ESPN sues Notre Dame over police records

[Bogtrotter07]

One of the pieces I read specifically mentioned Seeberg, so yes, Shembo. Fishing for others, too.

The Indiana State officials, in conjunction with the St. Josephs County Prosecutor's Office released most of the Seeberg investigation, in a press conference. Since the state(county) took over from the University, they had most of the early reports done by the campus department. Without violating anyone's privacy the states attorney and the local prosecutor made it pretty clear that the most that was being investigated was a breast-fondling (above the clothing). When I was twelve, this was a really big deal.

It was a fishing expedition. And the results were a win for ESPN. The rationality of our legal system saved them from themselves. Even an anti-ND biased public would have wondered what kind of ass-clowns ran this thing at ESPN when only minor incidents turned up, and rape, murder, and other felonious activity is more common at almost every other football factory.

I'm very uncomfortable with this lack of transparency for any police force. There's just too much potential for abuse, cover-ups, and other wrong-doing. Any group operating as a police force, regardless of what you want to call them, is a de facto police force and their actions need to be open to scrutiny and be held to a high standard. If you don't think so, look at all the stuff we find out every day about some police force from across the country who has been abusing their power, engaging in wide spread corruption, or abusing the citizens they're supposed to be serving and protecting.

I'm disappointed in some of you here. If this were the campus police for any other university, you'd be roundly criticizing that school for hiding behind the law and insinuating that they didn't want their police records opened because of all the shenanigans they must be covering up.

Did you ever meet any of them? Have you seen them in action? Ever been to the campus?

Anyone really familiar with the campus and school, will tell you, whether they think the campus police are dicks or not, that the real beasts on the ND campus are the game ushers; and, with du Lac very little gets swept under the rug. Unless you are a celebrity. And then they still expel you. They just don't make it public. Ask Eddie and Bing's sons.

 

[IrishLax]

I'm very uncomfortable with this lack of transparency for any police force. There's just too much potential for abuse, cover-ups, and other wrong-doing. Any group operating as a police force, regardless of what you want to call them, is a de facto police force and their actions need to be open to scrutiny and be held to a high standard. If you don't think so, look at all the stuff we find out every day about some police force from across the country who has been abusing their power, engaging in wide spread corruption, or abusing the citizens they're supposed to be serving and protecting.

I'm disappointed in some of you here. If this were the campus police for any other university, you'd be roundly criticizing that school for hiding behind the law and insinuating that they didn't want their police records opened because of all the shenanigans they must be covering up.

If lawmakers want to change the law, fine. Until then it seems ridiculous to suggest that campus police should have to respond to every fishing expedition Disney wants. With actual serious cases (i.e. Lizzie Seeberg) they turn over all files to the South Bend DA. It's one thing to say "I would like files related to a specific incident" like what the South Bend Tribune did. I understand that request. It's another to ask for years and years of documents of every hypothetical incident that ever happened on campus... that's a completely unreasonable request.

Law is currently written as such specifically because the state didn't think that small security police forces for private entities should be subject to be subject to the same burdens as larger, public police forces. Their roles are very different. I wouldn't mind the law being changed, but I'm also happy that 3 decades of precedent weren't thrown out the window on a whim.

 

[ulukinatme]

Corruption is certainly bad, but how much wrong can really occur on a campus of 10,000 students? It's not like this is the Godfather and there's a mile of corrupt cops and paid politicians protecting secrets from within the university. If something major happens it's going to come out, it's not going to stay quiet. As I said before, arrests and incidents occur on every campus in the US on a weekly basis, but Notre Dame is one of a few schools that are under a microscope with such things. Trivial news at one school because a headline if it's Notre Dame. In serious cases the campus police turns records over to the DA and that should suffice when it comes to the law.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Your arguments keep coming back to, "We do things the right way and there's nothing to worry about because we tell you so."

I don't doubt that ND tries to do things the right way more than most schools do. I doubt there is anyone who believes the NDSP is covering up murders and a drug ring. Nobody expects to find NDSP is comparable to the Tallahassee PD. I don't even have a problem with campus police turning minor issues over to the HC instead of making a legal issue of kids being kids.

The problem is that NDSP has all the powers of any other police department and thus are subject to the same potential abuses of that power as any other PD. Just telling us that they would never abuse that power and we shouldn't worry about it because they're above such wrong doing is inadequate. We've seen far too many PD's, schools, churches, community leaders, football coaches, medical personnel, youth workers, financial advisors, and others get caught committing gross ethical violations after constantly being told that they were to be trusted and would never do such a thing.

It's what has led to discovering all too late that football teams were full of drug using thugs, that female students at the military academies were being routinely sexually assaulted, that financial advisers were stealing millions from clients, that priests were molesting kids and being quietly relocated instead of prosecuted, that Sandusky was molesting kids for years, and that numerous police departments around the country were abusing citizens or covering up crimes by the local college's athletes.

