Sweeping Sexual Assault Suit Filed Against UT

no poll

  • Total voters
    0
#1,251
#1,251
SobeVol said:
I40 you need a muzzle, before you say this kind of nonsense!
I personally know one of the victims involved in this suit, and know that they are actually merely asking for the tuition monies and not some large sum. ( she left the university after the event!) unfortunately it involves a player who remains on the team and has yet to be named. This issue is quite possibly larger and goes higher than most of us want to believe.
To sweepingly generalize about ALL women in this case as morally defunct is ignorant and reckless!
Click to expand...
You are getting one side of the events. None of us know what happened, but there's the old saying "actions speak louder than words." If she didn't pursue criminal charges against the alleged attacker and is seeking financial reimbursement, then something doesn't add up. Clearly money is more important than justice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#1,252
#1,252
SobeVol said:
I40 you need a muzzle, before you say this kind of nonsense!
I personally know one of the victims involved in this suit, and know that they are actually merely asking for the tuition monies and not some large sum. ( she left the university after the event!) unfortunately it involves a player who remains on the team and has yet to be named. This issue is quite possibly larger and goes higher than most of us want to believe.
To sweepingly generalize about ALL women in this case as morally defunct is ignorant and reckless!
Click to expand...

My question is, please, if she is just suing to recover lost tuition, why is the amount of money in the lawsuit asked for so much greater than the nine or so tuition reimbursements that would be recoverable if the university is found at fault? I realize that the law firm will get a huge chunk, but if all that was being asked was tuition reimbursement plus lawyer fees, it seems to me that the amount claimed in the suit would be much less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#1,253
#1,253
drvenner said:
My question is, please, if she is just suing to recover lost tuition, why is the amount of money in the lawsuit asked for so much greater than the nine or so tuition reimbursements that would be recoverable if the university is found at fault? I realize that the law firm will get a huge chunk, but if all that was being asked was tuition reimbursement plus lawyer fees, it seems to me that the amount claimed in the suit would be much less.
Click to expand...

File a suit with a big #, then settle for less.

I think it's wrong to call these women whores. Just tacky and wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,254
#1,254
Maybe calling the women that claimed to be raped, but are happy to settle for cash from UT, whores was wrong. Maybe some of you could help with the correct label. What would be a correct term for a female that is willing to settle for cash for sex? I realize a rape victim wants justice, what kind of police reports were made? Or, without police report, there was a trip to a lawyer-to get a big pay day. Again, what label would be correct? I've read many, many, many posts on this very board that assert this is nothing more than a money grab, females looking for a big pay day, am I the only one that is connecting the dots?
 
Last edited:
#1,255
#1,255
This is a money grab because lawyers are looking for a big pay day.

Please don't dismiss that there may be a real victim lost in all of this. I certainly don't think they all are. And in no way has UT created or promoted any kind of culture. But to collectively identify all the accusers by any derogatory name is ignorant and distasteful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#1,256
#1,256
I40flyer said:
Maybe calling the women that claimed to be raped, but are happy to settle for cash from UT, whores was wrong. Maybe some of you could help with the correct label. What would be a correct term for a female that is willing to settle for cash for sex? I realize a rape victim wants justice, what kind of police reports were made? Or, without police report, there was a trip to a lawyer-to get a big pay day. Again, what label would be correct? I've read many, many, many posts on this very board that assert this is nothing more than a money grab, females looking for a big pay day, am I the only one that is connecting the dots?
Click to expand...

Let's call them women. Women who are, intentionally or not, in a pretty bad place right now. They're not enjoying this, any more than the accused men are.

Are they opportunists? Some of them probably are (looking especially at Nauright (sp?) for this one). But probably not all of them.

Are they prostitutes? We've seen nothing that indicates any of them are.

Are they "loose" or "sluts" or any other, similar derogatory nouns or adjectives (including the one you chose to use)? We simply don't know. Chances are, maybe so for some of them, and probably not for most.

So of all those choice words, the only one that seems to fit 100% of them is "women." So why not just call them women?

My personal guess is, there are a lot of victims in this sweeping money grab, both male and female, individuals and institutions, and only the plaintiffs' lawyer sees nothing but up side.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#1,257
#1,257
VFL-82-JP said:
Let's call them women. Women who are, intentionally or not, in a pretty bad place right now. They're not enjoying this, any more than the accused men are.

Are they opportunists? Some of them probably are (looking especially at Nauright (sp?) for this one). But probably not all of them.

Are they prostitutes? We've seen nothing that indicates any of them are.

Are they "loose" or "sluts" or any other, similar derogatory nouns or adjectives (including the one you chose to use)? We simply don't know. Chances are, maybe so for some of them, and probably not for most.

So of all those choice words, the only one that seems to fit 100% of them is "women." So why not just call them women?

