|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Ohio State - Dr Richard Strauss
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on September 11, 2018
|
Bob Preusse wrote: "public institutions cave because their leaders are weak and its not their money."
Very good point. Sadly, it's even worse with congress only the money comes from special interests.
Mike Holman wrote: "As a leader, always try to do the right thing..."
Well, you've got half my vote but sadly we get all goofed up over what the right thing is. You know what? Most of the time most of us know what it is. But we disagree because of the team we're rooting for tells us too.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Ohio State - Dr Richard Strauss
Roe Fox added to this discussion on September 12, 2018
|
“Very good point. Sadly, it's even worse with congress only the money comes from special interests.â€
Even more sad because most of the money is taxpayer money.
Mike Holman wrote: "As a leader, always try to do the right thing..."
True in premise but in this instance if the statute of limitations precludes recovery by the abused I can think of a few reasons for TOSU not to pay.
Who is the next group for whom we ignore the statute of limitations?
What message does it send people who should come forward and sue in a timely fashion to prevent further injury to others?
As pointed out why should taxpayer funds be used for this IF the statute has run? Does my daughter’s tuition go up because others haven’t followed the law and she not only did nothing wrong but wasn’t even born then?
Leadership may also involve doing the right thing in the face of authentic emotional responses otherwise.
I have little doubt at this point abuse happened. Michael’s story is riveting.
But others who have sued 20 or more years after they were abused AS ADULTS creates a real unfairness to some who may not have wronged someone but who, through the passage of time, have had their ability to defend themselves compromised. I’m not speaking about Strauss.
This is the reason for the statute of limitations.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Ohio State - Dr Richard Strauss
Mike Stann added to this discussion on September 12, 2018
|
wow I can't believe that so many of you say don't pay if not legally obligated to. if you are a buckeye fan how does this improve the perception of the university? from a simply pr point of view this makes you look worse. wrong was done and the university had an obligation to protect the folks abused. do we really think that the university doesn't have the wherewithal to decide if claims are spurious. that's why we have one of the top law firms doing the investigation. I graduated from the Ohio state law school and I want my university to do the right thing. hold those you can accountable and address the wrong done to those abused.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Ohio State - Dr Richard Strauss
John Drumm added to this discussion on September 12, 2018
|
What is interesting about blogs is that sometimes people appear to be arguing and disagreeing, but really they are not.
The evaluation PROCESS standing alone is a different than saying "only pay what you owe" which seems more like the conclusion.
I assume TOSU legal team is carefully investigating and evaluating current and potential claims.
How can you know if or what you owe until after you do your investigations and evaluation and considered different possible outcomes? Who do want to make the decision on what you owe? Do you want to lose that control?
If we were talking about buying a gallon of milk from IGA, then I would agree it is "not rocket science and you only pay what you owe". The PROCESS TOSU is undergoing is more complex.
In a perfect world, witnesses don't lie, evidence is authentic, and Judges and/or Juries always arrive at the right result never influenced by emotions or bias.
Settlements are not admissions of fault or liability. There are a multitude of reasons settlements occur, including caving into public pressure.
Sometimes claims and/or cases are settled when the defendant doesn't currently owe a dime or has a slam dunker defense to bounce the case early on (Statute of Limitations), but the defendant makes its own informed decision with assistance of counsel rather than running the risk of leaving the decision up to the Court or the court of public opinion. Weakness or good business sense?
Depending on your source, a majority of civil cases settle without trial. Stats range from 80% of cases to 95% of cases. I am going to assume that in the same majority of cases nobody knew Exactly what they owed when they paid, just a reasonable estimate based on potential exposure.
If after evaluation you believe that you don't owe a dime or can assert a bullet proof affirmative defense and get the case bounced, then by all means, fight like you were the third lion trying to board Noah's Ark.
Certainly, the Statute of Limitations is a major issue.
I am also a paying taxpayer so I don't want to fund payment of claims that won't fly.
My comment is directed towards considering the evaluation PROCESS before deciding not only that you currently don't owe anything, but that you won't owe anything in the future either (or run the risk of paying more in the future). Again, just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Ohio State - Dr Richard Strauss
John Flanigan added to this discussion on September 13, 2018
|
No reason it has to be taxpayer funded, the university has a large pool of money that it can utilize. MSU settlement money is not coming from taxpayers at this point (with no plans to), so why would OSU be different.
Of course there will be tuition hikes in the future, but no different than the $1000 fee students pay to cover coach salaries.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Ohio State - Dr Richard Strauss
Jared Ball added to this discussion on October 21, 2018
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Ohio State - Dr Richard Strauss
Doug Brandt added to this discussion on October 21, 2018
|
|
Quote from Jared Ball's post:
|
|
"https://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2018/10/rep_jim_jordans_campaign_paid.html
In no way shape or form did I share this to make any political statement. Rather if you scroll to the bottom where it talks about congressman Jordan’s democratic political opponent’s primary donors. I have to admit I laughed out loud just a little."
|
Sure you didn't...
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Ohio State - Dr Richard Strauss
Reed Vetovitz added to this discussion on May 19, 2019
|
|
Quote from Mike Holman's post:
|
|
"OSU Wrestling and Sexual Contact Issues
Here is my current analysis of the 20+ year old sexual contact issues involving Dr. Strauss and Ohio State Wrestling and other sports. This is solely my analysis and does not reflect the views of any other person. I WELCOME IMPUT FROM OTHERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE WITH FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE.
