The Three Issues Concerning Keenan and C.U.

Hahahaha, BobC

as you know because I've told allya enough times, my daughter is one of two female police officers on our city's police force. The other one is my cousin. It's a hostile environment there, all right, especially at PMS time. The men just keep their distance, LOL. Good Gawd, I wish women would stop running down their own gender. Most women are not wimps, and I wish they would stop making them out to be.

 

Message to Koldkase

Would you get over yourself, or at least get over me? I have priorities in my life, you're not one of them. You're not on any list of mine, I haven't even thought about you in days. You amaze me with your continued dive into incredibility.

Paranoia will destroya. WY's not out to get you. Don't look for WY in any of the posters at Purg. I'm not there. I don't want to be there. I don't like it there. I don't like fanatics. I don't like destroyers of truth. I don't like fools. I don't like manipulators. I don't like Purgatory.

I don't care what you think. I don't dance to the beat of your drummer. I am not impressed with your soap opera that has all the male characters as convicted rapists and all the female characters as perfect angels.

Your fanaticism/activism will not change my mind about the definition of rape. I don't have to think like you do. It's called freedom of thought and speech. Accept that and move on.

It's sad it's come to this just because a few people at FFJ expressed a differing opinion from yours. I will have no more to say on this issue. I may, however, express views on the CU scandal. They may not agree with your opinions. Oh well.

 

Heres a police report

http://thesmokinggun.com/archive/colocoach1.html

UPDATE: Cops are investigating allegations from another student who claims that she was sexually assaulted by a CU football player, according to police reports released today. The woman has told investigators that she met her attacker at a Boulder bar in August 2002 and walked home with the man and a friend of his (who was also a scholarship athlete). The woman told cops she "believes she may have been drugged" before being assaulted in her home. Police took DNA samples from the suspect late last year and the case remains open.

 

Posted on Sun, Feb. 22, 2004
Fans, administrators forgive transgressions as long as coach wins

"SAN JOSE, Calif. - Once upon a time, institutions of higher learning strictly sold academics. No $2 million-a-year football coach. No billion-dollar TV contract. No scandals."

"Before pro football, alumni ran slush funds from which coaches could outbid rivals for the best players. But as the NFL took off, college football became a free feeder system for the pros. That's when the NCAA fought to preserve the ivy-covered image it sells in its billion-dollar TV package: The all-American boy acing his English Lit exam, then throwing the winning touchdown pass.

The NCAA began making "death penalty" examples of schools like Southern Methodist whose big-cigar alums were caught paying weekly salaries to players. Why should an institution of higher learning pay a player to risk his knees and neck playing nationally publicized games when he could eventually earn big money in the NFL? That's what college administrators argued as player after player damaged his pro earning power all but dying for Dear Old U's cause.

And you wonder why point-shaving scandals have stained college football and basketball after unpaid players who just wanted to make a little spending money betting on games wound up in the pockets of bookmakers."

"You hope the media frenzy spotlighting Colorado's scandal scares other schools into cleaning up their seamier enticements. The shock isn't how many college scandals have been exposed. The shock is how many haven't."
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/8012252.htm

 

I hold my position

these girls who have come forward could be telling the truth. Then again, maybe they are not. It's interesting, though, to see how many take it for granted they are telling the truth before hearing the other side. Not that it will matter, now. They've made their claims. The athletes will forever be tainted whether they are guilty or not.

If they are guilty, they should be held accountable for their actions. I don't defend rapists or people who support them. If they are not guilty, however, then the people who have accused them should also be held responsible for making false claims. Until all the facts are in, I don't know and neither does anyone else on these forums.

I don't care if it's 7 or 70 who come forward. There's more to this story. I want to hear it all before I hang anyone for rape.

 

Re: I hold my position

I just thought it interesting that it's so big that it hit thesmokinggun.com!

Did you read some of the allegations these women made?

One said she invited the guy to her house and they watched a movie and were kissing but when he tried to take her pants off she told him "No." and he stopped, but they began kissing again and again, he tried to get her pants off; she again told him she did not want to have sex with him and he responded by asking if they could do other stuff and she agreed.

