|
|
Post by trillesthoya on Dec 3, 2019 9:23:39 GMT -5
While I agree with this on the merits of guilt and innocence, the docket clearly indicates that at least LeBlanc and Alexander were served with process in at least one of these matters (there are two of these complaints) on November 5, 2019. After which, they both continued to play basketball for Georgetown. Georgetown owes an explanation for why that decision was made. Is it possible that the despite the fact that the players were served on 11/5 the information did not get to the coaching staff and administration until last night? Do the courts have any kind of requirement to notify anyone else? University? Parents? Since the players involved are adults who else do you notify? It seems possible that they got the notifications then successfully kept it quiet for a while. I know nothing of court proceedings, just guessing. The court filings suggest GUPD has been involved for quite some time. No way they didn’t know. |
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,300
|
Post by royski on Dec 3, 2019 9:24:31 GMT -5
Yes, I think having complaints filed against you by multiple women alleging serious crimes like sexual harassment, burglary, assault, and battery absolutely warrants an immediate suspension by the university pending further investigation. I don't even think it's a close call. How do we know what has or has not happened in terms of investigation by the school? I disagree with the concept of immediate suspension based on an untoward accusation. Each case must be evaluated carefully on its merits. We know that LeBlanc was suspended the next day, 11/6, after being served on 11/5. That suggests that the team did go with the immediate suspension route. But then he was cleared to play, and now he's dismissed from the team. That's a strange sequence of events, and the University owes an explanation for it. I also don't want to diminish the allegations here. These weren't campus rumors. Multiple women filed formal complaints, under oath, that these events happened. They told the same to a judge, who determined that there was a substantial likelihood that they would succeed on the merits at trial, and granted requests for temporary restraining orders. All the while, these players continued (and in the case of Gardner and Alexander, continue) to play for the team. There's no way around the fact that the University and the program owe an explanation for that, because it's very troubling to every alum I've talked to. |
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,823
|
Post by njhoya78 on Dec 3, 2019 9:28:05 GMT -5
While I agree with this on the merits of guilt and innocence, the docket clearly indicates that at least LeBlanc and Alexander were served with process in at least one of these matters (there are two of these complaints) on November 5, 2019. After which, they both continued to play basketball for Georgetown. Georgetown owes an explanation for why that decision was made. Is it possible that the despite the fact that the players were served on 11/5 the information did not get to the coaching staff and administration until last night? Do the courts have any kind of requirement to notify anyone else? University? Parents? Since the players involved are adults who else do you notify? It seems possible that they got the notifications then successfully kept it quiet for a while. I know nothing of court proceedings, just guessing. The courts are not obligated to notify the schools. Once a complaint is filed with the clerk of the court, the complaint and summons are served upon the defendant; not sure what the process is in DC, but here in NJ it can be served by a private process server or a sheriff's deputy. No one else is required to receive anything relating to the pleadings. Is it possible that service was made upon LeBlanc and Alexander without Ewing's knowledge? Sure, but it would indicate that Ewing has very little control over his players if he was completely unaware for almost a month (before the news broke yesterday). |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,460
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 3, 2019 9:31:00 GMT -5
Is it possible that the despite the fact that the players were served on 11/5 the information did not get to the coaching staff and administration until last night? Do the courts have any kind of requirement to notify anyone else? University? Parents? Since the players involved are adults who else do you notify? It seems possible that they got the notifications then successfully kept it quiet for a while. I know nothing of court proceedings, just guessing. The courts are not obligated to notify the schools. Once a complaint is filed with the clerk of the court, the complaint and summons are served upon the defendant; not sure what the process is in DC, but here in NJ it can be served by a private process server or a sheriff's deputy. No one else is required to receive anything relating to the pleadings. Is it possible that service was made upon LeBlanc and Alexander without Ewing's knowledge? Sure, but it would indicate that Ewing has very little control over his players if he was completely unaware for almost a month (before the news broke yesterday). I believe that Georgetown campus cops (along with MPD) notified of allegations of the assault and burglary. Aren't they obligated to report it internally? |
|
wolveribe
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 404
|
Post by wolveribe on Dec 3, 2019 9:31:21 GMT -5
How do we know what has or has not happened in terms of investigation by the school? I disagree with the concept of immediate suspension based on an untoward accusation. Each case must be evaluated carefully on its merits. Then why suspend him game one to begin with? Or put him on a minutes restriction? If the logic is let them play innocent till proven guilty, then they should have been playing the whole time. We don't know if those things are related to the alleged incidents. |
