RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 4953 posts, RR: 25 Posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1935 times:
This is a tricky one.
I don't claim to fully appreciate how seriously cheerleading in this context is taken in the States or indeed in Texas where this school is. However, it does seem somewhat repellent that this situation has been allowed to arise.
Whether or not she should be cheerleading, or whether or not the perpetrator should be allowed to play are perhaps valid questions, but to have to compensate the school just seems pretty wrong.
Bongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 2575 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1907 times:
Having read the article, it appears that she isn't being financially penalised for refusing to cheer, the school gave her a choice "cheer or leave the gym" The young lady and her parents then chose to launch as legal action against the school, no doubt encouraged by the US legal system claiming that her right to "free speech" had been violated. As she launched a silent protest I can't see that there was any speech involved !
They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 4953 posts, RR: 25 Reply 2, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1899 times:
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
I get that, yet still find it hard to escape the fact that he was found guilty of assaulting her. Whether or not her case was deemed frivolous, there is bound to be a fairly understandable legacy of the incident apparently at the root of all this.
Quokkas From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, RR: 6 Reply 4, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1854 times:
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2): find it hard to escape the fact that he was found guilty of assaulting her.
At a personal level I can understand her unwillingness to cheer on a person who had been convicted of an assault upon her. However, a cheer squad is supposed to support players as members of a team. They are not there to cheer or "endorse" an individual as an individual but as a player for the team. Cheerleaders are part of a team as well and they perform as a team, not as individuals who can decide if they feel like cheering or not. I do not believe that this is a freedom of speech or expression issue as the whole point of a cheer squad is precisely to do that - cheer. Freedom of expression doesn't come into it at all.
The questions that arise are, was she aware that the player would be on the team when she agreed to appear as a cheerleader? If so, why didn't she excuse herself at that time, or make her feelings known before the game rather than deciding to make a public display at the event? Perhaps the school may have excused her for this appearance, but if the player was going to be in the squad on a regular basis I can see that her continuing membership of the cheerleader squad would become untenable. You can't have each member doing their own thing whenever they feel like it.
On the question of compensation it seems reasonable that if a person decides to bring a frivolous matter to court that they should be prepared to not only pay their own costs but the costs of the other party if they are unsuccessful. It is common practice in many countries for a winning party to seek costs from the losing party, although it is up to the courts to decide whether an order for costs should be made.
StarAC17 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 4 Reply 5, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1847 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 3): What kind of high-school has a rapist on the team? I'd certainly not put my children there.
Certain areas like this Texas town don't care a thing about your morals if you are a star athlete and you might well be able to get away with murder (almost literally).
In any other place such as a city in Texas or another country he would have been kicked out of the school and perhaps the district for his actions.
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): As she launched a silent protest I can't see that there was any speech involved !
The first amendment doesn't just cover freedom of speech but also freedom of expression.
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
Ok then the case should be dropped and this $45,000 should be to cover only the legal costs incurred by the school and nothing more.
dc9northwest From Romania, joined Feb 2007, 1177 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1812 times:
"surrenders her constitutional right to free speech"
Really? Ok, then, kids, don't become cheerleaders!
This reeks of stupidity from both sides. Why was she cheering? Why did she sue when given the right to withdraw from the squad and hot have to cheer for her assaulter/rapist? I can certainly see her fault here, but the court decision above sounds really bad... Losing her first amendment rights for cheering for a school. But the right course of action was withdrawing from the squad. Period.
However, American schools tend to require a certain number of PE credits for graduation... Which can pose a problem if this was her last semester.
I guess the idea is not to go against bigger entities than yourself in the American justice system, because you'll lose. Seems very strange.
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 7, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1807 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5): In any other place such as a city in Texas or another country he would have been kicked out of the school and perhaps the district for his actions.
Seems like the reasonable thing to do The way I see it, keeping rapists in school-sports teams is no better than keeping a child molester in a sports team. Which he was in this case, since he raped that girl when she was 16.
Quokkas From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1752 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 7): Which he was in this case, since he raped that girl when she was 16.
From the linked article:
Quote: In court, Bolton pleaded guilty to the misdemeanour assault of HS. He received two years of probation, community service, a fine and was required to take anger-management classes. The charge of rape was dropped, leaving him free to return to school and take up his place on the basketball team.
Now I appreciate that the linked article doesn't go into further detail but it does state that he was not convicted of rape. Whether that was the result of a lack of evidence or as a result of plea-bargaining I do not know, but he was not charged with rape.
Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 6):
"surrenders her constitutional right to free speech"
Really? Ok, then, kids, don't become cheerleaders!
The trouble is that the first amendment is not absolute. It provides protection against action by the state for speaking freely and even then not in all circumstances. The first amendment does not provide protection for breech of the terms of your employment. Why we would see this as a particular problem of US justice, I do not know. A person working for a private company in Europe or Australia who actively undermined their employer would also face dismissal.
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 11, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1747 times:
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 10): Now I appreciate that the linked article doesn't go into further detail but it does state that he was not convicted of rape. Whether that was the result of a lack of evidence or as a result of plea-bargaining I do not know, but he was not charged with rape.
Yes he was actually charged with rape (dropped, for unknown reasons) and was convicted of assault. Draw your own conclusions, but it sure isn't rocket science.
Furthermore it doesn't aid or change any fundamentals of my argument that a person convicted of assaulting a child should represent a high-school in a sports team. Let alone the fact that he probably raped the child.
One wonders if you would be so defensive for the convict if he had been a catholic priest.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 12, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1733 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 9): The right action would have been to never allow a child molesting rapist to be on the school-team. Seems pretty self-evident.
This is one of the first things that jumps out at me. Even if he only assaulted her (and to me it sounds like he did more than that, but got off on a plea bargain, perhaps aided by his athlete status), he still should have been off the team for at least a year. It would be a good opportunity for him to learn how to be a functioning member of society, and learn that the rules still apply to him even though he is unusually good at playing with a ball.
Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 6): Why did she sue when given the right to withdraw from the squad and hot have to cheer for her assaulter/rapist?
She didn't do anything wrong. Why should she be forced to walk away from cheerleading? Her solution sounded perfectly sensible - cheer for the team, not for the player.
That said, I can see why she lost her case. But that doesn't mean the school was morally right to do what they did. They come out of this looking horrible, as does the court system that's making her pay $45,000.
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
This is why "loser pays" systems suck. It's not frivolous when a victim wants to fight being punished for not wanting to cheer for her assaulter.
-Mir
[Edited 2012-01-30 08:31:51]
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Quote:
In court, Bolton pleaded guilty to the misdemeanour assault of HS. He received two years of probation, community service, a fine and was required to take anger-management classes. The charge of rape was dropped, leaving him free to return to school and take up his place on the basketball team.
/quote
Now I appreciate that the linked article doesn't go into further detail but it does state that he was not convicted of rape. Whether that was the result of a lack of evidence or as a result of plea-bargaining I do not know, but he was not charged with rape.
