• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Now her story has changed. Alleged sexual assault thread.

Finally, some facts:

"In May 2009, the student filed a complaint with the Miami Police Department about the alleged sexual assault. Clark gave a statement to police saying that the oral sex was consensual.

After the investigation was completed, the police consulted with prosecutor Laura Adams in June 2009. Adams eventually decided against filing criminal charges because there was no physical evidence and corroborating witnesses, the student didn’t report the allegations immediately to police, and Clark denied the allegations, according to the police report.

“In light of the above facts and circumstances, the State would not be able to satisfy its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” the police report said."

This reads more and more like the university did things by the book and the alleged victim and her family are unhappy with the outcome and want to press things further.

Not sure what the university should have done differently here.
 
e. the Hearing
1. The hearing panel for each case consists of seven (7) members of the Honor and Ethics Council. Each panel is composed of four (4) undergraduate students, two (2) faculty members, and one (1) person from the administration. These persons are appointed by the co-chair from the larger
pools of members. (Cf. Section III.B.)
Click to expand...

Letter has slightly different numbers but overall similar.

2. The assigned co-chair presides at the hearing and may participate freely in the questioning, but he or she will not be present
at deliberations, and will not have a vote. The hearing is held within a reasonable period of time, but not before five (5) days after the notification of charges. If a closed hearing is held, only the presiding co-chair, the investigator, members of the Honor and Ethics Council, the accused, and his/her advisor may be present. As appropriate, the advisor acts as spokesperson for the accused. A witness may be present only during his/her testimony. In cases where more than one individual is charged with a violation arising out of a single incident, each student may request an individual hearing. The request should be presented to the presiding co-chair in the form of a written statement at least five (5) days in advance of the hearing date. The co-chair presents the petition to the judicial conference. The judicial conference decides whether the petition is granted. In cases where there are several charges arising from a single incident and no requests for individual hearings are made, the judicial conference determines whether the individuals are heard together or separately.
Click to expand...

No issues here. Sounds like it was a group case as is allowed.

5. Each party may request witnesses to testify during the presentation of evidence in the case. The accused and the investigator should submit a list of witnesses at least five (5) school days before the hearing. During the hearing, witnesses may be questioned by the investigator, the accused, the co-chair, and the members of the Honor and Ethics Council.
Click to expand...

6. In an opening and a closing statement, the investigator and the accused are entitled to summarize the facts as viewed from their
perspective, to suggest lines of inquiry which should be pursued by the hearing panel, to make observations consistent with the testimony or anticipated testimony of witnesses, and to advance a plausible theory of the case.[/Quote]

In this case, it appears multiple people testified and she worried about the issue of hearing each other's testimony. As our handbook states, all testimony (which includes the information from the parties and the witnesses) happens during the presentation of evidence.

As well, if they actually admitted they were guilty, they would have automatically been found responsible and the process then would have gone to sanctions. See below:

(a) If the accused has been found or pled responsible, the investigator and the accused, in that order, suggest to the panel a sanction appropriate to the violation and give reasons for their recommendations. The investigator and the accused may present evidence to support their recommendations. If evidence or testimony is to be presented, the presentation proceeds as outlined above
Click to expand...



You can read the whole process here: http://www.wfu.edu/new/publications/students/2010-2011.handbook.pdf

Around Page 70.
 
The article:

"A former Wake Forest University student who will appear Thursday on NBC’s The Today Show filed a complaint in 2009 alleging that former WFU basketball player Gary Clark sexually assaulted her in a hotel bathroom while teammate Jeff Teague stood outside the door, according to a report from the Miami Police Department.

No charges were filed, the report said, because prosecutors said they didn’t have enough physical evidence, the woman’s report was delayed and the players claimed the incident was consensual.

Nathan Hatch, president of Wake Forest University, issued a statement today that the university “is taking appropriate action” to address the allegation.

Clark finished his senior year with the team this spring, and Teague now plays for the Atlanta Hawks in the National Basketball Association. Clark’s cell phone said this afternoon that his voice mail was full, and Teague had not responded to a message left with a family member asking for comment.

The student had traveled with the Wake Forest basketball team to Miami in March 2009 for that year’s NCAA Tournament. The Winston-Salem Journal does not publish the names of alleged victims of sexual assault.

According to the report, the student told investigators that on the morning of March 21 she was heading back to her hotel room when she ran into Teague, who was sitting in the hallway. They talked and Clark joined them, the report said. Clark and Teague asked her questions about performing oral sex, and she told Teague that she liked him, the report said.

Teague asked her if she wanted to go to his hotel room with them, and they did, the report said. Clark and the student went into the bathroom, and Teague closed the door and stayed outside, the report said.

The student said that Clark dropped his pants and asked her to touch his penis. She refused, then Clark asked her to perform oral sex on him, the report said. The student told investigators that she did perform oral sex on Clark because she felt she had no choice, according to the report.

Afterward, Teague walked her back to her hotel room and asked her what happened. When she told him, Teague hugged her, kissed her on the neck and left.

The student returned to North Carolina and didn’t tell anyone until two days later. She told a friend, who insisted she report it to Wake Forest campus police. Detective James Rae of the Wake Forest Campus Police did an investigation and forwarded statements he got from Teague, Clark and another man to the Miami Police Department, the report said.

In May 2009, the student filed a complaint with the Miami Police Department about the alleged sexual assault. Clark gave a statement to police saying that the oral sex was consensual.

After the investigation was completed, the police consulted with prosecutor Laura Adams in June 2009. Adams eventually decided against filing criminal charges because there was no physical evidence and corroborating witnesses, the student didn’t report the allegations immediately to police, and Clark denied the allegations, according to the police report.