She told police she thinks he took the opportunity to assault her because he did not go out with her the first time he had asked her on a date (didn't want to be around other people, I guess) she already had plans but asked him to come along and he did not call her back that night; he waited until the Friday after that at work where he allegedly overheard her tell a co-worker that her roommates were gone camping and that she'd be alone. He called her that night and said he was going to stop by, and that's when the assault occured.

To me, her story seems believable, what's more- these cases are all closed at the victims request.

Coach Barnett apparently told one woman that he needed time to take care of the matter and assured her he would "get him treatment"- that signals (to me) if it's true, that he knew this guy had a problem and later still told the same woman he would back his player 100%. That's sick if he really said that to her, why would she make herself look like that if it weren't true?

 

I didn't know that WY. No doubt if she's anything like you, she'll be a very confident cop. You always come through to me, as being a very confident type.

Do you ever discuss the JonBenét case with her? Does she have any theories that are different from ours?

 

Re: I hold my position

I don't know how 'guilty' these guy's are though, thinking about things from the perspective that these guys are the 'nations top recruits' and as such they felt 'entitled' to sex or sexual activity on the basis that they were 'lured' there being promised sex for the duration of their time at CU. Ego's just naturally come with these sorts of guys (usually) some are more reserved than others but the general consensus is that each and every one of them is "superior", or feels they are in some way. Being a football player is like being a celebrity to them, on a smaller scale but nonetheless a majority of them feel "above and beyond".

If these guys were told something that would cause them to suspect or believe the girls at CU were "easy", or even that they just were "okay" with the activity as long as they made comments like "I like you" or "I want this to go somewhere." Is it possible that the majority of them could have felt as though it was okay and that because these girls didn't get their rape whistles out and report their aggressive behaviour, that somehow the aggressive behaviour was acceptable or "normal"?? I'm not saying that what they did isn't considered rape, there are several similarities between the incidents: (in the smokinggun.com files)

In each case the attacker was known to the victim and their relationship begins with friendship; this is hardly getting drunk at a party and sleeping with some stranger.

In each case, the rapist committed the act in the home of the victim.

In each case the victim willingly participated in sexual activity but also state that they outright refused to have sexual intercourse with the men.

In each case the male wore a condom for the duration of the act and dressed still wearing it; left the victims residence still wearing it.

In each case, before the rape occured the male went into the bathroom for a few moments before returning to force sex on the female victim. He could have been relieving the pressure from the 4play that this girl told him would lead nowhere that involved penetration Or he could have been in there going over a checklist of things he was told to do to be sure he did not leave any forensic evidence behind (the condom is the perfect example)

In each case, the victims who reported the victims were naturally reluctant to reveal information, and chose not to proceed with charges resulting in the closing of the cases.

One was told by Gary Barnett that he would "take care of this problem and would make sure that ________ got treatment." but he also told her in the same conversation "he would back his player 100%"

 

Lawd, where to start...

First, Elle, my daughter doesn't keep up with the JBR case. In addition to being a police officer, she owns and runs an asphalt business and raises horses. She doesn't have the time to do much else. Whenever she sees I'm reading something about the JBR case or sees someone on TV about it, she asks me what's going on with it, and I tell her. She has been at my house during her lunch hour when Limpwood was on TV (second shift lunch hour), and she just rolls her eyes at him. From what she's read and heard on TV, she thinks the parents were involved.

JustinCase

I haven't seen any proof the recruits were promised sex by the coaching stafffor the duration of their time at CU. If other players told them, hey, dude, you can get all the xxxxx you want to CU, I believe that. But, that's not the coaching staff, and there is no proof anyone in the coaching staff ever approved any such thing.

There is something here that nobody is addressing - the difference between rape and sex. Rapists who are serving time in prison will tell you, it's not about sex - it's about power. It's about the degradation of women.

So, did the coaching staff at CU tell the recruits - you can rape all the women you want at CU - you can degrade all the women you want at CU?

Aside from the questions - did the "rapes" happen and do the women hold any responsibility, there is a far bigger question here. If these girls are telling the truth, when did these males stop having sex and start being rapists? When did it go from a man enjoying feeling good with his female counterpart and turn into a degrading, controlling male interested only in exerting power over the woman?

If rape isn't about sex, and rapists all have one thing in mind - power and degradation, then where does the loving part of sex come in? When does a man involved in consensual and enjoyable sex suddenly turn into a monster rapist?