Quoting Asturias (Reply 11): Furthermore it doesn't aid or change any fundamentals of my argument that a person convicted of assaulting a child should represent a high-school in a sports team. Let alone the fact that he probably raped the child
I think if I were the girl and her family, I would consider pursuing a separate civil action against the young man for the money he has now cost the girl. Of course it would be dependent on the statute of limitations for the crime he was convicted of but if it were possible, then a civil trial is perfectly acceptable as it happens all the time when a criminal justice penalty turns out to not be appropriate.
Just a thought.
I can certainly understand her unwillingness to cheer for the guy, though if I were her parent I would have kept her from being at the game somehow or if that wasn't possible, discussing it with the coach and school principle beforehand.
Tugg
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 12883 posts, RR: 30 Reply 14, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1712 times:
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2): I get that, yet still find it hard to escape the fact that he was found guilty of assaulting her.
If he was found guilty of sexually assaulting her, he should NOT be playing basketball, period. However, from the article, this angers me:
Quoting News Article (Reply website): In court, Bolton pleaded guilty to the misdemeanour assault of HS. He received two years of probation, community service, a fine and was required to take anger-management classes. The charge of rape was dropped, leaving him free to return to school and take up his place on the basketball team.
WTH?! This dude got off easy only so that he can compete in basketball. This is sending the wrong message to kids. If this cheerleader was my daughter, I would tell her to find some other hobby for the time being and wait for the football season to come back and then cheer for that.
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 4): They are not there to cheer or "endorse" an individual as an individual but as a player for the team.
While that may be true, but in high school, anything is possible. High School kids don't completely understand the cheering concept as a whole.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5): In any other place such as a city in Texas or another country he would have been kicked out of the school and perhaps the district for his actions.
In the school district I attended to, this young man would have been expelled from the district pronto even with the deal he made with the prosecution.
Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 6): But the right course of action was withdrawing from the squad. Period.
She could have done that. Why she didn't, I don't know. In her defense, I don't think she knew that he was actually eligible to participate in basketball after all that happened between the two. Normally, the cheer roster is announced the previous year (before the summer break) before the basketball roster was to be announced (during the new school when the football playoffs are being done).
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 10): t does state that he was not convicted of rape.
He pleaded it out and the article states what he got in return. I quoted that above. He is still guilty even if he pleads it out. He only did that so that he can actually participate in the basketball team. He isn't stupid, he knew this all along. Now if he went through a trial and was found guilty, then he wouldn't be on the team, period.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 6127 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1602 times:
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
Basic Texas legal system - the rights of some 16 year old little girl pales in comparison to the worship of athletes.
If the guy had not been an athlete he would have gotten 20 years.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2):
I get that, yet still find it hard to escape the fact that he was found guilty of assaulting her.
It was just rape. No big deal when it is the guy who was the star.
Quoting Asturias (Reply 3):
What kind of high-school has a rapist on the team? I'd certainly not put my children there.
What kind of high school? One that wants to win. And they will probably never understand why the rest of the world just shakes their head at them.
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 4): Freedom of expression doesn't come into it at all.
Freedom to Win certainly overrides Freedom of Speech or Legal Integrity in that pi$$-a$$ town.
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 4): On the question of compensation it seems reasonable that if a person decides to bring a frivolous matter to court that they should be prepared to not only pay their own costs but the costs of the other party if they are unsuccessful.
A girl still in high school is EXPECTED to cheer the $hit that raped her? While he is making a "free" throw? That $hit got the free throw of all time when the rape charge was dropped. Maybe it can be in-instated.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 14050 posts, RR: 55 Reply 16, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1523 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5): Certain areas like this Texas town don't care a thing about your morals if you are a star athlete and you might well be able to get away with murder (almost literally).
In any other place such as a city in Texas or another country he would have been kicked out of the school and perhaps the district for his actions.
In addition, it says that the charges of rape were dropped. I find that disgusting (if you're accused of rape, you should either stand trial for it or not; charges should not be dropped in a plea-bargain).
dc9northwest From Romania, joined Feb 2007, 1177 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1441 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 9): The right action would have been to never allow a child molesting rapist to be on the school-team. Seems pretty self-evident.
Of course, that's also true. However, at the time of the cheerleading incident, that wasn't an option anymore.
Quoting Mir (Reply 12): She didn't do anything wrong. Why should she be forced to walk away from cheerleading? Her solution sounded perfectly sensible - cheer for the team, not for the player.
That said, I can see why she lost her case. But that doesn't mean the school was morally right to do what they did. They come out of this looking horrible, as does the court system that's making her pay $45,000.
No, she didn't do anything wrong, per se, however, her not-wrong actions seem to be costing her $45,000 in court fees because she lost the case... which is, as you say, morally wrong coming from this "learning institution". I personally think no one is completely in the right here. Of course the rapist should probably be in prison (assuming he was guilty--which it seems he was, but without the details IMO we can't say that beyond a reasonable doubt).
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 10): Why we would see this as a particular problem of US justice, I do not know. A person working for a private company in Europe or Australia who actively undermined their employer would also face dismissal.
Hold on, though... undermined their employer... There's no employer here, is there? In this case I don't consider the school an employer--she's not getting paid at all; this is an extra-curricular activity undertaken on a voluntary basis--she's a volunteer, and should have the right to not participate when a conflict appears--she's representing the school, OK, I get that. However, it's on a voluntary basis and she is getting nothing out of it (except possibly enjoyment and because of the twisted US system a better chance at college... maybe). In my opinion it's unjust to expect the same commitment from an employee and from a volunteer. Don't know legislation on this subject though.
It's not a particular problem of US justice, maybe, but the incident did occur in the US.
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 18, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1431 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 16): In addition, it says that the charges of rape were dropped. I find that disgusting (if you're accused of rape, you should either stand trial for it or not; charges should not be dropped in a plea-bargain).
I just thought of this:
Did the girl involved agree to have the charge of rape dropped if the assailant plead guilty to assault and she then would not have to testify? I would think it is a quasi-common option the victim is offered to consider so that there is no risk by going to trial (and losing, aka the assailant has a clean record) and the victim is not questioned and challenged on the witness stand.
Tugg
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 1060 posts, RR: 24 Reply 19, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1375 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 12): She didn't do anything wrong. Why should she be forced to walk away from cheerleading? Her solution sounded perfectly sensible - cheer for the team, not for the player.
Completely agree. He should be made to leave before her. Not making her a victim a second time. She should be commended for only taking the extremely lenient action of not cheering for him.
In hindsight, she should have asked for a restraining order.
Don’t repeat earlier generations’ mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
StarAC17 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 4 Reply 21, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1340 times:
Quoting greasespot (Reply 20): Here is usually part of a persons probation. Not sure what it is in the USA.
That would force him to find a new school.
Remember this is Texas and sports so it is likely that they would have kicked her out of the school to fulfil the restraining order if one ended up being granted.
czbbflier From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 891 posts, RR: 3 Reply 22, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1272 times:
Kinda reminds me of a situation where a couple of kids, in the middle of a hot summer, ambushed this guy with squirt guns. Enraged, he went home, came back and shot them. With bullets.
In response, the town acted by banning squirt guns.
Here is usually part of a persons probation. Not sure what it is in the USA.
That would force him to find a new school.
