Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:34 pm to Cheese Grits
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:34 pm to Cheese Grits
The April 2011 suicide attempt followed the March 2011 breakup with her boyfriend. If her parents knew, and said something, about her being raped at that time, perhaps an investigation could have been done. But that didn't happen.
I am surprised her parents did not sign the withdrawal papers for her. Maybe they couldn't do so since she wasn't a minor any longer, and encouraged her to do so even though she was on a hold. Obviously, they wanted to get her into some in-patient care.
I am surprised her parents did not sign the withdrawal papers for her. Maybe they couldn't do so since she wasn't a minor any longer, and encouraged her to do so even though she was on a hold. Obviously, they wanted to get her into some in-patient care.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:35 pm to roadGator
This discussion about the document signing is completely irrelevant. A non-starter, a red herring, if you will. Fact is, it was a document that Sasha needed to sign to remain eligible after a medical withdrawal. If she didn't sign it by a certain deadline, she would fail out and likely be unable to continue her education at MU. It was in her best interest to sign it and to sign it by the deadline. The document protected her. With her signature, the document ensured that she would be able to return to Mizzou at that point when her medical issues were resolved. Since she signed it, she was protected.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:36 pm to Mizzeaux
quote:
I don't see why her mental condition would make a difference at all unless some suit comes up claiming damages stemming from her withdrawal or the school decided they wanted to keep her enrolled. Other than that, it's just a form that allowed her withdrawal from school to avoid the consequences of not withdrawing.
Who is going to sue over this form? No one. It was in the girl's best interest at the time.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:36 pm to Mizzeaux
quote:
I don't see why her mental condition would make a difference at all unless some suit comes up claiming damages stemming from her withdrawal or the school decided they wanted to keep her enrolled. Other than that, it's just a form that allowed her withdrawal from school to avoid the consequences of not withdrawing.
Her mental condition is precisely why she withdrew. The form states she was leaving Columbia, MO to seek direct care.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:38 pm to semotruman
quote:
I am surprised her parents did not sign the withdrawal papers for her. Maybe they couldn't do so since she wasn't a minor any longer, and encouraged her to do so even though she was on a hold. Obviously, they wanted to get her into some in-patient care.
She was an adult and they likely didn't have power of attorney. Not knowing all the circumstances that have since come to light, requiring a POA for what was at the time likely seen as a matter of formality would have been overkill.
As I said before, the only time her ability to sign that document would have ever come into consideration is if there was a conflict between the university and herself arising from her withdrawal.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:38 pm to the808bass
quote:
Who is going to sue over this form? No one. It was in the girl's best interest at the time.
Exactly my point.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:41 pm to Mizzeaux
Seriously, the withdrawal document is a non-issue. There is nothing odd about it, just like there is nothing odd about the fact that the AD in charge of Communications is the lead communicator on this issue.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:42 pm to MIZ_STL
quote:
Seriously, the withdrawal document is a non-issue. There is nothing odd about it, just like there is nothing odd about the fact that the AD in charge of Communications is the lead communicator on this issue.
Understood, but after everything else was debunked, that was the thread's talking point.
So, what's next?
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:42 pm to Mizzeaux
Have they shut down the football program and swimming program or are they going to accept the shutting down of the basketball program that's occurred so far this year?
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:42 pm to roadGator
quote:
This is a long thread so there's no way I'm reading all the quibbling back and forth but would this be a good summary.
Mizz fans: nothing to see here
Non-mizz fans: Mizz getting death penalty and you can't spell Unlikely Criminals wihtout UM
Is that about right?
Close. The Missouri fans have said that if anyone in the Athletic Department knew they should be fired. If they knew they should have reported it. The football players should be prosecuted if that is still possible. However, the OTL report doesn't support that school officials knew about it. So, what exactly should the Athletic Department have done?
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:44 pm to TrueSon
Why are you asking me? I have zero fricks to give about it.
No serious discussion from me on subjects I don't know about.
I am interested in what phognet has to say about this matter though.
hold please
No serious discussion from me on subjects I don't know about.
I am interested in what phognet has to say about this matter though.
hold please
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:44 pm to TigerMattSTL
quote:
TigerMattSTL
The issue is not with the drop date, the issue is with who signed. Do you see the difference here? Health care facilities are pretty damn strict on who can be on locked wards (if you are on a 3 day involuntary, that is a locked ward) and usually it is PoA's, Conservators, Health Care Surrogates, and similar type folks. If you have never been on these wards maybe you are unaware of how secure they are.
If a person is restricted in such a facility a parent or next of kin would have been the only valid signature. In essence they must step in and be responsible for signing such documents. It is not that the document was signed to meet a MU policy deadline that is the issue, it is that it was signed by someone other than the parents.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:44 pm to MIZ_STL
quote:
Seriously, the withdrawal document is a non-issue. There is nothing odd about it, just like there is nothing odd about the fact that the AD in charge of Communications is the lead communicator on this issue.
Prolly cuz that's who ESPN contacted. I can guarantee legal and the President's office read and/or contributed to the response before it went out. CG gone CG.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:46 pm to the808bass
quote]Prolly cuz that's who ESPN contacted.[/quote]
Probably
FIFY
Probably
FIFY
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:47 pm to roadGator
quote:
Why are you asking me? I have zero fricks to give about it.
No serious discussion from me on subjects I don't know about.
I am interested in what phognet has to say about this matter though.
hold please
Lol I'm not asking you what you think, I was summarizing most Missouri fan's position.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:47 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
It is not that the document was signed to meet a MU policy deadline that is the issue, it is that it was signed by someone other than the parents.
What's the legal liability for Mizzou here WRT the document? I'll give you a hint. It starts with "n" and ends with "one." The parents aren't going to come back and say "you kept out daughter from flunking out and we want to sue!!!" You're some has-been desk jockey, just acquainted well enough with policy to try to make people follow it even when it doesn't make a whit of difference.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:47 pm to TrueSon
OK. Carry on then.
Posted on 1/24/14 at 4:47 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:So, the issue is that Sasha signed a document that she was supposed to sign?
it is that it was signed by someone other than the parents.
Page 7 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News