DMR: Iowa's Lack of Transparency Serves No One

[CAARHawk]

While this is all true, he also addresses that.

Iowa, just like most schools, routinely releases information if it's positive (or at least not negative). Only when it could cause PR fallout do they clam up. Which is a natural response, but it's not right.

Actually, what if they do it to avoid the chance of litigation by the person about whom they are providing information.

Listen, I have been trained extensively in FERPA and HIPPA and have a strong working knowledge of employment law, as I used to do labor negotiations. These laws are there for a reason and the UI doesn't just comply when it is convenient. True student athletes waive certain protections for the purposes of NCAA reporting, awards and such, but those waivers do not give institutions carte Blanche to just go about telling everything to everyone.

This is what is so bad about articles such as this. They create a total public misperception and shouldn't be celebrated, but condemned.

That being said, in many circumstances, I agree that Iowa and particularly the football program should be a little more accessible, but not when it comes to issues of health, academics, or employment.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Iowa is without a doubt hiding skeletons. No doubt in my mind.
They operate just as Penn St did.

Axe to grind, much?

 

[GhostofBTT]

Axe to grind, much?

A lot of people seem to have strange axes to grind when it comes to this.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

I'm sure some preists, youth sports coaches and other perverts would have loved to hide behind HIPAA, FERPA and any other alphabet soup you want to toss up there, too.

The fact is that the universities have worked hard to craft a nifty little protective shell around themselves through over-arching interpretations of what the rules were intended to protect from exposure so they can cleanly hide and ignore these kinds of things. But the fact is the secrecy protects no one ... other than the perpetrators.

Too bad more journalists and other organizations aren't willing to try to smash those shells when appropriate.

<<Too bad more journalists and other organizations...>>

They can't have it both ways. Look at political reporting. It is so hopelessly biased toward the left. There has been so much about Barack Obama and his Administration that has gone unreported in order to protect an "agenda".

Either you report truth or you don't report at all. And when there are laws that govern or protect the release of information, you observe them. End of story.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

A lot of people seem to have strange axes to grind when it comes to this.

I just resent when people say, "This is how Iowa operates" or "If you knew KF the way 'I' know him", but then go no further. If you have something to say, say it. If you CAN'T say it--such as terms of a settlement, or it's not true--then DON'T say it.

All THAT said, let's everyone make sure this creep gets taken down. F-ing sicko.

 

[kmajhawk]

All of these Gray stories seem to keep getting posted by JDM. Very, very few of them have appeared from other posters. What is your fervent interest in this story Jon? I have this feeling that you're holding something back for just the right time, but want to keep this in the forefront of thought.

This (very minor) university donor is glad JonDMiller is posting the stories. The Gray story potentially is a black eye to the university I love and support involving individuals who perform on a higher stage and under brighter lights (UofI athletics) than the typical student. I'd like to know that athletic and university administrators are dealing effectively and thoroughly with this matter, unlike their former counterparts in State College did in a similar -- admittedly, much larger (as far as we know) -- matter over the past 20 years.

I'm curious why you seem so bent on hushing this up.

You are ignoring reality to think that similarities to Sandusky won't be made, as unfair as that might be. The university needs to get out in front on this story.

 

[doclee]

Actually, what if they do it to avoid the chance of litigation by the person about whom they are providing information.

Listen, I have been trained extensively in FERPA and HIPPA and have a strong working knowledge of employment law, as I used to do labor negotiations. These laws are there for a reason and the UI doesn't just comply when it is convenient. True student athletes waive certain protections for the purposes of NCAA reporting, awards and such, but those waivers do not give institutions carte Blanche to just go about telling everything to everyone.

This is what is so bad about articles such as this. They create a total public misperception and shouldn't be celebrated, but condemned.

That being said, in many circumstances, I agree that Iowa and particularly the football program should be a little more accessible, but not when it comes to issues of health, academics, or employment.

You would do well to listen to CARRHAWK on this one.

 

[Golfer]

You keep saying this, like you're implying the school is attempting to cover up sexual assault. If that's what you think, why don't you come out and say it?

I'm not sure they are smart enough to cover it up if that's what they wanted.

Yes, I keep saying this. It is clearly in the document. It is alleged. It should be investigated for what it is.

So my ax to grind, if that's what you want to call it, is that if someone is alleged to have fondled someone's else's genatilia, without their permission, if should be investigated for what is is. An alleged crime.

My position is not that difficult to understand, nor is it unreasonable.

 

[doclee]

<<Too bad more journalists and other organizations...>>

They can't have it both ways. Look at political reporting. It is so hopelessly biased toward the left. There has been so much about Barack Obama and his Administration that has gone unreported in order to protect an "agenda".

Either you report truth or you don't report at all. And when there are laws that govern or protect the release of information, you observe them. End of story.

Oh, please quit listening to Rush L.

 

[GhostofBTT]

I'm curious why you seem so bent on hushing this up.

You are ignoring reality to think that similarities to Sandusky won't be made, as unfair as that might be. The university needs to get out in front on this story.

I am not bent on hushing it up, I honestly don't care. However, I keep reading through these threads, and, liek I said before, people are digging out old axes to grind. Look at Hawkeyebob's post above.

So I guess my problem is not that it is a story, but that people are upset that the proper and legal channels are being pursued (Like CAAR said), and because they are unable to get information immediately and are unwilling to wait patiently (or have an agenda to pursue), they begin to make wild assumptions and allegations, or even, in your case, comparisons to the most heinous of crimes.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Actually, what if they do it to avoid the chance of litigation by the person about whom they are providing information.