You are talking about Small Town Texas, where sports are far more important than silly little obstructionists stuff like Criminal Laws.
Actually, those Bubbas & Juniors down in Texas are missing some potentially great games. Have those Texas Prison play each other. Winner gets a week's worth of prime beef for all prisoners.
Now that would be some Real Red Meat Texas Football.
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 24, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1263 times:
I completely understand the girl's anger, however this isn't about what happened between them - that's what the criminal court system is for, and rightly or wrongly, the guy cut a deal that was essentially a slap on the wrist and that's the end of that.
What this case IS about is the fact that this girl has, based on her past interaction with this student/athlete, unilateraly decided that she can determine to what extent she performs in her role as a cheerleader. And while what this jerk got away with is horrible, it's ultimately no different than a cheerleader refusing to cheer for an ex-boyfriend who broke up with her or even just a guy she happens to not like for whatever reason.
The school was completely within their rights to counsel her on the need to cheer for him, despite her feelings. And when she refused, they were completely within their rights to remove her from the cheerleading squad.
It's unfortunate that she chose to take legal action in this instance.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Quokkas From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, RR: 6 Reply 25, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1268 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 11): One wonders if you would be so defensive for the convict if he had been a catholic priest.
Do you believe that we should have different standards of evidence and justice determined by who a person is? I most certainly don't. If he had been a Catholic Priest I would hold the same view. I am not one of those who thinks that all Catholic Priests spend all their time raping children and that all Catholics are demons for supporting them. If a Priest is accused of raping a child he should be both subject to and provided the same rights under criminal law as any other person.
I can see what you are saying and to an extent agree, but my point was that the belief that the First Amendment is paramount is flawed. I can fully understand why the girl would not wish to cheer her assailant.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 26, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1251 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 24): And while what this jerk got away with is horrible, it's ultimately no different than a cheerleader refusing to cheer for an ex-boyfriend who broke up with her or even just a guy she happens to not like for whatever reason.
It's pretty different. The guy assaulted her at least, possibly raped her. That goes above and beyond the normal ex-boyfriend teen angst stuff.
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 24): The school was completely within their rights to counsel her on the need to cheer for him, despite her feelings. And when she refused, they were completely within their rights to remove her from the cheerleading squad.
Completely within their rights, sure. But they still come out looking horrible.
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 24): It's unfortunate that she chose to take legal action in this instance.
The school brought that upon themselves when they:
1) let the guy continue to play on the basketball team
2) got pissy about the girl's completely reasonable decision to cheer for the team but not for the guy who assaulted her.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 27, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1252 times:
Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 17): Hold on, though... undermined their employer... There's no employer here, is there? In this case I don't consider the school an employer--she's not getting paid at all; this is an extra-curricular activity undertaken on a voluntary basis--she's a volunteer
You make the mistake in assuming being a cheerleader is something EACH student gets to do, and that's not the case - they have to try out, and only a small, select group of students are invited to participate. As such, it's exactly like at-will employment in that regard, and if she elects to unilateraly change the conditions under which she'll participate, the cheerleading coach and/or the school can counsel her on what she must do to retain her position.
And if she doesn't comply, she's being insubordinate. Just about every employer on earth will dismiss you from employment for insubordination, and this is really no different.
Again, it sucks that the criminal court system didn't do more, but that's not the issue here.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 28, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1248 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 26): Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 24):
And while what this jerk got away with is horrible, it's ultimately no different than a cheerleader refusing to cheer for an ex-boyfriend who broke up with her or even just a guy she happens to not like for whatever reason.
It's pretty different. The guy assaulted her at least, possibly raped her. That goes above and beyond the normal ex-boyfriend teen angst stuff.
Again, I agree that what he got away with was beyond horrible. However, this is ultimately about saying to this girl she does not get to determine to what degree she'll perform as a cheerleader. Odds are there were other girls who were cut during tryouts who would have loved to have had the opportunity to cheer, even if it meant cheering for someone they thought of as a scumbag. The school expected her to perform to a certain standard as a cheerleader and when she intentionally chose not to, and then defied them when given a directive on her need to perform, the only thing they could do was cut her.
Quoting Mir (Reply 26):
The school brought that upon themselves when they:
1) let the guy continue to play on the basketball team
2) got pissy about the girl's completely reasonable decision to cheer for the team but not for the guy who assaulted her.
I agree that the school should really have told this jerk he wasn't fit to represent the school in athletic competition based on what he did, but again, that's not what we're discussing.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 29, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1232 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 28): The school expected her to perform to a certain standard as a cheerleader and when she intentionally chose not to, and then defied them when given a directive on her need to perform, the only thing they could do was cut her.
As I said before, I can understand why she lost the case (though I don't necessarily agree with the ruling - again, any reasonable person would see that what she chose to do is the most sensible option that still retains some human dignity). What I can't understand is why her case was determined to be "frivolous". It is not frivolous to fight back against having to cheer for one's assaulter. The judge who decided that needs to have his head examined.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
runner13 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 207 posts, RR: 0 Reply 30, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1218 times:
Being from Texas not small town though, it doesn't surprise me one bit. It is very sad and unforunate for the girl, but in small town Texas sports is king. During football season the towns basically shut down on Friday nights. Football is usually the most important but they treat all sports like religion in the small towns. I was visiting my family in Arlington a few years ago when I ran in college, and was doing my workout at the high school track, there were a bunch of little girls maybe 6 or 7 years old practicing also. It's the middle of summer during mid-day in July, so it's well over 100 degrees. They were doing 100 meter repeats and their coach was just screaming at them, to push harder and harder. They were obviously tired, crying and begging for water, but their coach wouldn't let them have any until they got it right. I felt bad for them, my college coach never yelled at me like their coach was. But just imagine how it is in high school for those kids. If you've ever seen the more Varsity Blues, or Friday Night Lights you get a good idea of how it is down there.
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 31, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1213 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 29): What I can't understand is why her case was determined to be "frivolous".
No offense intended, but I can't understand why you can't understand it. Let me put it to you in another context:
An employee comes forward with a complaint about a co-worker, saying he'd touched her inappropriately outside of work. He now tries to be friendly to her at work.
He's counseled to not interact with her at work in any fashion other than required by his job in a professional capacity only, and warned about retaliation or violating the company harrassment policies.
Later, the woman claims that's not good enough - he shouldn't be allowed to work there because his presence in the same building offends her. She even makes a point of publicly and adamantly refusing to interact with him in any work-related capacity as required by her job.
At this point, the woman is the one who is now creating a hostile work environment for him, and is counseled accordingly. Unfortunately, she continues to perform her work duties supporting everyone in the office except for him, refusing to take his work-related calls or assist as required by her job.
The employer now has to give the woman a directive to treat this co-worker professionally and with respect in the workplace, despite what may have happened between them outside of work. And if she does not comply, she can be terminated for harrassment as well as insubordination.
In a situation like this, if the woman were ultimately terminated, she'd not have a leg to stand on if she filed a lawsuit. It would be frivolous, as the intended goal was likely to go after the deepest pockets. I'd imagine that's the same basis the judge has used in his ruling as well when calling the high school girl's case frivolous.
