2018 Buckeyes Football

[EdMonix11]

There was a much uglier incident in 2009 where nothing came of it in the legal system...but I'm sure your smell test is pretty good?

I mean, I know how the legal system handles DV cases in Ohio. I can't speak to Florida laws but Urban Meyer did refute what's in that police report from 2009.

Trying to take this incident at face value.....i.e. "Well, the police didn't charge anyone" seems a bit disingenuous given what we know. Courtney also complained of stalking and trespassing, something that was corroborated by neighbors calling the police after one (known) incident.

But the bar to charge someone with a crime is WAY lower than convicting someone with a crime. All you need in Ohio is a mark, a bruise, a threatening text message/phone call or any signs of distress within the home and that's enough to charge someone with DV.

I think the telling thing, if you're trying to read incomplete information at this point, is the October 2015 incident appears to have set in motion Courtney finally following through on what she seems to have deemed a last straw.

After that incident in October, Courtney complained Zach was stalking her......and a restraining order was issued against Zach, something that requires paperwork, a hearing, evidence and a judge ruling it is necessary / founded. The PURPOSE of a restraining order is to stop someone from engaging in threatening or intimidating behavior. Courtney had to PROVE there was some immediate danger to her if Zach was not restrained on legal grounds. Courts need tangible evidence to grant one. So please, go ahead and explain how a restraining order would be granted if something didn't pass the "smell" test?

Your snark is duly noted, but any investigation into DV almost always comes with a TPO so why wasn't there one immediately after she filed the now infamous police report in October which resulted in an investigation into felony domestic violence?

After the issuance of the restraining order, she also went forward with divorce proceedings shortly after. Then about a month later, the neighbors call police when Zach is belligerently beating on windows and throwing Christmas decorations.

SHE called the police citing her neighbors seeing him. She also said he was driving drunk, drove over a curb and almost hit a sign.

Regardless, how can she file and allegedly be granted a restraining order on November 10th of 2015 and then be pulled over for speeding less than two months later and cite domestic issues with her ex? Either there was no TPO/CPO granted or she was lying to get out of a speeding ticket. Again, these are pretty big inconsistencies.

In all of the incidents you can argue "no charges were filed" but it's pretty tough to ignore the picture it paints. I'm sure he'll be presumed innocent until proven otherwise in the court of law but this isn't the court of law. The guy doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt in the court of public opinion until he PROVES everything that appears to be true about him is not. This isn't a guy with a sterling reputation and record. People should be very skeptical of him but in this situation, it is convenient to not be.

Guilty before proven innocent, got it.

I'm not taking anybody's side in this, but with my personal knowledge of how the State of Ohio handles DV cases, I am pointing out that there are HUGE inconsistencies in Courtney Smith's allegations. People forget that she has a responsibility in all of this too.... to be honest, transparent and have a consistent corroborating story to back up her allegations.

I don't doubt that DV occurred at some point in their relationship but, as more information comes to light, she did seem to call the police an awful lot and accuse her ex of many unsubstantiated incidents.

 

[Ohio]

There is a pretty big difference between claiming someone was arrested for a felony and that someone was investigated and not charged.

Especially at this level of journalism. The distinction is not at all minor, and McMurphy should have ABSOLUTELY been more forthright about the edit.

Yeah. To say that only accounts for a 2% inaccuracy is what leads people to believe there certain lenses people look through in this situation.

I find it curious that a reddit user and 11 Warriors were able to obtain police reports & publish them, yet McMurphy has yet to publish a police report that allegedly has the arrest box checked off. You would think he'd do this to defend his credibility, no?

He sure has no issue egging on the "anti OSU" mob, but people reasonably ask for evidence to backup his fake report and he won't produce it.

 

[I'mWithDan]

There is a pretty big difference between claiming someone was arrested for a felony and that someone was investigated and not charged.

Especially at this level of journalism. The distinction is not at all minor, and McMurphy should have ABSOLUTELY been more forthright about the edit.