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 3, 2019 9:32:40 GMT -5
How do we know what has or has not happened in terms of investigation by the school? I disagree with the concept of immediate suspension based on an untoward accusation. Each case must be evaluated carefully on its merits. We know that LeBlanc was suspended the next day, 11/6, after being served on 11/5. That suggests that the team did go with the immediate suspension route. But then he was cleared to play, and now he's dismissed from the team. That's a strange sequence of events, and the University owes an explanation for it. I also don't want to diminish the allegations here. These weren't campus rumors. Multiple women filed formal complaints, under oath, that these events happened. They told the same to a judge, who determined that there was a substantial likelihood that they would succeed on the merits at trial, and granted requests for temporary restraining orders. All the while, these players continued (and in the case of Gardner and Alexander, continue) to play for the team. There's no way around the fact that the University and the program owe an explanation for that, because it's very troubling to every alum I've talked to. From what I’ve gathered from reddit, casual, etc The TRO is easy for anyone to get Because there is little harm to the defendant getting the TRO And it keeps the plaintiff safe. So these are easily granted regardless of the guilt/innocence of the defendant. The reason LeBlanc was suspended was he violated the TRO while Alexander and Gardner didn’t violate the TRO. |
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Dec 3, 2019 9:32:46 GMT -5
Is it possible that the despite the fact that the players were served on 11/5 the information did not get to the coaching staff and administration until last night? Do the courts have any kind of requirement to notify anyone else? University? Parents? Since the players involved are adults who else do you notify? It seems possible that they got the notifications then successfully kept it quiet for a while. I know nothing of court proceedings, just guessing. The courts are not obligated to notify the schools. Once a complaint is filed with the clerk of the court, the complaint and summons are served upon the defendant; not sure what the process is in DC, but here in NJ it can be served by a private process server or a sheriff's deputy. No one else is required to receive anything relating to the pleadings. Is it possible that service was made upon LeBlanc and Alexander without Ewing's knowledge? Sure, but it would indicate that Ewing has very little control over his players if he was completely unaware for almost a month (before the news broke yesterday). November 5 : LeBlanc and Alexander were served with process November 6 : LeBlanc was suspended for a game |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2019 9:34:19 GMT -5
We know that LeBlanc was suspended the next day, 11/6, after being served on 11/5. That suggests that the team did go with the immediate suspension route. But then he was cleared to play, and now he's dismissed from the team. That's a strange sequence of events, and the University owes an explanation for it. I also don't want to diminish the allegations here. These weren't campus rumors. Multiple women filed formal complaints, under oath, that these events happened. They told the same to a judge, who determined that there was a substantial likelihood that they would succeed on the merits at trial, and granted requests for temporary restraining orders. All the while, these players continued (and in the case of Gardner and Alexander, continue) to play for the team. There's no way around the fact that the University and the program owe an explanation for that, because it's very troubling to every alum I've talked to. From what I’ve gathered from reddit, casual, etc The TRO is easy for anyone to get Because there is little harm to the defendant getting the TRO And it keeps the plaintiff safe. So these are easily granted regardless of the guilt/innocence of the defendant. The reason LeBlanc was suspended was he violated the TRO while Alexander and Gardner didn’t violate the TRO. You know that last part how? |
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Dec 3, 2019 9:35:19 GMT -5
How do we know what has or has not happened in terms of investigation by the school? I disagree with the concept of immediate suspension based on an untoward accusation. Each case must be evaluated carefully on its merits. We know that LeBlanc was suspended the next day, 11/6, after being served on 11/5. That suggests that the team did go with the immediate suspension route. But then he was cleared to play, and now he's dismissed from the team. That's a strange sequence of events, and the University owes an explanation for it. I also don't want to diminish the allegations here. These weren't campus rumors. Multiple women filed formal complaints, under oath, that these events happened. They told the same to a judge, who determined that there was a substantial likelihood that they would succeed on the merits at trial, and granted requests for temporary restraining orders. All the while, these players continued (and in the case of Gardner and Alexander, continue) to play for the team. There's no way around the fact that the University and the program owe an explanation for that, because it's very troubling to every alum I've talked to. There are many possibilities as to what happened and why- again, I prefer to let the process play out. From my perspective, the university owes the fans ZERO explanation. They have to handle thins internally and in light of important privacy concerns. As fans, we are not owed the story of what happened, when, or why. |