 

[IrishLax]

Your arguments keep coming back to, "We do things the right way and there's nothing to worry about because we tell you so."

Whose argument?

I don't doubt that ND tries to do things the right way more than most schools do. I doubt there is anyone who believes the NDSP is covering up murders and a drug ring. Nobody expects to find NDSP is comparable to the Tallahassee PD. I don't even have a problem with campus police turning minor issues over to the HC instead of making a legal issue of kids being kids.

The problem is that NDSP has all the powers of any other police department and thus are subject to the same potential abuses of that power as any other PD. Just telling us that they would never abuse that power and we shouldn't worry about it because they're above such wrong doing is inadequate. We've seen far too many PD's, schools, churches, community leaders, football coaches, medical personnel, youth workers, financial advisors, and others get caught committing gross ethical violations after constantly being told that they were to be trusted and would never do such a thing.

Except they only have jurisdiction on the grounds of Notre Dame. It is no different than corporate security that is empowered to carry guns and make arrests enforcing the law on their corporate campus. You can't have the same abuses when the scope of the operation is completely different. The fact that a small security police is given permission to operate does not make them the same as a town's or city's full-fledged police force.

And like was noted above, every incident that is major has the files turned over to the DA.

It's what has led to discovering all too late that football teams were full of drug using thugs, that female students at the military academies were being routinely sexually assaulted, that financial advisers were stealing millions from clients, that priests were molesting kids and being quietly relocated instead of prosecuted, that Sandusky was molesting kids for years, and that numerous police departments around the country were abusing citizens or covering up crimes by the local college's athletes.

I don't disagree with you, but most of things on your list aren't applicable here. In the late 2000s, ND kicked its best basketball player out of school for a simple marijuana possession. There hasn't once been an accusation of NDSP abusing anyone's rights. And so on and so forth.

The two applicable ones are sexual assault and institutional coverup. The former is addressed by the fact that any victim can go to the South Bend police immediately if they want and don't think NDSP is doing an adequate job. And NDSP turns over all files to the local DA who can then release them through applicable requests.

Institutional coverup is an unknown specifically by design. And transparency helps with getting rid of said coverups.

Again, I'd be fine with Indiana changing their laws. At that point, ND could choose to completely scrap its security police or hire a dozen more people to handle burdensome requests. Until then, it seems unreasonable to ask a very small security police force for a private entity to turn over all of their records for years on a whim. ESPN didn't ask for a couple documents in a specific date range related to a particular incident.

It should also be pointed out that SBPD and Indiana State Police are empowered to operate on ND's campus and do so very regularly. So there are two public police forces subject to all FOIA-esque laws who perform police actions on the campus. I just don't get the point of why a small private security group has to be over-burdened... and the courts don't either, and the law was specifically written this way for a reason.

 

[Bishop2b5]

The fact that NDSP is technically called a small private security agency instead of what they are, a de facto police department, is part of the problem. It allows them to operate without significant oversight from anyone but their employer. That employer may be the purest entity on the planet, but there's also a huge potential there to sweep anything embarrassing to that employer under the rug. NOBODY is above that temptation for abuse.

How many movies or TV shows have we all seen where a corporation's private security force was off the leash, or a small town's PD was controlled by the local gazillionaire and acted as his abusive private security force? No matter how noble or ethical an entity appears, claims to be, or actually is, that potential is there and it's very real... and there are hundreds of real life examples of it happening at places we all thought were 100% above reproach.

Again, if this were USC, Stanford, Harvard, Bama, FSU, or any other school, most of you would be roundly (and correctly) criticizing them for not gladly opening their records to examination and accusing them of having something to hide for not doing so. I doubt NDSP has anything of great significance to hide, so why not prove that instead of acting otherwise?

 

[IrishLax]

The fact that NDSP is technically called a small private security agency instead of what they are, a de facto police department, is part of the problem. It allows them to operate without significant oversight from anyone but their employer. That employer may be the purest entity on the planet, but there's also a huge potential there to sweep anything embarrassing to that employer under the rug. NOBODY is above that temptation for abuse.

Dude... that is literally exactly the point. Small security departments that only answer to a private employer and operate on private grounds are not subject to the Indiana public access laws. It does not matter how pure the entity is. It could be freaking Enron that we're talking about. The differentiation in the law specifically exists so that private entities can have security on their private grounds without being subject to dealing with the burdens of being public. The reason why is that there is no public trust issue with a private security police as they ONLY police the private grounds. And anyone that has an issue with how they dealt with an incident can go to one of the public police forces at any time. So there is literally no scenario where they can cover up a crime with a victim... victimless crimes (i.e. underage drinking) could certainly be covered up if there's no complaining party. If you think it's reasonable for ESPN to make blanket requests with no specificity in order to unearth all incidents of underage drinking by students then we simply disagree. I find that very unreasonable, as does the law. It would be little different than demanding reports from a corporations office security over people who stole a stapler.

