Sally Mason defends not releasing Coker info

[Golfer]

Just to be clear. Anything I ever posted about this subject, should never lead anyone to believe I feel I'm entitled to Mr. Coker's personal information.

 

[HomerChampless]

Nothing to see here. IMO, Iowa is also mightily trying not to make the same mistakes (and creating liabilities) of the Rhabdo crisis when players identities were made public. As well as satisfying the law.

 

[Golfer]

Honestly, if he were my child, I would want the university process to be scrutinized as much as possible, so I'd want them to release information such as the following:

It came to the attention of the university that Marcus Coker may have violated the student CoC. Person X investigated the matter and presented his/her findings to Person Y. Based on the investigation findings, Person Y decided that a one game suspension was warranted for violating the CoC.

Then, at least the people responsible for process/decision are just as well known as Coker, and their reputations are on the line as well. It's not fool proof but at least this provides one more reason not to act rashly with a punishment decision.

As a matter of good public policy, in a social democracy, I agree with this.

The process is outlined, and the University hasn't even indicated what parts, if any, of the process were followed, unless I missed something.

I guess I should add, it makes no difference to me, whether the situation is marcus Coker, and Iowa football, or an ethics investigation done by the State Legislature.

 

[DwayneTwill]

First of all, he did state on Facebook that he did nothing wrong and was being punished for something he didn't do.

Well, if he said it on facebook, it must be true.

 

[DwayneTwill]

this is a perfect example of why the "they should release info" idea is so stupid.

nothing is preventing Coker from clearing his name. if he wanted to talk he could. these laws are PROTECTING Coker not harming him.

Agree.

 

[DodgerHawki]

Of course he could speak...

Yes seriously. He's already stated that he think's he got punished for something he didn't do. So what's stopping him from further explaining that comment? What's stopping him from explaining the steps he took to clear his name which would include the appeals process?

Just to be clear, if I were his friend/attorney, I'd advise against making any public statements on the matter that may be used against him in a court of law. But if it's so cut and dried and Iowa railroaded an innocent man, then surely he wouldn't need to worry about a court case.

So in short, I take Coker's lack of further explanation to mean he would rather not explain further and would just like to move on. Thus I would infur that he'd want the University to keep his private matter private and therefore the University is bound by federal law to do so.

but what benefit is there to him to do so? There is a segment of people who will not believe him no matter what he says. My guess is any statement he could let out there would just raise more questions than it answered.

 

[Other]

Yes seriously. He's already stated that he think's he got punished for something he didn't do. So what's stopping him from further explaining that comment? What's stopping him from explaining the steps he took to clear his name which would include the appeals process?

Just to be clear, if I were his friend/attorney, I'd advise against making any public statements on the matter that may be used against him in a court of law. But if it's so cut and dried and Iowa railroaded an innocent man, then surely he wouldn't need to worry about a court case.

So in short, I take Coker's lack of further explanation to mean he would rather not explain further and would just like to move on. Thus I would infur that he'd want the University to keep his private matter private and therefore the University is bound by federal law to do so.

Coker had to sign a gag order. He can't talk about it and he has stated so publicly.
Not to mention the fact that if he does start talking to the media and makes the UofI look bad then his chances of ever playing football again in any meaningful way are about nil because no other institution would want to have anything to do with him.

 

[DwayneTwill]

Coker had to sign a gag order. He can't talk about it and he has stated so publicly.

Where's evidence of that?

 

[Billso]

Coker had to sign a gag order. He can't talk about it and he has stated so publicly.
Not to mention the fact that if he does start talking to the media and makes the UofI look bad then his chances of ever playing football again in any meaningful way are about nil because no other institution would want to have anything to do with him.

Precisely. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

I'll wager that people who interpret "no comment" = "must be guilty of something" have never been through a significant legal process. Right up there with people who say "I'll sue" having no clue what that really entails.

Most would be amazed - genuinely amazed - at how much a simple public comment can hurt you and set off a chain reaction of bad events. Especially in the hands of a criminal prosecutor, but also in civil actions. As one example, the slightest contradiction with prior statements can open you to perjury and/or re-open an investigation and/or hose you in a lawsuit. It is non-obvious to non-lawyers. There's virtually no upside. As one lawyer has said "it's a minefield, you might not die, but why would you walk out there?"

 

[bcl20]

Precisely. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

I'll wager that people who interpret "no comment" = "must be guilty of something" have never been through a significant legal process. Right up there with people who say "I'll sue" having no clue what that really entails.

