What's happens at minny?

A Mai Tai.

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:A Mai Tai.

That will be difficult, but hopefully the guy that brings rum will show up.

DWags wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Their head coach seems to want to straddle the fence....from "HeadFootballCoach" Claeys

GoldenGopherHFC ‏@GoldenGopherHFC
Have never been more proud of our kids. I respect their rights & support their effort to make a better world!

I don't know what the student code of conduct is at Minnesota. If they didn't break it, then they should stand up for their rights.

Still wouldn't play for me or represent my school. That doesn't mean their rights should be trampled on.

guarentee this was against student code. thanks obama!

duffy munn wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:

it is severely frowned upon to be black and gay. their religious parents ain't skipping out on grand kids!!

Wow.

And you wonder why people think you are a fucking idiot.

Because i actually know what I'm talking about instead of being narrow minded my The Dowager Lady Margret, Countess and Prefict of Northumbria simpleton?

duffy munn wrote:

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:Guys. Why the fuck are you wasting your keystrokes.

This a good question and I'm very guilty of wasting time with Blanch. Most of it is to easy.

But this thread is different. He is showing himself to be much more than a common idiot.

He is a racist, sexist piece of fucking shit.

I hope Dwags pulls the trigger. It's time.

The Dowager Lady Margret, Countess and Prefict of Northumbria at it again!

Blanch32 wrote:

duffy munn wrote:
Wow.

And you wonder why people think you are a fucking idiot.

Because i actually know what I'm talking about instead of being narrow minded my The Dowager Lady Margret, Countess and Prefict of Northumbria simpleton?

So basically blacks like to gang bang ( white women preferred) and black parents don't accept their kids being gay.

Nothing racist or idiotic about this.

duffy munn wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:

Because i actually know what I'm talking about instead of being narrow minded my The Dowager Lady Margret, Countess and Prefict of Northumbria simpleton?

So basically blacks like to gang bang ( white women preferred) and black parents don't accept their kids being gay.

Nothing racist or idiotic about this.

That's your simpleton interpretation mr PC. no winder you voted for Hillary...

Blanch32 wrote:

duffy munn wrote:

So basically blacks like to gang bang ( white women preferred) and black parents don't accept their kids being gay.

Nothing racist or idiotic about this.

That's your simpleton interpretation mr PC. no winder you voted for Hillary...

a.) I didn't vote for Hillary

b) making sweeping generalizations about a specific race is the very definition of racism

c.) your slam piece is enormous

duffy munn wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:

That's your simpleton interpretation mr PC. no winder you voted for Hillary...

a.) I didn't vote for Hillary

b) making sweeping generalizations about a specific race is the very definition of racism

c.) your slam piece is enormous

d.) muffy is simpleton

Blanch32 wrote:

duffy munn wrote:

a.) I didn't vote for Hillary

b) making sweeping generalizations about a specific race is the very definition of racism

c.) your slam piece is enormous

d.) muffy is simpleton

I'll dedicate a thread to you on the premium board if you get permabanned.

LooseGoose wrote:I don't want to come off as coarse to the woman.....but god damn.    She goes up to his room from a common area.  Doesn't try to leave.  Wasn't pushed.   Wasn't threatened.    Then calls rape?

I understand it might not be fair to her - but how in the fuck is it fair the men involved?

Ok what if she goes up with one guy and has consensual sex and then 5 more came in and took turns on her while she was saying no and trying to fight them off. If they had an 8 second video of that they would all be going to prison. But as it is rape cases are incredibly difficult to prove.
I assume they were expelled under this Obama college sexual assault program and I have mixed feelings about that. The burden of proof is lower so in the case where a rape in all likelihood happened but evidence is lacking to prosecute criminally they can be found guilty enough to be expelled. It does seem sketchy with some university trial that can screw up people's lives. And are they motivated to find them guilty to please the Feds? Then again they are "only" getting kicked out of school not going to prison for a felony.

Herbie Green wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:I don't want to come off as coarse to the woman.....but god damn.    She goes up to his room from a common area.  Doesn't try to leave.  Wasn't pushed.   Wasn't threatened.    Then calls rape?

I understand it might not be fair to her - but how in the fuck is it fair the men involved?

Ok what if she goes up with one guy and has consensual sex and then 5 more came in and took turns on her while she was saying no and trying to fight them off.

Simple. Those 5 should be going to prison for a long stretch.

Herbie Green wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:I don't want to come off as coarse to the woman.....but god damn.    She goes up to his room from a common area.  Doesn't try to leave.  Wasn't pushed.   Wasn't threatened.    Then calls rape?

I understand it might not be fair to her - but how in the fuck is it fair the men involved?