[Edited 2012-01-30 22:12:01]
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 3807 posts, RR: 4 Reply 32, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1198 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5):
Certain areas like this Texas town don't care a thing about your morals if you are a star athlete and you might well be able to get away with murder (almost literally).
Pssh. It happens all over the US, as we've seen in both collegiate and professional sports.
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31): Let me put it to you in another context:
Your analogy fails from the get-go:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31): An employee comes forward with a complaint about a co-worker, saying he'd touched her inappropriately outside of work.
This wasn't merely an accusation, but the male was convicted of assaulting the female. Whole different ballgame.
I agree that the lawsuit was pretty shaky (even though I think the punk basketball player should be castrated), but to call it "frivolous" and make the girl pay is sheer lunacy.
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 33, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1196 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 32): Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31):
Let me put it to you in another context:
Your analogy fails from the get-go:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31):
An employee comes forward with a complaint about a co-worker, saying he'd touched her inappropriately outside of work.
This wasn't merely an accusation, but the male was convicted of assaulting the female. Whole different ballgame.
Assume then that he admitted he did touch her inappropriately outside of work, but again, it was outside of work. The company cannot take action on that.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 4953 posts, RR: 25 Reply 34, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1145 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 24): it's ultimately no different than a cheerleader refusing to cheer for an ex-boyfriend who broke up with her or even just a guy she happens to not like for whatever reason.
Can't agree with that. It clearly is different. We can't just pretend that there are no different shades in potential reasoning behind the course of action she demonstrated.
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 35, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1139 times:
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 25): Do you believe that we should have different standards of evidence and justice determined by who a person is? I most certainly don't. If he had been a Catholic Priest I would hold the same view. I am not one of those who thinks that all Catholic Priests spend all their time raping children and that all Catholics are demons for supporting them. If a Priest is accused of raping a child he should be both subject to and provided the same rights under criminal law as any other person.
Well, good for you and I do agree with the general sentiment, but that's not what I meant. A person *convicted* of assaulting a child (probably raped the child, but charges were dropped, possibly because the child would have to testify) should not be allowed to work with children in general again, let alone that specific child.
In fact, that's not an uncommon result in civilized communities. Strange that you feel that a convicted child assaulter should be allowed such leniency.
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31): An employee comes forward with a complaint about a co-worker, saying he'd touched her inappropriately outside of work. He now tries to be friendly to her at work.
Your analogy doesn't hold water, as has been pointed out before. This guy was convicted in a court of law, this wasn't some inane workplace harassment claim. Also, we're talking about children and school environment.
In a workplace where one person is convicted of assaulting another person, they won't be working together and in fact the person convicted would be fired under all normal circumstance. Now if the worker assaulted was an underage intern, that would apply even stronger.
Quokkas From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, RR: 6 Reply 36, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1113 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 35): Strange that you feel that a convicted child assaulter should be allowed such leniency.
I am unable to comprehend how you can make such a false deduction from what I have written.
I haven't actually stated what I think of her assailant being kept on the team but I responded to your allegation that he raped her. I was not present in court or at pre-court meetings between the various parties and their respective attorneys, so I do not have the available evidence in front of me. Your probables may be possible, but possible and probable are not necessarily actual.
For you to deduce from that I believe leniency is appropriate is a logical fallacy.
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 11686 posts, RR: 8 Reply 37, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1104 times:
To me, her decision to not cheer for someone who has been convicted in a court of law for sexual/other assault on her should be considered to be the same as she in not required under the US Constitution (and upheld by SCOTUS decisions) to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in school or to speak the phrase 'under God' in the pledge. There should be no penalty for her or her family to assert her speech rights. Worse is that this judgement will cripple the financial situation and credit rating of her and her family for years, costs them a lot more to continue to fight, may badly hurt her chances for her to go to college or get a job.
I wish the ACLU or some other civil rights or even a right wing group would take up her cause to appeal it to the highest courts in Texas or even in the Federal courts up to the SCOTUS.
StarAC17 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 4 Reply 38, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1101 times:
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 10): The first amendment does not provide protection for breech of the terms of your employment.
No but it does from the state and if this school is public then the first amendment is valid unless if violates the school's code of conduct. I guess the school is saying this did that and the judge agreed.
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 10): A person working for a private company in Europe or Australia who actively undermined their employer would also face dismissal.
Yes but not prosecution unless they were actively giving trade secrets to the competition as an example. Getting sacked is not a violation of free speech
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 25): Do you believe that we should have different standards of evidence and justice determined by who a person is? I most certainly don't.
No but it happens, people of privilege usually get public support from a jury and hire the better lawyers because they can.
Quoting runner13 (Reply 30): If you've ever seen the more Varsity Blues, or Friday Night Lights you get a good idea of how it is down there.
To the Aussies commenting Varsity Blues is on GO right now on the eastern time zone, its a good movie.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 32): Pssh. It happens all over the US, as we've seen in both collegiate and professional sports.
Very true, its sad that people there put such an emphasis on sports like everyone can go pro and sports often trumps actually getting an education. I don't know if this guy is getting recruited by colleges just yet but I doubt by a hunch he won't get to the NBA on his skill level.
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 39, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1077 times:
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 36): I am unable to comprehend how you can make such a false deduction from what I have written.
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 25): Do you believe that we should have different standards of evidence and justice determined by who a person is? I most certainly don't. If he had been a Catholic Priest I would hold the same view. I am not one of those who thinks that all Catholic Priests spend all their time raping children and that all Catholics are demons for supporting them. If a Priest is accused of raping a child he should be both subject to and provided the same rights under criminal law as any other person.
I am unable to comprehend how you can make such a false deduction from what I have written.
It is actually irrelevant that he wasn't convicted for raping the child, he never stood trial for it because of a plea bargain. He wasn't acquitted for it. The question remains open to society at large, the justice system is not there to find truth or facts.
However he was charged and found guilty of assaulting the child, which comes down to exactly the same. While being convicted of rape is surely a higher degree of assault, it is an assault non-the-less. My opinion of the school, the sports team and the general response of the community and judicial system which handled this case is just as low as it would be had that loser been actually tried and convicted of rape.
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 41, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1058 times:
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 40): I found this article that might shed some more light on what happened.
Seems self-evident that justice was perverted to protect this obvious rapist, by the community itself, by his family and by the NAACP. This was clearly a case of great injustice towards this child that was raped.
After reading this article there's no question of what actually occurred. Sad story.
Aesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 3001 posts, RR: 3 Reply 42, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1045 times:
I thought that any minor offense involving genitalia (even peeing in the street) got you on the sex offenders list, and that when on that list you couldn't go anywhere near schools, churches, etc. ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 43, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1029 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31): No offense intended, but I can't understand why you can't understand it. Let me put it to you in another context:
You just described why she lost the case, but that doesn't mean that the case is frivolous. But in any case:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31): An employee comes forward with a complaint about a co-worker,
Your analogy falls apart right here. They weren't co-workers. They weren't on a team together. Let's write the analogy a bit differently:
An employee of yours is sexually assaulted by an employee of another company that you regularly do business with, who somehow manages to retain his job there. Your employee comes to you and says that she feels uncomfortable interacting with him, but that she really likes working for you and that she wants to continue to do her job, and so she proposes that she not be involved in any meetings where he is present. There are plenty of meetings in which he isn't present, and you have plenty of other employees who could take her place for those meetings in which he is, so the only burden her proposal places on you is a bit of scheduling inflexibility.
