PDA

View Full Version : The Chronicle article - two sexual assault allegations against Rasheed Sulaimon



Pages : [1] 2 3

duke09hms
03-02-2015, 07:56 AM
Unfortunately, what many of us heard on campus is now substantiated.

http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2015/03/02/rasheed-sulaimon-center-sexual-assault-allegations-prior-dismissal

CameronBornAndBred
03-02-2015, 08:12 AM
This will not be pretty. Think Duke fans (and every other school fan base) when charges were leveled against Jameis Winston. It isn't so much the possible criminal acts, it's the possible coverup. I have no idea if there was one, but 95% of fans from other schools will say there is.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 08:13 AM
This article doesn't have anything resembling a fact. It is all just rumors and unreported allegations nothing more. I don't think the University or the Basketball Program did anything wrong in this case, so "The next Duke scandal" is really not accurate, however it is Duke and it is the basketball program so this is going to end up being national news maybe even world news. Get ready for a fire storm I guess. Really disappointed that Sheed would even put himself in the position to have allegations like this brought against him. Without any kind of evidence or really anything at all in either case, there isn't really much to go on. I am sure we will hear more about this, and it will be a huge distraction through March. Hopefully it doesn't hurt the team that is left.

moonpie23
03-02-2015, 08:18 AM
this is going to be extremely ugly.


have there been rumors out there already that we, on dbr, just did not hear? I admit that i don't frequent a lot of other boards, but this is the first i've heard a word about it...


:(

Mike Corey
03-02-2015, 08:19 AM
The Chronicle has been working on this story for a while now.

I'll be curious to see what happens next.

TKG
03-02-2015, 08:20 AM
This might explain the silence from Rasheed and his family since the dismissal.

Cell-R
03-02-2015, 08:20 AM
this is going to be extremely ugly.


have there been rumors out there already that we, on dbr, just did not hear? I admit that i don't frequent a lot of other boards, but this is the first i've heard a word about it...


:(

These rumors have certainly been floating around the student body since the time of his dismissal. DBR's rumor-mongering policy would have prevented them (and other unsubstantiated rumors) from being posted here, though.

theschwartz
03-02-2015, 08:23 AM
Unfortunately, what many of us heard on campus is now substantiated.

http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2015/03/02/rasheed-sulaimon-center-sexual-assault-allegations-prior-dismissal

This is a bombshell. I feel like this is the realization of our worst fears. Even though these are just accusations and no one has been proven guilty, this is not a good look at all for Duke or for the basketball program. Questions will begin to swirl immediately about who knew what, when, and why Coach K waited so long (10 months!) to take action, although I have no idea what conversations or internal discipline might have occurred during that period.

More than anything, I hate the comparison of Duke to Florida State and the fact that the young ladies didn't report the incidents in part because of a fear of backlash. Maybe I'm naive, but I would like to think that the Duke community would respond to this sort of thing differently than the Florida State community did. Yes, we love our basketball team, but we love it for the values they demonstrate - we're not a "win at all costs" type of place. It really bugs me that these girls felt that they couldn't come forward to the police or go through the student judicial process because they were afraid.

Ian
03-02-2015, 08:24 AM
If the people involved didn't file charges, what was Duke supposed to do, dismiss a player because someone heard something at a retreat?

TKG
03-02-2015, 08:32 AM
I hope my alma mater has learned about crisis management from the 2007 lacrosse hoax and the manner in which Carolina has dealt with the fake class situation. Let's be thorough and transparent in our approach. Let's not jump to conclusions about guilt or innocence.

DrChainsaw
03-02-2015, 08:33 AM
If the people involved didn't file charges, what was Duke supposed to do, dismiss a player because someone heard something at a retreat?

Agree. While this is an extremely serious matter, it sounds as though there was only hearsay to work with. I wonder what actions could have been/should have been/were taken when these allegations first came to light.

I can only hope Duke conducted itself appropriately and that the reporting to come is balanced and accurate.

budwom
03-02-2015, 08:35 AM
If the people involved didn't file charges, what was Duke supposed to do, dismiss a player because someone heard something at a retreat?

Precisely. Unless anyone at Duke pressured the woman/women to not file charges, I see zero scandal...but obviously it's a bad situation.
As others have noted, we are lacking the facts here....if charges are filed they should be investigated thoroughly, but lacking charges what is there to do?

Duke95
03-02-2015, 08:38 AM
Precisely. Unless anyone at Duke pressured the woman/women to not file charges, I see zero scandal...but obviously it's a bad situation.
As others have noted, we are lacking the facts here....if charges are filed they should be investigated thoroughly, but lacking charges what is there to do?

Even if charges are not filed, you have to investigate. You have to find out WHY the charges were not filed. If the women did not file because they were scared of fan backlash, that's a serious problem. Students should never feel intimidated by a school's athletic standing.

grad_devil
03-02-2015, 08:39 AM
Precisely. Unless anyone at Duke pressured the woman/women to not file charges, I see zero scandal...but obviously it's a bad situation.
As others have noted, we are lacking the facts here....if charges are filed they should be investigated thoroughly, but lacking charges what is there to do?

Under Title IX, the grievant doesn't have to file charges - the institution needs only for a responsible employee to receive notice before they are required to investigate. The grievant can choose to not be a part of the process, but that doesn't absolve any responsibility to conduct an initial investigation.

Edit: Looks like Duke95 beat me to the punch

Bluedog
03-02-2015, 08:40 AM
More than anything, I hate the comparison of Duke to Florida State and the fact that the young ladies didn't report the incidents in part because of a fear of backlash. Maybe I'm naive, but I would like to think that the Duke community would respond to this sort of thing differently than the Florida State community did. Yes, we love our basketball team, but we love it for the values they demonstrate - we're not a "win at all costs" type of place.

Duke has already acted differently than Florida State -- they dismissed a guy after allegations of misconduct when they alleged victims declined to file a police or university report. Jameis Winston had criminal charges against him, an ongoing student affairs investigation, and the coach downplayed it all and he continued to play. Comparisons to the two situations don't make sense except as perhaps the Jameis Winston case would make victims less likely to come forward.

David Bunkley
03-02-2015, 08:46 AM
Unfortunately, what many of us heard on campus is now substantiated.

http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2015/03/02/rasheed-sulaimon-center-sexual-assault-allegations-prior-dismissal

Well, my birthday just took a shot to the stomache.

First, I hope this can all be cleared up without the scandal and cover-up that seem to have become the new normal.

Second, I hope that all parties involved are okay.

Third, I hope this isn't true.

Fourth, I will reserve judgement until all the facts come out - if that day ever comes.

#GODUKE

Channing
03-02-2015, 08:46 AM
Maybe I'm naive, but I would like to think that the Duke community would respond to this sort of thing differently than the Florida State community did. Yes, we love our basketball team, but we love it for the values they demonstrate - we're not a "win at all costs" type of place. It really bugs me that these girls felt that they couldn't come forward to the police or go through the student judicial process because they were afraid.

I agree with this 100%; and this is very very disturbing.


If the people involved didn't file charges, what was Duke supposed to do, dismiss a player because someone heard something at a retreat?

Unfortunately with sexual assault/domestic violence/etc. the court of public opinion is swift and it is vicious. I, like others, have only had a little while to digest the allegations, but I find myself torn two separate ways. On one hand, despite bungling things beyond belief, I think ultimately the NFL got it right by suspending Peterson/Rice/Hardy while their case was under investigation. However, (putting aside the professional/college distinction) while the allegations against Rasheed were still not known publicly, suspending him would have raised a lot of questions and could have really damaged his life had they turned out to be completely false (we still haven't had any adjudication of his case, but at least the accusations are known publicly). Even if ultimately exonerated, accusations of sexual assault will stick with and jade perception of someone forever. I guess he could have been suspended for violating team rules, or something like that, but it would seem pretty flimsy.

We may never know, but I would like to know to what extent the basketball program, athletic department, and Dean Sue actually investigated.

Chicago 1995
03-02-2015, 08:46 AM
If the people involved didn't file charges, what was Duke supposed to do, dismiss a player because someone heard something at a retreat?

The article talks about how, under Title IX, the University has an obligation to investigate the allegation even if a complaint isn't made.

There are more gaps to fill -- was it investigated; what was the basketball office told of the investigation among others -- but the optics, right now, aren't great for the University, K or the hoops team. There will be disagreement, but some are going to want an explanation for why he wasn't suspended pending the results of the investigation, and why he was dismissed.

I know we've all been through the Lacrosse case, and get that jumping to conclusions isn't wise. There's more to know here, but right now, this looks bad.

tallguy
03-02-2015, 08:47 AM
I think it's pretty clear from the timeline that the allegations have little, if anything, to do with Suliamon's dismissal. Which isn't a good look, but from the reporting, it sounds like there's really nothing the administration did wrong (on the surface). It will be news, and rightfully so...but unless something truly damaging (such as administrative pressure on the victims to keep it quiet) comes out, this isn't some massive scandal.

That said, it's awful to think that the victims didn't come forward b/c of fear of backlash from the fanbase...and yet, after witnessing the Winston debacle, I understand completely. That's something that needs to be addressed.

Channing
03-02-2015, 08:48 AM
Duke has already acted differently than Florida State -- they dismissed a guy after allegations of misconduct when they alleged victims declined to file a police or university report. Jameis Winston had criminal charges against him, an ongoing student affairs investigation, and the coach downplayed it all and he continued to play. Comparisons to the two situations don't make sense except as perhaps the Jameis Winston case would make victims less likely to come forward.

and yet, unfortunately, they are inevitable.

kmspeaks
03-02-2015, 08:50 AM
That article is what would happen if I wrote down the conversations I have with my high school students when I ask them about rumors floating around. "She heard this" and "she said that" so then I texted a 3rd person and "they said a little of this and a little of that". If that's the story they've been working on since Rasheed's dismissal maybe they should have waited a little longer until they actually had something to say.

Chicago 1995
03-02-2015, 08:50 AM
Duke has already acted differently than Florida State -- they dismissed a guy after allegations of misconduct when they alleged victims declined to file a police or university report. Jameis Winston had criminal charges against him, an ongoing student affairs investigation, and the coach downplayed it all and he continued to play. Comparisons to the two situations don't make sense except as perhaps the Jameis Winston case would make victims less likely to come forward.

Why did he get bounced 10 months after the team was made aware of the allegations?

Was his dismissal related to the allegations or other reasons?

Did the University investigate the allegations?

Lots of questions to answer before we can pat ourselves on the back too much.

Indoor66
03-02-2015, 08:53 AM
Why did he get bounced 10 months after the team was made aware of the allegations?

Was his dismissal related to the allegations or other reasons?

Did the University investigate the allegations?

Lots of questions to answer before we can pat ourselves on the back too much.

Likewise, just as many questions to answer before we condemn ourselves too much. Maybe we all need to take a breath and allow some FACTS to surface, not just rumors about "allegations". Innocent until proven guilty and all that stuff....

Chicago 1995
03-02-2015, 08:58 AM
Likewise, just as many questions to answer before we condemn ourselves too much. Maybe we all need to take a breath and allow some FACTS to surface, not just rumors about "allegations". Innocent until proven guilty and all that stuff....

We don't know enough about anything.

As to Sheed, odds are we'll never know.

As to the University, if the allegations were investigated and to what extent, what the program knew, when and what it did are all easier to verify.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 09:01 AM
So just so were clear here, is the University supposed to open a full investigation into each rumor of sexual abuse they hear? It sounds to me like there was nothing reported at all. The only thing that was reported was a rumor that someone heard that someone said they were sexual abused by Sheed. Now forgive me if I am misunderstanding this, but if the team was made aware of this yet there was no clue who the rumors came from then why should they investigate anything? You can't start an investigation over every single sexual abuse rumor you hear on campus. So I think there is nothing to see here, yet its going to get so much play in the national media that Duke will come out looking bad no matter how they handled it. I wonder how many sexual assault rumors about athletes on campuses there is every year, I am sure the volume of rumors is huge. There isn't much Duke can do unless they have more than a rumor to go on.

Seattle Hoo
03-02-2015, 09:06 AM
There is no direct suggestion that Duke did anything wrong. The only thing that I saw was that Student Conduct should be told even with no complaint, and the accuser and accused should be interviewed, and there are no facts that this happened. However, I guess Wasiolek is the person in charge of that division, and she was informed early on. She also refused to comment on the specific case. So, we don't know if Student Conduct talked to Sulaimon and the two women or not.

These situations are so difficult. They are treacherous for an institution. Brutal for someone like a coach. You want to believe in your player, but.... You have to do the right thing, but what is the right thing?

As a victim, reporting sexual assault is always a difficult decision. I don't see any indication that it's any different at Duke re: the basketball team than anywhere else period. The accused always has supporters who might be negative toward the accuser. My personal belief is that it is rarely in the victim's self-interest to report because she's going to be mistreated brutally again, this time by the public and the process. Go to counseling, talk to your support network, focus on healing and growth, and get on with your life has been my advice. Reporting can lead to two or more years of being immersed in a daily hell, and there is a very strong probability that no conviction will result. So the decision to report or not to report is not one that I believe should be used to judge a victim in any way. Not reporting is in no way any evidence that nothing really happened. Unless you were there, you just don't know.

I guess the timing of the dismissal will cause a lot of people to find smoke. I don't really see it. I just see a community struggling with a very difficult situation involving accusations of horrible wrong-doing by one of its own against two of its own.

Seattle Hoo
03-02-2015, 09:08 AM
So just so were clear here, is the University supposed to open a full investigation into each rumor of sexual abuse they hear? It sounds to me like there was nothing reported at all. The only thing that was reported was a rumor that someone heard that someone said they were sexual abused by Sheed. Now forgive me if I am misunderstanding this, but if the team was made aware of this yet there was no clue who the rumors came from then why should they investigate anything? You can't start an investigation over every single sexual abuse rumor you hear on campus. So I think there is nothing to see here, yet its going to get so much play in the national media that Duke will come out looking bad no matter how they handled it. I wonder how many sexual assault rumors about athletes on campuses there is every year, I am sure the volume of rumors is huge. There isn't much Duke can do unless they have more than a rumor to go on.

It sounds like Federal law requires at least an informal investigation of talking to the directly involved parties and taking it from there. They said if they have names, they talk to those people.

CDu
03-02-2015, 09:11 AM
So just so were clear here, is the University supposed to open a full investigation into each rumor of sexual abuse they hear? It sounds to me like there was nothing reported at all. The only thing that was reported was a rumor that someone heard that someone said they were sexual abused by Sheed. Now forgive me if I am misunderstanding this, but if the team was made aware of this yet there was no clue who the rumors came from then why should they investigate anything? You can't start an investigation over every single sexual abuse rumor you hear on campus. So I think there is nothing to see here, yet its going to get so much play in the national media that Duke will come out looking bad no matter how they handled it. I wonder how many sexual assault rumors about athletes on campuses there is every year, I am sure the volume of rumors is huge. There isn't much Duke can do unless they have more than a rumor to go on.

I would actually guess that the number of sexual assault rumors involving athletes is pretty small relative to the number of athletes there are. Furthermore, I don't think the number of false rumors out there is huge. People don't just start such awful rumors for nothing. I mean, how many rumors of sexual assault have risen about Duke athletes previously?

Note: These statements are not intended to relate at all to the current rumors; just a general point. As others have said, we don't know squat about this situation.

JasonEvans
03-02-2015, 09:14 AM
A few comments...

The way the whole thing is written sorta smacks of amateur/inexperienced journalism. It is confusing to follow at times and there are so many anonymous or third-party sources that it does not come out as a well-told narrative. I got confused by the timeline a couple times and the story only has the barest of details. I think there is far more discussion of how various people came to know about the allegations than the substance of the allegations themselves. I hope it does not sound too harsh, but the way this was written and the actual facts presented would not pass muster for a story in the N&O or other mainstream news service (as many of you know, I wrote for the Chronicle and was a journalist at CNN for 20 years). Of course, that is hardly surprising at a student publication. They are learning. That is what The Chronicle is there for. They did their best and I comment their courage in writing what they knew would be a very challenging story.

I hope The Chronicle tried for a while to get one of the women to give more details, even anonymously, about what happened. It is clear that the story was written without the cooperation of either of the alleged victims, which is what makes it such a difficult journalistic story to tell. But, if they did not want to cooperate and if the presumption of the Common Ground "sharing circle" (or whatever it was) was that things discussed there would be kept private, I wonder if the Chronicle may have overstepped a bit in publishing this.

I can't really decide if Duke or the basketball program comes off looking bad here. On the one hand, the women who allegedly mentioned these incidents of sexual assault say they were afraid to report anything because they did not want to be attacked and criticized by Duke basketball supporters, but on the other hand if there wasn't anything ever formally reported, I'm not sure what Duke/K could have done about it. Rasheed was kicked off the team, though the article does not say if these allegations had anything to do with that, which somewhat indicates there are consequences for basketball players who do bad things. This whole thing would look a lot worse if he was still on the team today.

Lastly, as a side note (and I don't mean to sound flippant about a very serious issue) what is it about Common Ground that it attracts women who have been sexually assaulted by Rasheed?!?! Common Ground takes 56 kids per semester -- out of 6000 at Duke -- and they happened to pick a woman who was assaulted by Sheed twice?!?! It makes one wonder if there are a lot more women on campus who may have been assaulted by him who have not had an open forum opportunity to speak about it. Shudder...

-Jason "the story is so incomplete and poorly sourced that I wonder if it gets much national/mainstream media attention -- without a victim coming forward (even anonymously) it is hard to see this getting very far in terms of attention" Evans

TKG
03-02-2015, 09:17 AM
It sounds like Federal law requires at least an informal investigation of talking to the directly involved parties and taking it from there. They said if they have names, they talk to those people.

At this stage, given what little we know, the question will be did Duke, in accordance with Title IX, conduct an internal investigation? Duke had better be able to document that such an investigation took place. The article levels some pretty serious claims that both K and Kevin White knew about the allegations aganist Saluaimon. Again, the Univertisty needs to respond with accuracy and transparency.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 09:17 AM
Can the extent of the investigation be that the student conduct board went to the alleged victim in the rumors and asked if there was anything to report and the alleged victim said no? Would that classify as an investigation, or would they be required to seek out witnesses, look for DNA, and ask around campus if anyone else has been assaulted by Sheed? The fact that he is still a student at Duke must mean something.

Troublemaker
03-02-2015, 09:17 AM
A former affiliate of the Duke basketball program, who was with the team throughout the majority of Sulaimon's basketball career, became aware of the allegations made at the Fall 2013 Common Ground. The anonymous affiliate began speaking to the female student in January 2014, and began speaking to the second female student in March 2014 after learning of her allegations.

The allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, the anonymous affiliate said. That month, the allegations were brought to Krzyzewski and assistant coaches Jon Scheyer and Nate James and associate head coach Jeff Capel.
-----------

I'm not familiar with journalistic practices. But am I wrong to question why the Chronicle allowed this "affiliate" to remain anonymous? Obviously the two female students should remain anonymous. But not this affiliate, imo, being such a key source for this article.

In any case, I'm in shock. Especially if these allegations against Rasheed are true (although I'm not sure we'll ever find out one way or another). Rasheed seems like a great guy based on various interviews during his time with the program and various anecdotes told about him, but those interviews and anecdotes are insufficient for any of us fans to truly know him.

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 09:18 AM
I would actually guess that the number of sexual assault rumors involving athletes is pretty small relative to the number of athletes there are. Furthermore, I don't think the number of false rumors out there is huge. People don't just start such awful rumors for nothing. I mean, how many rumors of sexual assault have risen about Duke athletes previously?

Note: These statements are not intended to relate at all to the current rumors; just a general point. As others have said, we don't know squat about this situation.

False rumors are rampant on college campuses, whether it's athletes or otherwise. Benefit of the doubt needs to go to facts, although unfortunately, that's not usually the way it goes these days.

Matches
03-02-2015, 09:22 AM
At this stage, given what little we know, the question will be did Duke, in accordance with Title IX, conduct an internal investigation? Duke had better be able to document that such an investigation took place. The article levels some pretty serious claims that both K and Kevin White knew about the allegations aganist Saluaimon. Again, the Univertisty needs to respond with accuracy and transparency.

This, with this caveat (and hopefully someone more knowledgeable than me can answer this):

How much can the school legally reveal about the details of its investigation?

DarkstarWahoo
03-02-2015, 09:22 AM
A former affiliate of the Duke basketball program, who was with the team throughout the majority of Sulaimon's basketball career, became aware of the allegations made at the Fall 2013 Common Ground. The anonymous affiliate began speaking to the female student in January 2014, and began speaking to the second female student in March 2014 after learning of her allegations.

The allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, the anonymous affiliate said. That month, the allegations were brought to Krzyzewski and assistant coaches Jon Scheyer and Nate James and associate head coach Jeff Capel.
-----------

I'm not familiar with journalistic practices. But am I wrong to question why the Chronicle allowed this "affiliate" to remain anonymous? Obviously the two female students should remain anonymous. But not this affiliate, imo, being such a key source for this article.

In any case, I'm in shock. Especially if these allegations against Rasheed are true (although I'm not sure we'll ever find out one way or another). Rasheed seems like a great guy based on various interviews during his time with the program and various anecdotes told about him, but those interviews and anecdotes are insufficient for any of us fans to truly know him.

In general, I think journalists grant anonymity too freely. There could be facts that come out that justify it. But while these are serious allegations, we're not talking about Watergate here.

Just wondering...how is the Chronicle regarded?

CDu
03-02-2015, 09:24 AM
False rumors are rampant on college campuses, whether it's athletes or otherwise. Benefit of the doubt needs to go to facts, although unfortunately, that's not usually the way it goes these days.

I don't recall hearing a single rumor of sexual assault of any kind (true or false; athlete or no) in my time in undergrad or grad school (spanning two institutions).

I would agree that false rumors in general may run rampant; false rumors of sexual assault not so much.

Duvall
03-02-2015, 09:28 AM
-Jason "the story is so incomplete and poorly sourced that I wonder if it gets much national/mainstream media attention -- without a victim coming forward (even anonymously) it is hard to see this getting very far in terms of attention" Evans

Thanks, Jason. I think we all needed a good laugh on what's shaping up to be a tough morning.

*Of course* this story will get national media attention. It will be the top sports story by this afternoon, and hit the mainstream press by tomorrow morning. The Hot Takes should be flowing across the Internet within the hour.

NashvilleDevil
03-02-2015, 09:29 AM
A few comments...

The way the whole thing is written sorta smacks of amateur/inexperienced journalism. It is confusing to follow at times and there are so many anonymous or third-party sources that it does not come out as a well-told narrative. I got confused by the timeline a couple times and the story only has the barest of details. I think there is far more discussion of how various people came to know about the allegations than the substance of the allegations themselves. I hope it does not sound too harsh, but the way this was written and the actual facts presented would not pass muster for a story in the N&O or other mainstream news service (as many of you know, I wrote for the Chronicle and was a journalist at CNN for 20 years). Of course, that is hardly surprising at a student publication. They are learning. That is what The Chronicle is there for. They did their best and I comment their courage in writing what they knew would be a very challenging story.

I hope The Chronicle tried for a while to get one of the women to give more details, even anonymously, about what happened. It is clear that the story was written without the cooperation of either of the alleged victims, which is what makes it such a difficult journalistic story to tell. But, if they did not want to cooperate and if the presumption of the Common Ground "sharing circle" (or whatever it was) was that things discussed there would be kept private, I wonder if the Chronicle may have overstepped a bit in publishing this.

I can't really decide if Duke or the basketball program comes off looking bad here. On the one hand, the women who allegedly mentioned these incidents of sexual assault say they were afraid to report anything because they did not want to be attacked and criticized by Duke basketball supporters, but on the other hand if there wasn't anything ever formally reported, I'm not sure what Duke/K could have done about it. Rasheed was kicked off the team, though the article does not say if these allegations had anything to do with that, which somewhat indicates there are consequences for basketball players who do bad things. This whole thing would look a lot worse if he was still on the team today.

Lastly, as a side note (and I don't mean to sound flippant about a very serious issue) what is it about Common Ground that it attracts women who have been sexually assaulted by Rasheed?!?! Common Ground takes 56 kids per semester -- out of 6000 at Duke -- and they happened to pick a woman who was assaulted by Sheed twice?!?! It makes one wonder if there are a lot more women on campus who may have been assaulted by him who have not had an open forum opportunity to speak about it. Shudder...