Listen, I have been trained extensively in FERPA and HIPPA and have a strong working knowledge of employment law, as I used to do labor negotiations. These laws are there for a reason and the UI doesn't just comply when it is convenient. True student athletes waive certain protections for the purposes of NCAA reporting, awards and such, but those waivers do not give institutions carte Blanche to just go about telling everything to everyone.

This is what is so bad about articles such as this. They create a total public misperception and shouldn't be celebrated, but condemned.

That being said, in many circumstances, I agree that Iowa and particularly the football program should be a little more accessible, but not when it comes to issues of health, academics, or employment.

Like. And in addition to federal statutory law, there are many common law doctrines such as libel, slander, defamation, invasion of privacy, etc. claims that can be brought if the school discloses too much or discloses something that is factually inaccurate. The administration must emphasize legal compliance and protection from litigation as top priorities in the world in which we live today. That op-ed is but one of many examples of why the Rag is a failing newspaper.

 

[GhostofBTT]

I'm not sure they are smart enough to cover it up if that's what they wanted.

Yes, I keep saying this. It is clearly in the document. It is alleged. It should be investigated for what it is.

So my ax to grind, if that's what you want to call it, is that if someone is alleged to have fondled someone's else's genatilia, without their permission, if should be investigated for what is is. An alleged crime.

My position is not that difficult to understand, nor is it unreasonable.

Since you are "outraged" as you said earlier, and the allegations of the crime are in accessable public documents, why are you not asking the ICPD to investigate the crime then? You are continually implying (but never straight out saying, for some reason) that UofI is covering this up, but if the allegations are public record, then the case can be made. Go bug the cops, that way the liberal moderators won't be able to silence you.

 

[Golfer]

Proper legal channels? You are correct. Two issues however. One the personnel and human resource guidelines, the other is the criminal investigation.

Unless they were told by LE to not indicate that it had been turned over, there is nothing wrong with indicating that it has been turned over.

If it hasn't been turned over, then their attorney might have advised them to let the alleged victims do this, but he is missing the legal standard of reporting a potential crime. Which we are all obligated to do. In practice, people are rarely prosecuted for not turning in a potential crime, but it is their legal obligation.

 

[azhawkphan]

I'm sure some preists, youth sports coaches and other perverts would have loved to hide behind HIPAA, FERPA and any other alphabet soup you want to toss up there, too.

The fact is that the universities have worked hard to craft a nifty little protective shell around themselves through over-arching interpretations of what the rules were intended to protect from exposure so they can cleanly hide and ignore these kinds of things. But the fact is the secrecy protects no one ... other than the perpetrators.

Too bad more journalists and other organizations aren't willing to try to smash those shells when appropriate.

1.) I am a libertarian, and so against most federal regulations. I also think there should be more transparency. But...
2.) Are you suggesting that the UofI, news stations, and reporters not adhere to and comply with federal laws and regulations?
3.) Smash what shells, when, and who deems when it is appropriate to do so?

 

[Golfer]

Since you are "outraged" as you said earlier, and the allegations of the crime are in accessable public documents, why are you not asking the ICPD to investigate the crime then? You are continually implying (but never straight out saying, for some reason) that UofI is covering this up, but if the allegations are public record, then the case can be made. Go bug the cops, that way the liberal moderators won't be able to silence you.

I think you are correct. I do know Tom Miller. I think I'll talk to him today.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Proper legal channels? You are correct. Two issues however. One the personnel and human resource guidelines, the other is the criminal investigation.

Unless they were told by LE to not indicate that it had been turned over, there is nothing wrong with indicating that it has been turned over.

If it hasn't been turned over, then their attorney might have advised them to let the alleged victims do this, but he is missing the legal standard of reporting a potential crime. Which we are all obligated to do. In practice, people are rarely prosecuted for not turning in a potential crime, but it is their legal obligation.

Seriously, with the PSU stuff and the Clery Act being front and center in the minds of college administrators in the wake of that, even though I do not repesent or work for the University of Iowa, I would say with 100% certainty that they have notified police.

 

[Golfer]

Seriously, with the PSU stuff and the Clery Act being front and center in the minds of college administrators in the wake of that, even though I do not repesent or work for the University of Iowa, I would say with 100% certainty that they have notified police.

That's not what is being indicated by comments out of the AD late Friday evening, and follow up questions to the ICPD. These comments might or might not be true, but if true they are going to have a problem going forward, if they don't already, which I think they do.

 

[racerhawk]

Iowa is without a doubt hiding skeletons. No doubt in my mind.
They operate just as Penn St did.

 

[9YRPLAN]

Iowa had to hire a new employee just to comply with FOI requests.

if theres anything buried here, it will be found.

 

[tubahawk]

So I guess my problem is not that it is a story, but that people are upset that the proper and legal channels are being pursued (Like CAAR said), and because they are unable to get information immediately and are unwilling to wait patiently (or have an agenda to pursue), they begin to make wild assumptions and allegations, or even, in your case, comparisons to the most heinous of crimes.

Since Gray was allowed to resign (probably given the option of resign or be fired) that would indicate the University's investigation of this event was pretty much concluded. When exactly were they going to disseminate this information?

Sally Mason released a statement yesterday that she would review the case and take any necessary action, but the departure of Gray would signal that part of the process has already been completed.

The U of I got caught trying to quietly put this behind them and got called out. Now they have to go back and cover their own PR blunder. I'm not saying the whole event was a cover-up. I think the U of I followed proper protocol (in regards of the investigation). I simply think they didn't want this to come to public light.

It did, and now to prevent Sally Mason from looking like a hypocrite after criticizing Penn State about transparency they are pretending it is still under investigation by the University.