Most would be amazed - genuinely amazed - at how much a simple public comment can hurt you and set off a chain reaction of bad events. Especially in the hands of a criminal prosecutor, but also in civil actions. As one example, the slightest contradiction with prior statements can open you to perjury and/or re-open an investigation and/or hose you in a lawsuit. It is non-obvious to non-lawyers. There's virtually no upside.

I like this post a lot.

 

[RocketHawk]

Honestly, if he were my child, I would want the university process to be scrutinized as much as possible, so I'd want them to release information such as the following:

It came to the attention of the university that Marcus Coker may have violated the student CoC. Person X investigated the matter and presented his/her findings to Person Y. Based on the investigation findings, Person Y decided that a one game suspension was warranted for violating the CoC.

Then, at least the people responsible for process/decision are just as well known as Coker, and their reputations are on the line as well. It's not fool proof but at least this provides one more reason not to act rashly with a punishment decision.

I would agree this seems very reasonable. I think this the least that the U should be releasing.

I don't say this because I want to know what happened, but since this issue was handled by the U and not the athletic department this information should be public knowledge (parties involved in the investigation and who made the decision to suspend). The core issue of keeping the student information private is accomplished, but the people involved in the investigation and suspension should not be shielded.

Under Iowa law there are very few things that are not of public record for any government entity (emails, financial, reports & phone records), anything that falls outside the students privacy should be open to the public.

 

[Golfer]

I would agree this seems very reasonable. I think this the least that the U should be releasing.

I don't say this because I want to know what happened, but since this issue was handled by the U and not the athletic department this information should be public knowledge (parties involved in the investigation and who made the decision to suspend). The core issue of keeping the student information private is accomplished, but the people involved in the investigation and suspension should not be shielded.

Under Iowa law there are very few things that are not of public record for any government entity (emails, financial, reports & phone records), anything that falls outside the students privacy should be open to the public.

You stated this much better than I. I think some are confused by our desire for transparency as being one and the same with wanting to know personal information.

 

[Clark]

Coker had to sign a gag order. He can't talk about it and he has stated so publicly.
Not to mention the fact that if he does start talking to the media and makes the UofI look bad then his chances of ever playing football again in any meaningful way are about nil because no other institution would want to have anything to do with him.

I hadn't heard about him signing a gag order. Can you link an article showing this? I'm not questioning you, I'd just like to see what grounds they gave for making him sign one.

 

[311hawk]

I get why we don't get the Coker info...doesn't make any less of a hag and a horrid fit for our university.

 

[DwayneTwill]

I get why we don't get the Coker info...doesn't make any less of a hag and a horrid fit for our university.

How so?

 

[tm3308]

I would agree this seems very reasonable. I think this the least that the U should be releasing.

I don't say this because I want to know what happened, but since this issue was handled by the U and not the athletic department this information should be public knowledge (parties involved in the investigation and who made the decision to suspend). The core issue of keeping the student information private is accomplished, but the people involved in the investigation and suspension should not be shielded.

Under Iowa law there are very few things that are not of public record for any government entity (emails, financial, reports & phone records), anything that falls outside the students privacy should be open to the public.

You stated this much better than I. I think some are confused by our desire for transparency as being one and the same with wanting to know personal information.

This. I don't care to know the details of the incident. But the public DOES have the right to know the steps that the university took in handling the case.

We don't have to know exactly WHAT they knew. But the timeline should be something that's revealed. WHEN did they learn of the police investigation? When did the university investigation start, and subsequently conclude? What steps were taken throughout the process? Who was involved in the process (as in university officials, etc.)?

Those are the sorts of things that a public institution should be transparent on, and they can easily release that information without releasing any confidential, private information on Coker.

 

[bandgrocks]

This. I don't care to know the details of the incident. But the public DOES have the right to know the steps that the university took in handling the case.

We don't have to know exactly WHAT they knew. But the timeline should be something that's revealed. WHEN did they learn of the police investigation? When did the university investigation start, and subsequently conclude? What steps were taken throughout the process? Who was involved in the process (as in university officials, etc.)?

Those are the sorts of things that a public institution should be transparent on, and they can easily release that information without releasing any confidential, private information on Coker.

