difficult and assuring failure in many cases. Innocent until proven guilty is a clear cut moral standard whether law related or not.I agree with much of what you've said, 76. I feel compelled to weigh in, though, on this "guilty until proven innocent" phrase that I'm hearing a lot lately.Indiana Daily Student had a multi part article about this topic, one part of which discussed Title Nine investigations from the guys perspective. Basically, from what I read, if you allow yourself to be put in the position that they are investigating you (the guy) you're usually going to end up losing.
I'm glad that we haven't gone the route of Michigan State and Penn State and gone full on cover up and/or protect the athlete & program at all costs... That's a Major positive.
I'm not at all thrilled with the approach of "guilty until proven innocent"... (that's a discussion for the Water Cooler however).
All that said, it sounds like an imperfect system worked as well as it could and protected those it was designed to protect from both the guy imposing themselves on the girl and potentially an entire portion of the University covering it up (see Michigan $tate).
The University is at least attempting to do the right thing. Hopefully, they did...
It's important to remember that proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard for criminal convictions only. It's not the standard for an investigation in an academic setting, in a hiring and/or employment environment, or anywhere else. In the case we're talking about, IU conducted an investigation and obviously found evidence of wrongdoing. Perhaps the evidence wouldn't be enough to sustain a finding of guilt by a jury in a criminal trial but, again, that's not necessary or required.
But I believe that under Title IX the victim/alleged victim can decide whether or not to report the crime to the police, the school, and/or the US Department of Education.
This might explain why there was no police involvement or police report. Even if IU Campus police was involved there would be a police report that would be subject to Public Record Request(s).
But I have no idea if that's right or not.
I would feel better if local law enforcement investigated allegation if this was a serious assault. There is a juco in my hometown that swept rapes and other assaults under the rug so the public didn't see the mess the campus was in. My wife's uncle was the chief of the campus police and gave her the real statistics so she would not be anywhere near campus at night.Rules like what? This isn't a case of IU applying some arbitrary standard. They're complying with Title IX and directives issued by the U.S. Department of Education. If an allegation of sexual violence is reported to a school's Title IX coordinator, they're required to investigate. Here, the investigation obviously led to some inculpatory findings. And, unlike criminal court proceedings, proof beyond a reasonable doubt isn't the standard.
A Title IX investigation isn't in lieu of a criminal proceeding. They're two separate things. If/when local law enforcement becomes involved, they conduct their own investigation which can be on very different timetable. And, because of prosecutorial discretion, they may or not pursue the matter for a whole host of reasons.
Finally, with respect to the definition of sexual violence (and consent) that someone cited in a link above, that again is consistent with federal guidelines. In the context of drugs and alcohol, it's really not that complicated. If someone's incapacitated, they can't give consent.
There's no hiding this stuff anymore. Under the Clery Act, colleges are required to maintain and disclose crime statistics and other security-related matters.I would feel better if local law enforcement investigated allegation if this was a serious assault. There is a juco in my hometown that swept rapes and other assaults under the rug so the public didn't see the mess the campus was in. My wife's uncle was the chief of the campus police and gave her the real statistics so she would not be anywhere near campus at night.
I remember kids getting beat up for their tennis shoes and one occasion of members of the basketball team getting caught stealing wheels off a Camaro in a dorm parking lot across the street from the police office. The cop made them put the wheels back on. No report or disciplinary measures were taken.
I'm not saying IU would hide or persuade people to not report a crime, but law enforcement is a better place to investigate crimes. If you feel it is important enough to report to school officials, I don't know why you wouldn't also report it to police. I would expect the university would refer the complaint to the proper legal authorities if it were a serious crime.
Even though this article is written by someone who obviously opposes the Trump administration, it points out how title IX needs to be fixed.https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/title-ix-reforms-are-overdue/569215/If the school followed the Title IX protocol, he would have absolutely no case.
My comments were in relation to the law as it currently exists. I'll leave debate about any flaws and/or necessary fixes to others.Even though this article is written by someone who obviously opposes the Trump administration, it points out how title IX needs to be fixed.https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/title-ix-reforms-are-overdue/569215/
Excellent find - every holier-than-thou poster on here should read it.Even though this article is written by someone who obviously opposes the Trump administration, it points out how title IX needs to be fixed.https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/title-ix-reforms-are-overdue/569215/
Well, to say Ellison would have “no case” does not appear to be accurate.My comments were in relation to the law as it currently exists. I'll leave debate about any flaws and/or necessary fixes to others.