-Jason "the story is so incomplete and poorly sourced that I wonder if it gets much national/mainstream media attention -- without a victim coming forward (even anonymously) it is hard to see this getting very far in terms of attention" Evans

It will get attention. Duke's own the "esteemed" Shane Ryan is already saying that it is great journalism from the Chronicle.

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 09:29 AM
Even if charges are not filed, you have to investigate. You have to find out WHY the charges were not filed. If the women did not file because they were scared of fan backlash, that's a serious problem. Students should never feel intimidated by a school's athletic standing.

Of course, students should never feel intimidated by a school's athletic standing. And I agree it is a serious problem if the women did not file because they were scared. But whose problem is it? I don't think we know enough to say.

Fear is subjective, and as other people have pointed out on this thread, many sexual assault victims experience fear or hesitation about coming forward (perhaps especially if they are in situations where they knew the person who assaulted them and thus might be subject to claims that they consented to what happened). As a society, we should work to make women feel more secure about coming forward, and obviously Duke is part of the society--but it's not clear what may have motivated these women not to come forward and it's not clear that, if they feared fan backlash, those fears were justified.

Edit: After reading the article, I see that anonymous second-hand sources say the women did not come forward because of fear of backlash. So there is some evidence (albeit not conclusive) that this was their reason. That raises my level of concern about a possible problem in Duke's culture that should be addressed--but there is still a difference between the women's perception that there would be a backlash and the reality (which we don't know since they did not come forward).

Devilwin
03-02-2015, 09:31 AM
The part that gets me is the 10 months of doing nothing, if the staff knew. Worries me...

Dukehky
03-02-2015, 09:32 AM
I can almost assuredly state that Duke did not glance over this investigation or the potential for an investigation. Dean Sue and Dean Bryan live for this stuff. Duke Student Conduct goes after people with an iron fist and those two would love to show that they are mightier than the basketball program. I don't mean that they would make it up, I mean that if there was something that they could grab hold of, they would have grabbed hold with all the strength in their beings.

I have never really liked the Chronicle, I think they overstep their bounds a fair bit, so whatever I think on the article is going to be inherently biased so I will refrain from commenting. I did really enjoy Jason's post, even if I would have been harsher in my critique.

Tripping William
03-02-2015, 09:34 AM
It will get attention. Duke's own the "esteemed" Shane Ryan is already saying that it is great journalism from the Chronicle.

The Big Lead has picked it up, but it is on the only non-Chronicle article I have seen thus far this morning.

http://thebiglead.com/2015/03/02/rasheed-sulaimon-sexual-assault-allegations/


Still, I'm with Duvall & NashvilleDevil: It will get attention, at least for a time (and maybe a long time). Hopefully the media will rigorously insist on facts, but I'm not terribly optimistic about that.

gus
03-02-2015, 09:39 AM
"The allegations were brought to the attention of a team psychologist in March 2014, the anonymous affiliate said. That month, the allegations were brought to Krzyzewski and assistant coaches Jon Scheyer and Nate James and associate head coach Jeff Capel."

Is this timeline correct? Scheyer wasn't an assistant coach in March of 2014, and Capel wasn't the associate head coach- Wojo was.

(ftr -- Troublemaker did not say this, he quoted the article)

dahntaysdawg
03-02-2015, 09:41 AM
Is this timeline correct? Scheyer wasn't an assistant coach in March of 2014, and Capel wasn't the associate head coach- Wojo was.

(ftr -- Troublemaker did not say this, he quoted the article)


Couldn't they be referring to their current titles?

tux
03-02-2015, 09:42 AM
There is no direct suggestion that Duke did anything wrong. The only thing that I saw was that Student Conduct should be told even with no complaint, and the accuser and accused should be interviewed, and there are no facts that this happened. However, I guess Wasiolek is the person in charge of that division, and she was informed early on. She also refused to comment on the specific case. So, we don't know if Student Conduct talked to Sulaimon and the two women or not.

These situations are so difficult. They are treacherous for an institution. Brutal for someone like a coach. You want to believe in your player, but.... You have to do the right thing, but what is the right thing?

As a victim, reporting sexual assault is always a difficult decision. I don't see any indication that it's any different at Duke re: the basketball team than anywhere else period. The accused always has supporters who might be negative toward the accuser. My personal belief is that it is rarely in the victim's self-interest to report because she's going to be mistreated brutally again, this time by the public and the process. Go to counseling, talk to your support network, focus on healing and growth, and get on with your life has been my advice. Reporting can lead to two or more years of being immersed in a daily hell, and there is a very strong probability that no conviction will result. So the decision to report or not to report is not one that I believe should be used to judge a victim in any way. Not reporting is in no way any evidence that nothing really happened. Unless you were there, you just don't know.

I guess the timing of the dismissal will cause a lot of people to find smoke. I don't really see it. I just see a community struggling with a very difficult situation involving accusations of horrible wrong-doing by one of its own against two of its own.


Agree on the point about the difficulty of reporting a sexual assault. The article mentions the power of the basketball program (and the loyalty of the fans) as the main reason the alleged victims didn't report, but that could be more a convenient shorthand for what would have been a difficult decision regardless. I.e., that really could be more a grapevine rumor than the fact that Rasheed did something (at best) regrettable (at worst) criminal. A lot has been written and discussed about campus sexual assaults over the past 12 months, and one main takeaway is just the inherent difficulty in getting to the facts in these cases. Most of the time, alcohol is involved and both parties may be very drunk. Victims are reluctant to come forward and suffer a great deal. Sometimes men are expelled with very little hard evidence and also have their lives ruined with what appears to be very little respect for their legal rights. Understandably, most folks would like to give the alleged victims as much benefit of the doubt as possible. Just unfortunate all the way around.

It seems that K's actions were less timed to the allegations but more closely linked to the student secretary resigning and meeting with Mike Craig. I'll happily wait for whatever facts come out, but on the surface, it seems that the prospect of the story becoming public was more the driving force here than the actual allegations. Plus, apparently, some other "things" not related to this story were part of the calculus.

My guess is that Dean Sue and the other university folks tasked with investigating these things took the steps they were required to take. If the victims did not want to file a report, and it was never more than a campus rumor (that Rasheed no doubt denied), it would have been very hard to dismiss him from the team as a first step as others above have stated.

I hope that the facts show that the proper steps were taken to protect both the women and also Rasheed's rights. That nothing rash was done, but at the same time, Rasheed was not protected just because it was March 2014 and the team was in the midst of the season's stretch run. That would be devastating.

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 09:45 AM
The part that gets me is the 10 months of doing nothing, if the staff knew. Worries me...

No. no. no. This is the problem with such things. We have no earthly idea what was known, what wasn't, and what was done or wasn't. We don't know.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 09:47 AM
A few comments...

The way the whole thing is written sorta smacks of amateur/inexperienced journalism. It is confusing to follow at times and there are so many anonymous or third-party sources that it does not come out as a well-told narrative. I got confused by the timeline a couple times and the story only has the barest of details. I think there is far more discussion of how various people came to know about the allegations than the substance of the allegations themselves. I hope it does not sound too harsh, but the way this was written and the actual facts presented would not pass muster for a story in the N&O or other mainstream news service (as many of you know, I wrote for the Chronicle and was a journalist at CNN for 20 years). Of course, that is hardly surprising at a student publication. They are learning. That is what The Chronicle is there for. They did their best and I comment their courage in writing what they knew would be a very challenging story.

I hope The Chronicle tried for a while to get one of the women to give more details, even anonymously, about what happened. It is clear that the story was written without the cooperation of either of the alleged victims, which is what makes it such a difficult journalistic story to tell. But, if they did not want to cooperate and if the presumption of the Common Ground "sharing circle" (or whatever it was) was that things discussed there would be kept private, I wonder if the Chronicle may have overstepped a bit in publishing this.

I can't really decide if Duke or the basketball program comes off looking bad here. On the one hand, the women who allegedly mentioned these incidents of sexual assault say they were afraid to report anything because they did not want to be attacked and criticized by Duke basketball supporters, but on the other hand if there wasn't anything ever formally reported, I'm not sure what Duke/K could have done about it. Rasheed was kicked off the team, though the article does not say if these allegations had anything to do with that, which somewhat indicates there are consequences for basketball players who do bad things. This whole thing would look a lot worse if he was still on the team today.

Lastly, as a side note (and I don't mean to sound flippant about a very serious issue) what is it about Common Ground that it attracts women who have been sexually assaulted by Rasheed?!?! Common Ground takes 56 kids per semester -- out of 6000 at Duke -- and they happened to pick a woman who was assaulted by Sheed twice?!?! It makes one wonder if there are a lot more women on campus who may have been assaulted by him who have not had an open forum opportunity to speak about it. Shudder...

-Jason "the story is so incomplete and poorly sourced that I wonder if it gets much national/mainstream media attention -- without a victim coming forward (even anonymously) it is hard to see this getting very far in terms of attention" Evans

I had the exact sentiments as you - Mike Corey mentioned they had been "working on this awhile." How long is awhile?

Sheed was dismissed at the end of January. If the internet is to be believed, rumors about this stuff have been swirling since before that. The article itself states that an allegation was made in 2013.

So how long has the Chronicle known about the allegations? Let's assume they only started looking into this shortly after Sheed got dismissed. It took them a month to come up with an article devoid of facts or sources and rife with opinion? It read more like a gossip column in Us magazine. Where's the content? If you're going to "scoop" a story that big, you better put on your journalist pants.

I find the timing of the story's release curious at best. You have basically nothing more than rumors in your article, yet it takes you 4 weeks to publish? And you do it on "Rivalry Week"? Sure we're not trying to fish for visibility?

And allowing a quote that cites "the next Duke scandal" and comparing it to FSU (where there was a criminal charge)? Unacceptable and unprofessional. It sounds like a hatchet job.

I'm with others in the sentiment of, what is K or the university supposed to do here? Do we suspend/dismiss every student that has an allegation filed against them. Forget a legal charge - just a student conduct charge. Do we *really* think that K, who has seen the legacies of guys like Joe Paterno go up in smoke due to stuff like this, would risk it all to protect Sheed? I think the fact that Sheed is still in good standing as a student with the university is the only fact we have right now. That means the investigation is still on-going, or the investigation concluded with no wrong doing found.

I don't know what the percentage of fake assault claims vs real ones is, and I don't care. These matters should get taken very seriously and unless something comes out that says they were not taken seriously, there isn't much to see here.

gus
03-02-2015, 09:49 AM
Couldn't they be referring to their current titles?

I suppose so, but it really leaves a lot of ambiguity, and in a story like this the reporter should really strive for clarity.

bbosbbos
03-02-2015, 09:52 AM
Shocked by the news this morning.

I think we need more evidence to make any conclusion. Just do not make any assumption.

weezie
03-02-2015, 09:53 AM
...
Lots of questions to answer before we can pat ourselves on the back too much.

Even the Chronicle story is a bit too breathless in recounting their summary of the situation. Frantic, maybe due to space constraints.
One line caught my eye, something about "most" of the University employees being required to report hearing of sexual assaults?
Who would not be on that list?

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 09:54 AM
These matters should get taken very seriously and unless something comes out that says they were not taken seriously, there isn't much to see here.

True, true. True dat.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 09:55 AM
Well the Washington Post picked it up and was sure to state that Coach K knew of the allegations for 10 months. All the haters are going to be out for blood unfortunately. It is very odd that this story comes out on March 1st, but I guess thats the best time for the Chronicle to run it. Now they will get quoted in every college basketball forum and tv show for the foreseeable future.

Mike Corey
03-02-2015, 09:57 AM
I had the exact sentiments as you - Mike Corey mentioned they had been "working on this awhile." How long is awhile?

These matters should get taken very seriously and unless something comes out that says they were not taken seriously, there isn't much to see here.

Re: The Chronicle, at least since shortly after Sulaimon's dismissal.

Re: the latter, I think that's right. I'll take another step back first: Is there solid reporting that people at Duke in fact knew of the indirect allegations? And then, there is zero reporting on what might have been done with what little information may have been shared with Duke...so what precisely happened?

Let's wait for some more facts, and see what comes then.

If in fact sexual assaults did occur, I'm hopeful the women received proper and thorough treatment and are doing as well as possible, and I'm hopeful that if all of this transpired and it came to Duke's attention, that Duke behaved above reproach in inquiring and handling all of this.

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 09:59 AM
The part that gets me is the 10 months of doing nothing, if the staff knew. Worries me...

Sure, but again--there are so few clear facts here. We don't know exactly what they knew, for starters, since the women apparently declined to pursue formal complaints and the Chronicle article itself, through a quoted source, says that Coach K and Kevin White knew "that Rasheed had these rumors swirling about him." "Knowing about rumors" is pretty vague and might have justified a rather different response than knowing about a formal charge.

We also don't know that they did nothing. The Chronicle article mentions involvement of a team psychologist, and everything we have heard about this situation suggests that the coaching staff has been dealing in some way or another with Sulaimon issues for some time, not just ignoring them. If they had dismissed Sulaimon from the team immediately, based on rumors that might later have proved unfounded or exaggerated (not saying they were, just imagining a scenario), they might have been criticized harshly or even sued for that action (think Dez Wells at Xavier).

It's also possible there was an investigation by the Office of Student Conduct despite the women's failure to complain, based on a report from a third party. If so, it would be confidential under student privacy laws, and allowing that investigation to proceed before acting might have been a reasonable approach.

It's worrisome, but I'm far from ready to conclude that Duke personnel acted wrongly or deliberately covered up information to protect the program. I doubt the media will share my hesitation, unfortunately.

CrazyNotCrazie
03-02-2015, 10:00 AM
A few early thoughts on the situation:

- For those wondering why there was no investigation: I'm sure there was at least some investigation into the situation. I don't think Coach K just woke up one morning, heard a rumor about Rasheed, and dismissed him from the team. Particularly after the lacrosse fiasco, the athletic department is too well educated about due process to not have done some research. Knowing Coach K, I would also guess that part of this process was sitting Rasheed down (likely multiple times), looking him in the eye and asking him if this was true. Based on the minimal amount of information now available, I am not going to hypothesize about what Rasheed's dismissal says about the outcome of that conversation.
- Notwithstanding the comment above about "The Chronicle had been working on this for a while" - please stop being so vague and acting omniscient - I thought that for such a "blockbuster" article, it was not very well researched or written. It was published as if they were in a huge rush to get it out before someone beat them to the scoop. In their efforts to be very 21st century, digital, and competing with the pros, the Chronicle seems to be sinking to the level of many of the 21st century digital pros. The Chronicle has a very esteemed group of alums that are prominent in journalism who are involved as mentors, teachers, and generally a sounding board. One would hope for an article of this magnitude, the writers would have reached out to some of these true professionals - it does not appear that they did. Also, one would hope that they reached out to legal counsel.

weezie
03-02-2015, 10:04 AM
There is no direct suggestion that Duke did anything wrong. The only thing that I saw was that Student Conduct should be told even with no complaint, and the accuser and accused should be interviewed, and there are no facts that this happened...

Right. What to do if the accuser(s,) who in fact make no actual accusation, since we are not privy to a recorded statement, only hearsay?

What a freaking mess. OK, back to the days of dorm mothers, curfews, visiting rooms and total loco parentis.

DBFAN
03-02-2015, 10:05 AM
So for those asking why or if anything was done or wasn't done earlier. Well I think we aren't looking at how complex this is. If the team and school decided to pursue a rigid investigation and in doing so would have had to dismiss him much earlier, what if they had done that and the rumor turned out to be false. So then the rich elitist Duke university showed they are racist and found someone guilty before he had due process. He may have done this, but without charges being filed you can't just go invading someone's private life and making a spectacle of them.

bluedev_92
03-02-2015, 10:06 AM
I remember very well how the lives of the lacrosse players were severely impacted by false accusations. That team was condemned by many before anyone knew anything. To me, that was handled incompetently by the university & many of the faculty members. I don't pretend to know anything about what happened or didn't happen in this particular case. However, the university has a responsibility to make sure that it not only does its duty under the law, but also (and just as crucial) - doesn't destroy student's futures via unsubstantiated claims.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:07 AM
Re: The Chronicle, at least since shortly after Sulaimon's dismissal.

Re: the latter, I think that's right. I'll take another step back first: Is there solid reporting that people at Duke in fact knew of the indirect allegations? And then, there is zero reporting on what might have been done with what little information may have been shared with Duke...so what precisely happened?

Let's wait for some more facts, and see what comes then.

If in fact sexual assaults did occur, I'm hopeful the women received proper and thorough treatment and are doing as well as possible, and I'm hopeful that if all of this transpired and it came to Duke's attention, that Duke behaved above reproach in inquiring and handling all of this.

Agreed. If true, the victims are what really matter here. Everything else is secondary.

tux
03-02-2015, 10:08 AM
To push back a bit on the Chronicle bashing. There are some facts worth reporting. I mean, we have a student who worked in the basketball office for 3 years who quit his job over the handling of this issue. That was on Jan 21st. He met with Craig on the 22nd. And Rasheed was dismissed approx. one week after that. The biggest issue I have is the use of the anonymous source, who is allowed to inject a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions --- it's his/her quote that draws the FSU comparison... Anyway, I can see why the Chronicle would investigate. And I think there was enough there to print something. But, they unfortunately fill out the story with a lot of silly stuff that should have been left out.

Question: Are students at the CG retreat encouraged to name names? I mean, it makes sense to create a safe place for women (or men) to discuss these things, but given the possibility that allegations could be fabricated or wrong, it seems dangerous to allow the participants to give the names of other Duke students. Those sort of things are never going to stay within the group...

Matches
03-02-2015, 10:10 AM
Common internet fallacy - the assumption that, because an event has not been made public, it must not have happened.

We do not know what investigation, if any, Duke performed. The Chronicle article quotes Dean Sue in saying that all charges of this nature are investigated, as the law requires. The school declining to share the specifics of that investigation <> the school doing nothing.

Indoor66
03-02-2015, 10:12 AM
Agreed. If true, the victims are what really matter here. Everything else is secondary.

I find the highlighted text to be ridiculous - unless you include a possibly innocent accused among your victims. No one is sacrosanct in a situation like this. We do not know if anything happened. We don't know who to call the "victim". Until that is defined we need to keep both our sanctimony and condemnation in very close check.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:13 AM
I find the highlighted text to be ridiculous - unless you include a possibly innocent accused among your victims. No one is sacrosanct in a situation like this. We do not know if anything happened. We don't know who to call the "victim". Until that is defined we need to keep both our sanctimony and condemnation in very close check.

I said "if true." I did not say it *is* true.

I personally don't care about implications to basketball or someone's good name if they are guilty of something like this.

Do you disagree that, if the allegations are true, there are other parties that matter more than the victims of said assault?

jjredickrules
03-02-2015, 10:16 AM
Lastly, as a side note (and I don't mean to sound flippant about a very serious issue) what is it about Common Ground that it attracts women who have been sexually assaulted by Rasheed?!?! Common Ground takes 56 kids per semester -- out of 6000 at Duke -- and they happened to pick a woman who was assaulted by Sheed twice?!?! It makes one wonder if there are a lot more women on campus who may have been assaulted by him who have not had an open forum opportunity to speak about it. Shudder...

I have been on Common Ground. There are a few notes I can clarify.

1) In order to create a "safe space" for sharing, the leaders make clear that the participants should keep all shared experiences private. If the allegations were made public by people other than the alleged victims, it would be frowned upon. CG emphasizes that personal experiences are only the individual's to share.
2) The CG application asks for a story of personal struggle, so I find it likely that the CG committee saw the Sheed stories as a chance to spark dialogue on the retreat. CG participants are chosen in order to make a diverse group, but also to create tough, personal conversations. There is no reason to assume that the proportion of women who spoke of Sheed on CG is representative of the overall Duke population.
3) CG attracts people who have been assaulted in general because it is a safe space to have that discussion without fear of repercussions/backlash. I'd say if the ones who shared their stories in confidence didn't spread the allegations, then the Chronicle, as well as the "friends" who spread it, are causing more harm than good.

IrishDevil
03-02-2015, 10:16 AM
Is there solid reporting that people at Duke in fact knew of the indirect allegations? And then, there is zero reporting on what might have been done with what little information may have been shared with Duke...so what precisely happened?

Let's wait for some more facts, and see what comes then.

My thinking also went along those lines, Mike.


“I wanted personally for the conversation to steer toward Coach K and Kevin White and I think he could sense that too,” Wensley said. “After advising me on my interactions with Laura Ann, he said that if I wanted to pursue further action on this issue that I would need to go through Student Conduct. And that Coach K had known and knew that Rasheed had these rumors swirling about him and that Kevin White had also known.”

It seems unlikely that is how this conversation went. Would an administrator in this situation sit down with a disgruntled former employee - a possible, maybe even probable whistleblower - and confirm that people in charge had knowledge, without saying something to the effect of, "and appropriate action was taken" ? It seems like prudence would dictate either don't say anything about who knew what, or state that they knew and acted appropriately. Otherwise, it would just be adding fuel to the fire. Either way, it seems to me that this article is reporting either more than what was said or less, although I couldn't say whether that is due to Wensley or the Chronicle. Or maybe it is because Mike Cragg actually said something that makes little sense to me in context. Just further reason to wait to see how things shake out.

J_C_Steel
03-02-2015, 10:16 AM
If the women who decided not to report the sexual assault allegations were AT ALL pressured by anyone affiliated with Duke athletics, then Duke should be sanctioned by the NCAA. If not, it doesn't appear that sanctions could be pursued, but the 10-month lag between the reporting of the second assault and any action by the basketball program is nonetheless embarrassing and wrong. Even if these allegations are false, the program should have conducted its own investigation and suspended Sulaimon during its pendency. We don't know if the program conducted an investigation, but allowing Sulaimon to play after he faced TWO sexual assault allegations is not reasonable (in my view). Too many people -- including higher-ups in the Duke administration and even Coach K -- seem to think these kinds of thing can be ignored...

The only possible defense for the Duke basketball program is that the allegations were confidential and the need for privacy for all involved precluded them from making any kind of announcement. But even that doesn't excuse failing to conduct an investigation, if they failed to do so, or failing to suspend Sulaimon during its pendency.

A sad day for the program.

CameronDuke
03-02-2015, 10:19 AM
It will be interesting to see more details regarding this case if any in the next few days. Does it have the potential to evolve into a disturbing and detrimental scandal for our program? For what I know so far, you bet it does. But after the Duke LAX case, I am reserving any opinions and judgments until I know more. I personally found that article confusing, at times aimless, and wandering. I have followed Coach K for as long as I can remember and he is a man of the utmost integrity and Duke has some of the best lawyers and administrative professionals in the world. This will be handled as best as it can by some of the best in their field. Obviously, if any wrongdoing did occur, I wish the victim the most sincere apologies and want healing to occur as the allegations are heinous. But I do not have nearly enough factual evidence as of this point to make any sort or call on who is wrong. Duke forever, though. We will sort this out and be the program of integrity and morals we always have been.

Matches
03-02-2015, 10:19 AM
Even if these allegations are false, the program should have conducted its own investigation and suspended Sulaimon during its pendency.

How do you know this wasn't done?

There was a report when Sulaimon was dismissed that he was "separated from the team" for several weeks during the offseason. If the investigation occurred in the offseason, and was resolved by the time this season began, how would we ever know of a suspension?

Kfanarmy
03-02-2015, 10:20 AM
Agreed. If true, the victims are what really matter here. Everything else is secondary.

The victims are what really matters if the accusations are true or false...who the victims are changes substantially however.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
03-02-2015, 10:20 AM
Very sad and disappointing news.

Also disappointing to me - the number of people posting on here using "I expect," "I assume," "I would imagine..." in their defense and/or critique of the handling here. At this point, it's extremely sketchy to work under any assumptions regarding either proper or improper handling of the situation.

If any fan base should know the dangers of jumping to conclusions, it ought to be us. I have very strong opinions about how I hope things were handled, but I am going to tread very lightly until more is known. If the coaches/administration have been anything other than above board, it might be time for me to step away from sports for awhile.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:21 AM
The only possible defense for the Duke basketball program is that the allegations were confidential and the need for privacy for all involved precluded them from making any kind of announcement. But even that doesn't excuse failing to conduct an investigation, if they failed to do so, or failing to suspend Sulaimon during its pendency.

A sad day for the program.

