• 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.

Just a strange story. I would like to believe Wake wouldn't go through the trouble of deceptively covering this up to protect a basketball scrub and a guy going to the NBA. If the players assumed now to be involved are correct, it seems like it would have been an easy call to kick both out or whatever was reasonable under the circumstances. It would have caused an equal stir to the Tony Woods drama.

If there's any shred of Wake not supporting this girl where it was reasonable to do so, then I'm truly disgusted with the university. Maybe I am naive, but I would like to believe that there were not enough Wake officials to be content with a cover-up/deceit to execute it. I was on several j-hearings as a panel member at Wake and things were taken very seriously. I don't know what to really think about this though.
 
DeaconSig said:
Unless the person making the accusation is not being truthfull.

I'm not saying that is the case here, but it certainly happens.
Click to expand...

Rape is the only crime where the victim seems to be questioned. It's embarrassing.
 
IamThunderbolt said:
I don't think the university would turn a blind eye to these allegations or cover for athletes if they were found to be true, but that is the part that bothers me.
Click to expand...
But to believe that, you have to believe the school would charge and/or kick out non-athletes with the same evidence. Do you think that's the case? I don't. And this situation does not just occur with athletes. Didn't someone post that 25% of woman of college age claim to be assaulted? That's not all the product of athletes and not many kids get kicked out of school.

I think Wake probably evaluated the situation like every other one they encounter. We know one of the guys left immediately and he would not be subject to discipline, and the one that stayed was not a high-profile athlete that needed to be protected.

Unfortunately this organization appears to be spinning this situation as a school wanting to protect it's precious athletes.
 
IslandDeac said:
I have no clue what exactly happened between the young woman and the two players but what is known that there were poor decisions made by multiple people. Even if only consensual acts occurred, no parties should be hooking up during a university trip/event. You are representatives of the school and held to a higher standard than most other people. I hope there was punishment handed out for simply putting themselves in an awful spot where bad things could (and may) have happened. Not upholding the standards and values of WF is not only violated by sexual assault but also by making poor, yet legal, decisions.
Click to expand...

So when the band goes to band camp, cheerleaders go to cheerleading camp, they should not hook up/have sex with one another, they should wait and do it when they get back to campus?
 
IslandDeac said:
I have no clue what exactly happened between the young woman and the two players but what is known that there were poor decisions made by multiple people. Even if only consensual acts occurred, no parties should be hooking up during a university trip/event. You are representatives of the school and held to a higher standard than most other people. I hope there was punishment handed out for simply putting themselves in an awful spot where bad things could (and may) have happened. Not upholding the standards and values of WF is not only violated by sexual assault but also by making poor, yet legal, decisions.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything wrong with young adults having consentual sex on a school trip. Not sure how that reflects poorly on the university. Two men raping a girl on a school trip is disgusting and the men should be punished if it happened.
 
bigdoublezero said:
Oof, apparently I've really touched a nerve against the big reppers on this thread, since I got knocked down like 20 rep points from two negreps. Sweet.

Sorry I think "where there's smoke there's fire" is stupid ...
Click to expand...

That's funny, because I think you're actually right. That's a poor phrase to use in my last post.

I guess what I was trying to say with that comment is that, even if he wasn't 100% involved, his presence around everything suggests that he knew what was going on. At that moment (no matter what he was doing), I'd find it hard to defend him as a leader.

And mods, can you please graph the total amount of neg and pos reps given during the past 7 days?
 
Once again, the pics are really offensive and not funny in this situation at all.
 
Here's some relevant excerpts from our handbook:

VIII. Felonies
a. Procedures
Cases concerning charges which give rise to criminal felony charges in local, state, and federal courts are referred to the vicepresident for student life and instructional resources who determines whether the case should be referred to the appropriate hearing panel, delayed pending the outcome of criminal proceedings, or heard administratively. Cases heard in an administrative hearing by the vice-president for student life and instructional resources can be appealed to the Judicial Council.
B. Sexual Assault
In cases of sexual assault, whether heard in an administrative hearing or by the Honor and Ethics Council, the alleged victim has the option of selecting up to two members of the Wake Forest community to accompany him/her during the hearing process. These individuals may be a BIA member, PREPARE Student Advocate or Facilitator, a counselor, or friend. The support people are to be identified in advance and designated by the associate dean/judicial officer.
 