Simple Google search "university of iowa student code of conduct"

http://www.uiowa.edu/~athlss/StudentAthleteHndbk2011.pdf

The steps below are to be followed if you believe that you have been treated unfairly or if you have a complaint or grievance.
If you have other questions about how to proceed through the grievance procedures, consult with the Associate Athletics Director for Student Services and Compliance.
• Step 1: A student who has a complaint about a disciplinary action related to the student’s athletic status or financial aid attempts to resolve the issue with the head coach.
• Step 2: If a satisfactory outcome is not reached with the head coach, the student may submit a written request to the Athletics Director or the Associate Athletics Director for Student Services and Compliance. The student must include a full explanation of the complaint and the specific action requested. If the complaint is resolved to the student-athlete’s satisfaction, a written statement explaining the terms will be issued by the Athletics Director to the student-athlete and the head coach.
• Step 3: If a satisfactory solution is not reached with the Athletics Director, the student may request a hearing. The hearing shall take place before one of three panels:
a. Review Panel of the Presidential Committee on Athletics. This panel hears all cases that have no impact on financial aid. (His scholarship was going to be renewed, so he would fall in this category)
b. Financial Aid Non-Renewal Committee. This committee hears all cases concerning any reduction or cancellation of financial aid during a period of award, or concerning the non renewal of or reduction in a student’s financial aid for the upcoming year. The Director of Financial Aid shall appoint the committee with one member coming from each of the following units: Offices of the Dean of Students and Registrar, and Financial Aid Advisory Committee.
c. Joint Hearing. If, in the judgment of the Director of Financial Aid, the request has potential financial aid implications, a joint hearing shall be held before two panels: The Committee shall decide the financial aid issues(s), and the Review Panel shall decide all other issues.
• Step 4: Student may appeal to the President the decision of the Review Panel or Committee within (5) University business days following receipt of the written decision. The President shall render a decision within (30) calendar days.

He has an attorney, I'm sure Leon Spies has told him to keep quiet.

"There was an accusation made in Iowa City, but no criminal charges were brought against Marcus," said Coker's lawyer, Leon Spies. "He chose to withdraw from the University of Iowa. He has had a great deal of support here within the university community and from family and friends. Everyone is heartened to know he is going to pursue his college career."

Marcus Coker transfers to Stony Brook

 

[tm3308]

Simple Google search "university of iowa student code of conduct"

http://www.uiowa.edu/~athlss/StudentAthleteHndbk2011.pdf

The steps below are to be followed if you believe that you have been treated unfairly or if you have a complaint or grievance.
If you have other questions about how to proceed through the grievance procedures, consult with the Associate Athletics Director for Student Services and Compliance.
• Step 1: A student who has a complaint about a disciplinary action related to the student’s athletic status or financial aid attempts to resolve the issue with the head coach.
• Step 2: If a satisfactory outcome is not reached with the head coach, the student may submit a written request to the Athletics Director or the Associate Athletics Director for Student Services and Compliance. The student must include a full explanation of the complaint and the specific action requested. If the complaint is resolved to the student-athlete’s satisfaction, a written statement explaining the terms will be issued by the Athletics Director to the student-athlete and the head coach.
• Step 3: If a satisfactory solution is not reached with the Athletics Director, the student may request a hearing. The hearing shall take place before one of three panels:
a. Review Panel of the Presidential Committee on Athletics. This panel hears all cases that have no impact on financial aid. (His scholarship was going to be renewed, so he would fall in this category)
b. Financial Aid Non-Renewal Committee. This committee hears all cases concerning any reduction or cancellation of financial aid during a period of award, or concerning the non renewal of or reduction in a student’s financial aid for the upcoming year. The Director of Financial Aid shall appoint the committee with one member coming from each of the following units: Offices of the Dean of Students and Registrar, and Financial Aid Advisory Committee.
c. Joint Hearing. If, in the judgment of the Director of Financial Aid, the request has potential financial aid implications, a joint hearing shall be held before two panels: The Committee shall decide the financial aid issues(s), and the Review Panel shall decide all other issues.
• Step 4: Student may appeal to the President the decision of the Review Panel or Committee within (5) University business days following receipt of the written decision. The President shall render a decision within (30) calendar days.

He has an attorney, I'm sure Leon Spies has told him to keep quiet.

"There was an accusation made in Iowa City, but no criminal charges were brought against Marcus," said Coker's lawyer, Leon Spies. "He chose to withdraw from the University of Iowa. He has had a great deal of support here within the university community and from family and friends. Everyone is heartened to know he is going to pursue his college career."

Marcus Coker transfers to Stony Brook

That doesn't really answer the most important of the questions I laid out. That's your committee that makes the ruling. But that's still not a timeline and not what steps were taken throughout the investigation. That just tells us who's in charge.