Uh, that's not the "only" defense. That is THE defense. People's legal issues are no one's business but their own, the accuser's and the governing body.

Should your employer send out a mass email to your co-workers if you get accused of harassment at work?

How is this a "sad" day when we don't have all the facts?

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:23 AM
The victims are what really matters if the accusations are true or false...who the victims are changes substantially however.


I agree. My original post was in response to Mike Corey's post.

It's an unfortunate situation all around for everyone.

J_C_Steel
03-02-2015, 10:25 AM
How do you know this wasn't done?

There was a report when Sulaimon was dismissed that he was "separated from the team" for several weeks during the offseason. If the investigation occurred in the offseason, and was resolved by the time this season began, how would we ever know of a suspension?

That's a good point. At this point, the program will have to make that clear. I don't know if a thorough investigation into two separate sexual assault allegations could be conducted in a 2- or 3-week period, but if that's what happened, some of my fears and disappointments will be allayed.

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 10:26 AM
If the women who decided not to report the sexual assault allegations were AT ALL pressured by anyone affiliated with Duke athletics, then Duke should be sanctioned by the NCAA. If not, it doesn't appear that sanctions could be pursued, but the 10-month lag between the reporting of the second assault and any action by the basketball program is nonetheless embarrassing and wrong. Even if these allegations are false, the program should have conducted its own investigation and suspended Sulaimon during its pendency. We don't know if the program conducted an investigation, but allowing Sulaimon to play after he faced TWO sexual assault allegations is not reasonable (in my view). Too many people -- including higher-ups in the Duke administration and even Coach K -- seem to think these kinds of thing can be ignored...

The only possible defense for the Duke basketball program is that the allegations were confidential and the need for privacy for all involved precluded them from making any kind of announcement. But even that doesn't excuse failing to conduct an investigation, if they failed to do so, or failing to suspend Sulaimon during its pendency.

A sad day for the program.

OMG. The willingness to condemn in abscence of any real info or fact is stunning. A sad day for common sense.

J_C_Steel
03-02-2015, 10:27 AM
How is this a "sad" day when we don't have all the facts?

When a player facing two separate sexual assault allegations was permitted to play games for the Duke basketball program without any indication that a thorough, fair investigation was conducted by the program into those investigations, and the issue is made public by the student newspaper, that qualifies as a "sad" day for me. Maybe you have different standards.

tux
03-02-2015, 10:28 AM
If the women who decided not to report the sexual assault allegations were AT ALL pressured by anyone affiliated with Duke athletics, then Duke should be sanctioned by the NCAA. If not, it doesn't appear that sanctions could be pursued, but the 10-month lag between the reporting of the second assault and any action by the basketball program is nonetheless embarrassing and wrong. Even if these allegations are false, the program should have conducted its own investigation and suspended Sulaimon during its pendency. We don't know if the program conducted an investigation, but allowing Sulaimon to play after he faced TWO sexual assault allegations is not reasonable (in my view). Too many people -- including higher-ups in the Duke administration and even Coach K -- seem to think these kinds of thing can be ignored...

The only possible defense for the Duke basketball program is that the allegations were confidential and the need for privacy for all involved precluded them from making any kind of announcement. But even that doesn't excuse failing to conduct an investigation, if they failed to do so, or failing to suspend Sulaimon during its pendency.

A sad day for the program.


But it's important to realize that Sulaimon didn't "face TWO sexual assault allegations". No formal allegations were made. Furthermore, I would think that it's not the basketball program's responsibility to investigate. If Duke University needs the basketball program to launch an investigation of a sexual assault, then something is truly wrong. If the folks responsible for these things failed to investigate, or would have expelled Rasheed except were pressured by the athletic department not to, then THAT would be devastating. I would hope a players standing on an athletic team and/or at the university due to such an incident is handled outside the athletic department and the latter has no bearing on the outcome. Isn't that the way it's supposed to work?

At this point, we don't know enough to second guess what anyone did or didn't do.

Matches
03-02-2015, 10:28 AM
That's a good point. At this point, the program will have to make that clear.

Well, I'd love to know that information too, but I don't agree the program will have to make that clear. In fact, I think it may be legally prohibited from doing so. I'm sure we'd all like to know the whole story here, but both the accusers and the accused have privacy rights that the school can't compromise.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:29 AM
When a player facing two separate sexual assault allegations was permitted to play games for the Duke basketball program without any indication that a thorough, fair investigation was conducted by the program into those investigations, and the issue is made public by the student newspaper, that qualifies as a "sad" day for me. Maybe you have different standards.

As has been already stated, how do you know an investigation wasn't conducted? Because the Chronicle article that included references to "the next Duke scandal" and an FSU comparison didn't report it?

In fact, the article states that K knew about "rumors swirling." Those are hardly allegations made by an accuser.

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 10:31 AM
When a player facing two separate sexual assault allegations was permitted to play games for the Duke basketball program without any indication that a thorough, fair investigation was conducted by the program into those investigations, and the issue is made public by the student newspaper, that qualifies as a "sad" day for me. Maybe you have different standards.

This line of conjecture, assumption, and accusation is actually more dangerous to the truth than anything else. Jeeez.

J_C_Steel
03-02-2015, 10:32 AM
OMG. The willingness to condemn in abscence of any real info or fact is stunning. A sad day for common sense.

The article includes "real info," my friend. And the simple fact is that a player facing two separate allegations of sexual assault played games for the Duke basketball program. Until and unless I hear that the program conducted a thorough investigation into both incidents and absolved Sulaimon, I will continue to see this as a "sad" day and a "sad" development. You are certainly entitled to think otherwise.

J_C_Steel
03-02-2015, 10:33 AM
This line of conjecture, assumption, and accusation is actually more dangerous to the truth than anything else. Jeeez.

What do I assume here? I'm basing my opinion on what I know to be true already. At this point, the program needs to explain itself -- what it knew, when it knew, what it did when it knew, etc. I fully acknowledge that we don't have all the facts yet. But the onus is now on the Duke administration and basketball program to prove that it acted reasonably here.

DukeUsul
03-02-2015, 10:34 AM
At this stage, given what little we know, the question will be did Duke, in accordance with Title IX, conduct an internal investigation? Duke had better be able to document that such an investigation took place. The article levels some pretty serious claims that both K and Kevin White knew about the allegations aganist Saluaimon. Again, the Univertisty needs to respond with accuracy and transparency.

I find it very likely the University will not be able to respond with transparency for privacy reasons.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:34 AM
As has been already stated, how do you know an investigation wasn't conducted? Because the Chronicle article that included references to "the next Duke scandal" and an FSU comparison didn't report it?

In fact, the article states that K knew about "rumors swirling." Those are hardly allegations made by an accuser.

Just to re-iterate how annoyed I am about the Chronicle allowing the phrase "the next Duke scandal" into that article...

When you quote someone as saying it before all the facts are out and your article does little but confirm there are allegations, you kind of sound like you're hoping there is one.

J_C_Steel
03-02-2015, 10:34 AM
As has been already stated, how do you know an investigation wasn't conducted? Because the Chronicle article that included references to "the next Duke scandal" and an FSU comparison didn't report it?

In fact, the article states that K knew about "rumors swirling." Those are hardly allegations made by an accuser.

The question is, and remains, what did Coach K and the basketball program do when it heard the "rumors swirling"? Because I believe that "nothing" is not an adequate response. Do you?

Matches
03-02-2015, 10:35 AM
What do I assume here? I'm basing my opinion on what I know to be true already. At this point, the program needs to explain itself -- what it knew, when it knew, what it did when it knew, etc. I fully acknowledge that we don't have all the facts yet. But the onus is now on the Duke administration and basketball program to prove that it acted reasonably here.

How, other than Dean Sue saying, as she does in the Chronicle article, that the school investigates all claims like this, would you propose the school prove it acted reasonably?

Kfanarmy
03-02-2015, 10:35 AM
When a player facing two separate sexual assault allegations was permitted to play games for the Duke basketball program without any indication that a thorough, fair investigation was conducted by the program into those investigations, and the issue is made public by the student newspaper, that qualifies as a "sad" day for me. Maybe you have different standards.

More sad is the realization that anyone associated with a major university would not be able to parse a story rushed to the presses without facts and discern what is and isn't, should and shouldn't, be clear.

DBFAN
03-02-2015, 10:36 AM
So does that mean the allegations/rumors happened sometime around May of last year.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 10:37 AM
The article includes "real info," my friend. And the simple fact is that a player facing two separate allegations of sexual assault played games for the Duke basketball program. Until and unless I hear that the program conducted a thorough investigation into both incidents and absolved Sulaimon, I will continue to see this as a "sad" day and a "sad" development. You are certainly entitled to think otherwise.

So at any point in any players career some random person can come out and say, this guy raped me. Then automatically they can't play basketball anymore? It seems to me that without any kind of evidence or charges Coach K can't just kick him off the team or not let him play. That's not how the system works. Now if it is your opinion that any player with even a rumor against him shouldn't play then that's your own deal, not something any university should abide by. That would be a hard standard to live up to.

Kfanarmy
03-02-2015, 10:38 AM
What do I assume here? I'm basing my opinion on what I know to be true already. At this point, the program needs to explain itself -- what it knew, when it knew, what it did when it knew, etc. I fully acknowledge that we don't have all the facts yet. But the onus is now on the Duke administration and basketball program to prove that it acted reasonably here.

I understand the issue now.

Challenge/request: Lay out what you believe are facts, contained in the arcticle.

miramar
03-02-2015, 10:39 AM
We are not Florida State. If a Duke student has a legitimate complain about physical or sexual assault, then the Duke community certainly will not go after her in any way. In fact, if we recall the lacrosse case, it went entirely the other way, although I hope that since then we have all learned to wait until the facts come in.

Whatever Sheed did or did not do, it will probably become impossible for him on campus either way. Spring Break starts Friday and the last day to withdraw from classes is March 25, so I wouldn't be surprised if he takes full advantage of those dates.

DBFAN
03-02-2015, 10:39 AM
The question is, and remains, what did Coach K and the basketball program do when it heard the "rumors swirling"? Because I believe that "nothing" is not an adequate response. Do you?

I understand what you are saying, but not sure investigating a young man, who hadnt been charged with anything, and making a public display of him and the accusers is the right thing either. If you go down that route and he is innocent then you face a whole new world of prob

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:40 AM
The question is, and remains, what did Coach K and the basketball program do when it heard the "rumors swirling"? Because I believe that "nothing" is not an adequate response. Do you?

Well, we do know Sulaimon has been suspended a few times in the last few seasons. Could be related. Could be unrelated.

I just wonder what's more important to you - being in the "know" about a situation that doesn't really pertain to you or anyone not directly involved? Or allowing due process to play out and make judgements after all facts have been presented rather than letting people take giant leaps in logic?

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:41 AM
We are not Florida State. If a Duke student has a legitimate complain about physical or sexual assault, then the Duke community certainly will not go after her in any way. In fact, if we recall the lacrosse case, it went entirely the other way, although I hope that since then we have all learned to wait until the facts come in.

Whatever Sheed did or did not do, it will probably become impossible for him on campus either way. Spring Break starts Friday and the last day to withdraw from classes is March 25, so I wouldn't be surprised if he takes full advantage of those dates.

I thought the same, but everyone in the Duke community is not like everyone else.

Every fan base has some stupidity in it.

tux
03-02-2015, 10:41 AM
The question is, and remains, what did Coach K and the basketball program do when it heard the "rumors swirling"? Because I believe that "nothing" is not an adequate response. Do you?

Even though there were rumors and no formal allegations, I agree that "nothing" would be an inadequate response. That said, there is nothing in the Chronicle article that points to "nothing". Regardless of what K did, if that information comes out, there will always be people who disagree --- either that he overstepped or didn't do enough.

The fact that Rasheed is still at Duke completing his coursework is a big data point for me. These were rumors that flowed from a student retreat. No formal allegations were made. It's hard to move forward from that starting point. That said, I would be very surprised if K just ignored even the rumors.

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 10:42 AM
What do I assume here? I'm basing my opinion on what I know to be true already. At this point, the program needs to explain itself -- what it knew, when it knew, what it did when it knew, etc. I fully acknowledge that we don't have all the facts yet. But the onus is now on the Duke administration and basketball program to prove that it acted reasonably here.

No, I' d say the onus is on the Chronicle to try to back up its intial, very very very loose reporting. The university has to think to student privacy, in all cases. Sexual assault cases and subsequent investigations are not fodder for public consumption, regardless if anybody involved is on an athletic team or not.

David Bunkley
03-02-2015, 10:46 AM
If the women who decided not to report the sexual assault allegations were AT ALL pressured by anyone affiliated with Duke athletics, then Duke should be sanctioned by the NCAA. If not, it doesn't appear that sanctions could be pursued, but the 10-month lag between the reporting of the second assault and any action by the basketball program is nonetheless embarrassing and wrong. Even if these allegations are false, the program should have conducted its own investigation and suspended Sulaimon during its pendency. We don't know if the program conducted an investigation, but allowing Sulaimon to play after he faced TWO sexual assault allegations is not reasonable (in my view). Too many people -- including higher-ups in the Duke administration and even Coach K -- seem to think these kinds of thing can be ignored...

The only possible defense for the Duke basketball program is that the allegations were confidential and the need for privacy for all involved precluded them from making any kind of announcement. But even that doesn't excuse failing to conduct an investigation, if they failed to do so, or failing to suspend Sulaimon during its pendency.

A sad day for the program.

Right after Rasheed was suspended, didn't some information stating that he had been suspended during the summer surface? Does anyone know why?

Purely speculation here, but hopefully that coincided with an internal Duke investigation.

This sucks.

#GODUKE

DBFAN
03-02-2015, 10:47 AM
I asked about it being last May because if so, and Rasheed was on team at start of year then he actually had very limited time to play before being removed from team.

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 10:48 AM
The article includes "real info," my friend. And the simple fact is that a player facing two separate allegations of sexual assault played games for the Duke basketball program. Until and unless I hear that the program conducted a thorough investigation into both incidents and absolved Sulaimon, I will continue to see this as a "sad" day and a "sad" development. You are certainly entitled to think otherwise.

Others have already responded to some of your points here, likely more eloquently than I could. I just want to say one more thing--that the basketball program is not the right body to investigate incidents of alleged sexual assault involving a player. There is an Office of Student Conduct that is set up precisely to deal with issues of this kind, and an athlete should go through the same process as any other student would. Imagine for a minute that the program had "investigated" and fully absolved Sulaimon--what kind of credibility would that finding have? It would have been seen as special treatment for athletes, and rightly so, whether or not the allegations were true.

Note I am not saying that the program should ignore such situations if they arise--but it's not their place to supplant the existing process because the involved student is an athlete.

DBFAN
03-02-2015, 10:49 AM
Guess my point is K didn't let him play this whole year before removing him.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:50 AM
And the firestorm/logic leaps begin.

Sulaimon is trending on facebook with the following text:


Dismissal of Duke Blue Devils player reportedly tied to sexual assault allegations

That was linked to the Chronicle article. Where in the article did they say his dismissal was related? Oh, that's right. Logic leap.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 10:51 AM
Others have already responded to some of your points here, likely more eloquently than I could. I just want to say one more thing--that the basketball program is not the right body to investigate incidents of alleged sexual assault involving a player. There is an Office of Student Conduct that is set up precisely to deal with issues of this kind, and an athlete should go through the same process as any other student would. Imagine for a minute that the program had "investigated" and fully absolved Sulaimon--what kind of credibility would that finding have? It would have been seen as special treatment for athletes, and rightly so, whether or not the allegations were true.

Note I am not saying that the program should ignore such situations if they arise--but it's not their place to supplant the existing process because the involved student is an athlete.

Exactly.

An equivalent would be any regular business.

Would your boss investigate you for sexual harassment? Or would HR? Would the janitor get investigated any differently than the guy in accounting?

JasonEvans
03-02-2015, 10:51 AM
One line caught my eye, something about "most" of the University employees being required to report hearing of sexual assaults?
Who would not be on that list?

I could see university employees who work in professions where confidentiality is presumed being excused from reporting something like this. So, a psychologist or a member of the clergy would not have to break confidentiality to report an alleged sexual assault.

I don't know this for a fact, but you asked who might be excused from reporting and those are a few professions where it would make sense.

-Jason

Indoor66
03-02-2015, 10:52 AM
No, I' d say the onus is on the Chronicle to try to back up its intial, very very very loose reporting. The university has to think to student privacy, in all cases. Sexual assault cases and subsequent investigations are not fodder for public consumption, regardless if anybody involved is on an athletic team or not.

Rolling Stone anyone?

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 10:54 AM
Glad the DBR front page uses "rumors" instead of "accusations." Unless somebody goes on the record somehow, "rumors" should be the term used.

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 10:55 AM
Rolling Stone anyone?

Exactly.

Matches
03-02-2015, 10:57 AM
Statement from the school:

https://twitter.com/bretstrelow/status/572424367348551680/photo/1

CameronDuke
03-02-2015, 11:02 AM
Statement from the school:

https://twitter.com/bretstrelow/status/572424367348551680/photo/1

I had to nearly get out a magnifying glass to read that...

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 11:03 AM
Statement from the school:

https://twitter.com/bretstrelow/status/572424367348551680/photo/1

Guess that settles it, they investigated it as required and must not have come up with anything. They are prohibited by law to speak about it any further and I doubt Coach K is allowed to talk about it either. Case closed as far as I am concerned, however the media will continue to milk it for all its worth.

Matches
03-02-2015, 11:04 AM
I had to nearly get out a magnifying glass to read that...

Yea sorry about that, I did too.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 11:04 AM
Yea sorry about that, I did too.

if yo click on the tweet it enlarges

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 11:06 AM
if yo click on the tweet it enlarges

Or if you hold your face really close to the screen... :p

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 11:07 AM
The more I read the original article, the more I think the Chronicle should be pressed to back-up their claims/suggestions. This is not shooting the messager, or retribution. It's simply about good journalism. If anything, the Rolling Stone incident showed that we need to hold news outlets accountable from day 1. I've seen some pretty good reporting at university papers around the country, and this Chronicle piece is more message board material than reporting.

hudlow
03-02-2015, 11:07 AM
I am reminded of Coach K's one and only rule.....

"We have only one rule here: Don't do anything that's detrimental to yourself. Because if it's detrimental to you, it'll be detrimental to our program and to Duke University."

We still don't know why Sulaimon was let go from the team. Knowing that Coach K runs a program that puts the burden of personal conduct on his players makes me think that for whatever reason Rasheed was removed from the team Coach K gave him every benefit of the doubt to uphold the only team rule.

hud

David Bunkley
03-02-2015, 11:09 AM
Or if you hold your face really close to the screen... :p

If you do both, it gets REALLY big. :)

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 11:10 AM
The more I read the original article, the more I think the Chronicle should be pressed to back-up their claims/suggestions. This is not shooting the messager, or retribution. It's simply about good journalism. If anything, the Rolling Stone incident showed that we need to hold news outlets accountable from day 1. I've seen some pretty good reporting at university papers around the country, and this Chronicle piece is more message board material than reporting.

Agreed.

However, if someone had posted that article as a message board post to DBR, the thread would have been locked and the poster banned. And they'd have a bunch of little flamey thingies from the rest of us.

If a message board won't stand for that kind of rumor mongering, we should expect a newspaper to be held to similar standards.

aimo
03-02-2015, 11:11 AM
How, other than Dean Sue saying, as she does in the Chronicle article, that the school investigates all claims like this, would you propose the school prove it acted reasonably?

The fact that he was kicked off the team but still enrolled in school leads me to believe that whatever was discovered about the alleged incidents was bad enough to be detrimental to the team's cohesion, but legally not enough to be expelled from Duke. I imagine that if the accusers aren't willing to file official reports with Duke or Durham Police, then there's nothing else the University can do.

Plus, they don't want to face another embarrassing lawsuit if the whole thing turns out to be bogus (lacrosse, anyone?).

Am I wrong in thinking that now that Rasheed is off the team, it would be more likely that the accusers would come forward officially? Less of a Jameis Winston Effect?

Kfanarmy
03-02-2015, 11:13 AM
Guess that settles it, they investigated it as required and must not have come up with anything. They are prohibited by law to speak about it any further and I doubt Coach K is allowed to talk about it either. Case closed as far as I am concerned, however the media will continue to milk it for all its worth.

Playing devil's advocate once again....the statement doesn't address this specific rumor at all. It is a general statement about what Duke does when it receives reports of sexual assault. So while I'm confident Duke took appropriate action if they had the report, I don't think this statement "settles" anything.

Duke31122
03-02-2015, 11:19 AM
Well, I think we all knew this would surface sooner or later. I have faith in our school and basketball program, that these allegations were handled appropriately. I do offer my thoughts and prayers to all of those involved. We never know until all of the facts come out, who is right and who is wrong. I do hope the females mentioned in this story are okay, and that their lives not be displayed on National media.

That being said, the only disappointment I have here is in the Chronicle (and possibly Rasheed if he is found guilty). What a terribly sourced article, and published without any thoughts of repercussions to the University.

Based on the statement by the school, everything was handled properly.In no way are we anything related to FSU. Our athletes go to class, work hard, and graduate at an exceptionally high rate. Not to mention Coach K is way classier than Jimbo Fisher. This is the first player in 30+ years K has ever dismissed.

Also, there has been talk on here about the 10 month delay. I do not know what caused this, and I am not trying to start any rumors/specualation, but I would guess Rasheed and the girls were offered due process. And, out of respect for all parties involved (not the Duke basketball program), the matter was kept under wraps until the investigation was finished. Duke's class extends through more than just it's basketball program. Duke is an elite and very respected University, and I trust this was handled with the utmost attention.

The facts will come out eventually. All we can do as fans is hope for the girls and everyone else involved first and foremost. Secondly we should have our team and coaches back. No doubt this is not the brightest day for the program, but we have a great team with a great brotherhood playing on the court for us this year. These 8 guys including 4 freshman have really put together a season to be proud of. As fans we need to show up Wednesday night against Wake Forest and show them more support than we have all season. I love this team, and I love our Coach. Now let's support them in the classy way the represent us.

Matches
03-02-2015, 11:23 AM
Also, there has been talk on here about the 10 month delay. I do not know what caused this, and I am not trying to start any rumors/specualation, but I would guess Rasheed and the girls were offered due process. And, out of respect for all parties involved (not the Duke basketball program), the matter was kept under wraps until the investigation was finished. Duke's class extends through more than just it's basketball program. Duke is an elite and very respected University, and I trust this was handled with the utmost attention.



Probably worth mentioning again that we do not know whether Sulaimon's dismissal was related to these allegations in any way. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. So this notion that there was a 10-month delay is problematic - for all we know, the university investigated this, took whatever action it deemed appropriate, and closed the book on it last spring.

Duke31122
03-02-2015, 11:26 AM
Probably worth mentioning again that we do not know whether Sulaimon's dismissal was related to these allegations in any way. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. So this notion that there was a 10-month delay is problematic - for all we know, the university investigated this, took whatever action it deemed appropriate, and closed the book on it last spring.

I completely agree. I am just referring to when the Chronicle reportedly says K first found out, and when K dismissed Rasheed. That is why I said in my post that I am sure due process was given. There is no telling why Rasheed was dismissed, and I do not care to know. That is for Duke Basketball personnel to know.

flyingdutchdevil
03-02-2015, 11:30 AM
We don't know a lot of facts, but there are a lot of interesting talking points from this article. First of all, I thought it was a well-written piece of journalism, especially considering it is amateurism (Chronicle staff isn't paid). Then again, I'm not the one to argue against journalists, commentators (save for Vitale), or refs.

1) As virtually everyone has commented on, we don't know a lot. What we do know - and the article has done a decent job of - is that there are two females who feel they have been sexually assaulted by Rasheed Sulaimon. We don't know if the female students are telling the truth. We don't know if Rasheed Sulaimon has any guilt. We don't know how much the different levels of Duke - admin, athletics, coaches - knew. But, based on multiple sources, it does sound like two women are explicitly stating that Rasheed Sulaimon sexually assaulted them. And I hope the university did everything in it's power to look into this matter. Because if it didn't, that is absolutely pathetic on behalf of the university.

