Creighton Employees "Under Review" After Criticizing Basketb

[NJRedman]

Maybe vague wasn't the right word...but they sure do have a lot of latitude.

I tried to not bore everyone with the whole code but focus on the four principles, on which the code is based.
"Conduct on or off campus that reflects poorly on Creighton University" That allows for a significant amount of latitude because "reflects poorly" is subjective.

And so we agree there actually isn't anything in the code of conduct about murder or too much noise in the dorm. In essence, you need to obey the law and follow the rules and the university makes the rules, the university decides how and when they are enforced and the punishment for conduct violations. Which is fine...it's a private institution and attendance is a privilege not a right.

But my point still is that there is a great deal of subjectivity/latitude in the interpretation or application of the code of conduct and your supposition of what you think happened, "law enforcement dropped the charges but the university found him responsible (guilty) and expelled him" is not a statement of fact because you don't actually know why they expelled him but you certainly implied they found him "responsible (guilty)" of sexual assault. You go on in the subsequent post to state that the university was at least 51% sure that he did commit sexual assault and the DA was less certain and that's how we go to this point. Are you on the board that decided his fate (in which case I don't think you should be talking about it here)? And if not, you have no idea why they actually expelled him. They could have found him guilty of conduct on or off campus that reflects poorly on Creighton University and expelled him, or found him guilty of "non Christian sexy time." I don't know and neither do you.

Well I mean we don't need 100% certainty to figure out why the guy who was accused of sexual assault and expelled shortly there was expelled for. I mean we are humans with brains who can come up with a reasonable idea.

I never said he definitely did it but it pisses me off when the homers come around and say he 100% didn't do it. Thats some Baylor/PSU level awfulness.

[Savannah Jay]

Well I mean we don't need 100% certainty to figure out why the guy who was accused of sexual assault and expelled shortly there was expelled for. I mean we are humans with brains who can come up with a reasonable idea.

I never said he definitely did it but it pisses me off when the homers come around and say he 100% didn't do it. Thats some Baylor/PSU level awfulness.

I was talking to TAMU but if you are reading the posts and still claim you know why he was expelled, I would agree that all humans have brains but suggest the intellectual spectrum and/or the ability to use said brain varies greatly.

And at no time did I assert that I believe Watson was innocent or guilty, much less "100% certain." Regardless, to equate this to Penn State or Baylor only reaffirms my statement above.

Cheers.

[TAMU Eagle]

Maybe vague wasn't the right word...but they sure do have a lot of latitude.

I tried to not bore everyone with the whole code but focus on the four principles, on which the code is based.
"Conduct on or off campus that reflects poorly on Creighton University" That allows for a significant amount of latitude because "reflects poorly" is subjective.

And so we agree there actually isn't anything in the code of conduct about murder or too much noise in the dorm. In essence, you need to obey the law and follow the rules and the university makes the rules, the university decides how and when they are enforced and the punishment for conduct violations. Which is fine...it's a private institution and attendance is a privilege not a right.

But my point still is that there is a great deal of subjectivity/latitude in the interpretation or application of the code of conduct and your supposition of what you think happened, "law enforcement dropped the charges but the university found him responsible (guilty) and expelled him" is not a statement of fact because you don't actually know why they expelled him but you certainly implied they found him "responsible (guilty)" of sexual assault. You go on in the subsequent post to state that the university was at least 51% sure that he did commit sexual assault and the DA was less certain and that's how we go to this point. Are you on the board that decided his fate (in which case I don't think you should be talking about it here)? And if not, you have no idea why they actually expelled him. They could have found him guilty of conduct on or off campus that reflects poorly on Creighton University and expelled him, or found him guilty of "non Christian sexy time." I don't know and neither do you.

You'll notice that I mentioned that I am assuming that Mo was expelled for the sexual assault multiple times in my post. I was merely explaining the process because there seemed to be some confusion. I don't know what Mo was expelled for. No one without direct access to his student file knows that. But I also think it is fair to make a common sense assumption that him being publicly accused of sexual assault and him being expelled around the same time is probably related. Occam's razor and all that. I can also tell you from my years of experience in student conduct that expulsions are typically reserved for the most serious of violations such as sexual assault. It is theoretically possible that "Conduct that reflects poorly on Creighton" or "christian sexy time" could result in expulsion but they better be expelling other students who get found responsible for those violations or they will get in hot water very quickly.

And yes, noise in the dorms and murder are both covered in the student code of conduct. Noise even has a specific rule attached to it #4.13 IIRC, whereas murder is covered by the following all criminal laws rule. This is important not because there are specific rules, but because it gives the university grounds to hear cases where students are accused of these things. If a Creighton student was accused of murder on campus, Creighton would have the right to investigate, hear the case, and sanction the student if found responsible based on what is in the Student Code of Conduct.

Regardless of what Mo was expelled for, a university employee publicly honoring an expelled student was not wise. Neither was two university employees blasting a fellow university employee in the newspaper. As I said before, nobody looks good in this situation.

[NJRedman]

Well I mean we don't need 100% certainty to figure out why the guy who was accused of sexual assault and expelled shortly there was expelled for. I mean we are humans with brains who can come up with a reasonable idea.

I never said he definitely did it but it pisses me off when the homers come around and say he 100% didn't do it. Thats some Baylor/PSU level awfulness.

I was talking to TAMU but if you are reading the posts and still claim you know why he was expelled, I would agree that all humans have brains but suggest the intellectual spectrum and/or the ability to use said brain varies greatly.

And at no time did I assert that I believe Watson was innocent or guilty, much less "100% certain." Regardless, to equate this to Penn State or Baylor only reaffirms my statement above.

Cheers.

See it's this shit right here. You try and act smart but you aren't as smart as you like to think.

Let me give it a try.

At no point in time did I ever say Watson was innocent or guilty, much less "100% certain". Yes, you all sound like Penn State and Baylor fans to me. They said the exact same shit when it was their players/coaches being accused.

[cujaysfan]

can someone please put NJR down for his nap while the grownups are talking?

[XtoDC]

Is it really jumping to conclusions to assume that Watson being accused of sexual assault and being expelled from school shortly after were linked? Sure, I guess he could have failed a couple of tests and stopped showing up to class, but I doubt that's the reason.

[NJRedman]

can someone please put NJR down for his nap while the grownups are talking?

Okay, once the grown ups show up then i'll leave.

[NJRedman]

Is it really jumping to conclusions to assume that Watson being accused of sexual assault and being expelled from school shortly after were linked? Sure, I guess he could have failed a couple of tests and stopped showing up to class, but I doubt that's the reason.

Exactly! These Jay fans are acting like it's all some mix up that no one outside of Omaha knows about. Only they know the REAL story! I mean it's not like local police/DAs office ever protects star athletes at local universities right?

[cu blujs]

For the love of Pete, give it a rest NJR. You have no idea what you are talking about. Each time you post you make yourself a bigger ignoramus.

[handdownmandown]

This thread would be off the front page if CU fans would stop posting on it.