[2006alum]

DC, read this article. Does this change how you feel at all? The accusations came from his brother's ex-wife, he denied the allegations, going to trial would have put his niece and his family in a terrible position, he took and passed a polygraph test, his records were sealed in accordance with law, and he legally reported his moves within Washington state as required by law. The only reason this came up at all is because Oregon authorities improperly believed he was an Oregon resident and that he had violated Oregon law. I am not sure how Oregon State would have been unaware of his conviction unless the law did not require he report it in accordance with the terms of his records being sealed. If he lied and misled them in his application, I agree that he should be expelled simply for being dishonest with the university. The fact that that has not happened makes me think he followed the rules. I just think this case is much murkier the more you know about it, and the rush to judgment is, IMHO, premature.

On principle, however, I don't think it's necessary to get into the facts of the individual case. If you think that child sexual assault is different, then the law should treat it as such. And it does, in so many ways. But denying him an athletic scholarship could possibly deny him the funding to pursue a degree, and also probably a career in baseball. I simply don't think it's the court of public opinion's job to decide that that should be taken away from him. If the court of law did not, then we should forgive, but not forget, and support him in making good choices going forward.

'Nuff said from me on this one.

[2006alum]

DC, read this article. Does this change how you feel at all? The accusations came from his brother's ex-wife, he denied the allegations, going to trial would have put his niece and his family in a terrible position, he took and passed a polygraph test, his records were sealed in accordance with law, and he legally reported his moves within Washington state as required by law. The only reason this came up at all is because Oregon authorities improperly believed he was an Oregon resident and that he had violated Oregon law. I am not sure how Oregon State would have been unaware of his conviction unless the law did not require he report it in accordance with the terms of his records being sealed. If he lied and misled them in his application, I agree that he should be expelled simply for being dishonest with the university. The fact that that has not happened makes me think he followed the rules. I just think this case is much murkier the more you know about it, and the rush to judgment is, IMHO, premature.

On principle, however, I don't think it's necessary to get into the facts of the individual case. If you think that child sexual assault is different, then the law should treat it as such. And it does, in so many ways. But denying him an athletic scholarship could possibly deny him the funding to pursue a degree, and also probably a career in baseball. I simply don't think it's the court of public opinion's job to decide that that should be taken away from him. If the court of law did not, then we should forgive, but not forget, and support him in making good choices going forward.

'Nuff said from me on this one.