Again, just to be very clear, both the State Police and SBPD (two PUBLIC agencies) perform the major police work in the area. NDSP is mostly responsible for writing parking tickets on campus, stopping undergrads from getting alcohol from the parking lots to the dorms, and patrolling to make sure people feel safe walking around at night.

Again, if this were USC, Stanford, Harvard, Bama, FSU, or any other school, most of you would be roundly (and correctly) criticizing them for not gladly opening their records to examination and accusing them of having something to hide for not doing so. I doubt NDSP has anything of great significance to hide, so why not prove that instead of acting otherwise?

Just completely and utterly false. Again, ESPN is not asking for files/reports related to a specific incident. If that was the case, sure, people would probably feel how you're alleging they would feel.

This is nothing more than a muckraking attempt, and the law is the law. And most of us thinking if you operate one way for 30+ years then it's ridiculous to ask someone to change on a whim.

 

[ND NYC]

Bishop as an alabama guy your last 4 posts should all be in italics

 

[IrishLax]

Just to be clear, because I think there is confusion, here is how a hypothetical crime (let's say theft) is addressed:
Option 1) Person A steals from Person B. NDSP investigates and turns their findings over to the local DA for prosecution. The reports are publicly available.
Option 2) Person A steals from Person B. Person B isn't happy with the NDSP investigation, so they call SBPD. Both NDSP and SBPD turn their findings over to the local DA for prosecution. The reports are publicly available.

There is no scenario where there is a crime with a victim and the reports aren't publicly available. None.

Now, if you consider a victimless crime (let's say trespassing):
Option 1) NDSP catches someone on top of Stepan. They decide not to prosecute and instead tell them to get down and not do it again.
There is no Option 2 because their is no complaining party.

So these are the "crimes" that could be "covered up"... basically minor stuff where someone gets let off with a warning instead of fined or whatever. Could they also cover up a meth lab getting run out of Keenan Hall? Absolutely. But in that case, there certainly wouldn't be a police report on file saying "I saw Walter White running a meth lab where Zalanad is supposed to be. Did not prosecute." So... again, what is the point of the blanket request by ESPN except to try to dredge up things like underage drinking, parking violations, etc.

And, again, SBPD and Indiana State Police and others are all empowered to go shut down the Keenan meth lab.

 

[Bishop2b5]

The law is wrong in this case. The potential for wrong doing there is big and very real. Even the judge who ruled on this case said as much and that he was uncomfortable with allowing them to operate in secrecy, but had no choice in his ruling according to the law. I understand its purpose, but it allows a de facto police department to hide behind a law and operate in secrecy with no accountability except to their employer.

How'd that work out at the military academies, PSU, and dozens of other schools where the campus police, the local PD who was in the school's pocket, the school's athletic department, or their admin, all operating in secrecy and with little or no oversight, "handled things?" If someone had been looking behind the curtain, there would be a lot of problems that would've been discovered much earlier, or never have occurred in the first place since the parties involved would've known they couldn't just sweep it under the rug.

I believe you're letting the fact that it's your favorite school and that it's ESPN asking for the records cause you to turn a blind eye to the potential problem here. Nobody is above the temptation to cover up events or facts that are embarrassing and harmful to themselves. The authorities, whether we call them private security or campus police, as well as admins and coaches, are all under pressure to avoid embarrassing their employer. Good grief man, we've seen literally hundreds of such cases where a coach, the admins, the campus police or the local PD have covered up all sorts of stuff and only later when it finally comes out and heads have rolled do we shake our heads in shock and disgust and ask, "How could this have gone on so long without us knowing or anyone doing anything about it?"

Seriously, I'm extraordinarily disappointed in some of you. I expected soooo much better. You go on and on about how clean and noble ND is, then something like this comes along and you're freakin' PROUD of the fact that ND has hidden behind a bad law to avoid potential embarrassment, and you're actually celebrating it! If all is as you claim, you should all be demanding that the NDSP prove that and be glad to have anyone look at their records. If ESPN sued Bama for access to Saban's records regarding recruiting, the UA campus police's records, or access to the academic records of any of our players, I'd be disappointed as hell if UA stalled and obfuscated and fought that. I'd be writing the BOT demanding that they ponied up or admitted they had something to hide.

You guys should be raising hell with ND for fighting this. You can't claim nobility and righteousness, then fight any attempts to look behind the curtain and see if that's actually true. I expected better of you.

 

[IrishLax]

The law is wrong in this case. The potential for wrong doing there is big and very real. Even the judge who ruled on this case said as much and that he was uncomfortable with allowing them to operate in secrecy, but had no choice in his ruling according to the law. I understand its purpose, but it allows a de facto police department to hide behind a law and operate in secrecy with no accountability except to their employer.