My personal guess is, there are a lot of victims in this sweeping money grab, both male and female, individuals and institutions, and only the plaintiffs' lawyer sees nothing but up side.
Click to expand...
Very well put. Nice response to a very inaccurate post
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,258
#1,258
davethevol said:
You are getting one side of the events. None of us know what happened, but there's the old saying "actions speak louder than words." If she didn't pursue criminal charges against the alleged attacker and is seeking financial reimbursement, then something doesn't add up. Clearly money is more important than justice.
Click to expand...
Thank you davethevol. This concept I knwo xyz is a good ol boy or girl is useless and not helpful either way when it comes to something like this. Unless an individual was there on the scene when the incident occurred and can testify to the facts postulating about someone because you "know them" does not count for diddly squat when it comes to the facts. Many a good ol bible toting girl and boy have witnesses to their college years with a whiskey bottle in thier mouth and their fannies in the air while mom, pop, and their friends aren't around to vouch for their character.Just stop that nonsense please.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,259
#1,259
I40flyer said:
How right you are. I've made that point several times, but each time, you get a group of fan boys that think it's okay to bench players based on accusations, and accusations alone. Guilty until proven innocent. As so many have pointed out, all of these allegations are nothing more than a group of whores trying to get money from UT, it would be easy to hire 22 whores, the night before any game, and have all the starters benched-stupid even to think about it. It's sad, when Americans are willing to assess guilt on a player, just because some whore made an accusation. I hope it hasn't come to this.
Click to expand...

What was your point as it pertained to the post you quoted?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,260
#1,260
VFL-82-JP said:
Let's call them women. Women who are, intentionally or not, in a pretty bad place right now. They're not enjoying this, any more than the accused men are.

Are they opportunists? Some of them probably are (looking especially at Nauright (sp?) for this one). But probably not all of them.

Are they prostitutes? We've seen nothing that indicates any of them are.

Are they "loose" or "sluts" or any other, similar derogatory nouns or adjectives (including the one you chose to use)? We simply don't know. Chances are, maybe so for some of them, and probably not for most.

So of all those choice words, the only one that seems to fit 100% of them is "women." So why not just call them women?

My personal guess is, there are a lot of victims in this sweeping money grab, both male and female, individuals and institutions, and only the plaintiffs' lawyer sees nothing but up side.
Click to expand...

Just keep in mind that two of these women are apparently still socializing with members of the football team (at least according to a court filing by lawyers for UT). Does that mean they weren't assaulted? No but it does mean that they do not regard the environment surrounding the athletic dept and specifically the football program as hostile or threatening. If this does in fact go to trial (unlikely), we will undoubtedly learn a lot about these women that are both unsympathetic and unflattering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#1,261
#1,261
BowlBrother85 said:
Just keep in mind that two of these women are apparently still socializing with members of the football team (at least according to a court filing by lawyers for UT). Does that mean they weren't assaulted? No but it does mean that they do not regard the environment surrounding the athletic dept and specifically the football program as hostile or threatening. If this does in fact go to trial (unlikely), we will undoubtedly learn a lot about these women that are both unsympathetic and unflattering.
Click to expand...

Groupie is probably the more applicable term, and it generally isn't flattering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,264
#1,264
A middle Tn paper has a lead story this afternoon detailing why Knoxville police did not press charges against a former UT football player. The woman said she was out drinking then woke up with a man who asked her to leave. She identified someone else first then the football player. He denied the charges and took a DNA test. The only new information was that Hart said they don't give athletes a list of attorneys but more like a phone book with that information. As you can imagine most of the comments are on the relevance of such article and I wonder why that woman would want all that negative information about her behavior published as a lead article now.
 
#1,265
#1,265
CPA said:
A middle Tn paper has a lead story this afternoon detailing why Knoxville police did not press charges against a former UT football player. The woman said she was out drinking then woke up with a man who asked her to leave. She identified someone else first then the football player. He denied the charges and took a DNA test. The only new information was that Hart said they don't give athletes a list of attorneys but more like a phone book with that information. As you can imagine most of the comments are on the relevance of such article and I wonder why that woman would want all that negative information about her behavior published as a lead article now.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it Hart that asked for women to step forward if an assault had gone unreported.

What did the DNA test say?

No charges.would that mean his DNA wasn't there?
 
#1,266
#1,266
Iam4utalways said:
Wasn't it Hart that asked for women to step forward if an assault had gone unreported.

What did the DNA test say?

No charges.would that mean his DNA wasn't there?
Click to expand...

There was no DNA. The story is on the Govolsxtra front page. I'm not sure what the staff or administration could have done differently in a case like this. It's difficult for everyone involved.
 
#1,267
#1,267
The newspaper here said a DNA test was done and there was no evidence to tie the former football player to the alleged attack. After a 3 mo. investigation, the DA decided not to press charges.
 
#1,269
#1,269
Iam4utalways said:
Was this the same woman that did not go to UT? (Edit: go to UT with the allegation against the football player)
Click to expand...

This is a different one from the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. This accusation was merely mentioned in a new legal filing by the plaintiffs' lawyers. The woman is not a part of the suit.
 
#1,270
#1,270
doctorchoice said:
This is a different one from the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. This accusation was merely mentioned in a new legal filing by the plaintiffs' lawyers. The woman is not a part of the suit.
Click to expand...

Has it been released ,if she reported it to UT? And if so, how did they handle it?
 
#1,271
#1,271
They found no DNA whatsoever, and no evidence that there had been intercourse from reading the KNS article. Her original story was she woke up, naked, there was blood and she had a bruised area on her abdomen. In the photo of her and the player released by KPD it appears she is barefoot as they walked by the security camera. Who knows if she may have cut her foot or something.

From the article it appears she went straight to the KPD, correct?
 
#1,274
#1,274
The middle Tn article says the woman says she was attacked on the 20th, had a rape exam on the 22nd and campus officials refuse to say if they have done an examination of this incident due to privacy issues.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top