To the person that neg rep me for saying I am childish and misguided to believe "no one cares" unless there is some underlying motivation for it. I used "no one cares" as a broad generalization of the community. Of course those directly involved care, and advocacy and support groups care. However like most bad news around the world unless it is a direct impact or some other outstanding factor there are not 50,000 viewed threads about it. Example I am sure multiple sexual assaults took place on campus this year, but this is the first thread about one.
 
Well I just spent most of my afternoon catching up on this whole thread. I'm inclined to believe there was rape or assault involved. Being a rape victim is always going to be a losing situation, especially if you speak out about it. There will always be some people questioning your motives for addressing it publicly, whether or not it was actually rape or consentual sex followed by regret, and anyone who ever looks you up on the internet will always see it (such as potential employers). I can't imagine anyone wanting to go through all of that unless you really are a victim. (Then again, there's always the Duke and Kobe cases, so who knows.)
 
My goal was always to be one of the boosters giving $100 handshakes. If this forces major changes I may never realize my dream.
 
Sorry, I didn't state what I meant properly. I was trying to simply state that they're subject to more scrutiny and their errors will be magnified if found. They should exercise their discretion in making decisions, especially on a school trip, where their activities will not only negatively affect them but also their school.

If they want to fraternize with girls, they have that right (unless they were under instructions not to by the coaches/admin). But by doing that, they knowingly did place themselves in a situation where possible problems could ensue, especially if alcohol or other substances were involved.
 
Last edited:
AnonymousDeac said:
I am very familiar with the way our judicial process and hearings work, especially with matters of sexual assault/rape. Here's my interpretation of the letter, take it for what you want.

First off, no attorneys are allowed inside the judicial hearing. Everyone is allowed to have an attorney though they are not allowed to enter the hearing with you. The only representation you can have is a student advocate. I do not believe Wake would break that rule and allow a

Second, I am curious as to the quotes of "had to go through the school." Since in quotes, they better have that in writing or else it's their word vs Wake's. As well, that statement could be interpreted to mean that the process does HAVE to go through wake forest, not that it only solely must go through wake. Because it was on a school sanctioned trip, there HAS to be a judicial hearing. No questions there.

Third, there is no problem with hearing each other's testimony.

Fourth, the confession issue is pretty important. However, I doubt the validity of this statement. As some have previously mentioned, there are a lot of things you can confess to without sexual assault or rape occurring.

To be honest, I am far more relieved after reading this letter than I was before. To me, this sounds like an issue where the victim did not receive the verdict/decision she wanted and has now attempted to gain justice through other methods. I am not saying Wake did not do anything wrong, but from the claims in this letter, I do not see any problems.
Click to expand...

Great post.

The part I have the hardest time believing about that letter is that the players were allowed to waltz in with an attorney, while the accuser was denied representation. Knowing how seriously the judicial process is treated at Wake, I find that claim extremely far-fetched.

I also find it unlikely that anyone told the accuser that the matter had to be handled by the Wake Forest judicial process and not the police. Again, Wake Forest is a seriously lawyered-up place. I find it hard to believe that anyone in the administration would offer such a blatant lie.

Overall, I suspect something happened between a player and the accuser and that ultimately it is a he said/she said matter and no one will ever know exactly what went down other than the 2 (or 3) of them.

I'm not entirely sure what people expect Wake Forest to do about given that reality. Wake can hold a judicial hearing (which it did). If there is no concrete evidence, I don't see how you can punish a player. At that point you have to leave it to the accuser to handle it with law enforcement. Regarding a "cover up," what else did people expect Wake Forest to do? Announce a press conference to say that it investigated the accusation? That would violate privacy laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top