How'd that work out at the military academies, PSU, and dozens of other schools where the campus police, the local PD who was in the school's pocket, the school's athletic department, or their admin, all operating in secrecy and with little or no oversight, "handled things?" If someone had been looking behind the curtain, there would be a lot of problems that would've been discovered much earlier, or never have occurred in the first place since the parties involved would've known they couldn't just sweep it under the rug.

I believe you're letting the fact that it's your favorite school and that it's ESPN asking for the records cause you to turn a blind eye to the potential problem here. Nobody is above the temptation to cover up events or facts that are embarrassing and harmful to themselves. The authorities, whether we call them private security or campus police, as well as admins and coaches, are all under pressure to avoid embarrassing their employer. Good grief man, we've seen literally hundreds of such cases where a coach, the admins, the campus police or the local PD have covered up all sorts of stuff and only later when it finally comes out and heads have rolled do we shake our heads in shock and disgust and ask, "How could this have gone on so long without us knowing or anyone doing anything about it?"

Seriously, I'm extraordinarily disappointed in some of you. I expected soooo much better. You go on and on about how clean and noble ND is, then something like this comes along and you're freakin' PROUD of the fact that ND has hidden behind a bad law to avoid potential embarrassment, and you're actually celebrating it! If all is as you claim, you should all be demanding that the NDSP prove that and be glad to have anyone look at their records. If ESPN sued Bama for access to Saban's records regarding recruiting, the UA campus police's records, or access to the academic records of any of our players, I'd be disappointed as hell if UA stalled and obfuscated and fought that. I'd be writing the BOT demanding that they ponied up or admitted they had something to hide.

You guys should be raising hell with ND for fighting this. You can't claim nobility and righteousness, then fight any attempts to look behind the curtain and see if that's actually true. I expected better of you.

So you're just going to completely ignore how it was already explained how literally any crime with a victim that happens in South Bend is subject to public records laws because either the files get directly turned over to the DA by NDSP for prosecution OR if the victim feels they aren't being given a fair shake by NDSP they can go to SBPD (which is NOT controlled by Notre Dame and IS subject to all public records laws) at any time.

Your doomsday scenarios are literally impossible. And the bolded is the most laughable shit I've read on this site in awhile, especially given how Bama got busted not too long ago and people crucified the former Bama player for being a "snitch" and there have been many articles about the commonality of bag men in the SEC.

 

[Bishop2b5]

So you're just going to completely ignore how it was already explained how literally any crime with a victim that happens in South Bend is subject to public records laws because either the files get directly turned over to the DA by NDSP for prosecution OR if the victim feels they aren't being given a fair shake by NDSP they can go to SBPD (which is NOT controlled by Notre Dame and IS subject to all public records laws) at any time.

Your doomsday scenarios are literally impossible. And the bolded is the most laughable shit I've read on this site in awhile, especially given how Bama got busted not too long ago and people crucified the former Bama player for being a "snitch" and there have been many articles about the commonality of bag men in the SEC.

Sorry Lax, it's NOT impossible. It's not even unlikely. We don't KNOW that NDSP turns over all their files to SBPD or the state because nobody is allowed to look and see. We don't know if incidents involving athletes where there's no direct victim to complain are being investigated by an independent police force or swept under the rug because nobody is allowed to look at the NDSP's records and see. We don't know if some kid who's the star LB or son of a millionaire donor is let go after being caught with pot or nothing is done after he molests a coed and she doesn't want to press charges or go to the SBPD because nobody is allowed to ask or see the records except for people with a huge vested interest in making sure such things never see the light of day.

This is exactly how dozens of coeds at West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy got raped and nobody did anything about it because the admin and campus security turned a blind eye or bullied and threatened witnesses and victims and covered up to cover their ass. It's how Sandusky got away with molesting kids for years at PSU. It's how whistleblowers at major corporations get railroaded and their lives ruined for trying to do the right thing.

Look at all the countless cases from all across the country where schools, admins, PD's, coaches, campus security, churches, etc. all acted in secrecy to protect a vested interest in their school, church, job, etc. ANY authority, whether it's a PD, campus police, church hierarchy, school admins, or any other such group who acts in secrecy and won't allow their actions to be scrutinized has the very real potential to commit enormous wrong. This isn't a fairy tale, doomsday scenario. We see it every day in the news.

You can turn this around and say that since Bama has committed wrong and I'm a Bama fan, I have no moral authority to question anything ND has or hasn't done. OK, run with that then. Doesn't change the fact that I'm 100% right about all this. Your school, regardless of whether they have or haven't done anything wrong, is hiding behind the law to avoid being open and honest proving that they're completely above board, and as we've seen in countless numbers of cases, there is a HUGE potential for abuse there.

