VTTW Board Index

http://blanknews.com/2015/08/limbo-strange-case-von-pearson/

Interesting. Thanks for posting.

I'm beginning to believe that he's done at UT.  If it's gone this long and he's not back, I don't think he'll be back. 

Welcome to the world of the SJWs, where reality is rejected outright

I don't know what SJW means but my impression is that the case against him must be pretty serious for the university to re-suspend him. Hopefully some clarity will come soon.

Social Justice Warriors
They do not give a DAMN about the truth, just the cause.  Example, see the absolute FALSE Rolling Stone article on a claimed rape in a UVA frat that was written to prove a fact known not to be true.
The re-suspension smacks of a SJW vendetta.  The no associated rationale is a key factor as SJW's need no facts or rationale as they know more than the law or due process.

I wonder if it has anything to do with keeping up appearances for the Title IX investigators...

Got it. You may be right. Then again maybe he really did do something. 

Either way I do think the university should explain it's stance.

I think that has a whole lot to do with....JMO.

Right now UT is running scared because of the sexual abuse claim and Federal investigation of their response and training. So to be safe, UT suspended VP so the Federal authorities could not claim UT was ignoring a sexual charge. UT has NEVER had to have any facts before punishing someone. They do not need proof, just suspicion to act against everyone but an administrator.

Hyams just tweeted that Pearson will not be prosecuted.

Reading this article again:

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/investigations/2015/07/16/feds-launch-sexual-violence-investigation-ut/30251729/

I notice that at the top the investigation was based on a single complaint.  Reading through it the first time, I thought there had been multiple complaints.  The article does not state any details about the complaint that led to the investigation.

I also think it's unfair for the Tennessean to tack on all the accounts of football players, when it's not even clear that the complaint was about a football player!  It could have been anyone.

But...thinking about it a bit more, what I suspect is that the complaint was about the Von Pearson case, and the Tennessean knew that, but could not report it, so instead strongly implied it.

If my guess is correct, then it might well explain the University's behavior.  If the complaint was specifically about Von Pearson then the caution may well be warranted.

So he's in the clear as far as the law goes, but he still has to be reinstated into school.  And given our "special guests" who are on campus right now, that might not be a given.

I agree that we're not necessarily out of the woods yet, but how on earth could UT justifying keeping him suspended if there's not enough evidence to even file charges?

At the very least, it would be a PR nightmare for the top brass at the university. UT fans will demand his reinstatement now...and probably should.

Yeah, really they are in a position where something could be iffy from a PR standpoint (clearing someone who was accused of a crime that's under tight scrutiny right now) or could be a disaster from a PR standpoint or even a lawsuit if they refuse to reinstate him. It may make them nervous to clear him because of the federal investigation but it's far better than the alternative.

reinstate him now that he's not going to be charged...I understand they may be uncomfortable with it, but how can they refuse? If there wasn't enough to charge him then what is there to be concerned about?           :patriot:

Not to be all lawyer like, but it's somewhat similar to allowing a civil suit after an acquittal in a criminal trial -- different standards of proof.  There may not be enough evidence for a district attorney to bring criminal charges, but school officials may feel they have enough evidence to uphold a suspension or expulsion.  One doesn't necessarily preclude the other.  I have no idea if that is what is happening in this situation, but it could be.

It would be hard for them to make that argument when Michael Williams is still allowed to take classes at the university when he was actually charged with a crime. I mean, I know they technically can, but it would be very hard to justify. It seems like they'd be opening themselves up to some terrible PR and maybe a lawsuit if they don't lift his suspension.

I have read about a few male students removed from colleges/universities for alleged sexual assault who have never been charged and who are now suing, but I haven't heard about success.  There is a real due process issue in many of these cases because accusations are being accepted by schools as fact -- "prove your innocence" to some extent.  It seems schools would prefer to err on that side than the other.