Jurors hear starkly different portrayals in opening statements of Jane Meyer's case against Iowa
- Thread starter Duke
- Start date
sure are a labeling finger pointer, aren't you.
atomicblue224
Well-Known Member
atomicblue224
Well-Known Member
tksirius
HN's Love Doctor
My bad.
It's fairly obvious that she became a piss poor employee after her buddy was fired. I can see why the U didn't settle. I will be very surprised if she actually wins her case. I wonder if Jane would have been fired a lot sooner if Griesbaum wasn't fired.
Is Griesbaum suing for the gender/orientation discrimination as well or something else? If it's the former, I wouldn't imagine she'll have much of a shot either, unless there is evidence that we haven't heard yet in the Meyer weiner trial. Even if Griesbaum somehow shows that she was treated/fired unfairly due to gender, etc., it doesn't excuse Meyer's behaviour and/or incompetence.
All this being said, Barta isn't exactly looking like a highly competent AD either. I wonder if he moves/pushed along to another gig in the near future.
tksirius
HN's Love Doctor
It's ridiculous if these coaches complain about this crap to Barta and it isn't immediately rectified. Barta is supposed to be the boss, not a putz. I wonder if Gary was a little scared of Jane. Like she raises her voice and he pees his pants scared.
EstronHawkKing
Well-Known Member
any word on how Tom Brands testimony went last week? Had heard briefly that he said nice things about Griesbaum, but nasty things about Meyer.
Obviously the university's evaluation of a conflict of interest was incorrect. Jane and Tracey's relationship was much deeper than they let be known. The effect of Tracey's firing on Jane proves there was a conflict of interest. Conflict of interest policies are put in place to protect both parties from damage or exploitation. The nature of their relationship put Jane in the position of having to make the choice between doing her job or emotionally supporting Tracey. The question is multi-faceted - was the COI evaluation primarily an "affirmative action" pass, was there deception on the part of Jane and Tracey as to the true nature of their relationship, is the university's COI policy flawed, or was a re-evaluation of the relationship overlooked? If it was the last one then who's responsibility was it to re-initiate an evaluation of their relationship? One thing is for certain - not matter which way the verdict goes there will be a re-evaluation of the university's conflict of interest policy.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
I think the Griesbaum case is a much different beast. I think the UofI had enough to easily fire Jane. I think it is going to be more problematic to explain to a court why only Greisbaum was investigated on complaints. It will be easy to show Fran screaming at players, losing his cool, or even football coaches ripping into players. I'm sure Greisbaum will point out the Rhabdo situation and Doyle and how the University stood behind him.
I think the Greisbaum trial is gonna be much tougher.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
You've got a white male supervisor, in a University setting, trying to manage an insubordinate, incompetent, gay, female in her mid-50's. One wrong step, and that's got "lawsuit" written all over it. I don't see it as fear at all....I see it as Gary in a virtual no-win situation. Hindsight being 20/20, there should have been written documentation to back all of this up....that way there would never be a he said/she said situation like is happening now. But on the flipside, I do understand why Barta doesn't do email correspondence with the coaches....you don't want to have a FOIA request and have things come to light that you want kept under wraps.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
I wholeheartedly agree. The Meyer case is pretty cut and dry. You've got an incompetent, insubordinate employee who was terminated. Either the jury believes Barta was justified in terminating her or they don't.
The field hockey situation is something entirely different altogether. You've got a successful coach, who appears to be genuinely liked and respected by her peers at the University, terminated due to the complaints of a handful of players and parents....whose complaints were actually found to not have violated any University policies. In addition, you've got a significant amount of complaints from players/parents of other sports that never got investigated....plus there is ample evidence of two prominent coaches (Ferentz and Fran) berating and/or doing things that actually harmed players (rhabdo). Unless there is a "smoking gun" in this case, I don't see how the University comes out on top here. I know that she was technically fired without cause and was paid the remainder of her contract out....but when you've got a gay female, in a University setting, you are typically asking for trouble if you do that....
Let's hope that there is a strategy. Maybe they are fighting the meyer case but settling with Greisbaum? I would hate for everyone to be under a microscope in football season and for this to be brought up during lulls in games
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
The only thing I can think of with Griesbaum is a coach can be fired at any time. They paid her the remainder of her contract and let her go. It isn't like they tried to fire her with cause and keep the money. They paid her the remainder of her contract and said goodbye. I'm not sure what exactly she can sue for, that they HAVE to extend her contract?
I'm thinking that is what the UofI is going to say. They could do the same tomorrow to Ferentz, Fran, Brands or any coach. Heck they did it to Lickliter, it happens all the time at universities.