Stop defending this bs. It's beneath you. You're only doing so because it's YOUR school and you like that ESPN, who has been less than kind to you (to a great extent for exactly this sort of behavior) lost. Don't tell me that ND is wonderful and perfect and noble and honorable and does everything above board (and I fully agree that they probably do a MUCH better job of that than others), but then defend them hiding the actions of the PD and even worse, celebrating it instead of demanding better. I'm so genuinely disappointed in you for doing that.

 

[IrishLax]

Sorry Lax, it's NOT impossible. It's not even unlikely. We don't KNOW that NDSP turns over all their files to SBPD or the state because nobody is allowed to look and see.

This is flat out not correct. You're not understanding how this works even though I've already explained it in excruciating detail. You seem to completely misunderstand both how NDSP and SBPD function, and are not making an honest effort to understand it. So I'm making one more attempt and I'm done.

1. In the event of a crime that involves a victim, the victim either reports the crime or its observed in the act/after the fact by law enforcement.
2. If it happened on the campus of Notre Dame, it is possible that the victim may report the crime to NDSP instead of SBPD, etc.
3. NDSP then conducts an investigation. At the conclusion of the investigation, they give their findings to the local DA and then the DA decides whether or not to press charges. There is no conceivable logical scenario where NDSP could possibly just sweep an investigation under the rug AS LONG AS there is a victim who seeks justice. Why?
3A. In the event that NDSP concluded that there was no evidence of a crime and informed the victim thusly, the victim could then go to SBPD and request an investigation. At the end of the SBPD investigation, there would be a publicly available file on their investigation.
3B. In the event that NDSP concludes that there was evidence of a crime and informs the victim thusly (or at any point arrests a party on charges), the file automatically goes to the DA who is responsible for prosecuting the matter. At this point, the evidence in the hands of the DA is available under Indiana freedom of information laws.

There is not a single point here in this chain that is even arguable.

We don't know if some kid who's the star LB or son of a millionaire donor is let go after being caught with pot or nothing is done after he molests a coed and she doesn't want to press charges or go to the SBPD because nobody is allowed to ask or see the records except for people with a huge vested interest in making sure such things never see the light of day.

If someone doesn't want to press charges, then they don't want to press charges. This doesn't even make sense. It doesn't matter where you are in the country... no one can ever do anything unless a victim wants to press charges through the proper channels. This is just completely and utterly irrelevant to the entire discussion. Unless your point is that you want to slander people off of allegations that were dropped by the complainant, and then that's exactly the kind of mukraking that most would feel is horrible.

If your point is that you think you ought to know about all victimless crimes then I think it's comical that you think someone would list in a police report (i.e. what is being requested) that they stopped someone for an infraction like marijuana possession... and then didn't report it. If they're going to cover it up, they're not going to leave a freaking documented paper trail that they covered something up... they're just going to let them go on their merry way and not report it. No cop in the history of ever has written in a report "I stopped an individual, they had marijuana, and then I let them go" ... because that would get them fired/thrown in jail to put something like that in writing.

 

[NDdomer2]

Sorry Lax, it's NOT impossible. It's not even unlikely. We don't KNOW that NDSP turns over all their files to SBPD or the state because nobody is allowed to look and see. We don't know if incidents involving athletes where there's no direct victim to complain are being investigated by an independent police force or swept under the rug because nobody is allowed to look at the NDSP's records and see. We don't know if some kid who's the star LB or son of a millionaire donor is let go after being caught with pot or nothing is done after he molests a coed and she doesn't want to press charges or go to the SBPD because nobody is allowed to ask or see the records except for people with a huge vested interest in making sure such things never see the light of day.

This is exactly how dozens of coeds at West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy got raped and nobody did anything about it because the admin and campus security turned a blind eye or bullied and threatened witnesses and victims and covered up to cover their ass. It's how Sandusky got away with molesting kids for years at PSU. It's how whistleblowers at major corporations get railroaded and their lives ruined for trying to do the right thing.

Look at all the countless cases from all across the country where schools, admins, PD's, coaches, campus security, churches, etc. all acted in secrecy to protect a vested interest in their school, church, job, etc. ANY authority, whether it's a PD, campus police, church hierarchy, school admins, or any other such group who acts in secrecy and won't allow their actions to be scrutinized has the very real potential to commit enormous wrong. This isn't a fairy tale, doomsday scenario. We see it every day in the news.

You can turn this around and say that since Bama has committed wrong and I'm a Bama fan, I have no moral authority to question anything ND has or hasn't done. OK, run with that then. Doesn't change the fact that I'm 100% right about all this. Your school, regardless of whether they have or haven't done anything wrong, is hiding behind the law to avoid being open and honest proving that they're completely above board, and as we've seen in countless numbers of cases, there is a HUGE potential for abuse there.

Stop defending this bs. It's beneath you. You're only doing so because it's YOUR school and you like that ESPN, who has been less than kind to you (to a great extent for exactly this sort of behavior) lost. Don't tell me that ND is wonderful and perfect and noble and honorable and does everything above board (and I fully agree that they probably do a MUCH better job of that than others), but then defend them hiding the actions of the PD and even worse, celebrating it instead of demanding better. I'm so genuinely disappointed in you for doing that.

