Confirmed with Link: Former Jets Assistant coach Todd Woodcroft fired; accused of inappropriate conduct with a student.

[CorgisPer60]

Vermont men's hockey coach fired after probe into communications with student

Woodcroft became the coach of Vermont on April 15, 2020.

theathletic.com

Oh. Oh dear.

Click to read more...

 

[Eyeseeing]

Vermont men's hockey coach fired after probe into communications with student

Woodcroft became the coach of Vermont on April 15, 2020.

theathletic.com

Oh. Oh dear.

 

[Jetabre]

 

[Potential]

F**k this guy. Throw these people in jail and let them rot there.

 

[Jack7222]

F**k this guy. Throw these people in jail and let them rot there.

For inappropriate texts with a university student?

 

[Eyeseeing]

For inappropriate texts with a university student?

I’ll bring the tar
You bring the feathers

 

[Jetsfan79]

F**k this guy. Throw these people in jail and let them rot there.

I agree. Obviously he's guilty of a capital crime here right?

 

[Stumbledore]

For inappropriate texts with a university student?

Yep, that's the age we're living in now. Gotta protect the snowflakes.

 

[tbcwpg]

Yep, that's the age we're living in now. Gotta protect the snowflakes.

There's obviously a difference between something criminal and losing your job for inappropriate conduct. The only people I see trying to equate the two are people saying everyone is too offended.

If he broke protocol at his place of employment, he should lose his job. End of.

 

[Jetsetter]

All depends on what's in the text(s) and the age of the receipent of the text?

 

[tbcwpg]

All depends on what's in the text(s) and the age of the receipent of the text?

What's in it? That's important, sure. If the school says no coach/student relationships, age doesn't matter.

 

[AlphaLackey]

What's in it? That's important, sure. If the school says no coach/student relationships, age doesn't matter.

Exactly. It does not exactly defy credulity to imagine a school having strict rules on even completely legal and consenting relationships between two parties.

Having said that, modern American universities have a proven track record of conducting absolute kangaroo courts on "he said, she said" matters. At the very least, I'm certainly not going to dismiss his attorney's statement as mere boilerplate that "every guilty person's lawyer says"

 

[ps241]

Exactly. It does not exactly defy credulity to imagine a school having strict rules on even completely legal and consenting relationships between two parties.

Having said that, modern American universities have a proven track record of conducting absolute kangaroo courts on "he said, she said" matters. At the very least, I'm certainly not going to dismiss his attorney's statement as mere boilerplate that "every guilty person's lawyer says"

View attachment 730723

This is what courts are for. Woodcroft certainly has the right to defend himself and his reputation. We shall see how it plays out.

 

[AlphaLackey]

This is what courts are for. Woodcroft certainly has the right to defend himself and his reputation. We shall see how it plays out.

Yeah, I mean, the courts are where those hurt by courts have gone for relief. Fortunately, Woodcroft is an adult with a long-established career and steady finances and placing in life. Not every freshman subjected to these machinations have the means to get such relief, nor can avoid missing huge chunks of their most important early years.

 

[ps241]

Yeah, I mean, the courts are where those hurt by courts have gone for relief. Fortunately, Woodcroft is an adult with a long-established career and steady finances and placing in life. Not every freshman subjected to these machinations have the means to get such relief, nor can avoid missing huge chunks of their most important early years.

I am less familiar with the more global challenge as it pertains to freshmen students. I don’t follow the news much anymore.

 

[Channelcat]

With what little I know about Todd Woodcroft, he never seemed like "that guy". I hope I'm right.

 

[AlphaLackey]

I am less familiar with the more global challenge as it pertains to freshmen students. I don’t follow the news much anymore.

Coles Notes version: in 'he said, she said' cases (bearing in mind I'm talking about cases like "both parties are comparably drunk, both parties are ostensibly consenting, both do acts that would be legal if not statutorily declared otherwise", not things like the Brock Turner case which was completely unambiguous), the accused is completely hamstrung. Denied opportunities to face their accuser or to review the charges or evidence against them; denied opportunities to rebut charges; denied the right to have counsel present; given vastly insufficient time to respond to charges.

The last point recently came to a head when one such accused student was given nothing more than a zoom meeting where the charges were presented and he was not allowed to record or review them before responding. The current lawsuit involves around how he took screenshots and disconnected mid-hearing citing 'internet troubles'. I'll be damned if I can find the link cause I even had it in my folder.

