Problems for Torlan Pittman

[couch 'em]

That's a pretty big if that you are suggesting.

Indeed. My point was that it is immoral to punnish a guy (kick off the team) if he isn't found to be guilty. An accusation should not ruin your life.

[San Antonio Mustang]

It is impossible to make informed speculation about the guilt or innocence of these defendants. There are simply too many unknowns. Many of you have raised some of the questions we do not have the answer to and there are many more. For example, one obvious question which depending on the answer might make the outcome easier to guess is why did so much time elapse between the alleged act and the seeking of an arrest warrant. This could be very significant or not significant at all. The bottom line is with the information that has been made public there is no way any of us can make any kind of informed guess as to the outcome. What we are left with is that these defendants are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court and they should be treated accordingly. They should be released on bond with conditions designed to protect the public and assure their appearance in court. The policies of SMU and the athletic department should govern what happens to Pittman.

[RGV Pony]

An accusation should not ruin your life.

and yet it happens all too often

[Mexmustang]

Regarding the decision to suspend the athlete, I like a uniform rule--get arrested for a suspected felony and get suspended. No judgement by the coaches or administration is required.
However, if the athlete is proven innocent his reinstatement should be just as automatic, without further judgement by the university. We can't put the coaches or adminstration in a position of passing judgement on the legal system. Some are suspended, some not depending on how the school sees it. But the knife should cut both ways, the same rules if the athlete is judged innocent.
Somone posted the story of another athlete at another school that was finally proven innocent that was not reinstated and left to drift, ruining his life forever--we can't put ourselves in that position.

[Junior]

There's nothing like a bunch of speculation based upon incomplete newspaper reports, given the amount of bias that's typically reported.

[Wuba]

Regarding the decision to suspend the athlete, I like a uniform rule--get arrested for a suspected felony and get suspended. No judgement by the coaches or administration is required.
However, if the athlete is proven innocent his reinstatement should be just as automatic, without further judgement by the university. We can't put the coaches or adminstration in a position of passing judgement on the legal system. Some are suspended, some not depending on how the school sees it. But the knife should cut both ways, the same rules if the athlete is judged innocent.
Somone posted the story of another athlete at another school that was finally proven innocent that was not reinstated and left to drift, ruining his life forever--we can't put ourselves in that position.

I disagree. The standard for the law is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but there is no reason that a private organization should have to have that standard. If someone is found not guilty then I think the appropriate people at the school should evaluate the situation and decide whether to readmit them, but there is no reason that it should be automatic. It is possible that someone could be perfectly innocent of the crime, but still acted in ways that are not acceptable for members of the team.

I am not saying that Torlan is/is not innocent or did/did not do anything wrong otherwise; I am just saying that lifting the suspension should not automatically follow upon a potential not guilty verdict in every situation.

[SMU 86]

Regarding the decision to suspend the athlete, I like a uniform rule--get arrested for a suspected felony and get suspended. No judgement by the coaches or administration is required.
However, if the athlete is proven innocent his reinstatement should be just as automatic, without further judgement by the university. We can't put the coaches or adminstration in a position of passing judgement on the legal system. Some are suspended, some not depending on how the school sees it. But the knife should cut both ways, the same rules if the athlete is judged innocent.
Somone posted the story of another athlete at another school that was finally proven innocent that was not reinstated and left to drift, ruining his life forever--we can't put ourselves in that position.

I disagree. The standard for the law is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but there is no reason that a private organization should have to have that standard. If someone is found not guilty then I think the appropriate people at the school should evaluate the situation and decide whether to readmit them, but there is no reason that it should be automatic. It is possible that someone could be perfectly innocent of the crime, but still acted in ways that are not acceptable for members of the team.

I am not saying that Torlan is/is not innocent or did/did not do anything wrong otherwise; I am just saying that lifting the suspension should not automatically follow upon a potential not guilty verdict in every situation.

Give an example Wuba.

[mrydel]

What if the original O.J case had taken place while he was in school. Should he have automatically been allowed back as if nothing had occured?

There is an example. All are welcome to voice opinions.

[Wuba]

What if the original O.J case had taken place while he was in school. Should he have automatically been allowed back as if nothing had occured?

There is an example. All are welcome to voice opinions.

Thanks, that is a a good example.

SMU 86 - Another example: What if a person was accused of a crime based on overwhelming evidence that was subsequently ruled inadmissible because the police obtained it improperly. Surely you agree the team would be in the right to sever their relationship with the player?

[SMU 86]

Thanks for the example Wuba.

[couch 'em]

Thanks, that is a a good example.

SMU 86 - Another example: What if a person was accused of a crime based on overwhelming evidence that was subsequently ruled inadmissible because the police obtained it improperly. Surely you agree the team would be in the right to sever their relationship with the player?

Much better example than OJ. Excellent point.

[ProudMama]

ie: not guilty is not always innocent

[SMU89]

What if the original O.J case had taken place while he was in school. Should he have automatically been allowed back as if nothing had occured?

There is an example. All are welcome to voice opinions.

Back then, he would have been found guilty -- his hands were smaller so the glove would have fit.

[Mexmustang]

Proud Mama, just happy that you are back on board. You can see how difficult it is to find defensive lineman. Hope everything is going well with you.

Now back on topic. At SMU we've seen to many times when some faculty committee decides that there are two standards, one for atletes and another for students; or the head coach doesn't have the authority to run off players with "attitude".
In many cases someone on scholarship should be held to a higher standard-grades, conduct, etc. Fine, if it turns into an, "O J" case or "inadmisable evidence", have a petition for review, but I don't want some committee given the automatic power to conduct a second "trial" or judgement. Now that we finally have a head coach, one that has dealt with all sorts of problems like this--especially with the Atlanta Falcons, let him decide whether or not the player has lost his right membership on the team.

By the way, we all know that wet leather gloves, "shrink". Too bad prosecutors in CA don't bother to find out the answers to questions that they intend to ask beforehand.

[Wuba]

Proud Mama, just happy that you are back on board. You can see how difficult it is to find defensive lineman. Hope everything is going well with you.

Now back on topic. At SMU we've seen to many time when some faculty committee decides that there are two standards, one for atletes and another for students. In many cases someone on scholarship should be held to a higher standard-grades, conduct, etc. Fine, if it turns into an, "O J" case or "inadmisable evidence", have a petition for review, but I don't want some committee given the power to conduct a second "trial" or judgement on an authomatic basis. Now that we finally have a head coach, one that has dealt with all sorts of problems like this--especially with the Atlanta Falcons, let him decide whether or not the player has lost his right membership on the team.

I might have been a little sloppy with my language regarding who should make the decision. I definitely think the head coach and athletic director should be involved.