Patrick Witt - Skips Rhodes Interview - why?

[helenahusker]

Apparently because he was accused of sexual assault, rather than to elect to play in the Yale-Harvard bowl.

Glad to he moved out of the football factory to an Ivy League school - he might have become distracted from his studies otherwise . . .

http://deadspin.com/5879771/yale-quarterback-who-withdrew-as-rhodes-scholar-did-so-because-he-was-accused-of-sexual-assault-not-because-of-the-harvard-game

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/sports/ncaafootball/at-yale-the-collapse-of-a-rhodes-scholar-candidacy.html?_r=1&hpw=&pagewanted=all

[SUHnami]

What a rube. 

[RedSnapper]

It looks very bad.  However, without due process, its a little difficult to presume guilt - or innocence. 

[Capn Krunch]

"Alcohol is a hell of a drug."

[Roscoe Pound]

Witt’s accuser has not gone to the police, nor filed what Yale considers a formal complaint. The New York Times has not spoken with her and does not know her name.

[BubbliciousRed]

It looks very bad.  However, without due process, its a little difficult to presume guilt - or innocence. 

It's pretty easy to presume that he's guilty of misleading people as to why he "skipped" the Rhodes interview.

He's scum as far as I'm concerned.

[JR]

Witt’s accuser has not gone to the police, nor filed what Yale considers a formal complaint. The New York Times has not spoken with her and does not know her name.

Yea, the disappointing thing is that we know nothing about the accusation and neither does the New York Times.  Yet they chose to run with the article.  Fairly poor journalistic ethics, as far as I'm concerned.

[BubbliciousRed]

Witt’s accuser has not gone to the police, nor filed what Yale considers a formal complaint. The New York Times has not spoken with her and does not know her name.

Yea, the disappointing thing is that we know nothing about the accusation and neither does the New York Times.  Yet they chose to run with the article.  Fairly poor journalistic ethics, as far as I'm concerned.

They seem to know quite a bit about the accusation. 

In September, according to people with knowledge of the situation, a female student went to Yale’s Sexual Assault Harassment and Response and Education Center, claiming Witt had assaulted her in her dormitory room. The woman later made a complaint to the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, created last July as part of Yale’s new approach.

Like many colleges and universities, Yale offers accusers a choice between making a formal complaint and an informal one. This student chose the informal process. In that process, an individual or a few members of the committee are charged with resolving the issue, without a full investigation or a finding of guilt or innocence. The most significant outcome might be an agreement to move the accused to a different dorm.

(With a formal complaint, there is a five-member hearing panel that hires an outsider to conduct an investigation and produce a written report recommending punishment up to expulsion.)

[Omaha_Phil]

It looks very bad.  However, without due process, its a little difficult to presume guilt - or innocence. 

It's pretty easy to presume that he's guilty of misleading people as to why he "skipped" the Rhodes interview.

He's scum as far as I'm concerned.

You probably thought the same think about the Duke rape accusations.

[tfree32]

Witt’s accuser has not gone to the police, nor filed what Yale considers a formal complaint. The New York Times has not spoken with her and does not know her name.

Yea, the disappointing thing is that we know nothing about the accusation and neither does the New York Times.  Yet they chose to run with the article.  Fairly poor journalistic ethics, as far as I'm concerned.

They seem to know quite a bit about the accusation.  

In September, according to people with knowledge of the situation, a female student went to Yale’s Sexual Assault Harassment and Response and Education Center, claiming Witt had assaulted her in her dormitory room. The woman later made a complaint to the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, created last July as part of Yale’s new approach.

Like many colleges and universities, Yale offers accusers a choice between making a formal complaint and an informal one. This student chose the informal process. In that process, an individual or a few members of the committee are charged with resolving the issue, without a full investigation or a finding of guilt or innocence. The most significant outcome might be an agreement to move the accused to a different dorm.

(With a formal complaint, there is a five-member hearing panel that hires an outsider to conduct an investigation and produce a written report recommending punishment up to expulsion.)

No, they seem to know about the process by which she chose to pursue her allegation...but that says nothing about the allegation itself except that it allegedly happened in Witt's dorm room.

He hasn't been found guilty of anything. As far as I know, he hasn't even been formally charged with anything. And lots of people for a variety of reasons falsely accuse others of sexual assault. Parts of this story don't make much sense. For example, if someone sexually assaulted me or someone I care about, I'd be pursuing a remedy a lot more harsh than making that person move to a different dorm.

[BubbliciousRed]

It looks very bad.  However, without due process, its a little difficult to presume guilt - or innocence. 