Oh. When the woman says no. After she has, in many cases, initiated the sexual union, invited the sexual union, given inferred permission to have sex. Her NO turns an ordinary hot blooded teenager or 20 something year old male into a criminal rapist.

This is that murky area I was talking about. I would bet that at least most of these guys, if these charges are true, are not what anyone would consider criminal rapists. They do not live to degrade or exert their power over women. To them, it was about sex, not degradation or power. But, now, they have this label RAPIST painted on them because women's groups have propagated this nonsense that women have zero responsibility for their own actions. That is total BS. They started out to have sex, they ended up as rapists. What crap.

I totally agree with you on this. It's the same with any athlete on campus, whether football, basketball - they all have this sense of entitlement.

Let's look at this from another angle. You can't stand in line at the grocery store without seeing "How to give your man a mind-blowing orgasm," or "Best Sex Ever," or "Ten Ways to Make your Man Stand up and Take Notice." Look at the role models girls have today - Britteny Spears, Janet Jackson, Pink, Madonna - they are all skanks with no morals whatsoever. We've all seen their videos, and it's all about who can be the sluttiest.

I know from personal observation that morals, for many girls, are just so yesterday. Girls from very early ages are having sex, and they are also learning how to get even with boys who have sex with them once, then dump them. It's a very different world from when I grew up, and believe me, we didn't wear chastity belts.

A true rapist is someone to fear - he has a terrible hatred of women and desires only to hurt and degrade them. Guys out looking for sex are just that - looking for sex. If a girl hands him a condom and she invites him to her bedroom, that's sex, not rape. If the radical feminists have their way, every act of consensual sex that culminates in a woman saying no when it's damn near impossible for the man to stop (and, yes, ladies, it happens regardless of whom your male role models are, LOL), would be rape and the male involved a rapist. Quite a name to hang on anyone when the male is not a rapist.

Yes, and Nancy Krebs stated lots of things that were not true, too. I'm not saying these woman are not telling the truth, but are we to believe it, just because she says it's true? What does he say? But, of course, we all know he has to be lying, no matter what. Only the girl can be telling the truth.

Hello? Why didn't the "victim" get dressed and leave while her "attacker" was in the bathroom for a few minutes? What's the rest of the story?

Nah. I don't think so. Of course, if the girl gave him the condom to begin with, he wouldn't be thinking he needed to rape her, anyway. Right?

In this world where there are skeptics (like me), I know how difficult it would be for a woman to come forward. However, if a woman wants to be taken seriously, then she has to accept she is going to be questioned, and the man has the right to defend himself against her accusations.

Well, maybe Gary Barnett said that, and maybe he didn't. Unlike the activists who think women should believed and all men are rapists, I don't believe everything I read or hear. I would like to hear the rest of the story.

Here's one to stir up the radicals - a high percentage of reported "rapes" are false. It is my opinion that the true rapes in these cases are committed against the men involved who have been unjustly accused. When a woman makes a false rape claim against a man, his character has been raped, his reputation has been raped, and his future has been raped, because he will forever carry that stigma with him.

This is why I do not think it wise to blindly believe every woman who comes forward with a tale of rape. Wait until the whole story comes out before hanging these guys. Rape isn't about sex. Sex parties are not rape parties. It would be helpful if everyone could keep a perspective on the difference between sex and rape.

 

Parents speak out

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,112166,00.html

Parents of Colo. Football Players Speak Out

Monday, February 23, 2004

BOULDER, Colo. — Several dozen parents of University of Colorado (search) football players spoke out in support of the program and their children Sunday, saying they were tired of seeing their sons painted with the broad brush of scandal.



The parents also expressed unequivocal support for head coach Gary Barnett (search), who was placed on administrative leave last week by CU President Elizabeth Hoffman (search) after he had criticized the athletic ability of a female kicker who alleges a fellow player raped her when she was on the team.

"I've known this man to be a man of the highest integrity," said Gary Klatt, father of starting quarterback Joel Klatt.

Barnett's suspension was the latest development in a burgeoning scandal that has seen three women file lawsuits alleging they were assaulted by players and high-school recruits during or after an off-campus party in 2001.