 

[Legacy]

Seriously, I'm extraordinarily disappointed in some of you. I expected soooo much better. You go on and on about how clean and noble ND is, then something like this comes along and you're freakin' PROUD of the fact that ND has hidden behind a bad law to avoid potential embarrassment, and you're actually celebrating it! If all is as you claim, you should all be demanding that the NDSP prove that and be glad to have anyone look at their records. If ESPN sued Bama for access to Saban's records regarding recruiting, the UA campus police's records, or access to the academic records of any of our players, I'd be disappointed as hell if UA stalled and obfuscated and fought that. I'd be writing the BOT demanding that they ponied up or admitted they had something to hide.

You guys should be raising hell with ND for fighting this. You can't claim nobility and righteousness, then fight any attempts to look behind the curtain and see if that's actually true. I expected better of you.

Don't you think you are crossing the line here by getting personal and by impugning the motives of individuals who - to me - seem to be offering their comments to further a discussion?

 

[Legacy]

The law is wrong in this case.

At the very least, we can agree that the judicial decision was in accordance with existing Inidana state law. (The judge also noted that in three previous cases citing Freedom of Information complaints against the University all three were also denied based on Indiana law.)

As a matter of record regarding the Penn State issue, Shut out at Penn State
Why the “hybrid university” was exempt from releasing records

"ESPN, which had also been denied a similar request, appealed to the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records, arguing that since the university police department’s website asserted that state law gave its officers “the same authority as municipal police officers,” it should also have to abide by other laws to which municipal police officers were bound — namely, the Right-to-Know Law. But the Office ruled that because Penn State was exempt from the Right-to-Know Law, so was its police force."

 

[jimmymac]

I got caught doing the hesburgh challenge last week and nothing will likely happen to me because of NDSP, though if it was a legit police org I would likely have been cited with public intoxication. So I'm not complaining.

By the way, had only two beers left to go. Tragic

 

[Legacy]

As far as ESPN's suit to release Ohio State's records, OHIO SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST ESPN

It should be noted that ESPN was seeking specific records from Ohio State athletic personnel only after the issues involved became a matter of public record. In their suit against Notre Dame for release of records, no individual case was cited in their complaint or to the court.

 

[GoIrish41]

As far as ESPN's suit to release Ohio State's records, OHIO SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST ESPN

It should be noted that ESPN was seeking specific records from Ohio State athletic personnel only after the issues involved became a matter of public record. In their suit against Notre Dame for release of records, no individual case was cited in their complaint or to the court.

Witch hunt

 

[IrishLax]

As far as ESPN's suit to release Ohio State's records, OHIO SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST ESPN

It should be noted that ESPN was seeking specific records from Ohio State athletic personnel only after the issues involved became a matter of public record. In their suit against Notre Dame for release of records, no individual case was cited in their complaint or to the court.

And this is exactly what I took issue with. The South Bend Tribune was seeking a police report related to a specific incident... that's totally reasonable.

The ESPN request was a transparent attempt to dredge up as many dropped allegations and dead end investigations as possible over a large period of time, and then having compiled said dropped allegations publish an article that paints them in an inaccurate light. The goal was to find a large quantity of stuff, frame it all as bad police work or unfair treatment, and then find 1 or 2 people (easy to do) to give "damning" quotes on record. It's exactly what Rolling Stone just did against UVA but sadly for them the most sensational claim they chose to run with had so many holes it was easy to prove as false.

It would go something like...
"Records show that over the past 10 years 7 allegations of improper conduct were made against football players. None resulted in charges due to a lack of evidence or the complainant opting to drop the charges. Joe Smith says he felt 'pressured' to not pursue assault charges."

It's basic yellow journalism. Same crap as was used in Under the Tarnished Dome. And all the ND haters would lap it up, much like how Duke Lacrosse etc. etc. got lapped up by the masses who so badly want the entity they hate to go down. And with Seeberg, we saw a very reasonable small window of time between when she gave her final statement and the police interviewed Shembo painted as incompetence on account of subjective media defined standards of expected police alacrity.

I have no respect or patience for a fishing expedition that tries to go against 30+ years of legal precedent in order to produce the worst type of yellow journalism. This isn't about police transparency.

 

[ulukinatme]

I got caught doing the hesburgh challenge last week and nothing will likely happen to me because of NDSP, though if it was a legit police org I would likely have been cited with public intoxication. So I'm not complaining.

By the way, had only two beers left to go. Tragic

ESPN gets NDSP's records, next headline on ESPN.com "ND student athlete drinks 39 beers in library." Article within points out jimmymac only plays intramural.

 

[Legacy]

The federal Freedom of Information Act, though this case was filed in state court, recognizes that certain records must be protected by an institution or entity to protect the rights of an individual. Those might include the right to privacy and the right to a fair trial or any impact on the right to impartial adjudication.