2) Every student who went to Duke knows that the men's Duke basketball is nearly untouchable. Whether correct or not, it's true. They are held in such high regard that the mere sight of them on campus gets people whispering. I know this because I was often one of the whisperers when I saw the likes of JJ Redick, Shelden Williams, or Sean Dockery walking the quads. They are our biggest celebrities by a long shot. It's part of the reason that Duke basketball players are coached so hard about not doing anything stupid. Not even illegal, but stupid. It's also part of the reason that the Duke basketball players are such an isolated group; I don't think the players are introverted but the staff wants to isolate the players as much as possible to prevent these issues from arising. It's why players like Nolan Smith are so refreshing - a player who immerses himself in the Duke community as much as possible. I can't say this about a lot of players, but I see Nolan Smith as a Duke student first and Duke basketball player second because of his submersion into the Duke community. I have a fear that it's potential scandals or accusations like this that will further isolate the team from the rest of the Duke community.

3) This will be a media firestorm. Nothing sells better than "Duke" and "sex". Duke has had so many sex scandals in the last 10 years that many have made the two synonymous (lacrosse, sex dissertation, porn star, etc).

4) I'm just sad that this is happening. Unlike others, I think Duke players and students can make the same stupid mistakes as any other university's student body. But we have the fortune of having a coach, competent staff, and university support who mitigate these risks as much as possible. And it's not even preventing them from doing this, but even preventing them from being put in a situation like this (brings me back to 2)).

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
03-02-2015, 11:37 AM
I completely agree. I am just referring to when the Chronicle reportedly says K first found out, and when K dismissed Rasheed. That is why I said in my post that I am sure due process was given. There is no telling why Rasheed was dismissed, and I do not care to know. That is for Duke Basketball personnel to know.

How on earth is anyone in this thread certain of anything? The level of conjecture in both directions on this thread is truly embarrassing. It's possible that we will know more details as time passes, but given how little was leaked in the last year, we should probably come to terms with the fact that we may not. In the meantime, perhaps we should all take a few deep breaths before issuing proclamations about how things were handled.

Billy Dat
03-02-2015, 11:38 AM
Sounds like the weekly ACC telecon had a few more national writers paying attention:

Dana O'Neil ‏@ESPNDanaOneil 5m5 minutes ago
Mike Krzyzewski no comments on Rasheed Sulaimon situation at Duke

Jeff Goodman ‏@GoodmanESPN 5m5 minutes ago
Mike Krzyzewski been asked twice on ACC conference call about Rasheed Sulaimon allegations: "I don't have any comment about that."

Pat Forde ‏@YahooForde 5m5 minutes ago
Three questions about Sulaimon, three no-comments from Mike Krzyzewski on ACC conference call.

Duke31122
03-02-2015, 11:39 AM
How on earth is anyone in this thread certain of anything? The level of conjecture in both directions on this thread is truly embarrassing. It's possible that we will know more details as time passes, but given how little was leaked in the last year, we should probably come to terms with the fact that we may not. In the meantime, perhaps we should all take a few deep breaths before issuing proclamations about how things were handled.

I personally do not know anything. I am merely stating the faith I have in Duke University and our Basketball program. Any pessimism others have posted on this thread is their problem. I do not see how posting in support of our University is proclaiming how things were handled. Too many people are worried Duke went the wrong way about this and did some shady things.

Devilwin
03-02-2015, 11:47 AM
It's only human nature to speculate. But like the man says, we don't really know anything yet. Just conjecture is all we have at this point. Every Duke fan is upset, and that's understandable, so let's not rip into each other at this point...

oldnavy
03-02-2015, 11:48 AM
I don't "know" anything regarding the particulars of this situation, BUT I would bet the farm that the staff under Coach K's leadership did the right thing given the circumstances of the allegations/rumors.

Coach K isn't perfect, but I cannot imagine a situation where he would jeopardize his reputation and the program's reputation by trying to cover up a sexual assault committed by one of his players.

Just can't imagine this happened, too many years of seeing Coach K do the right thing to believe any different.

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 11:49 AM
However, if someone had posted that article as a message board post to DBR, the thread would have been locked and the poster banned. And they'd have a bunch of little flamey thingies from the rest of us.

What's the opposite of spork? Flork? Can we verb this? I florked thraotybeard.

DukeWarhead
03-02-2015, 11:51 AM
We don't know a lot of facts, but there are a lot of interesting talking points from this article. First of all, I thought it was a well-written piece of journalism, especially considering it is amateurism (Chronicle staff isn't paid). Then again, I'm not the one to argue against journalists, commentators (save for Vitale), or refs.

)).

Can't disagree more. There are plenty of college papers around the country that understand the basic tenents of reporting news even though they are students not getting paid. The Chronicle article makes very little effort to define rumor or heresay from fact and, most importantly, does not treat the situation as a claim made against a student but as rather as a crime yet unpunished. Insinuation is not good journalism, even in college.

Devilwin
03-02-2015, 11:54 AM
I don't "know" anything regarding the particulars of this situation, BUT I would bet the farm that the staff under Coach K's leadership did the right thing given the circumstances of the allegations/rumors.

Coach K isn't perfect, but I cannot imagine a situation where he would jeopardize his reputation and the program's reputation by trying to cover up a sexual assault committed by one of his players.

Just can't imagine this happened, too many years of seeing Coach K do the right thing to believe any different.

Well said.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
03-02-2015, 11:54 AM
I don't "know" anything regarding the particulars of this situation, BUT I would bet the farm that the staff under Coach K's leadership did the right thing given the circumstances of the allegations/rumors.

Coach K isn't perfect, but I cannot imagine a situation where he would jeopardize his reputation and the program's reputation by trying to cover up a sexual assault committed by one of his players.

Just can't imagine this happened, too many years of seeing Coach K do the right thing to believe any different.

I absolutely hope your faith is placed correctly, but the last few years in sports and media leave me pretty jaded. There aren't many heroes left. And I really hate when pedestals are knocked over and heroes come tumbling down.

CameronBornAndBred
03-02-2015, 11:59 AM
After taking some time to digest this, here are my thoughts.

IF the dismissal is related to the reports of sexual assault, that would be very bad for Duke, since someone didn't act sooner, so I am leaning towards the assumption that both are independent of each other. K has never struck me as anyone but an honorable person, and he has proven time and time again that no player is more important than the team. Benchings, doghouse, whatever the repercussions of their actions, both stars and bench-warmers have experienced them. Rasheed was the first (and hopefully last) to pay the ultimate price, but I just don't think that if Mike Krzyzewski thought for one second that he had a rapist on his team that player would be wearing the Duke uniform the next day.
Here is a man that is surrounded by women; I'm sure he is very in tune to their line of thinking, AND of their better interests and protection. The idea that he would protect one of his own players charged with sexual assault against a woman just seems highly unlikely.
Rasheed was not a player that is needed for this team to succeed. That's even more apparent now, but after K's past benchings/limited use, it was pretty obvious that he knew he could win without Sulaimon on the court. Why would he protect a player that is not required to win? It would make no sense to jeopardize the program as a whole for the skin of a role player.
Coach K's military training also is weighing on my mind. Do officers stray from loyalty? Sure...we read about scandals all the time, but as a general rule (and I've never seen anything from K to sway me otherwise), honor is held in the highest regard above everything else, regardless of the consequence. Protecting one player to shield the team would be pretty high up there on the "dishonorable things to do" list.
So...those are my thoughts, which mostly lead me to think that the reason Rasheed is not on the team anymore is not directly related to the alleged assaults. Even unproven, I'm sure the rumors weighed on K when he finally made the decision to boot him, but they were not the reason. I'll take his statements and those of others that the reason Rasheed is no longer a Blue Devil is due to his own actions with the team itself.

oldnavy
03-02-2015, 12:00 PM
I absolutely hope your faith is placed correctly, but the last few years in sports and media leave me pretty jaded. There aren't many heroes left. And I really hate when pedestals are knocked over and heroes come tumbling down.

MD I hear you and I agree with you in general.

But, given what I believe to be true about Coach K, I think if he were to stumble, it would not be like this. I cannot imagine K putting any player above the honor of "his" program.

wgl1228
03-02-2015, 12:00 PM
Why do reporters ask questions knowing that Coach K can't comment? Just to see him squirm? Media will run wild with this but reading the article it's just a bunch of rumor mongering and the tone was very unfortunate. I feel certain that our Coach followed proper procedure but it's a shame he can't respond.

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 12:04 PM
3) This will be a media firestorm. Nothing sells better than "Duke" and "sex". Duke has had so many sex scandals in the last 10 years that many have made the two synonymous (lacrosse, sex dissertation, porn star, etc).


Okay, first of all, three is not "so many."

Second, one gal entering the naked business does not qualify as a "sex scandal," so even if we're going to characterize three as "so many," your list doesn't have three sex scandals on it. If every college girl working in the porn industry is at the center of a "sex scandal," then...I don't even know how to finish that sentence.

Third, I don't know what a "sex dissertation" is, exactly, since all sorts of dissertations deal with human sexuality. But if every dissertation that addresses sex is a scandal, we've got a lot longer list than two or three, and so does almost every doctorate-granting institution.

Fourth, I need someone to explain to me why I'm even having this discussion.

So if your point is that the [2006] Lacrosse story renders the institution more vulnerable to negative media coverage when sexual assault is somehow related to a news story, then you're going to need to substantiate that further in order to be convincing. I watch a lot of of the tire fire that ESPN has become, and I don't doubt that Sulaimon will pop up on the worldwide leader soon, but if ESPN had some sort of a Duke sex branding strategy, I think we'd all know by now.

bbosbbos
03-02-2015, 12:04 PM
After taking some time to digest this, here are my thoughts.

Maybe it is not possible to know the facts since all parties are not allowed to disclose anything.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
03-02-2015, 12:10 PM
MD I hear you and I agree with you in general.

But, given what I believe to be true about Coach K, I think if he were to stumble, it would not be like this. I cannot imagine K putting any player above the honor of "his" program.

Again, I hope you are correct. I just get nervous when I see people making such absolute statement (either "no way we could have done anything wrong, we are better than that" or "this marks the end of our program - we will be drawn and quartered in the media") when there is so much emotion running around.

flyingdutchdevil
03-02-2015, 12:13 PM
Okay, first of all, three is not "so many."

Second, one gal entering the naked business does not qualify as a "sex scandal," so even if we're going to characterize three as "so many," your list doesn't have three sex scandals on it. If every college girl working in the porn industry is at the center of a "sex scandal," then...I don't even know how to finish that sentence.

Third, I don't know what a "sex dissertation" is, exactly, since all sorts of dissertations deal with human sexuality. But if every dissertation that addresses sex is a scandal, we've got a lot longer list than two or three, and so does almost every doctorate-granting institution.

Fourth, I need someone to explain to me why I'm even having this discussion.

So if your point is that the [2006] Lacrosse story renders the institution more vulnerable to negative media coverage when sexual assault is somehow related to a news story, then you're going to need to substantiate that further in order to be convincing. I watch a lot of of the tire fire that ESPN has become, and I don't doubt that Sulaimon will pop up on the worldwide leader soon, but if ESPN had some sort of a Duke sex branding strategy, I think we'd all know by now.

You and I can disagree then. A scandal is defined as "an action or event regarded as morally or legally wrong and causing general public outrage." If a Duke student entering the porn industry didn't bring up questions regarding morality and create a huge stir, then I'm not sure what could. To me, that is 100% a sex scandal. A sex scandal doesn't have to have legality as a criteria (think Carlos Danger).

The sex dissertation is the 20+ page PPT that a Duke senior wrote as a joke. The ppt went viral. Without going into more detail, this situation too swept through the web.

And, lastly, I have dozens of friends/acquaintances who asked me, "Why the hell does Duke always find itself in these sex situations?" after the porn star scandal. I don't see myself saying the same thing with the Harvards or Yales of the world.

So, with that said, I absolutely do believe that the media will pick up on this story despite it not having that many legs.

tux
03-02-2015, 12:16 PM
We don't know a lot of facts, but there are a lot of interesting talking points from this article. First of all, I thought it was a well-written piece of journalism, especially considering it is amateurism (Chronicle staff isn't paid). Then again, I'm not the one to argue against journalists, commentators (save for Vitale), or refs.

1) As virtually everyone has commented on, we don't know a lot. What we do know - and the article has done a decent job of - is that there are two females who feel they have been sexually assaulted by Rasheed Sulaimon. We don't know if the female students are telling the truth. We don't know if Rasheed Sulaimon has any guilt. We don't know how much the different levels of Duke - admin, athletics, coaches - knew. But, based on multiple sources, it does sound like two women are explicitly stating that Rasheed Sulaimon sexually assaulted them. And I hope the university did everything in it's power to look into this matter. Because if it didn't, that is absolutely pathetic on behalf of the university.

Right. I think we also know a few more things:

1) There is someone affiliated with the program who claims to have spoken to both of these women in late 2013 / early 2014. And that person played some role in bringing it to the attention of the team psychologist as well as the coaching staff and administrators in the athletic department sometime in March 2014.

2) There is a student who quit his job in the basketball office just after learning from a fellow intern about these rumors/allegations.


Both of the above people seem to think (based on their quotes) that things were not handled well, or at least in a way that satisfied them. I've re-read the Chronicle article a couple of times --- I think that much is more or less known.


A couple minor things jump out at me: Not sure why a student whose *best* friend was assaulted by a basketball player (and claims to have known since a retreat held over a year prior) would take a position as an intern in the basketball office. And it took Wensley one day (and some exchanged texts) to go from zero knowledge of the situation to quitting his job. And based on his quotes, he seemed more interested in discussing Coach K and Kevin White than Sulaimon or what had been done at the university level in response to these rumors.

One last point: The high profile/status of the basketball program cuts both ways. Yes, the players and K are Duke's version of celebrities. But that can generate some ill will over time as well, whether justified or not.

Dukehky
03-02-2015, 12:27 PM
There is a bigger issue here than the program. The anonymous source claims that Student Conduct knew of the allegation and did NOTHING. Now, this source, due to FERPA would have absolutely no knowledge of whether Dean Sue picked up the phone and called the two alleged victims. However, it appears that that is what he is claiming. I don't know what else Student Conduct can do but call and ask if they had anything to share, since it is a he said she said type of deal, especially without any kind of rape kit.

If Duke Student Conduct told K they couldn't find anything out (it's not K's job to go around as a police man), and there were no charges filed with the police, then I have no problem with him keeping Sheed on the team. I am a full proponent of due process and don't think that student panels have any right to decide criminal culpability. I too see appeal for the national media to say that Duke swept this under the rug because they let an accused player stay on the team. The Chronicle did not do a good job of stating that these were in fact allegations, and they didn't focus on Rasheed at all, but rather strictly on the basketball office. This is an easy narrative to follow, and with the information the source (coward, put your name on it, you don't work for them anymore) if you're telling the truth, you will be praised as a whistle blower just like we praise the UNC whistle blowers, it is justifiable. However, it doesn't seem like this source has a good grasp on the confidentiality that FERPA guarantees.

I too am praying that K did the right thing, and I think he did. If the girls don't push this, we won't even know anything more, because only a court can mandate the release of their investigation if they believe that their Title IX rights were violated.

This bllllllllloooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwsssssssss.

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 12:27 PM
Why the hell does Duke always find itself in these sex situations?" after the porn star scandal. I don't see myself saying the same thing with the Harvards or Yales of the world.

Then your friends are trying to get a rise out of you, as most people who hate Duke like to do.

Do you have any clue how common it is for 18-25ish women to work in porn? Some like doing it, actually, rather than doing it solely for the money. I know a gal in Mississippi who told me her industry alias. I don't think ESPN is going to do an expose on a Mississippi State "sex scandal."

Also, a 20-slide PPT is not a dissertation. One often has to give a presentation at one's defense, and in the last decade or so, that often involves Power Pointless. I'll repeat myself: oodles of dissertations in the Humanities, in the Social Sciences, and the Natural Sciences address human sexuality. One PPT does not mean Duke has the market corned on sex scandals.

It's early yet, and it's just one data point, but without precisely knowing the danger is, I just turned on ESPN's most visible media product. Of the eight stories in the queue on the left of the screen, not a single one featured Duke, sex, or so-called Duke "sex scandals." In fact, two were about spring training for MLB teams located in medium-sized, rust belt markets. Unless Andrew McCutchen has some side work I don't know about, it's hard to think of anything less sex-related in sports than Pirates or Indians training camp.

I also don't see how forcible rape, whether actual, actual and alleged, false and alleged, or merely rumored falls, into the semantic field of "sex scandal." I'd go more with "violent crime." A sex scandal is when the President mixes it up with an intern. A rape, OTOH, is something very, very, very serious.

flyingdutchdevil
03-02-2015, 12:30 PM
There is a bigger issue here than the program. The anonymous source claims that Student Conduct knew of the allegation and did NOTHING. Now, this source, due to FERPA would have absolutely no knowledge of whether Dean Sue picked up the phone and called the two alleged victims. However, it appears that that is what he is claiming. I don't know what else Student Conduct can do but call and ask if they had anything to share, since it is a he said she said type of deal, especially without any kind of rape kit.

If Duke Student Conduct told K they couldn't find anything out (it's not K's job to go around as a police man), and there were no charges filed with the police, then I have no problem with him keeping Sheed on the team. I am a full proponent of due process and don't think that student panels have any right to decide criminal culpability. I too see appeal for the national media to say that Duke swept this under the rug because they let an accused player stay on the team. The Chronicle did not do a good job of stating that these were in fact allegations, and they didn't focus on Rasheed at all, but rather strictly on the basketball office. This is an easy narrative to follow, and with the information the source (coward, put your name on it, you don't work for them anymore) if you're telling the truth, you will be praised as a whistle blower just like we praise the UNC whistle blowers, it is justifiable. However, it doesn't seem like this source has a good grasp on the confidentiality that FERPA guarantees.

I too am praying that K did the right thing, and I think he did. If the girls don't push this, we won't even know anything more, because only a court can mandate the release of their investigation if they believe that their Title IX rights were violated.

This bllllllllloooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwsssssssss.

I really like this post. Because it a) sheds light on the fact that this is a Duke University problem so much more than it is a Duke basketball problem, b) really shows potential breakdown/ holes in the Duke Student Conduct process, and c) shows that these things can happen anywhere, anyhow, and there isn't a foolproof way to make it easier for victims.

hsheffield
03-02-2015, 12:39 PM
Shame on you Chronicle.

Almost everything in the article is gossip.

Meanwhile, with out significant on the record factual knowledge, you have impuned the reputations of Mr. Sulaimon, Duke University and the basketball program.

oldnavy
03-02-2015, 12:43 PM
Again, I hope you are correct. I just get nervous when I see people making such absolute statement (either "no way we could have done anything wrong, we are better than that" or "this marks the end of our program - we will be drawn and quartered in the media") when there is so much emotion running around.

Well, I am not saying that it isn't possible that this was handled inappropriately, I am just saying that given the track record of K and our staff, I would bet on them doing the right thing, and I will be very surprised if they did act in a way to bring discredit to themselves and the program.

If we can't trust Coach K in a situation like this, then who (that is human) is worthy of our trust?

I still hold out that there are honorable people left in this world, even if the numbers seem to be shrinking all around us.

Could I be wrong, sure... but I am betting on K and his 40+ years of honorable service.

flyingdutchdevil
03-02-2015, 12:43 PM
Then your friends are trying to get a rise out of you, as most people who hate Duke like to do.

Not at all. They do it cus they hear it in the news. Given, it started with Duke lacrosse. That opened up the floor gates to the extent that every sex "scandal" and Duke now gets publicity.


Do you have any clue how common it is for 18-25ish women to work in porn? Some like doing it, actually, rather than doing it solely for the money. I know a gal in Mississippi who told me her industry alias. I don't think ESPN is going to do an expose on a Mississippi State "sex scandal."

I'd argue it's less common than common. Of course, that depends on your definition of common. I know a buddy who won an Olympic medal. But I don't really think that's common. And I think you helped prove my point with the Mississippi State point; Duke is held under a microscope for these kinds of things. It's a product of being an elite school, a school that had one of the most highly publicized sex scandals in recent memory, a high polarized school.


Also, a 20-slide PPT is not a dissertation. One often has to give a presentation at one's defense, and in the last decade or so, that often involves Power Pointless. I'll repeat myself: oodles of dissertations in the Humanities, in the Social Sciences, and the Natural Sciences address human sexuality. One PPT does not mean Duke has the market corned on sex scandals.

"Dissertation" was used in jest. I apologize for using that word if it so offends you. When the article/ppt deck came out, many referred to it as a "dissertation" based on the length and depth of the ppt deck for such a non-academic topic.


It's early yet, and it's just one data point, but without precisely knowing the danger is, I just turned on ESPN's most visible media product. Of the eight stories in the queue on the left of the screen, not a single one featured Duke, sex, or so-called Duke "sex scandals." In fact, two were about spring training for MLB teams located in medium-sized, rust belt markets. Unless Andrew McCutchen has some side work I don't know about, it's hard to think of anything less sex-related in sports than Pirates or Indians training camp.

I also don't see how forcible rape, whether actual, actual and alleged, false and alleged, or merely rumored falls, into the semantic field of "sex scandal." I'd go more with "violent crime." A sex scandal is when the President mixes it up with an intern. A rape, OTOH, is something very, very, very serious.

I will again refer to the definition of "scandal": an occurrence in which people are shocked and upset because of behavior that is morally or legally wrong. And, given the topic and the information at hand, this is a "scandal". It too is a "violent crime" if a rape actually occurred, but it is also a "scandal" based on the public opinion. Also, I'm not sure where you're getting that "scandals" aren't serious. The spectrum of a scandal runs deep - some can be petty, some can be very serious.

tux
03-02-2015, 12:45 PM
The anonymous source claims that Student Conduct knew of the allegation and did NOTHING.

I enjoyed your post, and not to nit-pick, but is the above true? From the article:



Because the women voicing the allegations did not want to pursue their cases, no official complaints were filed with the Office of Student Conduct.

...

Even if a student chooses not to file a complaint, however, the University is legally obligated by Title IX to look into any indications of sexual assault. If the Office of Student Conduct receives information about a possible assault with a student perpetrator, the protocol is to investigate to whatever extent is possible, Wasiolek said.

“Sometimes, it’s so little information that there’s really nothing to follow up on. When we have the name of an alleged victim, we would certainly want to talk with that individual,” Wasiolek said. “When we have the name of an alleged respondent, we would want to talk with that individual as well. Depending on what information we get from either of those individuals, that will dictate how we proceed.”

I read that to mean that Dean Sue (or someone) did in fact follow up (as the office had not received any formal allegations from the two women) and that some form of investigation did take place. We just don't know anything re: the conclusion of that investigation, except that Rasheed is still at the University, which must mean IMO that there wasn't enough to move forward on...

What am I missing?

Matches
03-02-2015, 12:47 PM
There is a bigger issue here than the program. The anonymous source claims that Student Conduct knew of the allegation and did NOTHING. Now, this source, due to FERPA would have absolutely no knowledge of whether Dean Sue picked up the phone and called the two alleged victims. However, it appears that that is what he is claiming. I don't know what else Student Conduct can do but call and ask if they had anything to share, since it is a he said she said type of deal, especially without any kind of rape kit.



Really good point. We're talking about alleged assaults that were brought to light months after the fact. Highly unlikely there would be any physical evidence - not impossible *cough*Lewinsky*cough* but unlikely.

So investigation = contacting the girls, talking to Sulaimon, and talking to any other possible witnesses to the events.

If at the end of that, what you're left with is a murky "he said she said" situation where Sulaimon professes innocence, the girls don't want to go public, and there's no other real evidence either way, what else is the school supposed to do? Duke is currently being sued by a student who was expelled over a sexual assault charge that turned out to be bogus. Duke just finished getting sued all over the place by the lacrosse players.

Ugh, this whole business where schools and sports teams are supposed to investigate and prosecute crimes is a disaster on wheels.

Dukehky
03-02-2015, 12:51 PM
I enjoyed your post, and not to nit-pick, but is the above true? From the article:



I read that to mean that Dean Sue (or someone) did in fact follow up (as the office had not received any formal allegations from the two women) and that some form of investigation did take place. We just don't know anything re: the conclusion of that investigation, except that Rasheed is still at the University, which must mean IMO that there wasn't enough to move forward on...

What am I missing?

