Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That Finkes guy must be a Jordan family member. He sure seems to take these allegations personally, and is going to look REALLY foolish if they turn out to be true.
Amen. A criminal record doesn't make the rest of one's like having no credibility.I don't know much about the accusers but their history--which isn't good for them, should this find its way to court--only gets you so far in discrediting them, because they could be generally dishonest and yet not lying about this particular claim. Nor do tweets in the interim praising Jordan for unrelated reasons necessarily undermine the claim.
Reasons why I'm waiting and seeing: (1) There's a third wrestler (anonymous) who corroborated; (2) DiSabato's degree of specificity with respect to the allegations; (3) DiSabato's claim that Russ Hellickson confronted Strauss--Hellickson has yet to comment or deny that allegation; (4) numerous other athletes (14 so far ) have corroborated Strauss' conduct; (5) Jim Jordan's denial about being contacted by investigators, which tOSU lawyers contradicted. Perhaps that was a misunderstanding but not a great look since Jordan is effectively relying on credibility contest between himself and at least three accusers.
The wrestler, Shawn Dailey, said he was groped half a dozen times by Dr. Richard Strauss in the mid-1990s, when Jordan was the assistant wrestling coach. Dailey said he was too embarrassed to report the abuse directly to Jordan at the time, but he said Jordan took part in conversations where Strauss' abuse of many other team members came up.
"I participated with Jimmy and the other wrestlers in locker-room talk about Strauss. We all did," Dailey, 43, told NBC News, referring to Jordan. "It was very common knowledge in the locker room that if you went to Dr. Strauss for anything, you would have to pull your pants down.”
also can make one desperate...Amen. A criminal record doesn't make the rest of one's like having no credibility.
That's not quite how I'd interpret that statement by lawyers. They suggest that Jordan was sent emails and was attempted to reach by phone and that "apparently" he didn't receive them. But even DiSabato sent Jordan an email, per the news, on June 24. Everything going to spam filter? Lawyer's hedge of "apparently" is basically saying "according to Jim Jordan...."
The article said Ohio State sent the emails to an email address no longer in use.That's not quite how I'd interpret that statement by lawyers. They suggest that Jordan was sent emails and was attempted to reach by phone and that "apparently" he didn't receive them. But even DiSabato sent Jordan an email, per the news, on June 24. Everything going to spam filter? Lawyer's hedge of "apparently" is basically saying "according to Jim Jordan...."
The article said Ohio State sent the emails to an email address no longer in use.
I don't know if this happened in this instance, but it is feasible. A few years ago my (USG) customer's organization overhauled its email system -- everyone got new email addresses. If I sent to the old email address, it dead ended without sending a system reply.
In this case, what would lead you to conclude that he was "desperate," and "desperate" for what?also can make one desperate...
I'm guessing the, when all else fails, socialist, or the newly created, deep state (whatever that is)....Shawn Dailey (about whom I expect we'll shortly be hearing was running a pyramid scheme)
to regain credibility. All perception of course.In this case, what would lead you to conclude that he was "desperate," and "desperate" for what?
There's actually a way to talk about this story without resorting to politics despite that there's obviously a political component to it. I get why some people can't help themselves but am nevertheless petitioning the mods to simply prune out the garbage and let the thread stand. The subject itself is obviously relevant.
To try to besmirch anything associated with tOSU, due to previous business problems with their licensing group.In this case, what would lead you to conclude that he was "desperate," and "desperate" for what?
All 5 of them? Are Jordan and Hasturd friends?
I'm not saying it didn't happen or justice shouldn't be served if it did. If it happened, I sure do hope that victims get their justice.All 5 of them? Are Jordan and Hasturd friends?
Jordan seems to have a case of Cosby-itis IMOThis isnt going to stop. In my opinion, this gets bigger. It will be shocking if this doesnt bring Jim down.
Curiously for me watching from afar, but will Jim go down and tO$U remain unscathed.
To try to besmirch anything associated with tOSU, due to previous business problems with their licensing group.
At this point, it seems that there's now a herd of people supposedly "lying" and "besmirching" Ohio State. This guy alone is no longer, and shouldn't be, everyone's whipping boy.To try to besmirch anything associated with tOSU, due to previous business problems with their licensing group.
I don't see how that's pertinent to this issue, especially when you now have the numbers corroborating his story, including Hellickson in the original article about it.So when DiSabato was presented with powerful evidence that his crowd could not have been as big as he claimed, he insisted against all reason that it was? Hmmm.
That explanation is super clear and to the point, and I now feel like I understand something. Thank you, Tikk!... The legal question, in essence, will be whether tOSU failed to exercise the requisite duty of care owed to its student-athletes when it failed to protect them from Strauss. But tOSU can only be said to have failed to exercise that duty if they were on notice of Strauss's misconduct (though there might also be an argument, harder to make, that they failed regardless of being put on notice merely by maintaining a system that permitted Strauss to act without oversight).
So a key component to that underlying legal question is whether/when/what Hellickson and Jim Jordan (among many others) knew, since they were employees of the school, and possibly even "mandatory reporters" (state laws on that front have changed over the years and I'm guessing were more lenient during the era in question).
Jordan's political career aspirations aren't relevant to any of the questions motivating and relevant to this inquiry, which is ultimately about Strauss (who committed suicide in 2005), his contact with students across multiple sports, and the school's awareness of those interactions.
Obviously Jordan is the highest profile figure in this, but I've not seen anyone suggest the inquiry itself was ever about him, regardless of the headlines themselves.
You changed the question. Your question that led to my answer was about "he," being DeSabato, nothing more, nothing less.At this point, it seems that there's now a herd of people supposedly "lying" and "besmirching" Ohio State. This guy alone is no longer, and shouldn't be, everyone's whipping boy.
Yes, but it now means that several people are apparently "lying," not just the original guy.You changed the question. Your question that led to my answer was about "he," being DeSabato, nothing more, nothing less.