This exemption to the FOIA is as follows:
Exemption 7. Law Enforcement
The seventh exemption allows agencies to withhold records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such records would cause one of the following harms of Exemption 7 described below:
(A) allows the withholding of a law enforcement record that could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. This exemption protects an active law enforcement investigation from interference through premature disclosure.
(B) allows the withholding of law enforcement information that would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication.
(C) recognizes that individuals have a privacy interest in information maintained in law enforcement files. If the disclosure of information could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, the information may be exempt from disclosure.


The University has the obligation to protect those individual rights by withholding documents from disclosure to a news organization under state and federal law.

If ESPN is arguing that the Notre Dame Police force is a law enforcement agency, then these restrictions apply. By arguing the ND police were a law enforcement agency, ESPN seemed to be counterproductive to its case. It may be have been acting in disregard to individual rights in pursuit of a story.

 

[phgreek]

The fact that NDSP is technically called a small private security agency instead of what they are, a de facto police department, is part of the problem. It allows them to operate without significant oversight from anyone but their employer. That employer may be the purest entity on the planet, but there's also a huge potential there to sweep anything embarrassing to that employer under the rug. NOBODY is above that temptation for abuse.

How many movies or TV shows have we all seen where a corporation's private security force was off the leash, or a small town's PD was controlled by the local gazillionaire and acted as his abusive private security force? No matter how noble or ethical an entity appears, claims to be, or actually is, that potential is there and it's very real... and there are hundreds of real life examples of it happening at places we all thought were 100% above reproach.

Again, if this were USC, Stanford, Harvard, Bama, FSU, or any other school, most of you would be roundly (and correctly) criticizing them for not gladly opening their records to examination and accusing them of having something to hide for not doing so. I doubt NDSP has anything of great significance to hide, so why not prove that instead of acting otherwise?

I certainly understand the concern. My view is, general requests like this should Always be rejected simply based on the cost and time to comply. ESPN knows better than to pull crap like this. I mean, in reality, literally no state or local government I ever dealt with would have made an affirmative response to the request as presented. So in this instance...ESPN was amazingly lazy or stupid, or thought they could muscle a new precedent through with regard to how records are referenced and turned over by ANY entity.

ESPN was unreasonable and dickish, and they got bitch-slapped by someone who may have been sensitive to their "concern" had the request not been dickish, and unreasonable. In a way this proves ESPN cares little for the "plight" of potential victims of the ND process because they knew better, but pressed forward looking for crap they could sensationalize...read, ESPN doesn't think there is anything there, otherwise they'd have asked for the records in a way in which someone could comply.

As for private vs. public security. It seems to me this is largely done to protect on campus discipline that is not necessarily criminal in nature...something students should be guaranteed. If I break a rule at ND, why in hell would I expect that to be accessible by the public...who is not affected but who may well use the information...screw that. Issues between me and ND are just that until something criminal occurs. If the fear is ND is holding back criminal behavior, I'd ask for an audit from another law enforcement agency...not special dispensation to break laws.

 

[Legacy]

Again, if this were USC, Stanford, Harvard, Bama, FSU, or any other school, most of you would be roundly (and correctly) criticizing them for not gladly opening their records to examination and accusing them of having something to hide for not doing so. I doubt NDSP has anything of great significance to hide, so why not prove that instead of acting otherwise?

Really?

As examples of universities (besides Penn State and Ohio State cited above) not "gladly opening their records to examination" of this type of information are:

Jameis Winston's code of conduct hearing records. FSU protected all potentially involved individual's testimony. What came out, including the entire decision, was obtained through sources. You wonder why, if ESPN is fishing for something specific with regard to Notre Dame, it cannot locate any individual involved in a true investigative journalistic fashion to disclose.

The specifics with regard to Todd McNair, former USC coach, alleged misconduct that resulted in his dismissal. The impartial adjudication of McNair's lawsuit against the NCAA is preserved on USC's end by non-disclosure of the facts they gathered. Yahoo's investigative journalism was independent of any FOI request.

Few of us here would claim that these should be placed in the public domain without the usual safeguards for preserving the rights of individuals, as you evidently think, even regarding an allegation of a criminal case investigated by the police department of a public university (Winston).

 

[johnnycando]

Bwahahaha

Bwahahaha

Sorry Lax, it's NOT impossible. It's not even unlikely. We don't KNOW that NDSP turns over all their files to SBPD or the state because nobody is allowed to look and see. We don't know if incidents involving athletes where there's no direct victim to complain are being investigated by an independent police force or swept under the rug because nobody is allowed to look at the NDSP's records and see. We don't know if some kid who's the star LB or son of a millionaire donor is let go after being caught with pot or nothing is done after he molests a coed and she doesn't want to press charges or go to the SBPD because nobody is allowed to ask or see the records except for people with a huge vested interest in making sure such things never see the light of day.