The anonymous affiliate said other athletic administrators were then made aware of the allegations. Among the administrators identified by the anonymous affiliate were Mike Cragg, deputy director of athletics and operations; Director of Basketball Operations David Bradley; and Kevin White, vice president and director of athletics. The allegations were also brought to the attention of Sue Wasiolek, assistant vice president of student affairs and dean of students, according to the anonymous affiliate.25

“Nothing happened after months and months of talking about [the sexual assault allegations]," the anonymous affiliate said. "The University administration knew. Kevin White knew, Mike Cragg knew."


I take that to mean that none of them anything. I have changed my opinion of this section (which really is the meat of the real issue) after every other read. Does it mean that nothing happened to Sulaimon or that nothing was done about Sulaimon? This is conjecture and a question that the media will run with as being the latter, because that is indeed the most troubling.

cruxer
03-02-2015, 12:54 PM
This Chronicle article really begs for some good editing before publication. Most readers will assume things that clearly aren't in evidence due to federal law.
It seems to me our young intrepid reporters had 3 ways to gather evidence:

They could have reached out to the alleged victims and confirmed whether anyone from the university made an attempt to investigate the claims.
They could have found a source within the university willing to break federal law and share details of the investigation. (which would have been a good reason to grant anonymity)
They could have convinced Sheed to cooperate and share what investigation took place (unlikely, I know).

The fact is, due to federal law, Duke could have done all it could here and nobody from the school could talk about it. The article practically asks the reader to use Duke's silence to assume the worst, even though that silence is dictated by federal law. That's egregiously bad journalism, even from a college student. If you want to prove Duke did wrong, go out and prove it. Allowing your readers to assume that's the case without evidence is very nearly libel. Allowing an anonymous source, who by law would have no knowledge of any investigation, to boldly assert that no investigation took place might actually be libel.

-c

Exiled_Devil
03-02-2015, 12:57 PM
There is a bigger issue here than the program. The anonymous source claims that Student Conduct knew of the allegation and did NOTHING.

So one of us is misreading here, because I don't see anything in there that claims knowledge of what the Student Conduct dept. did or didn't do.

Here's what I see:

Nothing happened after months and months of talking about [the sexual assault allegations]," the anonymous affiliate said. "The University administration knew. Kevin White knew, Mike Cragg knew


Because the women voicing the allegations did not want to pursue their cases, no official complaints were filed with the Office of Student Conduct.


Even if a student chooses not to file a complaint, however, the University is legally obligated by Title IX to look into any indications of sexual assault. If the Office of Student Conduct receives information about a possible assault with a student perpetrator, the protocol is to investigate to whatever extent is possible, Wasiolek said.


“Sometimes, it’s so little information that there’s really nothing to follow up on. When we have the name of an alleged victim, we would certainly want to talk with that individual,” Wasiolek said. “When we have the name of an alleged respondent, we would want to talk with that individual as well. Depending on what information we get from either of those individuals, that will dictate how we proceed.”

Even if an official complaint is not filed, Student Conduct still documents all conversations it has as part of an investigation of a potential sexual assault, Wasiolek said. The records are kept confidential under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.Wasiolek declined to comment on the subject of allegations against Sulaimon.



If a victim of sexual assault decides to file a complaint with Student Conduct, a case is initiated. The accuser and accused then submit a statement, and Student Conduct hires an independent private investigator to interview witnesses and establish facts. After this process—which can take several months—Duke convenes a hearing and a three-person panel presides over the process. If the panel determines that there is a "preponderance of evidence" suggesting a sexual assault occurred, the recommended disciplinary action is that the student is expelled.
Sulaimon is still a Duke student and remains in good academic standing.


So, what I take from that is that the anonymous affiliate was not privy to what Student Conduct did or didn't do because of Federal Law. And that the implication is that if a student should be expelled if there is preponderance of evidence, and Sulaimon is still in school, the investigation didn't find enough evidence.

That doesn't say that nothing happened in the incidents, nor is it concrete evidence that the school followed procedures. But nothing in there says that anyone talking to the press knows anything about what procedures did or didn't happen.

tux
03-02-2015, 01:02 PM
I take that to mean that none of them anything. I have changed my opinion of this section (which really is the meat of the real issue) after every other read. Does it mean that nothing happened to Sulaimon or that nothing was done about Sulaimon? This is conjecture and a question that the media will run with as being the latter, because that is indeed the most troubling.

I'm having the same problem. If the anonymous source was no longer affiliated with the program, were they waiting around for Sulaimon to be dismissed and/or expelled and took the lack of that action as being an indication of "nothing" being done?

Just not sure...

johnb
03-02-2015, 01:02 PM
My two cents, or less:

1. Few young women want their names to be forever linked to a rape allegation. While one woman at Columbia is carrying around her mattress and meeting political heavyweights, I am very confident that most of the time, she would rather just be anonymous Emma.

2. How is someone supposed to investigate when the two women refuse to talk? Is Coach K supposed to become a Columbo character? Presumably, Rasheed denied it. Where is the program supposed to go from there? I'm assuming they either came up with evidence or Rasheed's ongoing crankiness pushed K over the line.

3. Rapes are underreported significantly.

4. There should be another term for "rape" which consists of consensual activity that evolves into nonconsensual activity. When one person suddenly becomes aggressive and a make-out session evolves into forcible intercourse, that is rape in my book (though NOT in the book of most college-age men), and police should be called (and, before that, the universities should make an ongoing effort to teach that a little does not give license for a lot). But there are other times in which the guy is pushy, and the woman is nonverbal about her displeasure. I very much like the Yes requirement, in theory, but it's tough to investigate such activities using amateurs.

5. Colleges should get out of the sexual assault assessment business. If the woman wants to prosecute, go the police. Perhaps universities should have some influence or hire a rape counselor, and they should definitely be in charge of education, but let professionals do the investigation rather than the assistant dean of student life.

6. It's prudent to coach ours daughters to be careful, but it's just as important to teach our sons not to be rapists.

7. From what I've read, we know NOTHING new about Rasheed, the program, the Duke political subculture.

8. I'd bet a lot of money that Coach K didn't do anything wrong in his assessment of the situation, and I'd bet an equivalent amount of money that any of our All-American players would have been kicked off the team immediately after any of several of Jameis's incidents, but especially the rape "allegation."

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 01:04 PM
"Dissertation" was used in jest. I apologize for using that word if it so offends you. When the article/ppt deck came out, many referred to it as a "dissertation" based on the length and depth of the ppt deck for such a non-academic topic.

I'm not offended at all. You're the one who is defining three occurrences in which Duke and sex appear in the same sentence as shocking and scandalous, and then generalizing these to some imagined cultural branding disaster for the university.

(PS -- I'm not an expert on porn or anything, but I'm going to estimate that the number of college-enrolled women who have ever appeared in porn is a lot higher than the number of living Olympic gold medalists).

I'm well aware that Duke has a higher Q rating than Mississippi State. That doesn't elevate a silly PPT to a "sex scandal."

So basically, we're back to the fact that 2006 happened. Tell me when the cultural statute of limitations, so to speak, on that kicks in. The answer may be never, but I was pleasantly amazed to see how relatively quickly Duke's name got out from under that mess in the media, by 2008 or so. I had mistakenly predicted we'd be PR-screwed for the rest of my life. We're not. I haven't heard about it on ESPN in years, and when I do hear about it in the print media, it is usually in Duke's favor, as the journalists notes it as a cautionary tale about rushing to judgment.

A rape (or much more rarely, false allegation thereof) isn't a "sex scandal." It's one of the most heinous crimes there is. One might as well call dozens of stab wounds resulting in a murder a "cutlery scandal."

Dukehky
03-02-2015, 01:06 PM
My two cents, or less:

1. Few young women want their names to be forever linked to a rape allegation. While one woman at Columbia is carrying around her mattress and meeting political heavyweights, I am very confident that most of the time, she would rather just be anonymous Emma.

2. How is someone supposed to investigate when the two women refuse to talk? Is Coach K supposed to become a Columbo character? Presumably, Rasheed denied it. Where is the program supposed to go from there? I'm assuming they either came up with evidence or Rasheed's ongoing crankiness pushed K over the line.

3. Rapes are underreported significantly.

4. There should be another term for "rape" which consists of consensual activity that evolves into nonconsensual activity. When one person suddenly becomes aggressive and a make-out session evolves into forcible intercourse, that is rape in my book (though NOT in the book of most college-age men), and police should be called (and, before that, the universities should make an ongoing effort to teach that a little does not give license for a lot). But there are other times in which the guy is pushy, and the woman is nonverbal about her displeasure. I very much like the Yes requirement, in theory, but it's tough to investigate such activities using amateurs.

5. Colleges should get out of the sexual assault assessment business. If the woman wants to prosecute, go the police. Perhaps universities should have some influence or hire a rape counselor, and they should definitely be in charge of education, but let professionals do the investigation rather than the assistant dean of student life.

6. It's prudent to coach ours daughters to be careful, but it's just as important to teach our sons not to be rapists.

7. From what I've read, we know NOTHING new about Rasheed, the program, the Duke political subculture.

8. I'd bet a lot of money that Coach K didn't do anything wrong in his assessment of the situation, and I'd bet an equivalent amount of money that any of our All-American players would have been kicked off the team immediately after any of several of Jameis's incidents, but especially the rape "allegation."


Wow, not real big on college males are you? Most!??? Forcible intercourse is always rape, to everyone. Other than that major point of contention, agreed.

flyingdutchdevil
03-02-2015, 01:07 PM
I'm not offended at all. You're the one who is defining three occurrences in which Duke and sex appear in the same sentence as shocking and scandalous, and then generalizing these to some imagined cultural branding disaster for the university.

(PS -- I'm not an expert on porn or anything, but I'm going to estimate that the number of college-enrolled women who have ever appeared in porn is a lot higher than the number of living Olympic gold medalists).

I'm well aware that Duke has a higher Q rating than Mississippi State. That doesn't elevate a silly PPT to a "sex scandal."

So basically, we're back to the fact that 2006 happened. Tell me when the cultural statute of limitations, so to speak, on that kicks in. The answer may be never, but I was pleasantly amazed to see how relatively quickly Duke's name got out from under that mess in the media, by 2008 or so. I had mistakenly predicted we'd be PR-screwed for the rest of my life. We're not. I haven't heard about it on ESPN in years, and when I do hear about it in the print media, it is usually in Duke's favor, as the journalists notes it as a cautionary tale about rushing to judgment.

A rape (or much more rarely, false allegation thereof) isn't a "sex scandal." It's one of the most heinous crimes there is. One might as well call dozens of stab wounds resulting in a murder a "cutlery scandal."

This is just an argument in semantics at this point. And you and I differ on a lot of points, some debatable and some not. Let's just leave it at that.

Tom B.
03-02-2015, 01:11 PM
The Chronicle has done some good work in the past -- e.g., they were one of the few media outlets that didn't jump into the feeding frenzy in the wake of the rape allegations against the lacrosse team in 2006, and they were dogged in bringing Mike Nifong's overreaches and malfeasance to light.

But their sourcing and reporting on this Rasheed story reminds me of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Y-SieCU11r4#t=22

grad_devil
03-02-2015, 01:11 PM
https://twitter.com/laurakeeley


There are legal ramifications and ethical concerns when it comes to letting third-parties and anonymous sources make accusations in print
As a reporter, I have to make sure every word I report passes muster on both fronts. And that’s how it should be
Journalism doesn’t play favorites. Every potential speaker is equal, regardless of race, gender, income, sexual orientation, etc.
Journalism doesn’t assume. Saying something doesn’t make it true, and it doesn’t make it false, either.
And documents are way, way above word-of-mouth on the preferred source of information pyramid, by the way
And I have no interest in playing God and trying to judge anyone’s character. None whatsoever.
I think of those things every day as I try to be the best source for Duke athletics news. & I will always do that every day I have this job
Knee-jerk reactions are fine for most people to have, but not me. I'm not most people. I'm a reporter.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 01:15 PM
One reason why it was a good idea for Duke not to suspend Sulaimon for a rumor.

http://www.wral.com/duke-student-expelled-after-sex-assault-claim-sues-for-degree/13678099/

tux
03-02-2015, 01:18 PM
5. Colleges should get out of the sexual assault assessment business. If the woman wants to prosecute, go the police. Perhaps universities should have some influence or hire a rape counselor, and they should definitely be in charge of education, but let professionals do the investigation rather than the assistant dean of student life.


To this point, I found this Emily Yoffe piece in Slate (http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/12/college_rape_campus_sexual_assault_is_a_serious_pr oblem_but_the_efforts.html) to be (long but) very interesting. It was published a couple months ago in the aftermath of the Rolling Stone article re: UVA. Yoffe claims here and in other places that Universities primarily have an alcohol problem; she's taken a lot of grief for making that point, and whether one agrees 100% with what she lays out, IMO it does add something significant to the conversation.

The issue of rape shouldn't have "sides" --- but I think what's worth debating is how universities are handling these cases and what can be done to improve the response to any allegations...

gcashwell
03-02-2015, 01:19 PM
https://twitter.com/laurakeeley


There are legal ramifications and ethical concerns when it comes to letting third-parties and anonymous sources make accusations in print
As a reporter, I have to make sure every word I report passes muster on both fronts. And that’s how it should be
Journalism doesn’t play favorites. Every potential speaker is equal, regardless of race, gender, income, sexual orientation, etc.
Journalism doesn’t assume. Saying something doesn’t make it true, and it doesn’t make it false, either.
And documents are way, way above word-of-mouth on the preferred source of information pyramid, by the way
And I have no interest in playing God and trying to judge anyone’s character. None whatsoever.
I think of those things every day as I try to be the best source for Duke athletics news. & I will always do that every day I have this job
Knee-jerk reactions are fine for most people to have, but not me. I'm not most people. I'm a reporter.


Shots fired!

Orange&BlackSheep
03-02-2015, 01:19 PM
First, I would like to echo all who have pointed out that the misreporting of sexual violence by women is quite uncommon since they rightly perceive that in the battle of "he said, she said", they are likely to lose for a variety of reasons (the most generous of those would be that no one wants to incarcerate someone on the basis of a single individual's assertion -- the reasons less generous begin wading into a justice system choked with (male) investigators who are disinclined to believe victims).

Having said that, here is the part of this story which defies logic to me. That in the wake of the following:

(1) the absolute evisceration of Joe Paterno and his legacy because of a lack action once informed (a man who Coach K befriended and publicly admired)
(2) the Duke Lacrosse case in all of its twists and turns
(3) The Jameis Winston sexual assault accusation
(4) The Justice Department's public vilification of Universities and possible legal action against same for mishandling sexual assault cases (List of High Ed Institutions Under Investigation (http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-list-higher-education-institutions-open-title-ix-sexual-violence-investigations)) ((Duke not listed by the way))

That Coach K (father to three daughters, person for whom "leader" is the most important adjective of his life) would have abetted a "cover-up" in any way, shape, or form. It defies everything that I know. And even if he were blinded by his personal relationship with Rasheed, that the administration (given the zeitgeist of the time on campuses around the country) would not have dotted every "i" and crossed every "t" in terms of following its policies for sexual assault allegations is also beyond logic that I can imagine. I recognize that an allegation requires an accuser so it is impossible to investigate an assault without the name of someone making a claim. The privacy concerns of the victims is paramount, and the effort to maintain that privacy is a laudable goal by all involved. How all of this played out will only emerge if people defy those privacy wishes.

I do know personally from having sat on a variety of committees the past couple of years that my alma mater's administration has been absolutely CONSUMED with this issue and the implementation of policies which both the justice department and (more importantly) women on campus will view as correct and proper. It would be hard for me to believe that every university in the country would not be hyper aware of implementing an acceptable policy including the proper training of personnel across campus in what the policy is and what one's responsibilities are in the face of hearing about a potential victim. It would be even more difficult to believe that in the wake of the Duke Lacrosse case that every person involved with this situation would not be hyper aware of what public outcry looks like AND the impossibility of keeping this kind of story localized in any way. Occam's razor tells me that this situation has been handled to the absolute letter of the law/policy.

Finally, (and I point this out in no way to question the veracity of any particular victim of sexual violence) when I was a senior, one of my classmates was wrongfully accused of rape by one of my friends during a "Take Back the Night" march. To this day I do not know whether she was raped and then she somehow replaced the perpetrator with this other person or if the entire affair was made up. Whatever the case was, HIS life was absolutely destroyed for a period of time. And he did absolutely nothing to deserve it. He barely knew her and was not associated with her in any way. His good fortune was that he had a rock solid alibi for the time when she claimed the event happened. I can only imagine if he had been in the library studying by himself how the story might have played out. So I say this only as a warning that in rare cases (I know, Duke Lax case) eye witness testimony in a sexual assault case ends up being completely incorrect and that the accused (official or otherwise) absolutely deserves to be presumed innocent. I recognize that two different accusers make doing that here a little more difficult. But do not rush to judgment. It serves no one's best interest and generally is more a reflection of the paradigm in which you live based on your own set of life experiences.

Orange&BlackSheep

MChambers
03-02-2015, 01:20 PM
https://twitter.com/laurakeeley


There are legal ramifications and ethical concerns when it comes to letting third-parties and anonymous sources make accusations in print
As a reporter, I have to make sure every word I report passes muster on both fronts. And that’s how it should be
Journalism doesn’t play favorites. Every potential speaker is equal, regardless of race, gender, income, sexual orientation, etc.
Journalism doesn’t assume. Saying something doesn’t make it true, and it doesn’t make it false, either.
And documents are way, way above word-of-mouth on the preferred source of information pyramid, by the way
And I have no interest in playing God and trying to judge anyone’s character. None whatsoever.
I think of those things every day as I try to be the best source for Duke athletics news. & I will always do that every day I have this job
Knee-jerk reactions are fine for most people to have, but not me. I'm not most people. I'm a reporter.


Have to give Keeley a lot of credit on these tweets.

superdave
03-02-2015, 01:20 PM
https://twitter.com/laurakeeley


There are legal ramifications and ethical concerns when it comes to letting third-parties and anonymous sources make accusations in print
As a reporter, I have to make sure every word I report passes muster on both fronts. And that’s how it should be
Journalism doesn’t play favorites. Every potential speaker is equal, regardless of race, gender, income, sexual orientation, etc.
Journalism doesn’t assume. Saying something doesn’t make it true, and it doesn’t make it false, either.
And documents are way, way above word-of-mouth on the preferred source of information pyramid, by the way
And I have no interest in playing God and trying to judge anyone’s character. None whatsoever.
I think of those things every day as I try to be the best source for Duke athletics news. & I will always do that every day I have this job
Knee-jerk reactions are fine for most people to have, but not me. I'm not most people. I'm a reporter.



So is it fair to say that Laura (and likely many others) had this scoop but did not report it because of how thin it was?

Unless we hear from a victim or Rasheed or the University, it sounds like this story will just be out there, with no follow up and no resolution. That is an ugly, unfortunate scenario.

TKG
03-02-2015, 01:21 PM
Shame on you Chronicle.

Almost everything in the article is gossip.

Meanwhile, with out significant on the record factual knowledge, you have impuned the reputations of Mr. Sulaimon, Duke University and the basketball program.

Perhaps that is the point.......... I have no facts to support my claim but am just offering an opinion - just like The Chronicle.........

CameronBornAndBred
03-02-2015, 01:23 PM
One reason why it was a good idea for Duke not to suspend Sulaimon for a rumor.

http://www.wral.com/duke-student-expelled-after-sex-assault-claim-sues-for-degree/13678099/
Another big difference....she went to the cops in that case. Whether she was truthful or not is up for others to decide, but at least she went to the authorities. I have to agree with others that without the women in Sulaimon's case seeking to press charges, there is anything anyone can do to remove him from the team and/or school. If the women that stood up at GC had done so, Rasheed would have been gone a long time ago. (Or at the very least suspended until the case played out.)

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 01:24 PM
https://twitter.com/laurakeeley


There are legal ramifications and ethical concerns when it comes to letting third-parties and anonymous sources make accusations in print
As a reporter, I have to make sure every word I report passes muster on both fronts. And that’s how it should be
Journalism doesn’t play favorites. Every potential speaker is equal, regardless of race, gender, income, sexual orientation, etc.
Journalism doesn’t assume. Saying something doesn’t make it true, and it doesn’t make it false, either.
And documents are way, way above word-of-mouth on the preferred source of information pyramid, by the way
And I have no interest in playing God and trying to judge anyone’s character. None whatsoever.
I think of those things every day as I try to be the best source for Duke athletics news. & I will always do that every day I have this job
Knee-jerk reactions are fine for most people to have, but not me. I'm not most people. I'm a reporter.


Very well put by Keeley. Thanks for posting this.

Leelee902
03-02-2015, 01:25 PM
THANK YOU LAURA KEELEY!!!!!

I am a woman who has had far too many friends speak of feeling taken advantage of by men, so if Sheed did this then he deserves punishment. BUT we DO NOT KNOW! This article was such terrible journalism! As someone else said, if you want to prove something was or was not done then PROVE it. Thanks to Keeley for pointing this out! I hope the Chronicle sees this. As a recent grad who still does part-time work with a lot of Duke athletics for fun (including basketball), there was definitely a murmur of "worse news to come" when it came to the Sheed dismissal. It seems this wave of discontent from the student population ran over into student "journalism". I get the sentiment if you feel people you know have been sexually assaulted, but you can't report news this way and expect to be taken seriously by those who can critically think.

The school statement made it clear they can't talk about this, but certainly implied they looked into it. But we can't hang someone for smoke, but no fire.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 01:25 PM
https://twitter.com/laurakeeley


There are legal ramifications and ethical concerns when it comes to letting third-parties and anonymous sources make accusations in print
As a reporter, I have to make sure every word I report passes muster on both fronts. And that’s how it should be
Journalism doesn’t play favorites. Every potential speaker is equal, regardless of race, gender, income, sexual orientation, etc.
Journalism doesn’t assume. Saying something doesn’t make it true, and it doesn’t make it false, either.
And documents are way, way above word-of-mouth on the preferred source of information pyramid, by the way
And I have no interest in playing God and trying to judge anyone’s character. None whatsoever.
I think of those things every day as I try to be the best source for Duke athletics news. & I will always do that every day I have this job
Knee-jerk reactions are fine for most people to have, but not me. I'm not most people. I'm a reporter.


Looks like I am back on the Keely bandwagon again. :)

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 01:26 PM
Colleges should get out of the sexual assault assessment business. If the woman wants to prosecute, go the police. Perhaps universities should have some influence or hire a rape counselor, and they should definitely be in charge of education, but let professionals do the investigation rather than the assistant dean of student life.

OK, great, but who are "the police?"

A problem here is that just about any college/university of any size now has its own police force. In most places, they are called police, wear uniforms, and collaborate with municipal and/or county-level police. Students may not accord them the same respect (I remember students often calling Duke's "Public Safety" as they were called in the 1990s, "mall cops") and students--rape victims--may not know exactly to whom to go to report an assault. Furthermore, the campus police forces that have any clue whatsoever, which is fewer than 100% of them, now have an additional level of staff whose job it is to handle assault victims sensitively. These people are often, younger women who aren't police in either the state, country, city, or even campus sense, because in the last couple decades, people finally made the blindingly obvious realization that it's less onerous for a raped 19yo woman to report the crime to someone who isn't a 50yo man with a gun swinging from his belt, which is the demo you see with a lot of police. Sometimes these employees are counselors, sometimes HR calls them something else, and always it's way more complicated than "go to the police." I don't claim to have more than a passing grasp of all the issues, but I know they are there.

So in practice, if you're Jessica W Dukestudent and some guy rapes you, I'm not even sure what the next step you pursue is. Presumably they're educating the students about this, like at orientation or something. If I had the advantages of not being a rape victim and of the entire situation being hypothetical and if I had a lot of time to weigh options, I think I'd go to receiving at Hospital North and say I was the victim of a sexual assault and needed help. I really doubt I'd go anywhere near a police station.

El_Diablo
03-02-2015, 01:26 PM
The anonymous affiliate said other athletic administrators were then made aware of the allegations. Among the administrators identified by the anonymous affiliate were Mike Cragg, deputy director of athletics and operations; Director of Basketball Operations David Bradley; and Kevin White, vice president and director of athletics. The allegations were also brought to the attention of Sue Wasiolek, assistant vice president of student affairs and dean of students, according to the anonymous affiliate.25

“Nothing happened after months and months of talking about [the sexual assault allegations]," the anonymous affiliate said. "The University administration knew. Kevin White knew, Mike Cragg knew."