To me, that seems like it falls within the grounds of making a reasonable accommodation for your employee. The law might not see things the same way - I get that. But that doesn't mean she has no argument.
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31): In a situation like this, if the woman were ultimately terminated, she'd not have a leg to stand on if she filed a lawsuit. It would be frivolous, as the intended goal was likely to go after the deepest pockets.
Or perhaps it was to correct an injustice. I think we're in agreement that the school's actions were disgusting, and I think someone who has done nothing wrong is entirely justified in fighting against punishment for being forced to publicly support someone who committed a criminal act against them. Doesn't mean they have to win, but they absolutely have a case.
And I don't see who else they could have gone after. The school is really the only party here that treated her unjustly (apart from the guy who assaulted her, of course, but the criminal justice system already had its say with him, and as long as he stays out of her way from here on out, there's not much else she can do). It's the school's decision that she's fighting, so it's entirely appropriate to sue the school. Frivolous cases are those where people are after money for trivial stuff where they clearly have no case - I'm not convinced she didn't have a case, nor is one's basic human dignity trivial.
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 37): I wish the ACLU or some other civil rights or even a right wing group would take up her cause to appeal it to the highest courts in Texas or even in the Federal courts up to the SCOTUS.
Unfortunately, the article said they did, and the case was rejected.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 3628 posts, RR: 2 Reply 44, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1014 times:
Isn't this why every self respecting bible thumping southern baptist father of a daughter in the South has a gun, he could shoot the guy, since the kid was black the god fearing white folks in town would probably let him off. The school would be without there star player but gods justice would be served. Isn't that how is supposed to work in the South?
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 46, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 964 times:
I think my biggest issue is with the school. I mean, come on, she was maybe raped, at least assaulted by the guy, let her sit that cheer out. Would've prevented all this crap.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 44): Isn't this why every self respecting bible thumping southern baptist father of a daughter in the South has a gun, he could shoot the guy, since the kid was black the god fearing white folks in town would probably let him off. The school would be without there star player but gods justice would be served. Isn't that how is supposed to work in the South?
I don't know where that ignorant, stereotypical comment came from. I hope it's in jest.
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 47, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 956 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 46): I think my biggest issue is with the school. I mean, come on, she was maybe raped, at least assaulted by the guy, let her sit that cheer out. Would've prevented all this crap.
It seems it went to the absurd and it just did not need to. Regardless of everything else, the school should not have made an issue of it at all.
Also, have you seen the cheer that she refused to do (form the article linked by Starbuk7 in reply 40)?
Quote: Court documents show the cheer that Hillaire refused to make was “2, 4, 6, 8, 10, Come On Rakheem, Put It In.”
Yeah, I'd cheer my attacker and rapist with that.....
Tugg
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 48, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 951 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 47): Quote:
Court documents show the cheer that Hillaire refused to make was “2, 4, 6, 8, 10, Come On Rakheem, Put It In.”
Yeah, I'd cheer my attacker and rapist with that.....
But seriously, they couldn't just have her stand to the side? No offense to cheerleaders, but I usually never watch them at a game anyway. Maybe she could have just done a flip or something while they were cheering. Also realize, there is a whole chain of command this girl would have to go through, is everyone in that chain of command really that uncaring? You'd have to have the cheerleader coach(es,) maybe the athletic director(s,) and then school management all say "no, you are cheering for the guy that assaulted you, who you think raped you." Something does not add up, and I doubt all these people are "uneducated hicks" that hate black people except when they're good at football...
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 49, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 943 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 48): Also realize, there is a whole chain of command this girl would have to go through, is everyone in that chain of command really that uncaring? You'd have to have the cheerleader coach(es,) maybe the athletic director(s,) and then school management all say "no, you are cheering for the guy that assaulted you, who you think raped you." Something does not add up, and I doubt all these people are "uneducated hicks" that hate black people except when they're good at football...
If you read the article starbuck7 posted carefully, it's pretty evident that yes there was a whole chain of management - not just in the school but in the community - that shielded the rapist and ignored the raped girl.
In a small community like that, everyone knows what actually happened and what persons were involved.
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 3807 posts, RR: 4 Reply 50, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 897 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 38):
No but it does from the state and if this school is public then the first amendment is valid
There is no right to participate in extracurricular activities.
Quoting Asturias (Reply 49): it's pretty evident that yes there was a whole chain of management - not just in the school but in the community - that shielded the rapist and ignored the raped girl.
I figured that out long ago. The only evidence you need is that he was allowed to plead to a lesser charge just so he could keep playing basketball.
Some fridge logic: Maybe this serves as a warning as to what happens when you let high school kids party like rockstars? Getting raped/assaulted is disgusting, but it's clear the parents are letting their children run amok, which caused this whole thing. Taking responsibility for your actions is a common GOP line (except, of course, when money is involved. And sports bring in buckets of it).
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 51, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 859 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 43): Your analogy falls apart right here. They weren't co-workers.
In a manner of speaking, they absolutely were - the both "worked" to represent the school in interscholastic athletic competition. Your choice not to see that point is exactly that - a choice you're making.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 53, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 825 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 47): Also, have you seen the cheer that she refused to do (form the article linked by Starbuk7 in reply 40)?
Quote:
Court documents show the cheer that Hillaire refused to make was %u201C2, 4, 6, 8, 10, Come On Rakheem, Put It In.%u201D
Yeah, I'd cheer my attacker and rapist with that.....
Wow. Just...wow.
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 51): In a manner of speaking, they absolutely were - the both "worked" to represent the school in interscholastic athletic competition.
You could consider them as members of two different divisions of the same company, I suppose. But they're not co-workers. They have nothing to do with each other except that they both show up at the same company function from time to time.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 54, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 812 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 53): They have nothing to do with each other except that they both show up at the same company function from time to time.
C'mon now, one's "job" is to support the other while they're "working". They have plenty to do with each other in that regard.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 55, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 810 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 54): C'mon now, one's "job" is to support the other while they're "working". They have plenty to do with each other in that regard.
In order for that to be a valid argument, there'd have to be some evidence that the quality of performance of a cheerleading team has any effect at all on the performance of the team that's actually on the court/field. Such evidence may exist, but I've never heard of it.
They're both there for the same purpose - entertaining the spectators.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 56, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 806 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 55): In order for that to be a valid argument, there'd have to be some evidence that the quality of performance of a cheerleading team has any effect at all on the performance of the team that's actually on the court/field.
Okay, now you're taking this to the ridiculous. The cheers the cheerleaders do explicitly refer to the team or individuals on the team, regardless of the degree of perceived benefit.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 57, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 801 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 56): The cheers the cheerleaders do explicitly refer to the team or individuals on the team, regardless of the degree of perceived benefit.