What makes this all especially problematic is that in such cases, schools will often adopt a double standard that in the "both comparably drunk, both ostensibly consenting" cases above, only the man needs get consent from the woman, not vice versa. This poster (briefly) did the rounds at Coastal Carolina University in the late 2000s, and I think summarizes the attitudes nicely. And far from being limited to some old Student U somewhere, in a 2015 lawsuit, Duke's dean Sue Wasiolek testified in direct response to the above scenario by supporting this double standard ("Assuming it is a male and female, it is the responsibility in the case of the male to gain consent before proceeding with sex")

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

Coles Notes version: in 'he said, she said' cases (bearing in mind I'm talking about cases like "both parties are comparably drunk, both parties are ostensibly consenting, both do acts that would be legal if not statutorily declared otherwise", not things like the Brock Turner case which was completely unambiguous), the accused is completely hamstrung. Denied opportunities to face their accuser or to review the charges or evidence against them; denied opportunities to rebut charges; denied the right to have counsel present; given vastly insufficient time to respond to charges.

The last point recently came to a head when one such accused student was given nothing more than a zoom meeting where the charges were presented and he was not allowed to record or review them before responding. The current lawsuit involves around how he took screenshots and disconnected mid-hearing citing 'internet troubles'. I'll be damned if I can find the link cause I even had it in my folder.

What makes this all especially problematic is that in such cases, schools will often adopt a double standard that in the "both comparably drunk, both ostensibly consenting" cases above, only the man needs get consent from the woman, not vice versa. This poster (briefly) did the rounds at Coastal Carolina University in the late 2000s, and I think summarizes the attitudes nicely. And far from being limited to some old Student U somewhere, in a 2015 lawsuit, Duke's dean Sue Wasiolek testified in direct response to the above scenario by supporting this double standard ("Assuming it is a male and female, it is the responsibility in the case of the male to gain consent before proceeding with sex")

View attachment 730851

By their own standard, a man who is intoxicated cannot give his legal consent for sex, so proceeding under these circumstances is a crime. The next day, Josie should be charged with rape. They are both guilty of raping the other, under this 'policy'. It only takes a single day to ruin everyone's lives I guess.

Look, I am not trying to make light of this Woodcroft situation. I do think he has the right to provide his side of the story / defend himself before he is jailed for life, or whatever other knee jerk 'burn him at the stake' presumption of guilt. If found guilty of criminality, damn right he needs to pay the appropriate price. And if criminal court presents too high of a bar, try civil.

 

[ERYX]

There's obviously a difference between something criminal and losing your job for inappropriate conduct. The only people I see trying to equate the two are people saying everyone is too offended.

If he broke protocol at his place of employment, he should lose his job. End of.

I think you missed @Potential saying he thinks Woodcroft deserves to be thrown in jail and left to rot there (cf. post #4 of this thread). That's what people were responding to with the "tar and feather" comments.

 

[tbcwpg]

I think you missed @Potential saying he thinks Woodcroft deserves to be thrown in jail and left to rot there (cf. post #4 of this thread). That's what people were responding to with the "tar and feather" comments.

I did see that, and I concluded that he did not read the article and just read the headline. I don't think anyone who actually read it would suggest jail time.

 

[Buffdog]

So let me get this straight ... two adults texting each makes a news story because the man fired.
Where is Greta when you need her?

It's the power dynamic involved

 

[AlphaLackey]

By their own standard, a man who is intoxicated cannot give his legal consent for sex, so proceeding under these circumstances is a crime. The next day, Josie should be charged with rape. They are both guilty of raping the other, under this 'policy'. It only takes a single day to ruin everyone's lives I guess.

Well that was the backbone of what caused the lawsuit from where the testimony came from. You'd have several cases where the accused man would bring that up, and the school's response would be "uhh we think you're doing this in retaliation so we're ignoring your complaint". This led to the (grimly) humorous case where two students in a mutual drunken hookup both woke up at different times and like *raced* to lodge their complaint. In this case, it was the man who got his complaint in half an hour early, and last I checked, was the one who got to stay in school.

I mean, aside from the fantastically dystopian new reality TV show they suggest, these cases show just what they're up against; that poster and that Dean's comments clearly demonstrate a bias that violates equal protection along sex-based lines. Given that it's hard enough to adjudicate these cases as it is, (to tie it back up to the on-topic topic) it's really why I wouldn't even want to try and guess how likely it is he's guilty, or even the full details of what he's guilty of.

Just too murky, and the complete opacity of the case regarding any details only makes things worse.

 

[Eyeseeing]

With what little I know about Todd Woodcroft, he never seemed like "that guy". I hope I'm right.

I’m thinking he texted in all lower case, without punctuation

 

[AlphaLackey]

I’m thinking he texted in all lower case, without punctuation

If he responded to ANY professional-setting text with "omg ikr?", he should be blacklisted just on principle.

 

[Eyeseeing]

Well......ya, that would be bad. But no spaces? Lock him up and throw away the key. Or if he misused there, their, they're. Also unforgivable.

Noone is another transgression I hate