I was a practicing lawyer for 38 years. I have tried to be specific with no exaggeration, speculation, or name calling. As a lawyer, I have carefully parsed the words used, being careful to refer exactly to what people said. I think that is vitally important where reputations are at issue.
I believe that that Dr. Strauss probably was guilty of repeated acts of “sexual impositionâ€, as defined in the Ohio Revised Code. There are many defined acts of sexual misconduct. “Sexual imposition†is one of them. In terms of severity, it is the least severe. I have provided a reference to the Chapter of the Ohio Revised Code on sexual crimes so you make your own determination.
My current analysis is based on articles in the Columbus Dispatch, a WOSU interview with Mike DiSabato, the video produced by Mike DiSabato, i.e., The Scarlet X, and a CNN article.
Here is my current analysis.
• Dr. Strauss probably was gay
• Dr. Strauss allegedly conducted unnecessary examinations of many athletes’ genitalia.
• Dr. Strauss took showers with athletes, including more than one shower a day
• Gays observed athletes in the shower and sauna in Larkins Hall
• Gays were observed masturbating in Larkins Hall
• Russ Hellickson talked to Dr. Strauss and told Dr. Strauss that Dr. Strauss was “too hands onâ€
• Russ Hellickson complained about the “environment†and complained to Fred Beckman about “itâ€.
• Mike DiSabato wrote a paper about the sexual abuse on campus for his Masters.
Important but ambiguous or missing.
The specifics about who complained to whom about what, and when they complained are ambiguous or missing.
For example, the CNN article stated, “In the video that DiSabato made about the allegations against Strauss, which DiSabato sent to Ohio State in June, Hellickson, the former head wrestling coach, said he told school administrators about Strauss and also warned the doctor to steer clear of his wrestlers.â€
The CNN article is not true. In the Scarlet X, which I replayed multiple times Russ Hellickson said, “Talked to all of them [administrators] about my discontent with the environment. Had a lot of conversations with Fred Beckman about it.â€
I assume Russ Hellickson did complain about Dr. Strauss. Russ, however, needs to clarify what he said, to whom he said it, when he said it, what the administrators said and did (if anything) in response, and how he followed up to address his concerns and to protect his wrestlers.
Because reputations are at issue, it is vitally important that not only Russ but anyone who has claimed “sexual abuse†be specific with respect to what was done to them, when it was done, when they complained, and what they said in making their complaints.
In considering Dr. Strauss’ conduct it should not be conflated with Jerry Sandusky’s and Dr. Larry Narrar’s conduct. It is a matter of degree. In this regard, I note that none of the head coaches in the many sports involved called the police to report Dr. Strauss. The coaches either were unaware of Dr. Strauss’ conduct or did not consider it serious enough to contact the police.
Under Section 2921.22 of the Ohio Revised Code, any person with knowledge of a serious crime, i.e., a felony, is required to report the crime to law enforcement authorities. The failure to report a felony is a crime, i.e., a misdemeanor.
What was not done.
Based on the current information available to me, there is no evidence of rape, sodomy, drugging, or “sexual conduct†as defined in the Ohio Revised Code. There is no evidence of Dr. Strauss engaged in “sexual conduct†with a minor in the OSU shower, similar to Jerry Sandusky at Penn State, or engaged in sexual conduct with minors similar to Dr. Larry Nassar. This is not intended to downplay what Dr. Strauss did, but to point out the differences, which are legally important.
The Law.
Dr. Strauss probably would be guilty of “Sexual Impositionâ€. Section 2907.06 of the Ohio Revised Code, which defines “sexual impositionâ€, provides:
(A) No person shall have sexual contact with another, not the spouse of the offender… when any of the following applies [emphasis added]:
(1) The offender knows that the sexual contact is offensive to the other person ... or is reckless in that regard.
….
(B) No person shall be convicted of a violation of this section solely upon the victim's testimony unsupported by other evidence.
(C) Whoever violates this section is guilty of sexual imposition, a misdemeanor of the third degree.
Note that “Sexual contact†as used in Section 2907.06 its defined as:
(B) "Sexual contact" means any touching of an erogenous zone of another, including without limitation the thigh, genitals, buttock, pubic region, or, if the person is a female, a breast, for the purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying either person.
“Sexual conduct†is treated much more harshly under the law than “sexual contactâ€. “Sexual conduct†is defined in Section 2907 (A) and includes, “vaginal intercourse between a male and female; anal intercourse, fellatio, and cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex….â€
Sexual Imposition is a misdemeanor of the third degree. Under the Ohio Revised Code there is no duty to report a misdemeanor. There is a duty to report a felony. The University may have different rules and regulations.
Under the sentencing law, Section 2929.24 of the Ohio Revised Code, persons convicted on misdemeanors of the third degree are subject to “not more than six days†in jail. For multiple counts, the period could be extended.
Dr. Strauss is dead. Even if he was alive, the statute of limitations would have run.
You can Google “ORC Chapter 2907†and get a complete list of sex crimes."
|
Thanks for educating us!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