The parents, who spoke at a Boulder hotel Sunday, would not discuss any of the allegations but defended their children and the team.

Brad Littlehales, whose son Tyler is a wide receiver, described the charges against the program as a "general attack against our sons," and said the team was probably more united as a result of the scandal.

The parents said they wanted an investigation into the football program to go forward as quickly as possible.

"As coach Barnett has clearly said, he's going nowhere," said Bob Creighton of Niwot, whose son, Paul, is a tight end.

 

Re: Lawd, where to start...

 

Ladies, Ladies!

You guys are both posting some excellent points and very strong opinions. Let me inject a couple more.

WY is correct. Rape is not about sexual gratification, but domination, power and control. Rape is, by legal definition, a sexual act of some kind committed AGAINST the will of the victim or without his/her consent.

In order to establish rape from consensual sex, there must be other evidence besides the testimony of the witness that "no" or an absence of consent was present in the alleged assault. There must be evidence that force was used to promulgate the sexual act upon the victim. Such evidence could be in the form of ripped clothing, bruises, cuts, abrasions, vaginal or anal tears, the use of a weapon to elicit a victim's passivity and compliance, etc. In the absence of such evidence, where only the word of the victim and the denial of the alleged assailant is available, rape is impossible to prove.

In situations such as these, where the victims were clearly willing and inviting sexual activity, any sudden change of mind after a young man is, shall we say, primed, will meet with hormonally charged resistance from him. Additionally, if the alleged assailant did indeed leave his alleged victim unattended, the victim's failure to escape is further proof that rape, at least from the legal perspective, was not the intended activity. To the best of my knowledge, these girls bore no physical wounds that would prove force was used, no weapon or threats of violence were reported to coerce their cooperation in the alleged attacks and they did not try to escape. These are all very crucial reasons why any DA could not successfully charge and prosecute the involved boys.

Additionally, and specifically, in this CU case, there are two separate issues to be determined: (1) were rapes actually committed and (2) were such criminal acts committed with the knowledge, consent and encouragement of the CU staff. This entire issue should be thorougly investigated, which was the original point of this thread, that Keenan has the power but is too stupid to use it to convene a GJ for investigative purposes. I believe she is hoping to avoid a scandal during her term as DA, but it looks as if history is repeating itself in Boulder.

Perhaps it's time for Boulder to wake up and smell the feramones....

 

Well, then

JustinCase, I don't even think my daughter knows the extent of JBR's injuries. I do know she most likely wouldn't venture a guess at the type of weapon used to bash JB over the head without indepth study of the case. I personally think it was the flashlight.

When you say solidity, I assume you mean solidarity, which means united in cause. I call it not narking. Recruits all over the country? I've heard about a few. I'd hardly call it from all over the country, though. I know damn well it doesn't happen here. Barnett could be the biggest creep in the country for all I know, but I still don't think the coaching staff would put their livelihoods on the line for the purpose of recruiting athletes with sex. That's not to say the parties didn't happen; I still question on whose authority they happened. College sports is a highly competitive field, as you say, and the reason is also, as you say, big money. College athletes don't need to be promised sex as a recruiting tool - they have no problems getting women, I know this for a fact. Girls congregate around athletes, I've seen it with mine own eyes.

I'm not sure what your point is here. A guy trying to convince the girl to finish the job isn't rape. It isn't even coersion - it's typical. It may make the girl uncomfortable, but it isn't rape. Forcing a girl to finish the job is rape.

Wait. This is what I'm talking about. Rape is not about sex, right? Rapists are not out for sex for sex's sake. They are out to degrade and demean, and they use sex for that purpose. Do you think these young men are all "rapists?" Do you think they all have this mindset of a true rapist? I don't know what you mean by these women weren't really degraded to the extent that most rape victims are - are you saying there are different levels of rape? But, isn't that what I've been saying right along? How does "degraded" differ from "violated?" Isn't violated a form of degradation in itself? Does the law define rape cases as to degree as in 1st degree rape, 2nd degree rape, 3rd degree rape? Is it fair to throw these college men in the same barrel as the violent rapists who prey on women solely to violate (there's that word) and maybe even cut them up?