Where did I say he should not have been? "(or however you grade this)" was in there but anyway....

My response was to @Ohio saying the report not being 100% accurate somehow scrambled Meyer's brain and made him answer a question differently when asked. "Had his report actually been accurate, perhaps Urban has a different answer at media day." - @Ohio

McMurphy was certainly sloppy in the reporting.....I don't know anyone isn't arguing that. My response was that I found it ridiculous that people are trying to say that someone not accurately reporting details in a story made someone incapable of giving a response. He wasn't even asked about the report.

The two questions were:

Q. You said earlier that you were aware of the incident with Zach in 2009. Your inquiry into 2015 was unfounded. You couldn’t find anything. Why fire Zach now if you had kept him on staff after 2009?

Q. Just to clarify, did firing Zach now, is that — is it because any of this became public, or is it because there was another incident that led to the latest protective order on Friday?

Neither question references the details of the report. Meyer knew what happened, he decided to not be forthcoming. Saying McMurphy's inaccuracies on the reporting somehow influenced Meyer's response to the question above is laughable, especially looking at Meyer's transcript.

 

[TheISHT]

He should of just declined to comment or say you need to ask those questions to the compliance office. Then everyone could still argue a coverup.

 

[billmac91]

https://anchor.fm/the-captains-log/...-Campus-with-Mark-Packer---ESPNU-Radio-e1vesq

Excellent interview with a caller on Mark Packer's ESPNU show, where a compliance officer walks through the OSU allegations, and essentially sides with Meyer, although not necessarily with Athletic Department.

Said the NCAA "has hammered home if you see sexual, physical, domestic violence, you report to your boss and then DO NOTHING". There are multiple reasons for this:

1. They're not trained to handle violence....they're athletic employees
2. If you side with abuser and you're wrong, you open the school up to lawsuits and Title IX compliance issues
3. If you side with the victim, and the alleged abuser is innocent, you will get crushed on a "wrongful termination" counter-suit which could include excessive damages.
4. Every university has Title IX and compliance offices....it's their job to investigate and dictate what happens after abuse is reported.

If Urban did in fact report what he heard, as his twitter statement says, I see no possible way he is fired unless tOSU wants to eat the entirety of his contract and possibly get hit with damages on the way out for wrongful termination.

 

[Ohio]

https://anchor.fm/the-captains-log/...-Campus-with-Mark-Packer---ESPNU-Radio-e1vesq

Excellent interview with a caller on Mark Packer's ESPNU show, where a compliance officer walks through the OSU allegations, and essentially sides with Meyer, although not necessarily with Athletic Department.

Said the NCAA "has hammered home if you see sexual, physical, domestic violence, you report and DO NOTHING". There are multiple reasons for this:

1. They're not trained to handle violence....they're athletic employees
2. If you side with abuser and you're wrong, you open the school up to lawsuits and Title IX compliance issues
3. If you side with the victim, and the alleged abuser is innocent, you will get crushed on a "dismissal termination" counter-suit which could include excessive damages.
4. Every university has Title IX and compliance offices....it's their job to investigate and dictate what happens after abuse is reported.

If Urban did in fact report what he heard, as his twitter statement says, I see no possible way he is fired unless tOSU wants to eat the entirety of his contract and possibly get hit with damages on the way out for wrongful termination.

He ain't going anywhere.

 

[MGMT]

Cortney’s attorney has come out and said she was never been contacted by OSU; IF, proper protocols were followied? does OSU have any responsibility to do that procedurally speaking?

I hope this isn’t construed as attack the victim etc. I’m literally just curious. If the university is aware there is police involvement why would they? Don’t understand why you’d stick more hands in a cookie jar given something of that magnitude and sensitivity.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Cortney’s attorney has come out and said she was never been contacted by OSU; IF, proper protocols were followied? does OSU have any responsibility to do that procedurally speaking?

I hope this isn’t construed as attack the victim etc. I’m literally just curious. If the university is aware there is police involvement why would they? Don’t understand why you’d stick more hands in a cookie jar given something of that magnitude and sensitivity.