“In light of the above facts and circumstances, the State would not be able to satisfy its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” the police report said.

Kathy Redmond, a spokeswoman for the National Coalition Against Violent Athletes, told WGHP/Fox 8 that the former student told school officials about the alleged incident once she returned to campus. School officials told her they would take care of it, Redmond said.

Months passed, and the student never heard back from school officials, Redmond said. She flew back to Miami and filed a police report. The student later withdrew from the school and lives in another state, Redmond said.

“Regarding this matter, I must emphasize that federal law prevents the university from discussing specifics of this or any other student case,” Hatch said. “I can assure you the University takes these issues seriously, has a well-established Code of Conduct and has procedures for hearing alleged violations of that Code of Conduct. In addition, Wake Forest offers significant resources to support our students in times of need.”

mhewlett@wsjournal.com
 
It wasn't sexual assault/rape related, but, my one experience with the Wake judicial system was a mixed bag for justice.

A buddy of mine was seriously injured in an encounter with an inebriated and aggressive football player twice his size. I was a witness. The coach at the time (I won't mention his name but it rhymes with Hal Snow) was a real jerk and tried to defend the player and intimidate us (the victim and witnesses). In the end, the kid was kicked out of school (he had had other issues as well). My buddy also had him charged in "real" court, got him convicted and got restitution.

So, the end result was what it should have been but I experienced first hand a coach who was unreasonably supportive of his player and clearly would have liked to swept the whole thing under the rug.

BTW, the rest of the team blamed us for the whole thing and intimidated and threatened us every time they saw us the rest of the time we were in school...
 
So the victim wasn't satisfied with the results of the investigation and now wants to hurt the reputation of the university? I'm not saying her side of the story is inaccurate, but I guess people were right when they suggested her only other option was to go public and hurt the reputations of the legally innocent parties.
 
BigTreeDeac said:
while this is certainly the case, my experience with administrators is that they are very pragmatic. it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to cover-up a felony crime if you goal is to minimize the hit to the school. if that is the case, you take immediate and harsh action against those students. anyone with forethought would realize covering it up provides negatives that greatly outweigh the positives...in that when it actually comes to light you are up shit creek without a paddle and look absolutely terrible. as has been discussed a lot, instances of athletes sexually assaulting other student's isn't particularly uncommon so it wouldn't paint Wake in a super bad light. covering it up, however, does. just my opinion and admittedly it is partially biased due to my feelings that the higher ups at Wake couldn't possibly be depraved enough to try to cover this up if there was any form of evidence that it occurred other than testimony.
Click to expand...

Sure, and I don't necessarily think there was any real attempt to cover-up what happened (contents of the letter notwithstanding). I'm sure that the university deals with far more sexual assaults on campus than we realize. And I'm sure that most often the young woman does not want to press charges. The administration/AD/Dino might have felt that that was the way that this one was playing out and let things take their course.

They probably also felt that the woman was properly apprised of her rights as a victim and could make the appropriate decision for herself regarding criminal or civil prosecution. She and her parents should be able to easily comprehend that Wake Forest does not have a state penitentary building or courthouse on campus and that filing a criminal complaint is their job, not the uinversity's.

The worst that was ever going to happen in a J-Board trial was that someone was going to get kicked out of school. And if those J-Board losers kicked soemone out of school for sexual assault on a he said-she said accusation, they'd be the ones having their ass dragged throught he mud, along with the university, and the young woman too.
 
Based off the statements in this new article, the issue comes down to why "she felt she had no choice."

I am sure the exact details and reasons for why she felt she had no choice were revealed in the hearing, and I trust that they made the right decision.

As well, Detective James Rae, someone I know very closely, is VERY diligent in his job, and is very prone to leaning on the side of the accuser.

The more information that comes out, the better I feel about Wake Forest and this situation.
 
So, she tells Teague that she's interested in him but once in the room it's Clark that goes in the bathroom with her while Teague waits outside? Very weird.
 
Teague's role in this is very fuzzy from the article. It reads like they pulled a bait and switch.

And they asked her about oral sex before going into the room?

Yeah, this looks better for Wake than previously thought.
 
AnonymousDeac said:
Based off the statements in this new article, the issue comes down to why "she felt she had no choice."

I am sure the exact details and reasons for why she felt she had no choice were revealed in the hearing, and I trust that they made the right decision.

As well, Detective James Rae, someone I know very closely, is VERY diligent in his job, and is very prone to leaning on the side of the accuser.

The more information that comes out, the better I feel about Wake Forest and this situation.
Click to expand...

This is how I feel as well. While the situation itself is still a messy one, I do feel better about how the university has seemingly handled it.
 
deacphan said:
I haven't seen where that happened.
Click to expand...

You must have missed some earlier posts in this thread where people questioning the facts of the story are accused of attacking the victim.

This is a general problem with rape allegations. If the accused tries to discredit their accuser, they are vilified for it.
 
If we assume this story is true, the guys were completely out of line, but we really need more details for why she felt compelled. Was the door locked? Did Teague hold it shut? Did she say "I really don't want to do this"?
 
I'll ask it: is this sexual assault? She did it, because she "felt like she had no choice"...was she threatened or what? If not, what is the charge here?
 
I am sure all relevant parties are lawyered up but this girl needs to be very careful about defamation of character.

It is a very difficult decision to decide if a falsely accused rape victim should file for defamation of character but it should definitely be something he is considering.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I'll ask it: is this sexual assault? She did it, because she "felt like she had no choice"...was she threatened or what? If not, what is the charge here?
Click to expand...

There is no charge, nor will there be one due to lack of evidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top