|
|
|
Post by trillesthoya on Dec 3, 2019 9:35:28 GMT -5
Then why suspend him game one to begin with? Or put him on a minutes restriction? If the logic is let them play innocent till proven guilty, then they should have been playing the whole time. We don't know if those things are related to the alleged incidents. If there are other violations of student/team conduct going on with these students beyond just accusations of assault and battery, that is all the more reason to suspend them. Also apparently Ewing made the three players involved sit out in the open practice, which would suggest he knew about this well in advance of any court filings. Unless again all three were involved in something ELSE, which just further proves my point. |
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 3, 2019 9:39:26 GMT -5
From what I’ve gathered from reddit, casual, etc The TRO is easy for anyone to get Because there is little harm to the defendant getting the TRO And it keeps the plaintiff safe. So these are easily granted regardless of the guilt/innocence of the defendant. The reason LeBlanc was suspended was he violated the TRO while Alexander and Gardner didn’t violate the TRO. You know that last part how? Like I said I read it i the reddit thread or something. It would explain why LeBlanc was suspended while the other two weren’t. There’s other stuff on reddit as well as to why the 2 are gone. |
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,300
|
Post by royski on Dec 3, 2019 9:40:01 GMT -5
We know that LeBlanc was suspended the next day, 11/6, after being served on 11/5. That suggests that the team did go with the immediate suspension route. But then he was cleared to play, and now he's dismissed from the team. That's a strange sequence of events, and the University owes an explanation for it. I also don't want to diminish the allegations here. These weren't campus rumors. Multiple women filed formal complaints, under oath, that these events happened. They told the same to a judge, who determined that there was a substantial likelihood that they would succeed on the merits at trial, and granted requests for temporary restraining orders. All the while, these players continued (and in the case of Gardner and Alexander, continue) to play for the team. There's no way around the fact that the University and the program owe an explanation for that, because it's very troubling to every alum I've talked to. From what I’ve gathered from reddit, casual, etc The TRO is easy for anyone to get Because there is little harm to the defendant getting the TRO And it keeps the plaintiff safe. So these are easily granted regardless of the guilt/innocence of the defendant. The reason LeBlanc was suspended was he violated the TRO while Alexander and Gardner didn’t violate the TRO. I generally agree that TROs are easy to get, but the preliminary injunction order entered on 11/20 against LeBlanc and Alexander is less so, and contained significant judicial findings that warrant immediate suspension imo. The Court found that "Plaintiff will LIKELY suffer irreperable harm in the absence of injunctive relief" and "there is a SUBSTANTIAL LIKELIHOOD Plaintiff will prevail on the merits of the claim". (emphasis added) I just don't see how the program can let those players continue to play with those judicial findings on the record. And I think they need to explain themselves. |
|
jwp91
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,383
Member is Online
|
Post by jwp91 on Dec 3, 2019 9:41:22 GMT -5
A lot of people should step away from the keyboard and let this play out.
It is very sad. For the alleged victims....for the players involved....for the players not involved.....for the team to likely fail to come anywhere close to its potential.
|
|
joey0403p
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by joey0403p on Dec 3, 2019 9:41:38 GMT -5
I don’t know how anyone can say the university doesn’t own the fans anything. There has to be a line between protecting a young person (even if not part of the school anymore) and not providing any comments to the public.
I’m sorry - but the school asks for money ALL the time. I wouldn’t withhold money because the team was bad - but this is serious - they have to explain the decision making. Why were kids allowed to play, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 3, 2019 9:42:56 GMT -5
From what I’ve gathered from reddit, casual, etc The TRO is easy for anyone to get Because there is little harm to the defendant getting the TRO And it keeps the plaintiff safe. So these are easily granted regardless of the guilt/innocence of the defendant. The reason LeBlanc was suspended was he violated the TRO while Alexander and Gardner didn’t violate the TRO. I generally agree that TROs are easy to get, but the preliminary injunction order entered on 11/20 against LeBlanc and Alexander is less so, and contained significant judicial findings that warrant immediate suspension imo. The Court found that "Plaintiff will LIKELY suffer irreperable harm in the absence of injunctive relief" and "there is a SUBSTANTIAL LIKELIHOOD Plaintiff will prevail on the merits of the claim". (emphasis added) I just don't see how the program can let those players continue to play with those judicial findings on the record. And I think they need to explain themselves. I believe they are being given due process. Notice thought how little Alexander has played even though we could use him. Same with Gardner. It’s almost as if they were preparing to move on without them by giving more time to Mosley, Pickett and Wahab. |
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,300
|
Post by royski on Dec 3, 2019 9:43:40 GMT -5