This is exactly how dozens of coeds at West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy got raped and nobody did anything about it because the admin and campus security turned a blind eye or bullied and threatened witnesses and victims and covered up to cover their ass. It's how Sandusky got away with molesting kids for years at PSU. It's how whistleblowers at major corporations get railroaded and their lives ruined for trying to do the right thing.

Look at all the countless cases from all across the country where schools, admins, PD's, coaches, campus security, churches, etc. all acted in secrecy to protect a vested interest in their school, church, job, etc. ANY authority, whether it's a PD, campus police, church hierarchy, school admins, or any other such group who acts in secrecy and won't allow their actions to be scrutinized has the very real potential to commit enormous wrong. This isn't a fairy tale, doomsday scenario. We see it every day in the news.

You can turn this around and say that since Bama has committed wrong and I'm a Bama fan, I have no moral authority to question anything ND has or hasn't done. OK, run with that then. Doesn't change the fact that I'm 100% right about all this. Your school, regardless of whether they have or haven't done anything wrong, is hiding behind the law to avoid being open and honest proving that they're completely above board, and as we've seen in countless numbers of cases, there is a HUGE potential for abuse there.

Stop defending this bs. It's beneath you. You're only doing so because it's YOUR school and you like that ESPN, who has been less than kind to you (to a great extent for exactly this sort of behavior) lost. Don't tell me that ND is wonderful and perfect and noble and honorable and does everything above board (and I fully agree that they probably do a MUCH better job of that than others), but then defend them hiding the actions of the PD and even worse, celebrating it instead of demanding better. I'm so genuinely disappointed in you for doing that.

YOU are disappointed in LAX!?

Who the fuck are you!?

Lol.

As if that was supposed to sting?

Lmao Lololol.

Go away. Roll toilet.

World class troll job, I will concede.

 

[kmoose]

The law is wrong in this case. The potential for wrong doing there is big and very real. Even the judge who ruled on this case said as much and that he was uncomfortable with allowing them to operate in secrecy, but had no choice in his ruling according to the law. I understand its purpose, but it allows a de facto police department to hide behind a law and operate in secrecy with no accountability except to their employer.

You are speculating that there is no oversight. I would be shocked to learn that the State of Indiana empowered the NDPD with Law Enforcement powers, and that those powers didn't come with the stipulation that some government agency had the right to audit their operations and basically crawl up their rectums with a microscope. Just because NDPD is not required to comply with the same open record laws as taxpayer funded PDs, doesn't mean that they can operate in a complete bubble.

 

[Bishop2b5]

This isn't about hammering ND. In fact, I've repeatedly said I doubt there's much to see there. This is 100% about any and all organizations with a significant amount of authority over people - whether it's a school, church, PD or government agency - needing to operate with a great degree of transparency. The results of not doing so are rarely good as we've seen all too often.

 

[Redbar]

This isn't about hammering ND. In fact, I've repeatedly said I doubt there's much to see there. This is 100% about any and all organizations with a significant amount of authority over people - whether it's a school, church, PD or government agency - needing to operate with a great degree of transparency. The results of not doing so are rarely good as we've seen all too often.

How do you feel about "The Patriot Act" (doublespeak at its finest) or Edward Snowden?

 

[kmoose]

This is 100% about any and all organizations with a significant amount of authority over people - whether it's a school, church, PD or government agency - needing to operate with a great degree of transparency.

But you don't know that there isn't transparency. Banks have transparency, but that doesn't mean that you get to peruse their books at your leisure. It means that there are duly appointed people who can. Nothing I have seen indicates that there is NO oversight. What I saw here was a University standing up for its student athletes, and telling an entity that has largely become synonymous with yellow journalism in the last few years to take a hike. That the University will not provide them with source material that they are not entitled to, just so that that entity can twist the facts in order to create some splashy, drama-laden headline. And I support that. If you are disappointed in me for supporting that, then that is your prerogative. But understand this: I could not care any less what you think about my views on this particular subject. Other subjects, maybe, but not this one. The gossip columnists at the "Worldwide Leader" need some comeuppance!

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Here is a place to insert a conjecture made in a book I recently read :

In Ireland in the early part of the 20th century, paramilitary(influenced by the Ulster Constabulary) and police, responding to a growing groundswell of support from both Britain and Ireland for Irish home rule, established a police force with very different, more aggressive, and pro-military tactics. They even changed their uniforms. Wearing khaki shirts and black pants and boots, they appear to be the unit the Nazi and Italian paramilitary and secret police units molded themselves after.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8s2MSVaXNqQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I don't think there is the power vacuum in the administration at UND to allow the kind abuses taken by the Black and Tan.

And with the Patriot Act set for renewal on June 2nd, we have serious issues, and I cannot see this as any more than a media distraction. Sorry.