Ok what if she goes up with one guy and has consensual sex and then 5 more came in and took turns on her while she was saying no and trying to fight them off. If they had an 8 second video of that they would all be going to prison. But as it is rape cases are incredibly difficult to prove.
I assume they were expelled under this Obama college sexual assault program and I have mixed feelings about that. The burden of proof is lower so in the case where a rape in all likelihood happened but evidence is lacking to prosecute criminally they can be found guilty enough to be expelled. It does seem sketchy with some university trial that can screw up people's lives. And are they motivated to find them guilty to please the Feds? Then again they are "only" getting kicked out of school not going to prison for a felony.

this. under obama, pretty much an accusation is all that is needed, if the panel finds it believable (and why would they not?)

love to hear his statement on this matter, but guarantee he doesn't have the sack and outright avoids it.

LooseGoose wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

Ok what if she goes up with one guy and has consensual sex and then 5 more came in and took turns on her while she was saying no and trying to fight them off.

Simple. Those 5 should be going to prison for a long stretch.

as they are in the vandy case under franklin. plus its easier to prosecute when the main defendant is white.

Blanch32 wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Simple. Those 5 should be going to prison for a long stretch.

plus its easier to prosecute when the main defendant is white.

Unreal

Duffy,
So long as you insist on attempting to engage Blanch in cogent conversation he will antagonize you and post even more bullshit that is offensive.

duffy munn wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:

plus its easier to prosecute when the main defendant is white.

Unreal

not politically under today's libs

LooseGoose wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

Ok what if she goes up with one guy and has consensual sex and then 5 more came in and took turns on her while she was saying no and trying to fight them off.

Simple. Those 5 should be going to prison for a long stretch.

But it isn't that simple at all. This is basically what she said happened. Are you saying she is a liar? or is it more that there wouldn't be enough evidence for a conviction?

The law is heavily tilted towards protecting the accused in rape cases. The campus trial shifts the burden of proof the other way.

GRR Spartan wrote:Duffy,
So long as you insist on attempting to engage Blanch in cogent conversation he will antagonize you and post even more bullshit that is offensive.

someone doesn't like it when i call out their man hating tendencies....

Herbie Green wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Simple. Those 5 should be going to prison for a long stretch.

But it isn't that simple at all. This is basically what she said happened. Are you saying she is a liar? or is it more that there wouldn't be enough evidence for a conviction?

The law is heavily tilted towards protecting the accused in rape cases. The campus trial shifts the burden of proof the other way.

hence, why i said those phone videos tell us everything. then, then The Dowager Lady Margret, Countess and Prefict of Northumbria summarizes that i must be a biggot. lol

Herbie Green wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Simple. Those 5 should be going to prison for a long stretch.

But it isn't that simple at all. This is basically what she said happened. Are you saying she is a liar? or is it more that there wouldn't be enough evidence for a conviction?

The law is heavily tilted towards protecting the accused in rape cases. The campus trial shifts the burden of proof the other way.

That's not what she told the police. I guess you have better information than they do.

LooseGoose wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

But it isn't that simple at all. This is basically what she said happened. Are you saying she is a liar? or is it more that there wouldn't be enough evidence for a conviction?

The law is heavily tilted towards protecting the accused in rape cases. The campus trial shifts the burden of proof the other way.

That's not what she told the police. I guess you have better information than they do.

I haven't read anything beyond this thread. Were you in that apartment or attend the campus proceeding?

Herbie Green wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

That's not what she told the police. I guess you have better information than they do.

I haven't read anything beyond this thread. Were you in that apartment or attend the campus proceeding?

You're quoting her you nimrod, not me. Had she told police that the 5 men raped her they would have been charged months ago.

LooseGoose wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

I haven't read anything beyond this thread. Were you in that apartment or attend the campus proceeding?

You're quoting her you nimrod, not me. Had she told police that the 5 men raped her they would have been charged months ago.

Huh? She went to the hospital that night for a rape exam and reported it to police.

Herbie Green wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

You're quoting her you nimrod, not me.   Had she told police that the 5 men raped her they would have been charged months ago.

Huh?  She went to the hospital that night for a rape exam and reported it to police.  

If you're going to claim rape it would be better for your case if videos like this didn't exist.

During an 8-second clip, the woman “appears lucid, alert, somewhat playful and fully conscious; she does not appear to be objecting to anything at this time,” Wente wrote in his report. After viewing two additional videos, he wrote “the sexual contact appears entirely consensual.”

On Sept. 30, Wente sent the investigation to the Hennepin County Attorney’s office for possible prosecution. In it, he wrote about the videos, “at no time does she indicate that she is in distress or that the contact is unwelcome or nonconsensual.”

Why did the school expel them?

Herbie Green wrote:Why did the school expel them?

I'm assuming that there is a student code of conduct.  In this, I have never accused the players of doing anything illegal. I think it's highly immoral and shows a lack of social IQ.  I would assume that if what took place is legal, and prosecution has more information than we do, and the school wants them expelled it has to be on a students ethics clause.   

Again, if I was coaching, I wouldn't take their scholarship away, but they would not step out on the field for my school ever.  They represent an act that is beyond classless.   they would really have to show me something in order to get back into my good graces.  At the same time, the team shoudln't be punished for thier lack of class.  If they think they should be allowed to play for me, I'd be interested in why.