We know that LeBlanc was suspended the next day, 11/6, after being served on 11/5. That suggests that the team did go with the immediate suspension route. But then he was cleared to play, and now he's dismissed from the team. That's a strange sequence of events, and the University owes an explanation for it. I also don't want to diminish the allegations here. These weren't campus rumors. Multiple women filed formal complaints, under oath, that these events happened. They told the same to a judge, who determined that there was a substantial likelihood that they would succeed on the merits at trial, and granted requests for temporary restraining orders. All the while, these players continued (and in the case of Gardner and Alexander, continue) to play for the team. There's no way around the fact that the University and the program owe an explanation for that, because it's very troubling to every alum I've talked to. There are many possibilities as to what happened and why- again, I prefer to let the process play out. From my perspective, the university owes the fans ZERO explanation. They have to handle thins internally and in light of important privacy concerns. As fans, we are not owed the story of what happened, when, or why. Agree to disagree. This is national news, and is being covered by outlets including the Washington Post, on the front page. This is a national embarrassment for the university, and the greatest embarrassment for the program in recent memory. It may warrant NCAA discipline. The sequence of events, on their surface, simply do not make sense in light of the public record. The University's reputation is on the line here, and they have a duty to explain why they allowed credibly accused students to continue to play basketball representing the University, before abruptly dismissing one of the students. That duty is owed to the student body, to the alumni, to the people who fund the program, and even to the public. |
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 3, 2019 9:50:08 GMT -5
There are many possibilities as to what happened and why- again, I prefer to let the process play out. From my perspective, the university owes the fans ZERO explanation. They have to handle thins internally and in light of important privacy concerns. As fans, we are not owed the story of what happened, when, or why. Agree to disagree. This is national news, and is being covered by outlets including the Washington Post, on the front page. This is a national embarrassment for the university, and the greatest embarrassment for the program in recent memory. It may warrant NCAA discipline. The sequence of events, on their surface, simply do not make sense in light of the public record. The University's reputation is on the line here, and they have a duty to explain why they allowed credibly accused students to continue to play basketball representing the University, before abruptly dismissing one of the students. That duty is owed to the student body, to the alumni, to the people who fund the program, and even to the public. Wasn’t Devendorf allowed to play for Cuse for admitting to much worse? And the NCAA was fine with it. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Dec 3, 2019 9:52:24 GMT -5
From what I’ve gathered from reddit, casual, etc The TRO is easy for anyone to get Because there is little harm to the defendant getting the TRO And it keeps the plaintiff safe. So these are easily granted regardless of the guilt/innocence of the defendant. The reason LeBlanc was suspended was he violated the TRO while Alexander and Gardner didn’t violate the TRO. I generally agree that TROs are easy to get, but the preliminary injunction order entered on 11/20 against LeBlanc and Alexander is less so, and contained significant judicial findings that warrant immediate suspension imo. The Court found that "Plaintiff will LIKELY suffer irreperable harm in the absence of injunctive relief" and "there is a SUBSTANTIAL LIKELIHOOD Plaintiff will prevail on the merits of the claim". (emphasis added) I just don't see how the program can let those players continue to play with those judicial findings on the record. And I think they need to explain themselves. For one, I am not all that impressed by those judicial findings, which are fairly boilerplate and often made in an abundance of caution, in my experience. We will see what happens and what, if anything, we find out. |
|
|
|
Post by bearsandbulls on Dec 3, 2019 9:58:53 GMT -5
Given that Gardner and Alexander are still on the roster and not suspended, I would assume the university/police have either cleared them of any wrongdoing or found the allegations to be unsubstantiated. Meanwhile, their reputations will never recover now that this is national news. The incidents happened months ago. To think that the university and Ewing have been engaged in a months long coverup is quite a leap. I think we all should reserve judgement until more facts emerge. Best post of the last 24 hours. Let more facts emerge even though not looking good right now. |
|
joey0403p
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by joey0403p on Dec 3, 2019 10:02:26 GMT -5
Given that Gardner and Alexander are still on the roster and not suspended, I would assume the university/police have either cleared them of any wrongdoing or found the allegations to be unsubstantiated. Meanwhile, their reputations will never recover now that this is national news. The incidents happened months ago. To think that the university and Ewing have been engaged in a months long coverup is quite a leap. I think we all should reserve judgement until more facts emerge. Best post of the last 24 hours. Let more facts emerge even though not looking good right now. But how do you know more information will be forthcoming. That is my issue. I don’t want to give the university (anyone, the coach. AD. Or president) any latitude. I don’t believe they deserve it |
|
