2010 rape covered up by Mizzou or nothing to it?

That is so fricked up and sad. Such a shame to have her life ripped apart then end at such a young age.

quote:

---

Either way, it sure seems like Mizzou is having way too many rape cases involving athletes.

---

Sad how young males can be such complete pieces of shite.

Let's not turn this into a gender war...sheesh.

Every report is slanted a certain way. What kills me is that the swim coach is either totally clueless on what his swimmers are doing outside of the pool or the athletic department lied to him. He seemed confused and surprised when the reporter said that the young lady HAD been going to see a counselor for her problems after she was "kicked off the team".

So, in a quick read of the OTL article, and both Mizzou's follow-up letters, a girl with borderline personality disorder believes she was raped by more than 1 football player, after having had consensual sex with a football player. She withdraws from school and enters an in-patient treatment program for her illness. She ultimately, and tragically, commits suicide more than a year after the incident. This was, at minimum, her 3rd suicide attempt, 1 of which occurred before she came to Mizzou. The university worked closely with her coaches and parents to get her treatment, and help in any way they could. The ONLY people she told were medical personnel, who were bound by confidentiality, and Rolandis Woodland.

The university found out about this alleged assault after her death, when her parents filed a records request under the Sunshine Law. They found 1 reference to the assault in an file saved - I believe it was a saved chat with a rape crisis hotline. Woodland says he confronted one of the football players about the incident, and says that after her death he received a video tape of the assault. He claims there were 3 rapists, but could not tell who was who because the tape was so dim. He has lost this tape.

ESPN gets access to medical records through her parents, and it appears that she did not want to pursue the case, didn't think she could handle it. She was intoxicated at the time - which is no excuse for rape, but her memory was very impaired. She wasn't sure how many men were involved, or who they all were. One young man, Gil Moye, admitted to ESPN that he had consensual sex with her, but nothing more.

Mizzou, when they find the reference to the assault in her records, writes to her parents to ask if they would like an investigation to be opened, since she has passed away. Her parents have never responded.

I am all for throwing the book at rapists. They are the scum of the earth, along with people who abuse children, and deserve everything that is coming to them. However, in this case, what was the University or the AD to do? They did not have a report on which to act, and apparently she did not even tell her parents it had happened - only medical personnel and Rolandis Woodland. The AD folks can't get her medical records without her consent, and if Rolandis didn't tell the coaching staff, how was anyone to know?

This is the kind of hack journalism that makes me sick. This is not the Winston case, where the girl reported it the night it happened and had a rape kit done. It's not the Derrick Washington case, where she reported it and pursued it. It's not even the Michael Dixon case, where the coach knew of it, but the victim chose not to pursue it so nothing could be done officially. She did not report it, and it only came to light after her death. Yet, somehow Mizzou covered up a rape? Muck-raking, scurrilous excuse for reporting. But anything to get viewers, huh?

Now, if it comes to light that someone in a position to help this girl, or start an investigation (assuming she wanted one to occur) knew about this incident, and did nothing? String 'em up.

ETA - Yes, the entitlement culture of athletes is a problem. They need to understand that not every girl wants to have sex with them because they're athletes. They need to be more careful than the average student because of their higher profile, not more promiscuous. They need to be sure any girl they have sex with is 1)willing, and 2)not impaired. If there is any question, walk away - they can get it somewhere else, to be sure.

quote:

---

2nd response letter from Moller makes it sound like ESPN was dead set on writing a hit piece.

---

They're missing the bigger picture. An entire culture has to change at the University. What about the culture at MU leads to repeated assaults by athletes on women. Figure that out and fix it. That is the important point. Not whether or not they handled this situation properly.

quote:

---

They're missing the bigger picture. An entire culture has to change at the University. What about the culture at MU leads to repeated assaults by athletes on women. Figure that out and fix it. That is the important point. Not whether or not they handled this situation properly.

---

I get your point. But ESPN was set on writing a hit piece saying that Mizzou covered up a rape and the victim ultimately committed suicide. That was what the responses addressed.

The culture at Mizzou wasn't the subject of the article, it was how this situation was handled. The culture is a different issue, and obviously needs to be addressed.

quote:

---

I get your point. But ESPN was set on writing a hit piece saying that Mizzou covered up a rape and the victim ultimately committed suicide. That was what the responses addressed.

The culture at Mizzou wasn't the subject of the article, it was how this situation was handled. The culture is a different issue, and obviously needs to be addressed.

---

I agree 100% semo. I guess I didn't make it clear. I wasn't defending the article or criticizing the University for the response given to some specific questions. I was saying the article and as a result the University's response is missing the point. I could give a frick about the article. Frick ESPN.

I'm more concerned about what seems to be an ongoing problem with athletes at the University.

True enough. Like I said, wasn't a thought out suggestion. How about firing Anderson? I have little doubt she not lie in her journal about having told Anderson. What incentive would she have to lie about it in a personal journal? Why would she just make that up? She didn't go public. She didn't report it and go after the player(s). I have little doubt she told Anderson in my own mind and I don't believe Anderson is in a position that invokes confidentiality. If that's the case, show the ZERO tolerance by firing or investigating Anderson to determine if she should be fired for not doing anything with that information.