It's pretty easy to presume that he's guilty of misleading people as to why he "skipped" the Rhodes interview.

He's scum as far as I'm concerned.

You probably thought the same think about the Duke rape accusations.

LOL!  Were the Duke Lacrosse players claiming to be Rhodes scholar candidates, but skipped the interview to play a lacrosse game?

[BubbliciousRed]

Witt’s accuser has not gone to the police, nor filed what Yale considers a formal complaint. The New York Times has not spoken with her and does not know her name.

Yea, the disappointing thing is that we know nothing about the accusation and neither does the New York Times.  Yet they chose to run with the article.  Fairly poor journalistic ethics, as far as I'm concerned.

They seem to know quite a bit about the accusation.  

In September, according to people with knowledge of the situation, a female student went to Yale’s Sexual Assault Harassment and Response and Education Center, claiming Witt had assaulted her in her dormitory room. The woman later made a complaint to the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, created last July as part of Yale’s new approach.

Like many colleges and universities, Yale offers accusers a choice between making a formal complaint and an informal one. This student chose the informal process. In that process, an individual or a few members of the committee are charged with resolving the issue, without a full investigation or a finding of guilt or innocence. The most significant outcome might be an agreement to move the accused to a different dorm.

(With a formal complaint, there is a five-member hearing panel that hires an outsider to conduct an investigation and produce a written report recommending punishment up to expulsion.)

No, they seem to know about the process by which she chose to pursue her allegation...but that says nothing about the allegation itself except that it allegedly happened in Witt's dorm room.

He hasn't been found guilty of anything. As far as I know, he hasn't even been formally charged with anything. And lots of people for a variety of reasons falsely accuse others of sexual assault. Parts of this story don't make much sense. For example, if someone sexually assaulted me or someone I care about, I'd be pursuing a remedy a lot more harsh than making that person move to a different dorm.

He's guilty of lying and misleading people to think he's some sort of modern day football martyr for skipping his Rhodes interview.   

[tfree32]

Witt’s accuser has not gone to the police, nor filed what Yale considers a formal complaint. The New York Times has not spoken with her and does not know her name.

Yea, the disappointing thing is that we know nothing about the accusation and neither does the New York Times.  Yet they chose to run with the article.  Fairly poor journalistic ethics, as far as I'm concerned.

They seem to know quite a bit about the accusation.  

In September, according to people with knowledge of the situation, a female student went to Yale’s Sexual Assault Harassment and Response and Education Center, claiming Witt had assaulted her in her dormitory room. The woman later made a complaint to the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, created last July as part of Yale’s new approach.

Like many colleges and universities, Yale offers accusers a choice between making a formal complaint and an informal one. This student chose the informal process. In that process, an individual or a few members of the committee are charged with resolving the issue, without a full investigation or a finding of guilt or innocence. The most significant outcome might be an agreement to move the accused to a different dorm.

(With a formal complaint, there is a five-member hearing panel that hires an outsider to conduct an investigation and produce a written report recommending punishment up to expulsion.)

No, they seem to know about the process by which she chose to pursue her allegation...but that says nothing about the allegation itself except that it allegedly happened in Witt's dorm room.

He hasn't been found guilty of anything. As far as I know, he hasn't even been formally charged with anything. And lots of people for a variety of reasons falsely accuse others of sexual assault. Parts of this story don't make much sense. For example, if someone sexually assaulted me or someone I care about, I'd be pursuing a remedy a lot more harsh than making that person move to a different dorm.

He's guilty of lying and misleading people to think he's some sort of modern day football martyr for skipping his Rhodes interview.   

I think that's an open question. He indicated he would be playing in the game. He further indicated that he would be withdrawing his candidacy for the scholarship. But it sounds like the media jumped to the conclusion that the reason for one was the other.

He didn't correct that misperception. Does that make him guilty of lying and misleading? Does that make him scum? I don't think that's at all clear.

[BubbliciousRed]

There are a lot of things that all add up to him being scum.  Five different high schools just to find one that passed enough and would let him start.  His drunken arrest at UNL trying to go into the women's dorm without an escort.  His veiled shots at UNL academics when he left.  The formal accusation of sexual assault by a fellow Yale student (not a stripper hired by his frat brothers.)  And the well thought out deceptive answers to the questions about his "skipping" the Rhodes interview.

SCUM

[Royal003]

Does anyone have any insight on Witt's current saga, and his departure from Lincoln?  He is certainly getting beat up in the Dallas press, including his behavior in Lincoln.  I've always thought he would have stayed if he had been named #1 on depth chart.