DWags wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:Why did the school expel them?

I'm assuming that there is a student code of conduct.  In this, I have never accused the players of doing anything illegal. I think it's highly immoral and shows a lack of social IQ.  I would assume that if what took place is legal, and prosecution has more information than we do, and the school wants them expelled it has to be on a students ethics clause.   

Again, if I was coaching, I wouldn't take their scholarship away, but they would not step out on the field for my school ever.  They represent an act that is beyond classless.   they would really have to show me something in order to get back into my good graces.  At the same time, the team shoudln't be punished for thier lack of class.  If they think they should be allowed to play for me, I'd be interested in why.

I assume they were expelled because the school found them guilty of rape or associated crime, not for having legal consensual sex.
My main point is that although they were not prosecuted by law doesn't mean they didnt actually do it. With a lower burden of proof one could conclude they did. I can completely understand someone having a problem with how that goes down as I said I have mixed feelings about it myself.
If they were able to bring in high powered lawyers and real judges to hear the school proceeding like Winston got would they reach the same verdict?

LooseGoose wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

Huh?  She went to the hospital that night for a rape exam and reported it to police.  

If you're going to claim rape it would be better for your case if videos like this didn't exist.

During an 8-second clip, the woman “appears lucid, alert, somewhat playful and fully conscious; she does not appear to be objecting to anything at this time,” Wente wrote in his report. After viewing two additional videos, he wrote “the sexual contact appears entirely consensual.”

On Sept. 30, Wente sent the investigation to the Hennepin County Attorney’s office for possible prosecution. In it, he wrote about the videos, “at no time does she indicate that she is in distress or that the contact is unwelcome or nonconsensual.”

way to pass judgement on videos you've never seen....

DWags wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:Why did the school expel them?

I'm assuming that there is a student code of conduct.  In this, I have never accused the players of doing anything illegal. I think it's highly immoral and shows a lack of social IQ.  I would assume that if what took place is legal, and prosecution has more information than we do, and the school wants them expelled it has to be on a students ethics clause.   

Again, if I was coaching, I wouldn't take their scholarship away, but they would not step out on the field for my school ever.  They represent an act that is beyond classless.   they would really have to show me something in order to get back into my good graces.  At the same time, the team shoudln't be punished for thier lack of class.  If they think they should be allowed to play for me, I'd be interested in why.

so izzo should have never played appling or Payne? haven't you banned people for criticing izzo? would you suport your own banning?

http://www.startribune.com/after-authorities-did-not-charge-her-rapist-u-student-fought-back/398051931/

Here is another case at Minnesota that might shed some light on the topic. There had been 1,000 sexual assaults reported on campus and zero prosecutions.

Herbie Green wrote:http://www.startribune.com/after-authorities-did-not-charge-her-rapist-u-student-fought-back/398051931/

Here is another case at Minnesota that might shed some light on the topic. There had been 1,000 sexual assaults reported on campus and zero prosecutions.

jesus!!!! the fuck is wrong Minneapolis? they ARE the movie and show Fargo. no more denying it!!

I'm with the president

That certain behavior is simply unacceptable and antithetical to our institutional values. We support Gopher Athletics' decision because this is much bigger than football. It is about the values every University of Minnesota student is called on to uphold. We make these expectations clear, and when they are not met, there are consequences."


This is much bigger than football This is much bigger than football

DWags wrote:I'm with the president

That certain behavior is simply unacceptable and antithetical to our institutional values. We support Gopher Athletics' decision because this is much bigger than football. It is about the values every University of Minnesota student is called on to uphold. We make these expectations clear, and when they are not met, there are consequences."


This is much bigger than football This is much bigger than football

What's a consequence??

Sincerely,
People born after 1996

I've never understood the teammate bonding by all banging a chick together. Very weird

CORNER BLITZ wrote:I've never understood the teammate bonding by all banging a chick together. Very weird

Sex is a hell of a drug.

DWags wrote:I'm with the president

That certain behavior is simply unacceptable and antithetical to our institutional values. We support Gopher Athletics' decision because this is much bigger than football. It is about the values every University of Minnesota student is called on to uphold. We make these expectations clear, and when they are not met, there are consequences."


This is much bigger than football This is much bigger than football

good article, but no mention of obama.

.....and you never answered my question about Appling and Payne?

Blanch is a pretty shitty person. He supports rape.

Are people shocked? He is known to be a pervert towards women at tailgates and even ran off a woman poster at the RCMB because he put his tongue in her ear at one. I'm sure it was consensual to him

CORNER BLITZ wrote:I've never understood the teammate bonding by all banging a chick together. Very weird

the down low culture. that and sports in general creste homo erotic behaivor

Death Roe wrote:Blanch is a pretty shitty person. He supports rape.

stick to that agenda no matter what, my The Dowager Lady Margret, Countess and Prefict of Northumbria wannabe?