[ColoradoTree]

[quote author=ColoradoTree link=topic=14578.msg156379#msg156379 date=1455303862]
2. Does anyone here know anything about what the investigation found or what's in the report? 

For the most part that seems to be a resounding "no" - though perhaps some here have more direct knowledge than they are stating.

A few things.

As far as I can tell, the law firm was hired to do a Title IX investigation of the trainer Marcello. The discussion here seems to imply that this investigation concerned the general state of affairs on the softball team and the future of Rittman, which seems to not be the case (though it is true that there is a relation between the two). My understanding is that under normal circumstances, such investigations are carried out by Stanford's Title IX officer herself (Catherine Criswell). Hiring an outside attorney is at least one step more neutral/disinterested than that usual procedure would be.

Details of the investigation into the general situation of the softball team are almost entirely unknown via public press accounts.

There doesn't seem to be much consideration here that neither Stanford nor the group of players who were unhappy have spoken to the press. The articles, therefore, are almost exclusively the view of those who are upset Rittman is gone.

---------
Personally, I don't feel like I have nearly enough information to have a real opinion on the performance of Muir in this particular situation. It's pretty easy to imagine it was anything from venal to incompetent to the only thing possible in the presence of a bad situation.
The one thing that is pretty clear is that it was a bad situation - no team becomes this divided when things are working properly.
[/quote]

Thanks, CTcard.  That all makes sense to me. 

[ColoradoTree]

[quote author=ColoradoTree link=topic=14578.msg156379#msg156379 date=1455303862]
2. Does anyone here know anything about what the investigation found or what's in the report? 

For the most part that seems to be a resounding "no" - though perhaps some here have more direct knowledge than they are stating.

A few things.

As far as I can tell, the law firm was hired to do a Title IX investigation of the trainer Marcello. The discussion here seems to imply that this investigation concerned the general state of affairs on the softball team and the future of Rittman, which seems to not be the case (though it is true that there is a relation between the two). My understanding is that under normal circumstances, such investigations are carried out by Stanford's Title IX officer herself (Catherine Criswell). Hiring an outside attorney is at least one step more neutral/disinterested than that usual procedure would be.

Details of the investigation into the general situation of the softball team are almost entirely unknown via public press accounts.

There doesn't seem to be much consideration here that neither Stanford nor the group of players who were unhappy have spoken to the press. The articles, therefore, are almost exclusively the view of those who are upset Rittman is gone.

---------
Personally, I don't feel like I have nearly enough information to have a real opinion on the performance of Muir in this particular situation. It's pretty easy to imagine it was anything from venal to incompetent to the only thing possible in the presence of a bad situation.
The one thing that is pretty clear is that it was a bad situation - no team becomes this divided when things are working properly.
[/quote]

Thanks, CTcard.  That all makes sense to me.