Aaaaand Duke Settles...

Which is all why the families settled rather than go to court, but the school was wrong, too and this is about as much of an admission as they are going to give on this.

 

Creating an atmosphere of slander? When did Duke come out with the statement that these students did it? Yeah, they were thrown out of school, but when you are a student and decide to spend your time and money hiring strippers and then hurling racial epithets at them, I am guessing the school would be able to find grounds for your dismissal.

Seems to me that the kids were just going after the school because it was a big target and had lots of money.

 

These "kids" chose to hire black strippers, and hurl racial epithats at them while pawing them. These "kids," not the school, brought this upon themselves, and aren't some sweet, innocent cherubs.

I suspect the school saw it as the soundest thing to do politically, to make nice with rich people, to not discourage them from sending their kids there.

 

Still haven't seen a cause of action there.

The fact that a prosecutor pursued an improper indictment does not mean that the school should be civilly liable. Basically, Pastor nailed it on the head.

 

They were kicked off campus.

They were vilified in the campus newspaper.

They exercised no control over the Duke88.

 

The school has a right to kick students off of its campus.

Newspapers around the country vilified the lax players.

They don't have to exercise "control" over a group that wants to do something separate.

None of what you listed is grounds for a lawsuit.

 

Sorry, I didnt mean to infer that Duke would pay the legal bills. Rather, the money they would get would be used to pay the hefty legal bills.

 

My post pointed out why the school, and not any professors (as someone asked), was sued. The most significant of the reasons was the last (you sue someone who has money, not someone who doesn't), but you don't get that far without jangling your spurs about the other reasons. Duke settled mostly for political reasons, sure, but months ago it acted in another manner altogether for political reasons, and the settlement acknowledges in some way it wasn't without fault.

 

Bullshit. They're a private university. They can keep as much private and in check as they want to. Like Coach K's salary, for instance. They could've shielded these kids, they could've closed the gates.

I'm not saying they're the epicenter of the scrutiny; that's Nifong. But when they let the kids twist in the wind the way they did, they've left themselves open. Duke was smart to throw a pre-emptive financial strike. It's goddamn time they did the right thing. Just because the kids might've come from money doesn't mean they were turning cartwheels to pay for their defense.

If Duke is not complicit, then why has President Brodhead gone on an incredibly exhaustive goodwill tour of cities in the U.S., having meetings with the various alumni groups? To save face. To save the university's face. To get school donors to start giving again.

My neighbor went to Duke on a sports scholly. He stopped giving and a lot of other folks have, too.

 

The problem with your argument, pastor, is that you're looking at the events you listed as if each of them happened in a vacuum. Standing all by themselves, there's nothing wrong with what the university did (although, I'm not sure it can suspend a player for something's that's legal, but that's beside the point).

However, when you add those actions to the very public situation, the university did play an active role in tearing down these kids' reputations. The university is complicit in this situation -- to an exten -- under the law.

Trust me, if it wasn't, the attorneys wouldn't be settling. People act as if things can just automatically go before a jury. They can't. A judge gets to decide the merit of a case before a jury is selected. If there's no grounds for a suit under the law, the attorneys for the university would've damned sure let it get before a judge before anything was done.

 

As to the racially charged comments made by the players, it might be helpful to read "It's Not About The Truth," the new book on the story. While it doesn't excuse the comments, it does offer an anecdote to contextualize them. To make a long story short, the book says the stripper started the verbal jousting with a racially insensitive comment at the players. The players' response then made it politically expedient for various people -- an ethically bankrupt prosecutor; thoughtless, egomaniacal, unaccountable professors; and grandstanding rabble-rousers -- to go after them.

 

I'm reading that book, as well-just started. I'm behind on it and I have to do a review on it.

Of course, if folks like Pastor want the other side of the story, maybe Nifong will write a book. And I hope he does, because, hell, how else will he be able to make a dent into the damages that he's gonna have to pay for what he did?