Doesn't mean they have any effect on the team. Nor are they there to have an effect on the team. They're there to get the spectators involved and, in doing so, provide a better experience for the spectators. I fail to see how one person deciding not to cheer while one player is making free throws takes away from that in any measurable amount. I'm pretty sure nobody walked out of the gym/arena saying "wow, that one girl not cheering for that one player really irked me."
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 58, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 795 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 56): Okay, now you're taking this to the ridiculous.
This is all ridiculous. The idea that school and school extra-curricular activities as being equal to a work environment and situation is ridiculous. First, school is a state required activity. Second, the extracurricular activities that are a part of schools nationwide are sometimes considered required and sometimes an effective requirement to be accepted in both school and community, additionally extracurricular activity is essentially required for acceptance to better university and are delineating criteria used by universities to cull candidates.
This was not an "employee-employer" relationship. She was not an independent adult capable and allowed to do as she pleased, she was not "hired" nor was she "fired", she was not providing her skills in return for remuneration. She was a participant in a school sport (yes, cheer is a sport) and was under the instruction of the school employed coaching staff. She did not have the obligations and requirements of an employee, and the coaching staff had very different obligations to her and every other student on their team than an employer has for their employees.
While it is not a required school element and while it does have obligations that the student must fulfill the schools coaching staff has another obligation to the student under their care. And that obligation in critically different than an employers.
Tugg
[Edited 2012-01-31 21:27:02]
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 59, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 781 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 58): The idea that school and school extra-curricular activities as being equal to a work environment and situation is ridiculous
Yes she was, when she was counseled about the requirements to retain her position and then deliberately chose not to fulfill them.
Quoting tugger (Reply 58): She was a participant in a school sport (yes, cheer is a sport) and was under the instruction of the school employed coaching staff
Under the direction of school-employed coaching staff, who had the authority to place her on the squad, and also remove her from it for failure to perform as directed. It was at that point a work-performance issue, no different than a basketball player being cut from the team for intentional failure to execute set plays called out by the coach.
Quoting tugger (Reply 58): She did not have the obligations and requirements of an employee
In a manner of speaking, she did. But more to the point, as a participant in a sporting event she had the obligations and requirements of a member of a team. And when she chose not to follow the direction and instruction of the coaches to the benefit of the team, she was dismissed from it.
[Edited 2012-01-31 21:41:26]
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Perhaps in a way but not the way you are applying it.
If you cannot understand that teaching and teachers have a requirement to educate the students under their care. Even when a student acts up they are not allowed to simply dismiss the student, their are rules and requirements that they must follow. Students are entrusted to them, even after they audition for a school activity.
My whole point is that unlike and employer-employee relationship, a student-teacher/coach relationship is vitally different in the teacher is there to teach and support, encourage, and educate the student, and provide the students with life skills to be able to use in the outside world when they graduate. They have to relate to the student and use their skills to do what is best for the student as well as the class/team.
That the whole town and school appears to have been "against" the girl and have justified the action is not the point. The point is that the coaches and teachers failed in their duty to the students in this situation. Not all teachers or coaches are good teachers or coaches, it is a skill to be able to teach. These people did not have it.
Tugg
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 61, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 754 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 60): If you cannot understand that teaching and teachers have a requirement to educate the students under their care. Even when a student acts up they are not allowed to simply dismiss the student, their are rules and requirements that they must follow. Students are entrusted to them, even after they audition for a school activity.
My whole point is that unlike and employer-employee relationship, a student-teacher/coach relationship is vitally different in the teacher is there to teach and support, encourage, and educate the student, and provide the students with life skills to be able to use in the outside world when they graduate. They have to relate to the student and use their skills to do what is best for the student as well as the class/team.
You make the mistake in assuming the teacher/student relationship is the same as the coach/student athlete relationship.
It's not.
In many ways there are similarities, however while the teacher's ultimate responsibility is to continue applying their efforts to educate even in the face of resistance from the student, the coach has a responsibility to the team to discipline and/or discharge the student athlete from the team if they refuse to or cannot peform to the level required of their position or role on the team. Huge difference.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 62, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 725 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 61): You make the mistake in assuming the teacher/student relationship is the same as the coach/student athlete relationship.
You're making the mistake of comparing a school for minors to any other place. The first and foremost duty and obligation of such a school is to ensure a safe environment for all its students, safe both physically and socially.
That's where this school fails, that's their fault and that's the crux of the matter.
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 1060 posts, RR: 24 Reply 64, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 673 times:
Quoting Aesma (Reply 63): I remember reading here people defending decisions like the one that got a woman burned by hot coffee rich. Somehow, that wasn't a frivolous suit.
May I suggest some research in to the subject, you will get surprised. The real story is very different from the "public story."
Don’t repeat earlier generations’ mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 65, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 639 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 61): You make the mistake in assuming the teacher/student relationship is the same as the coach/student athlete relationship.
It's not.
In many ways there are similarities, however while the teacher's ultimate responsibility is to continue applying their efforts to educate even in the face of resistance from the student, the coach has a responsibility to the team to discipline and/or discharge the student athlete from the team if they refuse to or cannot peform to the level required of their position or role on the team. Huge difference.
Yes, I see, you do not understand.
From the Texas Coaches Association code of ethics:
Quote: In the relationship with players under one's care, the coach should always be aware of the tremendous influence that is exerted for good or bad. Parents trust their dearest possession to the coach's charge and the coach, through one's own example, must always be sure that the athletes who play under a coach are finer and more decent for having done so. The coach should never place the value of victory above that of instilling the highest desirable ideals and character traits in the players. The safety and welfare of the players should always be uppermost in one's mind and must never be sacrificed for any personal prestige or selfish glory. In teaching the game of one's choice, the coach must realize that there are certain rules designated to protect the players and provide common standards for determining a winner and loser.
Any attempts to deliberate unsportsmanlike conduct have no place in the coaching profession. Any coach guilty of such teaching does not have the right to be called a coach. The coach should set the example of winning without boasting and losing without bitterness. The coach who behaves according to these principles need have no fear of failure, for the success of the coach can be measured by the respect one has earned from the players and from the opponents.
In the relationship with the school for which one works, the coach should remember -- that he/she is on public display to represent that school. It is important, therefore, that one's conduct maintains the principles of integrity and dignity of the school. School policies regarding the athletic program should be adhered to, both the letter and to the spirit. The coach should remember that other members of the faculty also have an interest in the school and in the students and one's conduct must be such that no criticism arises of efforts to develop common interest and purposes of the institution along with other faculty members.
A school coach is there to provide important guidance in the ways of sports and sportsmanship to the students and to care for the student's needs and development. If a student has valid reasons for not doing specific things in an activity it is a school coaches responsibility to see what other options are available, and only if those options are exhausted and the student is the becoming a detriment to the performance of the team should the coach and school discharge the student from the team.
It is the curse of being a school coach. That is why the school coach (and any coach really) allows an injured student to sit out from plays that will exacerbate their injury, or why they put student with different abilities in positions that will allow whatever skills they have to best develop. That doesn't mean degrading the capability of the team to "fit" deficient student in, it means of the students that succeeded in meeting the try-out's requirements and made the team, the coaches are entrusted with working to find the best position for that players skills to provide the best growth and learning experience to that student.