I take that to mean that none of them anything. I have changed my opinion of this section (which really is the meat of the real issue) after every other read. Does it mean that nothing happened to Sulaimon or that nothing was done about Sulaimon? This is conjecture and a question that the media will run with as being the latter, because that is indeed the most troubling.

When a source says something like that, it seems like even a mediocre journalist should have the common sense to ask, "What do you mean nothing happened? Do you mean that there was no investigation? How do you know that?" Said hypothetical mediocre journalist would then be able to clarify the quote or (more likely) have to say, "Oh, you don't actually know. Well, then, I'm sorry but I can't publish that line. Let's just stick to what you do know."

Similarly, this line probably merits a simple follow-up question or two: "The following day, Jan. 22, Wensley—who had been working in the office for more than three years—notified Howard of his knowledge of the allegations and quit his job." Um, that's kind of a drastic step...why exactly did he quit his job? Was he dissatisfied with the way the situation had been handled thus far? That seems unlikely, since he quit as soon as he heard about it and did not have any idea who knew what until the conversation he had afterwards with Cragg. Maybe he just did not want to be around someone about whom there were rumors of sexual assault? Did he have other reasons? That little tidbit of information would give greater context to the source, but the authors decided that it was not worth finding out or sharing with the reader.

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 01:29 PM
https://twitter.com/laurakeeley


There are legal ramifications and ethical concerns when it comes to letting third-parties and anonymous sources make accusations in print
As a reporter, I have to make sure every word I report passes muster on both fronts. And that’s how it should be
Journalism doesn’t play favorites. Every potential speaker is equal, regardless of race, gender, income, sexual orientation, etc.
Journalism doesn’t assume. Saying something doesn’t make it true, and it doesn’t make it false, either.
And documents are way, way above word-of-mouth on the preferred source of information pyramid, by the way
And I have no interest in playing God and trying to judge anyone’s character. None whatsoever.
I think of those things every day as I try to be the best source for Duke athletics news. & I will always do that every day I have this job
Knee-jerk reactions are fine for most people to have, but not me. I'm not most people. I'm a reporter.


Good for her. I doubt this will cut any ice with the people who rained hatred down on her when bowl bids were coming out in 2013, but one can hope.

Kfanarmy
03-02-2015, 01:29 PM
I will again refer to the definition of "scandal": an occurrence in which people are shocked and upset because of behavior that is morally or legally wrong. And, given the topic and the information at hand, this is a "scandal". It too is a "violent crime" if a rape actually occurred, but it is also a "scandal" based on the public opinion. Also, I'm not sure where you're getting that "scandals" aren't serious. The spectrum of a scandal runs deep - some can be petty, some can be very serious.
FWIW, I tend to notice public discourse on Duke, but I live outside North Carolina. I had never heard of any of these, save the lacrosse mess, until you posted on them. Yes a scandal could involve the right lady's petticoat showing. Scandal has an element of severity and duration; the ppt presentation and nudity just don't grab national interest.

Owen Meany
03-02-2015, 01:32 PM
This is a very disturbing story, and its understandable that people would be concerned. However, there is a lot of unfair speculation and doubt being cast upon different individuals. Obviously, the victim(s) in this case, whoever they may be, suffer the most from this. That goes without saying. But I have read nothing that indicates malfeasance by the University, Coach K, etc.

This is a very complex situation. Rumors are brought forward of past incidents. The incidents were unreported at the time. The alleged victims shared their stories in small groups that expected confidentiality. They made conscious decisions that it was in their best interests to not go forward with their allegations. A third party brings these to the attention of basketball staff. What exactly is Coach K supposed to do?

Remove Suliamon from the team based on unsubstantiated rumors of past events from anonymous sources who don't wish to come forward? I certainly hope not. I would hope the Lacrosse/Rolling Stone stories would show the importance of proof before deciding guilt.

It has even been suggested the basketball office should have investigated the situation.
1.) How do you investigate such a charge when the alleged victims do not want to move forward?

2.)Do you approach them with information they thought was given in confidence in a "quasi-counseling" type environment, even though they have decided that it is not on their best interests to move forward? This seems legally and ethically questionable.

3.)Does anyone really believe that Coach K or the basketball office could be involved in any way, shape or form into investigating allegations involving young women who allegedly were victims of sexual assault by a player, and who feared the power and influence of Duke Basketball?

In my opinion the basketball office (and University) was in an extremely difficult position. I would have had no idea what to do. It would be very difficult to navigate this situation properly. In fact, I believe they would be criticized no matter what they did. The one thing that gives me hope it was handled very deliberately and carefully is the Lacrosse fiasco. It is my hope that the gravity of that situation led the Duke basketball office to hand this off to the University and its lawyers to decide the appropriate course of action. The fact that the allegations were brought to the attention of Sue Wasiolek, assistant vice president of student affairs and dean of students, does make it seem that this is how things were handled.

Some people assume because they are unaware of of an investigation, consequences, etc. that these things didn't take place. If the University handled this situation properly then, absent a finding of guilt, no one outside of the involved parties should have heard anything at all.

Dev11
03-02-2015, 01:32 PM
I don't know Coach K, nor do I know anybody with any authority in the men's basketball program, so I can't say how they might or might not treat this.

I do, however, know Dean Sue, and have seen how she reacts to issues like the alleged incidents described in this Chronicle article. Dean Sue would not take a rape allegation lightly and would at least bring an investigation to an informed conclusion. Nobody ever accused Dean Sue of being soft on campus safety issues.

Other than that, we have very few confirmed facts and we'll see how this develops. Until then, please keep the conversation civil and free of rumor-mongering.

lotusland
03-02-2015, 01:32 PM
My two cents, or less:

1. Few young women want their names to be forever linked to a rape allegation. While one woman at Columbia is carrying around her mattress and meeting political heavyweights, I am very confident that most of the time, she would rather just be anonymous Emma.



That may not be the best example to use.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/columbia-student-i-didn-t-rape-her.html

I agree that victims of assault by high profile athletes have reason to even more reluctant to come forward than other victims. Likewise if someone is inclined to make a false accusation then a high profile athlete may be an even more appealing target. Do you really want attention seekers or rival fans to be able to remove a player from the field/court with only an allegation? I'm not thinking of these allegations in particular as much as college campuses and college athletics in general. I absolutely believe there are fans who would go as far as to setup an athlete from a rival school with a false allegation.

Duvall
03-02-2015, 01:33 PM
I agree that victims of assault by high profile athletes have reason to even more reluctant to come forward than other victims. Likewise if someone is inclined to make a false accusation then a high profile athlete may be an even more appealing target. Do you really want attention seekers or rival fans to be able to remove a player from the field/court with only an allegation? I'm not thinking of these allegations in particular as much as college campuses and college athletics in general. I absolutely believe there are fans who would go as far as to setup an athlete from a rival school with a false allegation.

You absolutely believe this, despite the fact that nothing like this has ever actually happened.

Sports fans, everybody!

DBFAN
03-02-2015, 01:36 PM
Looks like I am back on the Keely bandwagon again. :)

Ha.. I thought I was the only one with this prob

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 01:36 PM
When a source says something like that, it seems like even a mediocre journalist should have the common sense to ask, "What do you mean nothing happened? Do you mean that there was no investigation? How do you know that?" Said hypothetical mediocre journalist would then be able to clarify the quote or (more likely) have to say, "Oh, you don't actually know. Well, then, I'm sorry but I can't publish that line. Let's just stick to what you do know."

Similarly, this line probably merits a simple follow-up question or two: "The following day, Jan. 22, Wensley—who had been working in the office for more than three years—notified Howard of his knowledge of the allegations and quit his job." Um, that's kind of a drastic step...why exactly did he quit his job? Was he dissatisfied with the way the situation had been handled thus far? That seems unlikely, since he quit as soon as he heard about it and did not have any idea who knew what until the conversation he had afterwards with Cragg. Maybe he just did not want to be around someone about whom there were rumors of sexual assault? Did he have other reasons? That little tidbit of information would give greater context to the source, but the authors decided that it was not worth finding out or sharing with the reader.

Yes, this part is particularly curious since Wensley apparently heard about this from a "fellow intern" who was a friend of one of the women who was allegedly assaulted--and this intern, according to Wensley, was interested in acting herself but feared the power of the basketball program. Okay--but was she an intern in the basketball office, which is where Wensley was working at the time? If so, and she were really this upset, mightn't she have looked for another job/internship on campus, rather than staying in that office? Obviously, there is no accounting for people's choices, but that part of the article seemed confusing to me. Did Wensley refuse to identify this intern? Did she refuse to talk to the Chronicle directly? Is she still working in the basketball office, even though Wensley quit?

SoCalDukeFan
03-02-2015, 01:41 PM
https://twitter.com/laurakeeley


There are legal ramifications and ethical concerns when it comes to letting third-parties and anonymous sources make accusations in print
As a reporter, I have to make sure every word I report passes muster on both fronts. And that’s how it should be
Journalism doesn’t play favorites. Every potential speaker is equal, regardless of race, gender, income, sexual orientation, etc.
Journalism doesn’t assume. Saying something doesn’t make it true, and it doesn’t make it false, either.
And documents are way, way above word-of-mouth on the preferred source of information pyramid, by the way
And I have no interest in playing God and trying to judge anyone’s character. None whatsoever.
I think of those things every day as I try to be the best source for Duke athletics news. & I will always do that every day I have this job
Knee-jerk reactions are fine for most people to have, but not me. I'm not most people. I'm a reporter.


It is very unfortunate that these rumors were given credibility by the Chronicle which comes across as a tabloid for publishing this.

There is no parallel to the FSU case because at FSU the accuser went to the authorities who did not pursue the case.

I think it is also very unfortunate that if the allegations are true that the victims did not go to the proper authorities. If the first one had, then maybe the second assault would have been prevented. I do fully understand that it is difficult for victims to come forward. If true, I feel very sorry for the victims.

If false then I feel very sorry for Rasheed.

It is also hard for me to say that Coach K should have done anything different.

The whole sexual assault area is just very difficult to handle correctly and fairly.

SoCal

lotusland
03-02-2015, 01:41 PM
You absolutely believe this, despite the fact that nothing like this has ever actually happened.

Sports fans, everybody!

I don't think athletes have ever been taken off the court or field merely due to an allegation with no proof or investigation but some posters have suggested that is what should have happened in this instance. But if that were the expected result of an allegation of any sort then yes, I absolutely believe it could happen.

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 01:44 PM
You absolutely believe this, despite the fact that nothing like this has ever actually happened.

Sports fans, everybody!

Where do you stand on perpetual PR malestroms [that don't exist] involving sex scandals?

mr. synellinden
03-02-2015, 02:02 PM
The Chronicle's reporting on this is so good that neither ESPN nor CBS Sports has any mention of this story on their web sites. SI has a story about Coach K not commenting on the accusations.

I think the reporting is weak and the story is poorly written in terms of logic, timeline and vagueness (I think Jason Evans commented on that in greater detail earlier in the thread - I totally agree with him). When someone says "nothing happened" for months - that could mean, nothing happened in terms of disciplinary action against the accused or nothing happened in terms of the appropriate University investigation. I certainly don't think the latter is true from what has been reported, but that is what the story implies. And to leave any vagueness or uncertainty out there about that issue is bad journalism, as others have noted.

**Update - two minutes after I posted that, ESPN.com (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12408702/duke-blue-devils-mike-krzyzewski-refuse-comment-rasheed-sulaimon-sexual-assault-allegations) now has a story on Coach K not commenting on the accusations. But my second paragraph still stands.

MattC09
03-02-2015, 02:03 PM
I have been on Common Ground. There are a few notes I can clarify.

1) In order to create a "safe space" for sharing, the leaders make clear that the participants should keep all shared experiences private. If the allegations were made public by people other than the alleged victims, it would be frowned upon. CG emphasizes that personal experiences are only the individual's to share.
2) The CG application asks for a story of personal struggle, so I find it likely that the CG committee saw the Sheed stories as a chance to spark dialogue on the retreat. CG participants are chosen in order to make a diverse group, but also to create tough, personal conversations. There is no reason to assume that the proportion of women who spoke of Sheed on CG is representative of the overall Duke population.
3) CG attracts people who have been assaulted in general because it is a safe space to have that discussion without fear of repercussions/backlash. I'd say if the ones who shared their stories in confidence didn't spread the allegations, then the Chronicle, as well as the "friends" who spread it, are causing more harm than good.

Common Ground is run out of the Center for Race Relations and is reputedly "student-led," but what is the level of involvement by Duke employees in the application process as well as the actual event? Is it entirely devoid of employee participation?

The reason I ask is that the employees would be obligated to report the accusations regardless of Common Ground's rules or be in violation of Title IX. If employees processed the applications, which included the accusations, were present when the conversations happened, or otherwise found out about the allegations, it is their job to report them. Having never attended Common Ground, it seems unreasonable to me that some employee associated with the CRR or program didn't hear about the allegations. Correct me if I'm wrong.

TKG
03-02-2015, 02:04 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/

We have now made the front page of ESPN.....oh, joy!

NancyCarol
03-02-2015, 02:06 PM
I am a woman. There are many reasons why women don't speak out in these situations. I don't know what happened, none of us do. What I DO know, what I am beyond confident in, is that Coach K would NEVER tolerate, condone, disguise, nor cover up any person nor player who caused this kind of harm to a woman. Beyond being the best coach in the game, he is a father and a husband.

Speculation, rumor and innuendo, doubt and gossip are all very entertaining and the wringing of hands on some of these posts is interesting in a tabloid sort of way, but for me - as a woman who has suffered physical abuse from a man in REAL life - I'd put my trust in Coach K to do the right thing without question.

Next play please.

flyingdutchdevil
03-02-2015, 02:06 PM
The Chronicle's reporting on this is so good that neither ESPN nor CBS Sports has any mention of this story on their web sites. SI has a story about Coach K not commenting on the accusations.

I think the reporting is weak and the story is poorly written in terms of logic, timeline and vagueness (I think Jason Evans commented on that in greater detail earlier in the thread - I totally agree with him). When someone says "nothing happened" for months - that could mean, nothing happened in terms of disciplinary action against the accused or nothing happened in terms of the appropriate University investigation. I certainly don't think the latter is true from what has been reported, but that is what the story implies. And to leave any vagueness or uncertainty out there about that issue is bad journalism, as others have noted.

ESPN has commented on the article or, more precisely, the silence of Duke: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12408702/duke-blue-devils-mike-krzyzewski-refuse-comment-rasheed-sulaimon-sexual-assault-allegations

MChambers
03-02-2015, 02:11 PM
Washington Post has also mentioned the Chronicle story, in a blog post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2015/03/02/duke-reportedly-knew-of-sexual-assault-allegations-against-rasheed-sulaimon-since-march-2014/

lotusland
03-02-2015, 02:14 PM
Pat Forde and Yahoo Sports weighs in :

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mike-krzyzewski-declines-comment-about-rasheed-sulaimon-situation-172046981.html

and places Duke in less than stellar company :


The Chronicle story was the latest revelation to rock the ACC. Last week, dismissed Louisville guard Chris Jones was charged with rape and sodomy – he entered a not guilty plea to those charges Friday. Last month, Syracuse self-imposed a postseason ban on its basketball team for violations of NCAA rules. And North Carolina remains under NCAA investigation pertaining to widespread academic fraud.

DukeinDC
03-02-2015, 02:16 PM
Have to give Keeley a lot of credit on these tweets.

I was initially preparing a semi-defense of the Chronicle until I read these tweets. In short, to the extent that the point of their article was to break news of Duke's awareness of sexual assault allegations against Rasheed and the timing of his dismissal, I did not find it to be thinly sourced, as it included a text message, Wensley's account, and an anonymous source. But, as Laura ably reminds us, just because the Chronicle had something arguably newsworthy does not make it ethical to report it if you don't have facts to back up the collateral damage - in this case to Rasheed and/or the alleged victims, in particular.

But now that it is out, it is worth asking - even as fans of the program - if the investigation happened and nothing was substantiated why was Rasheed kicked off the team days after a student secretary raised concerns after hearing news of a scandal and the allegations?

The key line though may be that: "The anonymous affiliate reiterated Plizga's statement that there were other factors that contributed to Sulaimon's dismissal." The allegations are so serious that they do not seem possible to be a "contributing" factor: either they are THE factor or deemed NO factor. My concern is that they fell in the middle.

jjredickrules
03-02-2015, 02:17 PM
Common Ground is run out of the Center for Race Relations and is reputedly "student-led," but what is the level of involvement by Duke employees in the application process as well as the actual event? Is it entirely devoid of employee participation?

The reason I ask is that the employees would be obligated to report the accusations regardless of Common Ground's rules or be in violation of Title IX. If employees processed the applications, which included the accusations, were present when the conversations happened, or otherwise found out about the allegations, it is their job to report them. Having never attended Common Ground, it seems unreasonable to me that some employee associated with the CRR or program didn't hear about the allegations. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I have never helped lead Common Ground, but I have been on leadership for another student-lead retreat that was run through a difference "Center", and I can say that the applications we received were reviewed solely by student leaders. I imagine CG was similar, but cannot say for certain. Faculty may have been consulted, but likely no substantial stories were shared.

Also, on the retreat, although several faculty members are brought in as presenters or guest speakers, the main activities occur solely among the students. I'd have to consult people who have lead the retreat to confirm, though.

One thing I have to stress about CG is its privacy. In order to create an atmosphere where people are willing to share their stories, they ask everyone to keep what is said there to themselves. They admitted that they don't have the legal backing to keep things "confidential" in the strictest sense, but the trust in each other to not spread stories is paramount to the retreat's success.

With that said, what I gather from the article is that people on the retreat, and/or those the women confided in, were the ones to spread the story to other outlets. If that were the case, they broke the trust of the retreat, and so not only could the basketball program NOT do anything, but they shouldn't have heard in the first place if the alleged victims did not wish to reveal it.

If the women were urged to not move forward by someone connected to the University, then that's awful. If they chose to keep the story to themselves, then it is not other's to spread.

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 02:17 PM
ESPN has commented on the article or, more precisely, the silence of Duke: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12408702/duke-blue-devils-mike-krzyzewski-refuse-comment-rasheed-sulaimon-sexual-assault-allegations

Their main cable station is presently concerned with the trade deadline of a league they refuse to televise (the NHL). So far, no on-air mentions of Duke, Sulaimon, powerpoints, or Belle Knox.

OK, I'll stop now.

I don't really see how Krzyzewski is in a position to comment on particulars.

nyesq83
03-02-2015, 02:21 PM
I question the existence, purpose and nature of this "Common Ground" program.

Students are chosen if they have a story to tell?

scottdude8
03-02-2015, 02:22 PM
I'd like to put my two cents on this, because I feel I have a perspective of interest to add to this discussion not only as a diehard Duke fan and alumnus, but also a former member of the Chronicle and also as a brother to a sister who is very involved in various feminist causes. Because this is such a touchy issue, I want to make sure I write everything I have to say as clearly as I can, hence the bullet points below.

-Firstly, if these allegations are true, I think that we can all agree that dismissing Sulaimon was the right thing to do, but we can possibly discuss the correctness of the timing of the dismissal. I would also hope that as a community we hold ourselves to a high standard of decorum with regards to discussing the alleged victims here. Duke has never been a "win at all costs" program as many people have said, so I hope we can prevent any rumor mongering or rampant speculation about the alleged victims. Any sort of "victim blaming" should be completely unacceptable as we discuss this.

-Again assuming the allegations and the content of the Chronicle article are true, I'd love to hear the thoughts of someone better informed than me about what options Duke truly had in this situation. I might have missed this discussion in this thread, which has quickly ballooned to 10 pages long, but given that there were no official complaints or charges filed, I'm not sure what the Duke basketball team really could have done. On this note, I'm wondering if the legacy of the lacrosse case was looming large in the decision making: if all that the program had access to were rumors and anonymous allegations, perhaps they didn't want to act without any hard evidence given the risk of creating another Lacrosse situation. Then again, perhaps by not acting they might have created a worse situation... regardless, I think that most reasonable parties can agree that there really wasn't a clear cut "right" action for the athletic department and the basketball team to take here, which makes this situation all the more troubling and confusing. It's clear to me that this is not at all as clear cut a situation as the Chris Jones case was at Louisville.

-Now, onto the piece itself. I, like many others on this board and many other Chronicle alumni, am concerned by the reporting in this article. In my personal experience, the danger of "anonymous sources" and the importance of only publishing a story when there were credible facts and people to be quoted on the record was drilled into me ad nauseum during my time with The Chronicle. Now here, just like in any other situation in which we don't have first hand accounts, there may have been other factors at play, so I would like to withhold any "moral" judgment on the reporters, the editors, and the Chronicle as a whole. But the article does seem to be largely based off of "friend of a friend" reporting and rumors, so I'm hoping that no one jumps to quick judgment in any direction based solely off of this report.

-Penultimately, the case of how this is going to be perceived by people outside the program will be interesting to follow. When I told this news to my father, his first reaction was, "I really hope this isn't a cover-up." I think that most people who are familiar with the Duke program and Coach K would adamantly deny any such accusations, and I'd be shocked if this was the case. That being said, from an external perspective this is what it may look like to many individuals. For that reason, I'm hoping more details about what was known by who when, and what actually occurred, comes out soon, for the sakes of all parties involved.

-Finally, I hope that the entire Duke community, and other players on the Duke team, don't have their reputations tarnished by what appears to be the actions of a single individual at this moment (again assuming the Chronicle article is mostly true). As a proud Duke alumnus I despise how the Lacrosse case comes up again and again as an indictment of the Duke community as a whole. I truly hope that this doesn't happen here.

jjredickrules
03-02-2015, 02:38 PM
I question the existence, purpose and nature of this "Common Ground" program.

Students are chosen if they have a story to tell?

Perhaps I was misleading with my first post.

The purpose of CG is to facilitate dialogue about race, gender, sexuality, and economic status that are difficult if not impossible to have in everyday life, due to a variety of reasons.

The participants are chosen in order to create as a diverse a group as possible in order to explore every topic thoroughly, and making sure all angles can be explored via each individual's unique perspective.

In that respect, I personally find it likely (although admittedly I have no knowledge other than my own application), that certain responses in the application would be more conducive to bringing up the tough discussions that they wish to have there. In no way do I believe that the leaders thought "Cool, we get to expose the Duke Basketball team!". That is not what happened, I assure you.

My point was to the fear that because 2 women came forward on that selective retreat, that is evidence that many other women were assaulted but had no outlet to speak up. My response was that there are rational arguments to be made for why this might not be the case.

CG has its issues, but please don't let my explanations be evidence against it.

Mike Corey
03-02-2015, 02:40 PM
I question the existence, purpose and nature of this "Common Ground" program.

Students are chosen if they have a story to tell?

With the explicit desire to not derail this thread, I'd direct you to this article with some more background on Common Ground. (http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2014/03/25/common-ground-mixed-legacy-11-years-making#.VPS8L7Eo6Uk)

Billy Dat
03-02-2015, 02:45 PM
I have been scouting the "court of public opinion", aka the comment sections under the online articles about this news, and it seems like there are just as many defenders of the way Duke handled this situation as there are detractors, which actually surprises me - I thought there would be a lot more Duke bashing.

Let's hope it turns out that Duke did everything by the book. As for all of the others actors in this drama - godspeed.

MattC09
03-02-2015, 02:45 PM
I have never helped lead Common Ground, but I have been on leadership for another student-lead retreat that was run through a difference "Center", and I can say that the applications we received were reviewed solely by student leaders. I imagine CG was similar, but cannot say for certain. Faculty may have been consulted, but likely no substantial stories were shared.

Also, on the retreat, although several faculty members are brought in as presenters or guest speakers, the main activities occur solely among the students. I'd have to consult people who have lead the retreat to confirm, though.

One thing I have to stress about CG is its privacy. In order to create an atmosphere where people are willing to share their stories, they ask everyone to keep what is said there to themselves. They admitted that they don't have the legal backing to keep things "confidential" in the strictest sense, but the trust in each other to not spread stories is paramount to the retreat's success.

With that said, what I gather from the article is that people on the retreat, and/or those the women confided in, were the ones to spread the story to other outlets. If that were the case, they broke the trust of the retreat, and so not only could the basketball program NOT do anything, but they shouldn't have heard in the first place if the alleged victims did not wish to reveal it.

If the women were urged to not move forward by someone connected to the University, then that's awful. If they chose to keep the story to themselves, then it is not other's to spread.