It would seem odd if they did not but it doesn't necessarily constitute a violation of protocol. For the sake of their own due diligence, they likely should have pursued a statement from her but their procedures may only involve law enforcement. Not sure if they (university procedures) are publicly available to confirm that.

I don't necessarily think it is "too many hands in the cookie jar" though, as pursing a statement from her (if they did not) may have prompted Meyer to let Smith go or to quietly find him another landing spot.....thus avoiding this whole situation.

Even if it isn't a procedural requirement, they certainly should have sought another side to any story in a situation like this. It's possible they did that through police channels but it is still curious as to why they would not have approached Courtney, even in a very informal, lets just have a conversation type setting.

 

[AZ_]

Cortney’s attorney has come out and said she was never been contacted by OSU; IF, proper protocols were followied? does OSU have any responsibility to do that procedurally speaking?

I hope this isn’t construed as attack the victim etc. I’m literally just curious. If the university is aware there is police involvement why would they? Don’t understand why you’d stick more hands in a cookie jar given something of that magnitude and sensitivity.

Simply put, no.

They do not have a responsibility to do so. That is the job of the Powell police.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Just for those who are interested, the Workplace Policy and Sexual Conduct Policy are publicly available online.

https://hr.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/policy705.pdf

https://hr.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/policy115.pdf

It would seem there was plenty of available info, within these university guidelines, to have terminated Smith long ago.....arrest or not.

It will be interesting to see how they officially answer or frame this as an athletic department.....why he was kept around given how the policies are outlined above.

There's certainly the possibility he did something else to satisfy these policies, like mandatory counseling, etc....I also am not versed in how Courtney not being an employee may effect the application of any university action.

 

[col63onel]

Just for those who are interested, the Workplace Policy and Sexual Conduct Policy are publicly available online.

https://hr.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/policy705.pdf

https://hr.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/policy115.pdf

It would seem there was plenty of available info, within these university guidelines, to have terminated Smith long ago.....arrest or not.

It will be interesting to see how they officially answer or frame this as an athletic department.....why he was kept around given how the policies are outlined above.

There's certainly the possibility he did something else to satisfy these policies, like mandatory counseling, etc....I also am not versed in how Courtney not being an employee may effect the application of any university action.

Policies were revised after 2015. What was changed then?

 

[Ohio]

View: https://twitter.com/kylamb8/status/1026806127516942337


I suggest everyone read this piece from Lamb (who has been a great follow throughout this process). In this, he covers the policy that @I'mWithDan posted above.

 

[Ohio]

Cortney’s attorney has come out and said she was never been contacted by OSU; IF, proper protocols were followied? does OSU have any responsibility to do that procedurally speaking?

I hope this isn’t construed as attack the victim etc. I’m literally just curious. If the university is aware there is police involvement why would they? Don’t understand why you’d stick more hands in a cookie jar given something of that magnitude and sensitivity.

No. And according to Lamb, not only do they not have to, it's often recommended not to.

 

[Ohio]

Once the police say what we expect them to say, the goalposts will move one final time to "Smith should have been fired in 2015 anyways, so fire Urban/Gene now!" for a hot second before the story dies.

I'm pretty sure this is how this story will end and people will just have to accept it. OSU/Gene/Urban will say they decided to give Smith one more chance in 2015, and he broke that in 2018 when he was actually charged & arrested, so he was fired.

I know it's not what people want (Urban's head on a spike, OSU burnt to the ground) but they are going to have to get over it.

And here we go...

 

[I'mWithDan]

Policies were revised after 2015. What was changed then?

From how I read the History citations, neither have changed since (after) the 2015 incident.

Both were renamed in 2015 and the re-naming noted as a revision but the last edit to the workplace policy was in 2006. The last edit to the sexual misconduct policy was 2013 (per the last page of the documents).

University would have to confirm but it looks like both policies were in place, as they are today, when everything was happening.