Tugg
Edited: Grammar
[Edited 2012-02-01 10:32:45]
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 66, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 607 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 65): If a student has valid reasons for not doing specific things in an activity it is a school coaches responsibility to see what other options are available, and only if those options are exhausted and the student is the becoming a detriment to the performance of the team should the coach and school discharge the student from the team.
Which is exactly what happened. In a case where it's "cheer, or do not cheer" there were no other options available. As the student was now a detriment to the performance of the cheer squad, she was discharged from the squad.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 67, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 597 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 66): Which is exactly what happened. In a case where it's "cheer, or do not cheer" there were no other options available. As the student was now a detriment to the performance of the cheer squad, she was discharged from the squad.
It is not what happened here. The girl was willing to remain silent and the coach could have had her sit the game or that cheer out and there would not have been a further escalation of the issue.
If a student has laryngitis or a broken arm or a pulled muscle and is not able to cheer should they be removed from the team? Why not? They are not "willing" (not willing to do the task as it would exacerbate their injury) to do the required task. Or should they be willing to do the task and risk further injury? Should a coach allow that?
Did this girl suffer an injury? Was she actually "able" to the task?
If you were on a cheer squad (I know old guy on a cheer squad, bad visual) and had a daughter that had been raped by the the recipient of the cheer, would actually be able to say:
" 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, come on ~guy who raped my daughter~, PUT IT IN!.... YEA!!!...."
If you could I think you would have to be classified as a sociopath. I know I couldn't.
Tugg
[Edited 2012-02-01 12:12:44]
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 68, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 564 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 67): It is not what happened here. The girl was willing to remain silent and the coach could have had her sit the game or that cheer out and there would not have been a further escalation of the issue.
Read it again, from the article:
when Bolton was about to take a free throw, the girl decided to stand silently with her arms folded.
Not "sit out." Not "remain silent." She made a point of standing there in the cheerleader lineup with her arms folded in an act of defiance.
In doing so, she intentionally made herself very conspicuously different from the remainder of the squad. She's TRYING to stand out in that regard, and that's the issue here. She could have simply gone through the motions and simply mouthed the words if she didn't want to say them aloud - odds are no one would have noticed. But no, she chose to make a statement through her stance and actions, and THAT is what got her booted.
Again, I'm not arguing that she needs to like the guy. I'm just saying that she didn't live up to her duties as a cheerleader, and that's what got her kicked off the squad.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 69, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 559 times:
I think some of you are being way harsh. I'm no expert in women studies, and think the whole "rape ruined my life I can't get intimate anymore" mentality is a bit exaggerated, but I really wouldn't know, and that's not the point. She got RAPED. Some guy took advantage of her and penetrated her (I believe it said without a condom?) against her will. So he raped her, got the charge BUMPED down (perhaps unfairly) and justice was NOT served. This is at least, according to her. Is it too much for a coach, knowing this girl got raped, for her to be silent during that cheer or step to the side? I mean it's high school cheerleading for some random basketball game, it really isn't a big deal if a girl steps out because a lot of cheerleaders make obvious mistakes anyways.
Sorry I kinda dragged that out, I'm just trying to put emphasis. She didn't date him and get dumped by him for her best friend or some other petty teenage drama, this guy committed a crime that, as an adult, can potentially carry the death penalty it was so bad! Her demand, IMO (and coming from a very un-PC person) is very reasonable--she didn't say kick him off the team or I'm not cheering, no one cheer for him at all, etc, she simply wanted to not cheer her rapist. I'm really having a hard time seeing what is so unreasonable about that. I'm not talking black and white, what is "legally required" of a HS cheerleader, use some common sense and let her sit the 5 second cheer of her rapist out!!
tl;dr what's the big deal about letting her sit the cheers of her rapist?
when Bolton was about to take a free throw, the girl decided to stand silently with her arms folded.
Not "sit out." Not "remain silent." She made a point of standing there in the cheerleader lineup with her arms folded in an act of defiance.
In doing so, she intentionally made herself very conspicuously different from the remainder of the squad. She's TRYING to stand out in that regard, and that's the issue here. She could have simply gone through the motions and simply mouthed the words if she didn't want to say them aloud - odds are no one would have noticed. But no, she chose to make a statement through her stance and actions, and THAT is what got her booted.
Again, I'm not arguing that she needs to like the guy. I'm just saying that she didn't live up to her duties as a cheerleader, and that's what got her kicked off the squad.
Still incorrect. And you are making massive assumptions about her intentions that are not contained in the article.
If someone is injured (and you haven't responded if she was injured) then it is the coach's responsibility to ensure the injury does not interfere with the team in a way that affects the team. Would you put your running back in the game with a pulled hamstring and injured ankle when the game was on the line and he had to run a good distance? Of course students don't always share that they are injured. If she was being required to participate then she took the very best action she could by standing there quietly.
Even afterwards a coach would approach the student and ask "Why did you do that?", "I was unable to perform that task coach, sorry. Here's what happened..." and address it appropriately: "Don't let it happen again" or "Talk to me first next time"....etc. Again this is a high school coach guiding, leading students to be able to do tasks and improve their life skills. (Did you read the Texas Coaches code of ethics?)
It is the coaches job to ensure the school is not embarrassed (excluding of course flagrant violations that a coach cannot control or foresee). The problem of her standing there while others cheered fell on the coaches shoulder, not hers. Especially with the reason (the "doctor's note", i.e. the court ruling) she did what she did.
So could you say the cheer? Could you even mouth it since you internally say it to yourself when you mouth words? "PUT IT IN" That's cheer involved here..... It's not that she just "doesn't like" the guy, it's not just a messy breakup between boyfriend and girlfriend. She was RAPED by this guy.
This is a huge failure of the coach and coaching staff.
Tugg
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 71, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 541 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 69): Her demand, IMO (and coming from a very un-PC person) is very reasonable--she didn't say kick him off the team or I'm not cheering, no one cheer for him at all, etc, she simply wanted to not cheer her rapist. I'm really having a hard time seeing what is so unreasonable about that.
Coming from another very un-PC person, I agree completely. In fact I feel it smells of PC to stare blindly at the verdict of a court without considering reality, as some seem prone to do.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 72, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 537 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 71): Coming from another very un-PC person, I agree completely. In fact I feel it smells of PC to stare blindly at the verdict of a court without considering reality, as some seem prone to do.
Exactly. I'd have to look into the details, but the court case and legal procession sounds like it was done correctly, and I'd probably agree with the court's decision (not talking about the the rape --> sexual assault case, that is a different point entirely.
BUT
It shouldn't have made it to court (IMO) !!! That's why I'm thinking there has got to be something not being reported. I don't see how everyone would have no problem making the girl cheer for her alleged rapist / convicted sexual assaulter. Seems a little odd to me. On the information given, I guess I have to say the court was right (legally) but the school was completely unreasonable.
A single fact could change the whole outlook on this case. But as of now, I'm very baffled.