Thanks for that.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 02:50 PM
The best way to judge the public reaction to this would be to check out our biggest critics thoughts. So I went to IC just to see what they were saying, and its actually about half and half. Believe it or not there are a lot of defenders of the truth and waiting to pass judgement. Of course there is still the crazy people who think we shouldn't be allowed to play basketball ever again and that we close the program down. So I think in general the public as a whole is split on this topic. There will be the crazy Duke haters who will take this as Duke cover up, and will look to press it as much as they can. Then there will be the more logical people who have learned from the past and aren't going to condemn anyone off of rumors.

tux
03-02-2015, 02:52 PM
I question the existence, purpose and nature of this "Common Ground" program.

Students are chosen if they have a story to tell?


I would tend to fall into more of a libertarian position. If students want to organize a retreat, regardless of the topic, they have every right to do so.

What's problematic (and confusing) is allowing folks at the retreat to share the names of other students. On the one hand, if someone is a real sexual predator, having knowledge of who to avoid could be what saves his/her next victim. (Although, I would advocate for bringing real charges at that point, even though I'm aware of the difficulty of that step.) On the other hand, I don't see how you keep a potentially false (or murky) allegation from moving outside the group. Suppose a women said John Doe raped her at the CG retreat. During the next semester, a retreat participant's good friend (or hall mate) gets asked out on a date by John Doe... I mean, we quickly move into bad territory IMO. Of course that women should warn her friend; even if done in a subtle way, it's damaging if the accusation is false... and one can see how the rumor would spread easily that way through the campus community...

Troublemaker
03-02-2015, 02:53 PM
The Chronicle has done some good work in the past -- e.g., they were one of the few media outlets that didn't jump into the feeding frenzy in the wake of the rape allegations against the lacrosse team in 2006, and they were dogged in bringing Mike Nifong's overreaches and malfeasance to light.

But their sourcing and reporting on this Rasheed story reminds me of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Y-SieCU11r4#t=22

Yes, the whole Lincoln Wensley section of the article was especially like that Bueller clip. As far as I can tell, the whole point of that section was to attempt to imply that Wensley speaking out and resigning forced Coach K's hand in dismissing Sulaimon, since the section added nothing else of substance that wasn't already stated by the anonymous former "affiliate."

While Shane Ryan is ready to believe that narrative (https://twitter.com/ShaneRyanHere/status/572399361138798593), it doesn't pass muster with me. What is the line of logic here?
1 - Coach K had enough information to dismiss Sulaimon all along but valued wins over morality?
2 - Coach K then assumed that nobody would EVER find out about Sulaimon and/or coerced folks into not talking?
3 - He would've gotten away with it, too, if not for that meddling Wensley?
4 - But since Wensley found out, Coach K had to panic-dismiss Sulaimon?
5 - Or maybe it wasn't panic. "I was all about wins over morality, but nobody could EVER accuse me of that if I dismissed him NOW, ten months after Sheed first confessed to me? Muahahaha. Better luck next time, Wensley!"


Probably worth mentioning again that we do not know whether Sulaimon's dismissal was related to these allegations in any way.

Yes.

Exiled_Devil
03-02-2015, 02:55 PM
With the explicit desire to not derail this thread, I'd direct you to this article with some more background on Common Ground. (http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2014/03/25/common-ground-mixed-legacy-11-years-making#.VPS8L7Eo6Uk)

On a sad tangent, folks around the internet are mis-reading the Chronicle article as saying that Sulaimon perpetrated rape at the conference two years in a row.

Yay, reading comprehension online!

Duke3517
03-02-2015, 02:55 PM
Unless I missed it, I'm shocked he is not kicked off the campus. But that is probably a rash decision considering their is no conviction nor found guilty of any charges.

K made the right move and the timing was perfect. He must of needed more confirmation before he pulled the plug on Sheed. Hoping for the best outcome for all parties involved.

TampaDuke
03-02-2015, 03:02 PM
A few thoughts after reading this thread:


If any information regarding an alleged sexual assault comes to the attention of the University (including the Athletics department), it absolutely has to be looked into. The reluctance on the part of the alleged victim is largely irrelevant to the issue of whether an inquiry must be made.


Whether a player is suspended or not pending an investigation, should absolutely not be made by anyone associated with the team or athletic department.


The "innocent until proven guilty" maxim is not of much use when considering whether to suspend pending an investigation. By its nature, the investigation is attempting to determine if there is reason to take some final action and address the guilt/innocence issue. That said, regardless of guilt or innocence, you can't ignore that there are additional concerns and ramifications unrelated to guilt/innocence that occur when you make the decision whether to suspend or not pending an investigation. Personally, I think you must suspend if the allegations are serious enough (and, if true, can do real damage to the University/program), but that is certainly a debatable position and is also heavily fact specific (i.e., you suspend the daycare worker accused of being a pedophile, but do you suspend a daycare worker accused of filing a false tax return?).


Those that think it's a given that you cannot suspend until the investigation has concluded must be forgetting the numerous times each year that athletic programs sit players while eligibility issues are being sorted. Should Kansas have played Cliff Alexander this past weekend? What about PJ Hairston and Carolina? Why would allegations of sexual assault be treated differently?


All that said, from everything I know about Coach K, I have confidence that he would not have ignored these concerns. Frankly, I'd guess that, if and when he became aware of these concerns, he immediately contacted the University's legal or HR departments (or had the Athletics Department do so) and then strictly followed their guidance.

Exiled_Devil
03-02-2015, 03:15 PM
Yes, the whole Lincoln Wensley section of the article was especially like that Bueller clip. As far as I can tell, the whole point of that section was to attempt to imply that Wensley speaking out and resigning forced Coach K's hand in dismissing Sulaimon, since the section added nothing else of substance that wasn't already stated by the anonymous former "affiliate."



Local sports radio in Durham, 99.9m just stated that a call to sources at Duke confirmed that the proper procedures were followed regarding contacting student conduct.

throatybeard
03-02-2015, 03:24 PM
The best way to judge the public reaction to this would be to check out our biggest critics thoughts.

I'm gonna need to see some reasoned defense of this position.

FerryFor50
03-02-2015, 03:30 PM
I'm gonna need to see some reasoned defense of this position.

Like, a dissertation? :p

Kedsy
03-02-2015, 03:35 PM
Like, a dissertation? :p

Only if it's about sex.

elvis14
03-02-2015, 03:37 PM
Local sports radio in Durham, 99.9m just stated that a call to sources at Duke confirmed that the proper procedures were followed regarding contacting student conduct.

Although the source, 99.9 The Heel, is a bit sketchy, I can say that I'm glad to hear this and hope it's true. My two thoughts as I've read the article and all the posts were 1) I hope it didn't happen and 2) if it did happen I hope Duke did what they were supposed to do.

One other thought I've had and that others have stated is that IF the allegations are true that the victims are treated with respect (and that includes being allowed whatever level of privacy they desire).

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 03:40 PM
I'm gonna need to see some reasoned defense of this position.

Ok Ok what I meant was that if there were posters on IC that were commenting that people should wait on more facts before judging then there is a good chance the general public who does't hate us as much would think the same way. Or something. :p

wgpatrick
03-02-2015, 03:48 PM
Common Ground is run out of the Center for Race Relations and is reputedly "student-led," but what is the level of involvement by Duke employees in the application process as well as the actual event? Is it entirely devoid of employee participation?

The reason I ask is that the employees would be obligated to report the accusations regardless of Common Ground's rules or be in violation of Title IX. If employees processed the applications, which included the accusations, were present when the conversations happened, or otherwise found out about the allegations, it is their job to report them. Having never attended Common Ground, it seems unreasonable to me that some employee associated with the CRR or program didn't hear about the allegations. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I was a facilitator at Common Ground several years ago. No employees were likely in attendance and employees aren't involved in the selection of the attendees. At least while I was involved, the CRR was pretty much entirely student run. There may have been a "faculty/administrative advisor" ... but they definitely would not have been in the room when the student spoke about the assault.

I have to say that I was very surprised to hear that he was named by two separate students at CG. Participates are not encouraged (but not discouraged) to call out specific individuals [FWIW - no one was specifically called out while I was a part of CG - however, I could definitely see it happening]. I'm also surprised (and sad) to hear that some attendees at the retreat did discuss the story outside the retreat (and to the Chron). It harms the two students and it breaks the safe space and may limit open sharing in the future.

Regarding the allegations, of course I have no idea what happened. However, given the context of the event, it's hard to imagine someone in that situation sharing their story with malicious intent.

Lar77
03-02-2015, 03:49 PM
Although the source, 99.9 The Heel, is a bit sketchy, I can say that I'm glad to hear this and hope it's true. My two thoughts as I've read the article and all the posts were 1) I hope it didn't happen and 2) if it did happen I hope Duke did what they were supposed to do.

One other thought I've had and that others have stated is that IF the allegations are true that the victims are treated with respect (and that includes being allowed whatever level of privacy they desire).

More unnamed sources? I am getting tired reading about double hearsay, rumors, and anonymous affiliates.

I agree with your thoughts. I trust that everyone at Duke and the Athletic Department did what they believe was the right thing to do and looking back that they have no regrets that they did not do everything they should have done.

Whether the allegations are true or not, there are many victims here and they should be treated with respect so they can be able to find peace in themselves.

1999ballboy
03-02-2015, 03:51 PM
So... the information that Sulaimon was separated from the team during the offseason... that's pretty much credible and confirmed, right? I'm asking. I thought I remembered reporters bringing this to light during the time of the dismissal.

Because if so, I am appalled at the total and deliberate omission of this information by The Chronicle. The Chronicle absolutely had every knowledge that he was separated from the team during that time- i.e., that the basketball program was doing something about it. The likely reason that he was back with the team in the fall is that they didn't get any closer to the truth than they already were- which was that there had been a couple of accusations, and that's all we knew. But instead, The Chronicle made an infographic that emphasizes the time elapsed between the coaches' initial knowledge of accusations and his dismissal from the team. And the Deadspins of the world have already jumped all over it with headlines like this. (http://deadspin.com/report-duke-coaches-administrators-ignored-sexual-I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.-1688875007)

Atlanta Duke
03-02-2015, 04:00 PM
Have to give Keeley a lot of credit on these tweets.

For reminding everyone of her own wonderfulness?

If she wants to state The Chronicle blew the story then go all in, write that article (or column) that explains why, and see if her editors will publish it in the N&O.

But saying you live on a higher moral level because you are a "reporter"? Spare me.

But why have a twitter account if not to draw attention to yourself?:)

daveduke76
03-02-2015, 04:00 PM
I was initially preparing a semi-defense of the Chronicle until I read these tweets. In short, to the extent that the point of their article was to break news of Duke's awareness of sexual assault allegations against Rasheed and the timing of his dismissal, I did not find it to be thinly sourced, as it included a text message, Wensley's account, and an anonymous source. But, as Laura ably reminds us, just because the Chronicle had something arguably newsworthy does not make it ethical to report it if you don't have facts to back up the collateral damage - in this case to Rasheed and/or the alleged victims, in particular.

But now that it is out, it is worth asking - even as fans of the program - if the investigation happened and nothing was substantiated why was Rasheed kicked off the team days after a student secretary raised concerns after hearing news of a scandal and the allegations?

The key line though may be that: "The anonymous affiliate reiterated Plizga's statement that there were other factors that contributed to Sulaimon's dismissal." The allegations are so serious that they do not seem possible to be a "contributing" factor: either they are THE factor or deemed NO factor. My concern is that they fell in the middle.

We just don't know

sagegrouse
03-02-2015, 04:03 PM
Some observations:


The alleged accusations occurred at two different Common Ground retreats -- October 2013 and February 2014. The Chronicle contacted the two women, both of whom declined to comment, before it published the story. Ergo, their names are known on campus.

It seems probable that the two accusations were "too hot to keep secret" once Rasheed was dismissed, in spite of the pledge of secrecy in the CG sessions.

The speculation then turns to associate the accusations with the "cause of dismissal."



I do not believe Duke and its officials would ever act stupidly in such matters, such as failing to (a) investigate allegations (under Title IX or student conduct code), (b) take immediate action a year ago if it had evidence of such behavior, and (c) do more than just dismiss Rasheed from the team -- throw him out of school and notify authorities.

KandG
03-02-2015, 04:08 PM
A couple of things beyond the many valuable insights/opinions already shared on this (massive) thread:

* I'm a huge supporter of the program, but sadly, I've become cynical enough that I just can't assume anything, including whether the program I've supported for decades would reflexively do the right thing in every circumstance. It's fair to at least engage in some of the questions that have persisted, as flawed and flimsily reported as the Chronicle article was. However, because of the visibility of Duke basketball and the huge number of people with a vested interested in seeing it squirm, you'll always have more polarizing perspectives thrown out there that aren't necessarily supported by evidence. So there's going to be a lot more heat than light in the short term.

* My biggest reason for believing K would do the right thing is not some general belief in his infallibility based on his long standing record of integrity (even the most accomplished and ethical individuals have slipped from time to time), but that he has experience in dealing with the most loaded of situations, specifically the lacrosse case and the case involving Shelden Williams and an alleged gang rape in Oklahoma before he matriculated at Duke. In other words, beyond his sense of ethics, Coach K knows all too well what allegations like this can do if not handled properly and judiciously.

I don't know what happened and I'm not going to assume anything without more information, but for now I have a strong belief that K (and Duke as a whole) handled this matter in the best way possible under less than ideal circumstances. There's some unflattering circumstantial information floating around for now being used to make a case against the Duke program that reminds me of Serial, but I'll be curious to see if it has any legs.

And as many on this thread have said, I hope for the best possible outcome for everyone involved. Right now though, it seems like much less than that.

ricks68
03-02-2015, 04:08 PM
What's the opposite of spork? Flork? Can we verb this? I florked thraotybeard.

Ya know, I really think that some of the ridiculous criticisms pertaining to misspelled words in posts are just that-----ridiculous, as long as they are not pertaining to our guys. For example: Sheldon, Redddick, Craig (It's Mike Cragg, people), etc. = bad ; Len Elmo, Dickie Vitalle, etc. = good. But to have one of our most esteemed long-time posters mess up his own name?????????

rciks:rolleyes:

gumbomoop
03-02-2015, 04:32 PM
This is a very disturbing story, and it's understandable that people would be concerned. However, there is a lot of unfair speculation and doubt being cast upon different individuals. Obviously, the victim(s) in this case, whoever they may be, suffer the most from this. That goes without saying. But I have read nothing that indicates malfeasance by the University, Coach K, etc.

This is a very complex situation. Rumors are brought forward of past incidents. The incidents were unreported at the time. The alleged victims shared their stories in small groups that expected confidentiality. They made conscious decisions that it was in their best interests to not go forward with their allegations. A third party brings these to the attention of basketball staff. What exactly is Coach K supposed to do?

Remove Sulaimon from the team based on unsubstantiated rumors of past events from anonymous sources who don't wish to come forward? I certainly hope not. I would hope the Lacrosse/Rolling Stone stories would show the importance of proof before deciding guilt.

It has even been suggested the basketball office should have investigated the situation.
1.) How do you investigate such a charge when the alleged victims do not want to move forward?

2.)Do you approach them with information they thought was given in confidence in a "quasi-counseling" type environment, even though they have decided that it is not in their best interests to move forward? This seems legally and ethically questionable.

3.)Does anyone really believe that Coach K or the basketball office could be involved in any way, shape or form into investigating allegations involving young women who allegedly were victims of sexual assault by a player, and who feared the power and influence of Duke Basketball?

In my opinion the basketball office (and University) was in an extremely difficult position. I would have had no idea what to do. It would be very difficult to navigate this situation properly. In fact, I believe they would be criticized no matter what they did. The one thing that gives me hope it was handled very deliberately and carefully is the Lacrosse fiasco. It is my hope that the gravity of that situation led the Duke basketball office to hand this off to the University and its lawyers to decide the appropriate course of action. The fact that the allegations were brought to the attention of Sue Wasiolek, assistant vice president of student affairs and dean of students, does make it seem that this is how things were handled.

Some people assume because they are unaware of of an investigation, consequences, etc. that these things didn't take place. If the University handled this situation properly then, absent a finding of guilt, no one outside of the involved parties should have heard anything at all.

Many thoughtful and thought-provoking responses on this complicated, upsetting topic. I want to acknowledge this one in particular. I've read it several times, and think I agree with every word.

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 04:38 PM
So... the information that Sulaimon was separated from the team during the offseason... that's pretty much credible and confirmed, right? I'm asking. I thought I remembered reporters bringing this to light during the time of the dismissal.

Because if so, I am appalled at the total and deliberate omission of this information by The Chronicle. The Chronicle absolutely had every knowledge that he was separated from the team during that time- i.e., that the basketball program was doing something about it. The likely reason that he was back with the team in the fall is that they didn't get any closer to the truth than they already were- which was that there had been a couple of accusations, and that's all we knew. But instead, The Chronicle made an infographic that emphasizes the time elapsed between the coaches' initial knowledge of accusations and his dismissal from the team. And the Deadspins of the world have already jumped all over it with headlines like this. (http://deadspin.com/report-duke-coaches-administrators-ignored-sexual-I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.-1688875007)

Sadly, the Deadspin headline is not the worst of it--the article itself contains a few clearly incorrect statements that make the situation sound like the worst-case scenario, such as
The Chronicle also reports that high-ranking members of the university's athletic department were aware of the allegations as early as March 2014, and violated federal law by failing to report them. The Chronicle reported no such thing. It quoted someone else as claiming that high-ranking members were aware of the athletic department, and no one in the article--certainly not the reporter--claimed that officials violated federal law by not reporting the allegations. Given that, according to the article, the allegations were reported to Dean Sue Wasiolek, who has jurisdiction over such matters, it would seem any "reporting" requirement had been met. At that point, the only question would be whether the allegations were investigated, which privacy laws apparently prevent the university from saying.

Mike Corey
03-02-2015, 04:41 PM
A thought: Be mindful of whatever you post in this thread. I have little doubt reporters will be sifting through to find examples they can quote as a gauge and illustration of "Duke's reaction among fans."

duke79
03-02-2015, 04:42 PM
Obviously, I have NO clue what might have happened here, but one of my concerns is that the mainstream media (and not so mainstream media) will go to town with this story and associate Duke with Florida State and Penn St. as universities with powerful athletic departments that have attempted to cover up scandals with their marquee sports teams to protect the money and the "brand." This may be grossly unfair in the case of Duke, BUT it has already started. See story linked below from today's Bloomberg.com website (what I would consider a mainstream media site, not prone to journalistic sensationalism).

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-02/duke-s-late-whistle-on-rasheed-sulaimon

I hate to say this but many casual sports fans or readers will probably associate Duke with the Florida States or Penn States of the world. I also think that it has the potential devolve into a black mark against Coach K (unfairly) in many people's eyes.

GDT
03-02-2015, 04:44 PM
As far as I can tell, the whole point of that section was to attempt to imply that Wensley speaking out and resigning forced Coach K's hand in dismissing Sulaimon, since the section added nothing else of substance that wasn't already stated by the anonymous former "affiliate."

That seemed odd. Wensley hears fellow intern talking about 'next big Duke scandal'. Despite the fact that the assault claim was made in March 2014 and it was now January 2015 and nothing had happened publicly. He asks about it and immediately quits his intern job. It seems weird and I don't know if it's the poorly written article or the inferences I'm making which are more at fault.

nyesq83
03-02-2015, 04:45 PM
Perhaps I was misleading with my first post.

The purpose of CG is to facilitate dialogue about race, gender, sexuality, and economic status that are difficult if not impossible to have in everyday life, due to a variety of reasons.

The participants are chosen in order to create as a diverse a group as possible in order to explore every topic thoroughly, and making sure all angles can be explored via each individual's unique perspective.


I will bet that it would be near impossible to be taken seriously for any hetero white male with any opinion contrary to the race-gender-class-privilege narratives at Common Ground. I expect the hetero white male would be othered and unwelcomed. If invited in the first place.

it is interesting that CG was the breeding ground for two semi-anonymous accusations.

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 04:54 PM
I will bet that it would be near impossible to be taken seriously for any hetero white male with any opinion contrary to the race-gender-class-privilege narratives at Common Ground. I expect the hetero white male would be othered and unwelcomed. If invited in the first place.

it is interesting that CG was the breeding ground for two semi-anonymous accusations.

Oh, let's not go here--gratuitous bashing of CG is irrelevant to this discussion and the speculation about the origin of the allegations has no basis.

cspan37421
03-02-2015, 05:00 PM
Once again, where is the evidence? Without it, once again it appears that the kind of rape culture that exists (if it exists at all) is a rape accusation culture. Actually, with no accusers stepping forward, it's a rape rumor of accusation culture. Lower and lower the bar goes. What is next, thoughtcrime?

By the way, if you don't think false accusations of sexual assault can and do happen on college campuses, look no further than Haven Monahan and his harrowing ordeal.

[and no, I'm not saying ALL accusations are false! Just that one should proportion one's belief to the evidence (Hume), and that it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true (Russell).]

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-02-2015, 05:04 PM
Once again, where is the evidence? Without it, once again it appears that the kind of rape culture that exists (if it exists at all) is a rape accusation culture. Actually, with no accusers stepping forward, it's a rape rumor of accusation culture. Lower and lower the bar goes. What is next, thoughtcrime?

By the way, if you don't think false accusations of sexual assault can and do happen on college campuses, look no further than Haven Monahan and his harrowing ordeal.

[and no, I'm not saying ALL accusations are false! Just that one should proportion one's belief to the evidence (Hume), and that it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true (Russell).]

This guy went hard in the paint, good post with citations. also his name is cspan which gives him more credibility in news matters :D

ricks68
03-02-2015, 05:05 PM
Like, a dissertation? :p

Nothing less is expected on the DBR board. We are Duke, you know.:cool:

ricks

cruxer
03-02-2015, 05:13 PM
The Chronicle reported no such thing. It quoted someone else as claiming that high-ranking members were aware of the athletic department, and no one in the article--certainly not the reporter--claimed that officials violated federal law by not reporting the allegations.....

As a reporter you have to recognize how your story will be interpreted. You simply can't quote someone, especially anonymously, making such a bold accusation unless that person was in a position to know the veracity of that accusation. It was clear that those conclusions could be drawn from the story and the reporters owed it to the reader to actually investigate the question and attempt to come to some conclusion rather than just air it. I suspect that lack of follow-up is what Ms. Keeley is referring to in her tweets. As a reporter you have to close the circle before you print that sort of accusation.

-c

J_C_Steel
03-02-2015, 05:21 PM
Had to log off for a while -- kid duty -- but I saw that plenty of people were jumping all over me about what the "facts" are as reported by The Chronicle, where the gaps are, and why I see this as a "sad day."

Simply put, any time someone affiliated with a prestigious part of my alma mater is accused of sexual assault, it's a sad day. Period. I didn't like the Duke lacrosse scandal, either, and it was a "sad" affair, even though none of the Duke students involved committed a crime or did anything egregiously wrong.

As for the facts, they are fairly thin, but they are there, as reported:

1. Two women brought allegations of sexual assault against Rasheed Sulaimon during the 2013-14 academic year.
2. Both women "voiced allegations publicly," but neither filed a complaint through Duke's Office of Student Conduct or initiated a legal action through the Durham Police Department.
3. Members of the Duke athletic department were made aware of the allegations by at least March 2014, including the team psychologist.
4. After March 2014, other athletic department officials were made aware of the allegations, including Mike Bragg, David Bradley, and Kevin White.
5. Sue Wasiolek, Dean of Students and Assistant Vice President of Student Affairs, was also made aware of the allegations at some point after March 2014.
6. According to the article, "[t]he fear of backlash from the Duke fan base was a factor in the female students' decision not to pursue the allegations."
7. Even though no complaint was filed, Duke University is obligated under Title IX to look into any indications of assault.
8. Ms. Wasiolek declined to comment on any investigation conducted by the University, if any, into the allegations.
9. A former secretary of the Duke basketball program (who may or may not be a disgruntled former intern), Lincoln Wensley, contacted a friend of one of the alleged victims, learning that the alleged victim was scared because of the "power the men's basketball possesses on this campus."
10. According to Mr. Wensley, he had a conversation with Mike Cragg during which Mr. Cragg stated that Coach K "had known and knew that Rasheed had these rumors swirling about him and that Kevin White had also known."
11. Rasheed Sulaimon was dismissed from the Duke basketball program on January 29, 2015.
12. Rasheed Sulaimon remains a student in good standing at Duke University.