How about the 17 year old boy who's been having consensual sex with his 17 year old girlfriend. He turns 18. Now he's a rapist if he continues to have consensual sex with his 17 year old. Is that fair? If convicted of statutory rape, this young man will carry the label, sexual offender, around with him for the rest of his life. I know this has nothing to do with the issue at hand, but it's indicative of how unfair some of our rape laws can be.

At the risk of being chopped up into little pieces, again, I will say I agree wtih you, here, especially about the "these men are barely overpowering these women, but they are still overpowering them for sex." Therein is the question - exactly how much were the girls overpowered? Some guys will take advantage of women they perceive don't really mean it when they say no, if the woman's actions don't match her words. Is this rape? The old addage, a stiff prick has no conscience is still true, whether anyone wants to admit it or not.

Nope, you're still not getting it. But, I don't know how else to put it.

I guess men are all dogs, then, except I know they are not. If these athletes are guilty of raping these women, they should be prosecuted, but if there isn't enough evidence to convict them, then they are not, under the definition of the law, rapists. However, that won't matter, now, because Mary Keenan took the chicken chit way out - made her accusations without having to prove them, knowing these guys may as well carry rapists signs around with them now, even if their names haven't been made public, because you and I both know everyone at CU knows who they are.

Then, he would be prosecuted as the gentle rapist, LOL. That means, I guess, that he didn't ram her half-way across the room. Yes, things do sometimes get out of hand that way, and I do know what you mean by "gentle."

Some things never change, only the terminology. Just because feminists think men should think a certain way toward women isn't going to make it so. Some things never will change, and one of those things is men trying to get into women's pants. Love has nothing to do with it, lust has plenty to do with it. In this area, women's rights groups have accomplished a lot, though. Women have as much right to be promiscuous these days as men do. What the heck, just read Cosmopolitan - they'll tell you so. Do men still call them whores? Some men do. Other men see women as equals, though, and sex is just that - sex - and yes the man still does respect the woman in the morning. I don't particularly like the free sex revolution, but it's better than the double standard - one for men and one for women.

I won't dispute any of this.

I was with you until the "and believed" part. While I believe they deserve to be protected, I do not believe every woman who comes forward with a claim of rape deserves to be believed. Credibility is not a guarantee - it's earned. I believe we have to be skeptical of all statements made by anyone until those statements are proven to be true. Anyone can say anything, that doesn't make it true. Pathological liars are everywhere. I can't accept that I have to accept the word of anyone on anything, including rape. BTW, saying I don't believe anyone based on their word is not the same as calling every rape victim a liar. If I find out she's lying, I'll call her a liar. I'm saying it's not wise to accept the word of anyone without evidence she is telling the truth. Neither believe nor disbelieve - keep an open mind is more like it. Neutral until someone makes a believer (or non believer) out of me.

Of course not, and I've never said that I would believe him any more than I believe her. I expect him to deny it. But, give him his day in court, at least. Make no assumptions one way or the other.

You and I differ here, too. I don't need to know EVERY detail, but what I do know so far is very little, and none of us has enough to say that rapes definitely occured in any of these cases. I know the women claim they were raped. That's not good enough for me, sorry. Give me more.


I can't say I'm right and you're wrong or vice versa. Everything you say could be right, and if it turns out to be the case, I will be every bit as offended by it as you seem to be. Our differences are mostly in the standards of proof. I don't easily accept statements made by anyone outside a courtroom as proof of anything, especially when it involves accusations against another person. Show me the proof, and don't tell me isn't any. It's easy to create a story and embellish it. I need more. As I said, I'm not going to hang anyone on the stories I've heard so far.

You've got a good head on your shoulders. I understand what you are saying. I just don't believe these girls because I'm supposed to believe them because they say they were raped. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't. None of us really knows what happened.

 

Re: Well, then

Originally posted by Watching You
JustinCase, I don't even think my daughter knows the extent of JBR's injuries. I do know she most likely wouldn't venture a guess at the type of weapon used to bash JB over the head without indepth study of the case. I personally think it was the flashlight.

I just thought it would be interesting to get the perspective of a police officer or detective that is totally unrelated to the case, my friends older brother is a police officer and I often wonder if asking him would offer me any insight into what made that gaping hole in her tiny skull. I have always wondered about the flashlight too, but have been more prone to wondering about the recently cleaned set of golf clubs, one of which was in the backyard with a hair on it; I don't know if it was JonBenet's or not but I guess it could be anyones and that could have been carted out there by one of the kids and left there, they typically did stuff like that according to LHP.