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 3807 posts, RR: 4 Reply 73, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 534 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 58): Second, the extracurricular activities that are a part of schools nationwide are sometimes considered required
By definition, extracurricular activities are not required to be participated in. If they are, then they are no longer "extracurricular", but a part of the regular curriculum.
Quoting tugger (Reply 58): additionally extracurricular activity is essentially required for acceptance to better university
Again, it has been ruled there is no inherent right to participate in extracurricular activities. Title IX provides for substantial funding as long as certain non-discriminatory policies based on race and gender are met, and even those are very loosely defined.
Also, there is no right to be accepted into "better" universities.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 74, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 526 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 73): Quoting tugger (Reply 58):
additionally extracurricular activity is essentially required for acceptance to better university
Again, it has been ruled there is no inherent right to participate in extracurricular activities. Title IX provides for substantial funding as long as certain non-discriminatory policies based on race and gender are met, and even those are very loosely defined.
You're right, there is no right. I would have hoped that the school realized this and kicked the RAPIST off the team instead of pressuring the girl to cheer for him. Or a win-win, have her sit that cheer out! Idk, I don't seem to be getting to anyone, my point was heard, I guess I'll give up saying it. I'm honestly surprised so many people are opposed to letting her sit a cheer out!
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 75, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 521 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 73): Quoting tugger (Reply 58):
Second, the extracurricular activities that are a part of schools nationwide are sometimes considered required
By definition, extracurricular activities are not required to be participated in. If they are, then they are no longer "extracurricular", but a part of the regular curriculum.
Do you remember when you were in school just how important the clubs and sports stuff were to being "part of the school" to even having friends? Have been in a small town environment and seen what it means to NOT participate in some extra-curricular activity? Are you seriously saying that though not "required" you do not understand how very important they are are how they can become essentially "required" to young kids trying to fit in in school or just being with their friends?
You are telling me that you do not understand that? What clubs or sports or groups did you participate in?
I understand what "extra-curricular" means. But dictionary definitions do not the real world we live in make.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 73): Quoting tugger (Reply 58):
additionally extracurricular activity is essentially required for acceptance to better university
Again, it has been ruled there is no inherent right to participate in extracurricular activities. Title IX provides for substantial funding as long as certain non-discriminatory policies based on race and gender are met, and even those are very loosely defined.
Again, have you applied to a university recently? How about a job? Are not those "extra" things you do and participate not important enough to include on your application or resume (if they are relevant to the job)? I know many kids that apply to university and they each say that the extra-curricular activities are important and are considered along with the rest of your transcripts by the university in determining if you are a best fit for the school and worthy to be accepted.
Is it mandatory? Perhaps not. Will affect your chances of getting in to a school? Yes, it very well can.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 74): I'm honestly surprised so many people are opposed to letting her sit a cheer out!
I think many here are defending the legitimacy of the courts decisions in this case. However regardless of whether the courts ruled properly (which they apparently did, and remember this was actually a case regarding the parents suing the school for damages not the rape and dismissal from the cheer squad.). But the crux of this is the failure on the part of the coaches, the school, the community, and her parents.
This simply should not have happened as it did, and quite simply the person best able to have prevented the entire thing from occurring was the coach. The coach was the relevant adult on hand at the time the problem arose. It could have been stopped right there.
Tugg
[Edited 2012-02-01 14:35:31]
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 76, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 505 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 75): I think many here are defending the legitimacy of the courts decisions in this case.
I can understand why the courts ruled against the case (though I don't necessarily agree). I don't understand why it was deemed to be frivolous (unless they're using a system of "well, it didn't win, so it's obviously frivolous", but that would be a broader indictment on the justice system in Texas).
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 3807 posts, RR: 4 Reply 77, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 483 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 75): Have been in a small town environment and seen what it means to NOT participate in some extra-curricular activity? Are you seriously saying that though not "required" you do not understand how very important they are are how they can become essentially "required" to young kids trying to fit in in school or just being with their friends?
Yep... and we see how well it worked out for those kids. A whole mess of underage drinking, sex, drugs, rape, and the thug life. Having experienced that kind of small-town life first and second hand, and the devastation that comes with it, I can tell you that while your views are nice, they're a bit naive.
The activities and clubs, and "fitting in" do not make someone successful.
Quoting tugger (Reply 75): But dictionary definitions do not the real world we live in make.
In court, they most certainly do.
Quoting tugger (Reply 75):
Again, have you applied to a university recently? How about a job? Are not those "extra" things you do and participate not important enough to include on your application or resume (if they are relevant to the job)? I know many kids that apply to university and they each say that the extra-curricular activities are important and are considered along with the rest of your transcripts by the university in determining if you are a best fit for the school and worthy to be accepted.
Is it mandatory? Perhaps not. Will affect your chances of getting in to a school? Yes, it very well can.
And when someone gives kids the right to get into a good school or job, I'll be right there with you. Until then, I call it how it is.
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 78, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 479 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 77): The activities and clubs, and "fitting in" do not make someone successful.
They do not "make" someone successful but they can be important elements to ones ability to be successful. Human social interaction and the ability to manage interpersonal relationships are critical elements in the "success" ability of people. Socially inept people and those that do not know how to handle interpersonal relationships are seldom successful in life as a whole. Clubs and sports and such help teach students valuable life skills, a key one being able to "fit in" while maintaining your individuality. You cannot say that these things do not greatly improve ones chances to be "successful".
Quite frankly this whole court case and the issues surrounding are as likely to be key impactors on her life that may either improve or diminish her chances for success in life. Part of the reason why a controlled environment under the guidance of a teacher is important and better is that the teacher and the structure (proper student focused structure) can help ameliorate the harm that such "life lessons" can do to people.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 77): Quoting tugger (Reply 75):
But dictionary definitions do not the real world we live in make.
In court, they most certainly do.
I understand that, however I am not really arguing the "court" aspect of this. Though I will offer that courts do indeed take into account evidence presented that demonstrates something is different from the "definition" and will decide that the definition while valid is not the ruling aspect for the case, that the "real world" impact has validity.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 77): And when someone gives kids the right to get into a good school or job, I'll be right there with you. Until then, I call it how it is.
Why are we talking about the right to go to a good school? I am pointing out that there is an impact and correlation between those that do extra-curricular activities and their ability to be accepted to a "good" university. Extra curricular activities are important to students, especially those wanted to go on to college.
By the way, I also want to say that reading my earlier post (75), it could be taken as disrespecting towards you. I just want to say that was not intended and I hope you did not take it that way.
Tugg
[Edited 2012-02-01 17:20:44]
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
Sponsor Message: 
From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 4953 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 2575 posts, 
From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, 
From Romania, joined Feb 2007, 1177 posts, 
The way I see it, keeping rapists in school-sports teams is no better than keeping a child molester in a sports team. Which he was in this case, since he raped that girl when she was 16.
From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2557 posts, 
WTH?! This dude got off easy only so that he can compete in basketball. This is sending the wrong message to kids. If this cheerleader was my daughter, I would tell her to find some other hobby for the time being and wait for the football season to come back and then cheer for that.
From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3015 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2009, 3001 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 3628 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