Interesting, but largely incomplete, set of facts. It is sad to me that a former player faced two separate allegations of sexual assault while he was on the basketball team. It is incredibly sad to me that, according to sources "close" to them, among the reasons the alleged victims did not file a formal or legal complaint are (1) the power of the basketball program on campus, and (2) the rabidity of the Duke fan base. That's awful, and it's also a culture problem that needs to be corrected at Duke and elsewhere.

I've heard from students familiar with the Common Ground retreat that it is supposed to provide a "safe space" on campus to talk about issues of race, gender, SES, sexual orientation, etc. It seemed to one of the students with which I spoke that The Chronicle's sources may not be wholly credible given the confidentiality pact that the students make on the retreat. The article, according to this student, makes it seem like the source was someone in the retreat who does not have the permission of the victims to tell their stories.

As a practicing lawyer, I hold up the idea of "due process" as firmly as anyone. No one here should presume that Rasheed Sulaimon is guilty. However, due diligence and Title IX both demand that the University take some steps to look into allegations of sexual assault against a student-athlete, even if the alleged victim does not file a formal complaint. Indeed, what if someone witnessed another student being raped and reported it? Certainly the University would and must investigate regardless of whether the victim wanted to file a complaint. I would certainly hope that there is some way for the University to continue investigating without the victims' cooperation (as is the case in criminal charges in some jurisdictions), particularly if the reason they don't want to cooperate is because they fear retaliation from basketball fans. We cannot have a system that allows women to be victimized in that way. The University has an obligation to protect them, both by investigating these incidents to the fullest extent and by protecting the victims in every way possible in the process -- and yes, confidential investigations can be conducted (it's what grand juries are for). The University also has a responsibility to protect other victims from a potential sexual predator and to create a campus culture where victims don't feel like they are unable to come forward because they fear retaliation.

Finally, I should say that it's certainly possible that the University did everything it was supposed to do and is simply following federal law and refusing to comment. The fact that Sulaimon remains a student at Duke could be evidence either of a completed investigation that revealed no wrongdoing (or none sufficient to merit expulsion), or of a bungled or incomplete investigation.

At the end of the day, the University and the men's basketball program will need to answer questions to the best of their ability while abiding by federal law and keeping certain information confidential.

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 05:24 PM
As a reporter you have to recognize how your story will be interpreted. You simply can't quote someone, especially anonymously, making such a bold accusation unless that person was in a position to know the veracity of that accusation. It was clear that those conclusions could be drawn from the story and the reporters owed it to the reader to actually investigate the question and attempt to come to some conclusion rather than just air it. I suspect that lack of follow-up is what Ms. Keeley is referring to in her tweets. As a reporter you have to close the circle before you print that sort of accusation.

-c

I was not so much trying to defend the Chronicle as calling out Deadspin, which was not "interpreting" the article in a certain way but outright stating that the article said things it did not say.

In principle, I agree with your view of journalistic responsibility here, though I'm not sure how often it is observed these days.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
03-02-2015, 05:25 PM
Once again, where is the evidence? Without it, once again it appears that the kind of rape culture that exists (if it exists at all) is a rape accusation culture. Actually, with no accusers stepping forward, it's a rape rumor of accusation culture. Lower and lower the bar goes. What is next, thoughtcrime?

By the way, if you don't think false accusations of sexual assault can and do happen on college campuses, look no further than Haven Monahan and his harrowing ordeal.

[and no, I'm not saying ALL accusations are false! Just that one should proportion one's belief to the evidence (Hume), and that it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true (Russell).]

And... there's my cue to exit this thread before I start making comments that I regret.

Good luck in here guys - someone hit the lights on the way out.

subzero02
03-02-2015, 05:27 PM
Innocent until proven guilty. He's still on campus and is still in good academic standing. We also aren't cerain if something else occurred subsequent to these accusations that contributed to Sulaimon's dismissal. I am guessing K will address this issue more thoroughly after the season. For the time being, I am satisfied with the university's response; especially considering a lack of formal complaints levied by the alleged victims.

nyesq83
03-02-2015, 05:29 PM
Oh, let's not go here--gratuitous bashing of CG is irrelevant to this discussion and the speculation about the origin of the allegations has no basis.

It is a fact that they originated from Common Ground participants.

I will not disagree with your opinion of my gratuitous bashing.

Of course if the allegations are true, I condemn any and all sexual assault.

DukeinDC
03-02-2015, 05:38 PM
As for the facts, they are fairly thin, but they are there, as reported:

1. Two women brought allegations of sexual assault against Rasheed Sulaimon during the 2013-14 academic year.
2. Both women "voiced allegations publicly," but neither filed a complaint through Duke's Office of Student Conduct or initiated a legal action through the Durham Police Department.
3. Members of the Duke athletic department were made aware of the allegations by at least March 2014, including the team psychologist.
4. After March 2014, other athletic department officials were made aware of the allegations, including Mike Bragg, David Bradley, and Kevin White.
5. Sue Wasiolek, Dean of Students and Assistant Vice President of Student Affairs, was also made aware of the allegations at some point after March 2014.
6. According to the article, "[t]he fear of backlash from the Duke fan base was a factor in the female students' decision not to pursue the allegations."
7. Even though no complaint was filed, Duke University is obligated under Title IX to look into any indications of assault.
8. Ms. Wasiolek declined to comment on any investigation conducted by the University, if any, into the allegations.
9. A former secretary of the Duke basketball program (who may or may not be a disgruntled former intern), Lincoln Wensley, contacted a friend of one of the alleged victims, learning that the alleged victim was scared because of the "power the men's basketball possesses on this campus."
10. According to Mr. Wensley, he had a conversation with Mike Cragg during which Mr. Cragg stated that Coach K "had known and knew that Rasheed had these rumors swirling about him and that Kevin White had also known."
11. Rasheed Sulaimon was dismissed from the Duke basketball program on January 29, 2015.
12. Rasheed Sulaimon remains a student in good standing at Duke University.



#6 and #9 are "facts" in the sense that it's a fact the Chronicle reported it that way but I don't think the report went far enough to deem the victim's fear of the program or fan base as a fact itself given that neither spoke with the newspaper directly. This is important because it's the imbalance between the power/money, etc. of College Athletics vs. a potential victim that make these stories compelling and newsworthy; but there is no real evidence as of yet that that imbalance was at play in this specific instance beyond second hand text messages and the impression of the affiliate.

Skitzle
03-02-2015, 05:45 PM
This is rather long, and I'm a little late to the party, but I've been thinking about this a lot. I would like to get your opinions (and support).

There are two ways this story plays out. Both are bad for Duke basketball on a National Stage. One is slightly less bad for Duke fans.

Fact: Rumors of Sexual Assualt
Fact: Rasheed played on the team till January
Fact: Duke Basketball is a tight lipped organization and will never talk in detail in an effort to protect itself and its players. So things in this case will never be very transparent.

And that's about it in this case.

Let's put forward the best-case scenario of what went down. (for Duke fans and the university as a whole).

1) Rasheed gets accused once. This is sad, but the school conducts its investigation properly, as required by law, and is unable to come up with anything damning.
2) Rasheed gets accused again, The school conducts its investigation properly as required by law but is unable to come up with anything. (I get that he was apparently suspended from the team this summer but no one knows why so any speculation is just that).
3) Other things happen and Coach K says "that's enough, you're gone."

Everything is actually in order but the Chronicle publishes a terrible article that is based almost entirely on rumor. The article purports Duke and the staff knew, did nothing at best, intimated the ones assaulted at worst, and only acted when they had no other choice. The dismissal (in the chronicles eyes) was 100% a result sexual assault.


In the best case scenario, here is Duke's defense:
1) The required investigations were conducted, in the correct time period, and the results were reported to all the parties required.
2) Meaning, the investigations did not turn up enough fact to make any formal acusations, but the fact that they took place coupled with goings on over the next 10 months lead to some straw that broke the camels back that lead to the dismissal.

Therefore Duke is actually in good standing, but there are no more details that can ethically be revealed, because it would cast inappropriate light on Rasheed and the accusers. (See fact 3, Duke is a tight lipped organization that protects its people as necessary). In this case being tight lipped is the right thing to do!

Now, this is just about the best potential way this situation could go down.

The flip side of this:
1) Duke is tight lipped, so if there was a cover up you might not hear about it
2) There was ACTUAL pressure from the Duke staff and Duke athletics to cover up these sexual allegations
3) Coach K not only knew, but also only dismissed Rasheed from the team when he thought that his cover would be blown. (Not what you want to believe, but after Penn State, Syracuse, Kentucky, UNC, the possibility HAS to be put on the table).

If any of these 3 things are true. Its really really really bad. Fortunately & unfortunately, those three things are ALL rumor at this point. This means that they can only go on to live in the world of internet rumor. More unfortunately still, in sports in general, where there is smoke there is fire.... (This is the part where we really hope that Duke is above all of this).

The worst problem is this: If Duke DID do everything required and found nothing, they cant actually talk about it in any satisfying detail! So the haters will always be able to believe that it was a cover up, and the believers will always believe the university acted appropriately.

There are two ways this will play out:

Scenario 1: The university is going to put up the defense I stated in my best case scenario. "We did what we had to do. Rasheed was dismissed for a number of reasons and the results of the investigations were a part but not the whole of the dismissal" [Because the investigations turned up nothing, but we can't say they turned up nothing because if we specifically say they turned up nothing we look guilty and we are not guilty]

Scenario 2: The university is going to put up the defense I stated in my best case scenario, and then slowly and steadily more leaks are going to break out. Coach K knew. He did nothing or worse the school intimidated. He only dismissed because he knew the story was coming etc etc. If more leaks come out or more whisteblowers step forward... it will really be a sad sad day to be a Duke fan.


In my heart of hearts I want to give K (and more importantly Duke university) my full backing (The University is ALWAYS more important than the Coach, as much as I love the Coach!). They did what needed to be done, they are ethical and upstanding and followed the law to a T.

I think if Scenario 1 happens (the correct statements are made and nothing else leaks). This story is actually just that. Unfortunately, what makes this such a sad day for Duke fans is that even if that is the case, these kinds of stories always are so vague (by ethical requirement) that people will always be able to believe what they want to believe. Duke will always have this blemish over its Basketball Program EVEN IF THEY ACTED APPROPRIATELY! (See Duke Lacrosse)

Rasheed Sulaimon by even getting close to the line (whether he crossed it or not) put himself, his program, and his university in just about the worst light he possibly could have. :(

Mike Corey
03-02-2015, 05:47 PM
FWIW: I've had some conversations today with people I trust, and though nothing was shared that couldn't be shared due to FERPA requirements, I'm assured that everything was handled in a timely and appropriate manner.

devilsadvocate85
03-02-2015, 05:48 PM
Had to log off for a while -- kid duty -- but I saw that plenty of people were jumping all over me about what the "facts" are as reported by The Chronicle, where the gaps are, and why I see this as a "sad day."

Simply put, any time someone affiliated with a prestigious part of my alma mater is accused of sexual assault, it's a sad day. Period. I didn't like the Duke lacrosse scandal, either, and it was a "sad" affair, even though none of the Duke students involved committed a crime or did anything egregiously wrong.

As for the facts, they are fairly thin, but they are there, as reported: Unless you are considering that these items were put in writing by the Chronicle as facts, most of the below are not facts.

1. Two women brought allegations of sexual assault against Rasheed Sulaimon during the 2013-14 academic year. Not a fact, but third party repeated information. Highly likely to be true based on the information at hand, but clearly not fact.
2. Both women "voiced allegations publicly," but neither filed a complaint through Duke's Office of Student Conduct or initiated a legal action through the Durham Police Department. Not a fact, hearsay -- they made statements in what was supposed to be a private setting that have apparently been repeated by third parties.
3. Members of the Duke athletic department were made aware of the allegations by at least March 2014, including the team psychologist. Again, likely true, but until confirmed by the individuals, just third party hearsay.
4. After March 2014, other athletic department officials were made aware of the allegations, including Mike Bragg, David Bradley, and Kevin White. Again, not a fact -- also hearsay repeated by an anonymous source to a Chronicle reporter.
5. Sue Wasiolek, Dean of Students and Assistant Vice President of Student Affairs, was also made aware of the allegations at some point after March 2014. Also not fact. As far as the article states, Sue Wasiolek confirmed how Duke is obligated to act, but cannot and did not disclose that this specific situation even exists.
6. According to the article, "[t]he fear of backlash from the Duke fan base was a factor in the female students' decision not to pursue the allegations." So far from fact I can't believe you would put it here. A third party claiming to have interpreted how someone else feels about a situation is not a "FACT".
7. Even though no complaint was filed, Duke University is obligated under Title IX to look into any indications of assault. A matter of law.
8. Ms. Wasiolek declined to comment on any investigation conducted by the University, if any, into the allegations. A fact that contradicts the non-fact #5 above.
9. A former secretary of the Duke basketball program (who may or may not be a disgruntled former intern), Lincoln Wensley, contacted a friend of one of the alleged victims, learning that the alleged victim was scared because of the "power the men's basketball possesses on this campus." Possibly a fact, but the information in this sentence is complete hearsay.
10. According to Mr. Wensley, he had a conversation with Mike Cragg during which Mr. Cragg stated that Coach K "had known and knew that Rasheed had these rumors swirling about him and that Kevin White had also known." Again, the conversation may be a fact, the content is clearly not a fact!
11. Rasheed Sulaimon was dismissed from the Duke basketball program on January 29, 2015. This is fact.
12. Rasheed Sulaimon remains a student in good standing at Duke University. This is fact.

Interesting, but largely incomplete, set of facts. It is sad to me that a former player faced two separate allegations of sexual assault while he was on the basketball team. It is incredibly sad to me that, according to sources "close" to them, among the reasons the alleged victims did not file a formal or legal complaint are (1) the power of the basketball program on campus, and (2) the rabidity of the Duke fan base. That's awful, and it's also a culture problem that needs to be corrected at Duke and elsewhere.

I've heard from students familiar with the Common Ground retreat that it is supposed to provide a "safe space" on campus to talk about issues of race, gender, SES, sexual orientation, etc. It seemed to one of the students with which I spoke that The Chronicle's sources may not be wholly credible given the confidentiality pact that the students make on the retreat. The article, according to this student, makes it seem like the source was someone in the retreat who does not have the permission of the victims to tell their stories.

As a practicing lawyer, I hold up the idea of "due process" as firmly as anyone. No one here should presume that Rasheed Sulaimon is guilty. However, due diligence and Title IX both demand that the University take some steps to look into allegations of sexual assault against a student-athlete, even if the alleged victim does not file a formal complaint. Indeed, what if someone witnessed another student being raped and reported it? Certainly the University would and must investigate regardless of whether the victim wanted to file a complaint. I would certainly hope that there is some way for the University to continue investigating without the victims' cooperation (as is the case in criminal charges in some jurisdictions), particularly if the reason they don't want to cooperate is because they fear retaliation from basketball fans. We cannot have a system that allows women to be victimized in that way. The University has an obligation to protect them, both by investigating these incidents to the fullest extent and by protecting the victims in every way possible in the process -- and yes, confidential investigations can be conducted (it's what grand juries are for). The University also has a responsibility to protect other victims from a potential sexual predator and to create a campus culture where victims don't feel like they are unable to come forward because they fear retaliation.

Finally, I should say that it's certainly possible that the University did everything it was supposed to do and is simply following federal law and refusing to comment. The fact that Sulaimon remains a student at Duke could be evidence either of a completed investigation that revealed no wrongdoing (or none sufficient to merit expulsion), or of a bungled or incomplete investigation.

At the end of the day, the University and the men's basketball program will need to answer questions to the best of their ability while abiding by federal law and keeping certain information confidential.



Why isn't it possible that:
1) First allegation came to light and resulted in the following of proper procedure, part of which was Rasheed's separation from the team for a period last summer? When the investigation/procedures were completed - the result was such that it was determined it was okay for Rasheed to return to the team?
2) Second allegation came to light, along with any other incidents/issues to the point where Duke and Coach K determined that regardless of "proof" of an actual assault, Rasheed had broken whatever limits were set internally just by being implicated again? As in Coach K asking Rasheed if there were any other situations of a similar or important nature of which he should be aware and Rasheed assured him there were not. The next allegation goes through whatever proper process/procedure and as soon as Coach K is informed, he dismisses Rasheed from the program.

I freely state that I have no inside knowledge, but this sequence of events seems entirely reasonable, quite possible given the privacy and other rules that must be followed and extremely consistent with the program that we all think we know Coach K runs at Duke. Why the rush to assume the worst about Duke and Coach K in this situation?

weezie
03-02-2015, 05:50 PM
FWIW: I've had some conversations today with people I trust, and though nothing was shared that couldn't be shared due to FERPA requirements, I'm assured that everything was handled in a timely and appropriate manner.

Reads well to me. First glimmer of some intelligent thought in this mess.

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 05:59 PM
It is a fact that they originated from Common Ground participants.

I will not disagree with your opinion of my gratuitous bashing.

Of course if the allegations are true, I condemn any and all sexual assault.

Agree it is a fact that they originated from Common Ground participants; my response was not well put as it could have been. It was the inferences that could be drawn from your conclusion that it was "interesting" that such participants were the source of the allegations that concerned me, in the absence of any actual information beyond the fact we have already agreed on.

I do not doubt that you condemn sexual assault.

MCFinARL
03-02-2015, 06:01 PM
FWIW: I've had some conversations today with people I trust, and though nothing was shared that couldn't be shared due to FERPA requirements, I'm assured that everything was handled in a timely and appropriate manner.

Very glad to hear this; thanks for sharing.

77devil
03-02-2015, 06:01 PM
I do, however, know Dean Sue, and have seen how she reacts to issues like the alleged incidents described in this Chronicle article. Dean Sue would not take a rape allegation lightly and would at least bring an investigation to an informed conclusion. Nobody ever accused Dean Sue of being soft on campus safety issues.


That for sure, just ask the 2006 Duke lacrosse team. Not her finest hour. But the article is so poor, it's unclear whether she's investigated or not.

BrazyATX
03-02-2015, 06:11 PM
I'm 6 pages into the thread and running out of time to read right now. Can someone clarify this for me though.

The last paragraph explains who is required and not required to report sexual assault allegations. The "Counseling and Psychologist' category is one that would not. So when they found out in October 2013 and again in a separate case February 2013, did they actually have to report it then. Does the school's code for this not fall in line with Title IX?

Additionally it says in the next paragraph, 'if the student victim decides to report it' (paraphrased), 'then they investigate'. The article never said that the student decided to report it, but that the rumors came from an acquaintance correct?

I apologize if I misread or skipped something that covers this.

Duvall
03-02-2015, 06:15 PM
Why isn't it possible that:
1) First allegation came to light and resulted in the following of proper procedure, part of which was Rasheed's separation from the team for a period last summer? When the investigation/procedures were completed - the result was such that it was determined it was okay for Rasheed to return to the team?

How much do we know about the proper procedure that people have suggested off the record was followed by Duke? How much do we know about Sulaimon's rumored separation from the team - was that ever reported anywhere? There don't seem to be many details about either.

wilko
03-02-2015, 06:16 PM
So....
It seems to me Sheed got kicked off the team for Rumor?
Not actual charges filed internally within or at Duke nor externally by the legal system.

And folks are a flutter this wasn't done sooner? That some how it was condoned by those in Power?
Is that the gist?

Is that the right conclusion?

We look to FSU and they keep their player eligible at all costs. UNC not much difference in attitude tho they have different circumstances.. UofL booted their guy and charges were files the NEXT day...

77devil
03-02-2015, 06:21 PM
I do not believe Duke and its officials would ever act stupidly in such matters, such as failing to (a) investigate allegations (under Title IX or student conduct code), (b) take immediate action a year ago if it had evidence of such behavior, and (c) do more than just dismiss Rasheed from the team -- throw him out of school and notify authorities.

Your view of the stupidity of Duke officials is different than mine, particularly as long as Larry Moneta is in a position of any authority. However, in this instance there is no real information yet on which to judge one way or another.

Mike Corey
03-02-2015, 06:27 PM
So....
It seems to me Sheed got kicked off the team for Rumor?
Not actual charges filed internally within or at Duke nor externally by the legal system.

And folks are a flutter this wasn't done sooner? That some how it was condoned by those in Power?
Is that the gist?

Is that the right conclusion?

No.

Look to what Coach K said: Mr. Sulaimon repeatedly struggled to live up to the standards of the program.

Dukehky
03-02-2015, 06:37 PM
Andy Katz was a real jerk in that conference call.

K was very nice to Laura, so maybe that beef that was the center of DBR controversy last week, is squashed.

K was also frustrated. Had to know this was coming. I hope that Duke Bball is able to come out with some statement of self defense if they feel they were in the right, but I don't think they can adequately do so without violating Rasheed's FERPA rights.

NashvilleDevil
03-02-2015, 06:47 PM
No.

Look to what Coach K said: Mr. Sulaimon repeatedly struggled to live up to the standards of the program.

I am waiting for one of the usual suspects (Forde, O'Neil, Katz, Seth, Feinstein) to use K's words from that statement as a sign that Rasheed is guilty. We all know it is coming.

ncexnyc
03-02-2015, 06:52 PM
Well this thread is an unwelcome cold slap in the face today.

I for one hope the University has dotted all the i’s and crossed all of the t’s on this matter. I hope that they were proactive in doing all they could legally do to find the truth on this matter.

It’s been interesting to see how this board has reacted to the FERPA issue. Now that the shoe is on the other foot and Duke is in the crosshairs of the media, people have no trouble embracing FERPA, but we all had a good laugh at UNC’s use of this over the past few years.

I also find it disturbing that so many people are taking the Chronicle to task for this story. Seems to me it’s a lot like UNC’s attack on Willingham’s methodology. Reeks to much of shooting the messenger for my taste.

Since Duke is a private institution I doubt we’ll ever get the whole story on this matter and honestly we don’t have any right to know.

I just hope that at the end of the day everyone connected with this matter can look themselves in the mirror and say they did the right thing.

Ranidad
03-02-2015, 06:52 PM
The Chronicle article really sets up misleading and unsupported conclusions that are surfacing in this discussion and in the other reports about the story (or about the Chronicle story). Some of which really bother me.

- “both students voiced allegations publicly”
The Common Ground retreats are referenced as the place this occurred but no mention of the safe or confidential nature of those discussions is mentioned. The implication of voiced publicly is misleading and contributes greatly to the questions about how Duke handled the allegations.

- allegations made in Oct '13 and Feb '14
It is not clear to me from the article that the allegations were brought forward at two different times.
According to the Chronicle the anonymous affiliate became aware of first student’s allegations(when is never stated) and began speaking to her in Jan '14 and to the second student in Mar '14. It then states that the allegations were brought to the coaches in March '14. Many are drawing the conclusion that Duke failed to act on two different occasions which makes Duke look worse.

- the connection of the timing of Rasheed's dismissal with Wensley quitting his job
The article implies a connection and leans heavily on Wensley being called to a meeting with Mike Cragg to build that implication. It certainly could be that Wensley's meeting with Howard when he quit wasn't simply an exchange where he told Howard what he learned and handed her his badge saying he couldn't work there anymore. Given that the article stated “Cragg began the conversation by advising him on how to better handle professional situations such as the one Wensley had with Howard,” it's possible that Cragg called the meeting because there were some aspects of his resignation that needed to be finalized.

- assumption that January dismissal from team was related only to these allegations which were known in March
Headlines are concluding that it took Duke 10 months to act on the allegations. Dean Sue told the Chronicle that the investigations can take several months. There were several months between March and the start of the basketball season during which an investigation of the allegations could well have occurred resulting in a decision that there was nothing sufficient in those allegations to suspend or dismiss Rasheed so he began fall practice with the team. The Duke statement for his dismissal mentioned he "repeatedly struggled to maintain the obligations" which could be two sexual assault allegations or those in addition to other transgressions. Some other transgressions, wholly unrelated to sexual assault could have occurred as well and possibly in January leading to his dismissal at that time.

Longer post than I was planning but those things have jumped out at me all day as I have struggled to figure out how I will respond to the inevitable questions that people will pose to me as I wear my Duke gear around town.

hudlow
03-02-2015, 06:57 PM
I just hope The Wolffies don't go after Duke like they have U*NC....

Those guys are relentless.

hud

(be nice to The Pack)