I can't say I'm right and you're wrong or vice versa. Everything you say could be right, and if it turns out to be the case, I will be every bit as offended by it as you seem to be. Our differences are mostly in the standards of proof. I don't easily accept statements made by anyone outside a courtroom as proof of anything, especially when it involves accusations against another person. Show me the proof, and don't tell me isn't any. It's easy to create a story and embellish it. I need more. As I said, I'm not going to hang anyone on the stories I've heard so far.

I don't want to be right, I just felt like you were piling the issues that are currently under investigation into the issues I posted with respect to thesmokinggun documents; I only posted them because I felt like they could provide some kind of insight into what's actually going on.

Instead they turned out to be historical rape accusations where in both cases the reluctant victim was encouraged (by a friend and a rape advocate) to report the crime to police and seemed reluctant to release intimate details out of embarassment; telling seperate officers different portions of her story because she felt more comfortable with one than the other. (not uncommon, so I felt it plausible)

I still felt that pointing out what happened in these cases was important because it's crucial to understand what type of rape is occuring and on what scale, dozens of women have made accusations since 1999 and in each case if the crime was reported, the victim refused to move forward and in some cases even requested personal property such as underpants and clothing back; these kinds of items would be best kept on file just in case (LOL) similar crimes occur. I looked at the overall pattern of the assaults right from the moment they met to the words the victim used in police reports, I don't know if it was in verbatim but I would assume that's the way things are done.

You've got a good head on your shoulders. I understand what you are saying. I just don't believe these girls because I'm supposed to believe them because they say they were raped. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't. None of us really knows what happened.

Thank you, I appreciate that you can still compliment my character whilst your personal opinions are under 'attack' by the same person; you have more integrity than I will ever be able to muster and I admire you most for that. I want you to understand that I respect your opinion but probably should have found a better way to express that AND still express my POV without insulting your integrity as person with experience with this genre.

I wanted to reply to everything you wrote but I think I want to leave things the way they are for now, I hope you are not offended by this because you have made some excellent points and I don't want to further cause friction when our objective is the same; justice, be it for these boys or JonBenet.

 

But, JustinCase,

I am truly enjoying this.

Okay, there probably isn't a lot left to say right now, but I want you to know something, too. I like to mess with people's heads sometimes, especially when they annoy me. I started out messing with your head a little, but that stopped after your second or third post when I could see I was dealing with someone with a lot more substance than is the norm in new posters. You're not here to prove you are right at any cost and are willing to debate a point intelligently. You are not thinking with your emotions but rather your brain, and you make more sense than you even know. You have not offended me; in fact, it's seldom I meet someone your age with the level of maturity you seem to possess, and I really appreciate that.

I don't give out these kinds of compliments easily, so just know you've made an impression on me. Whether we agree on specifics at this point or not isn't an issue - we don't have to agree. Our goals are the same, we'd both like to know the truth and have the truth dealt with fairly.

Welcome to FFJ, JustinCase. For whatever it's worth, you've passed muster with the old hardas$, WY.

 

Re: But, JustinCase,

Thanks very much WY, I enjoy the discussion too, it's hard to tell if I've offended anyone by my opinion but I still feel the need to stick to my guns sometimes; I appreciate your compliments and hope we can continue the discussion as the case progresses.

I feel more welcome than ever now that I know you understand me (probably better than I understand myself sometimes) and that you haven't taken anything that I've said personally because I don't demand that anyone I converse with have the same opinion, I don't know anyone here who expects that and can only think of one place where that demand is strictly enforced; I don't ever want to be like that hellhole swamp.

BTW: I noticed you said you were an old hard***, I don't think that at all; I think you enjoy a spirited but opinionated discussion, there's nothing wrong with that. That's just rarely seen these days, another trait I admire and have been trying to acquire (I'll get there)

 

Lawd, where to start...

I'll squeeze my reply in here WY between these exciting posts.
You're all doing a great job here giving your own opinions.

I would say your daughter is quite an achiever with a lot of energy! Bully for her. Pleased to hear she doesn't like Lin Wood