Jump to content
TBar1977

There is a lot going on with this story

Recommended Posts

Someone has been feeding the Mpls Strib false info from the start.

 

June 2-Star Tribune sources confirmed that university police have searched Robinson’s home and seized his computer as part of an investigation into his team’s alleged drug abuse.  Not true, no warrant was ever issued for his home.  Campus police took his office computer two weeks ago. 

 

University police have been investigating the wrestling team since April 11 and obtained search warrants to probe Robinson’s Plymouth home and personal computer. The university launched its own investigation Tuesday.  The University's Asst AD and Interim Ad were notified by JRob of his suspicions of drug use on March 11.  Multiple emails and a drug testing procedure confirm this. Almost two months later the U decides to investigate what they have been already actively involved in.

 

A Gophers (sic) wrestler, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Robinson offered to give his athletes amnesty if they wrote one-page confession letters.  The amnesty offered by JRob is the University's Safe Harbor program outlined in the drug testing procedure sent to him by Interim AD Goetz.  The essays were given as a learning tool by JRob on his own, as his superiors had already been notified of the problem and were involved in it. Who is this anonymous source that is feeding false information to the media?  Attorney Bock doesn't believe that it is a Gopher wrestler, calls the allegations absurd.

 

Interview with Bock starts at 22 minute mark: http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/audio/sports-to-the-max-with-mike-max/

video:http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/...ch-leave/?mc_cid=7ffe7c45c4&mc_eid=1db055755e

 

So to sum up, the University officials knew about JRob's drug suspicions on March 11, did drug testing, sat on the results until legislature hearings for more University money were completed, then dumped it in the lap of the new AD Coyle with instructions to find a fall guy and keep the U out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So to sum up, the University officials knew about JRob's drug suspicions on March 11, did drug testing, sat on the results until legislature hearings for more University money were completed, then dumped it in the lap of the new AD Coyle with instructions to find a fall guy and keep the U out of it.

 

 

 

Sat on the results to find a fall guy? 

 

Unfortunately, jammenz, you are connecting some dots that can't yet be connected. The actions we know of by Minny admins is pretty consistent with them first hearing of possible drug use by members of the Minny wrestling squad and then later hearing of possible drug dealing.

 

If they truly wanted to fire J Rob over the mere knowledge of drug use they could have done as much way back when they first found out about it in late March. Why would they wait 10 weeks to suspend him over this? Doesn't make sense, unless more credible information came to light that illustrated this was more than what they were first told. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, which is more likely, the situation picked up enough steam to catch the public eye which created enough pressure to visibly do something and putting JRob on leave makes it look like they did...........

 

 

 

All of that happened, but surely you are not so cynical as to suggest it is only about a CYA?

 

They sent him the whole manual. So in light of them sending him the manual, if, and this seems to be the important question here, they learn he did not follow it properly on a subject like drug dealing, this assumes the dealing aspect of the story is true, then they surely would be in the right to dismiss. No? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely believe it is a CYA and distance yourself as much as possible act by the University. It may very end up that proof comes out that JRob messed up(legally or simply Administratively), but I firmly believe the Administrators above him have been "in the know" for some time and aren't "all of a sudden" putting JRob on leave over a month later because of some "new and crucial" evidence....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely believe it is a CYA and distance yourself as much as possible act by the University. It may very end up that proof comes out that JRob messed up(legally or simply Administratively), but I firmly believe the Administrators above him have been "in the know" for some time and aren't "all of a sudden" putting JRob on leave over a month later because of some "new and crucial" evidence....

 

 

 

What were they "in the know" of for some time?

 

Drug use only OR drug use AND drug dealing, pills in the river, Pills confiscated by J Rob ...etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What were they "in the know" of for some time?

 

Drug use only OR drug use AND drug dealing, pills in the river, Pills confiscated by J Rob ...etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

I am pretty sure that a significant part of what you just listed has yet to be substantiated.  J Rob has always been a no nonsense guy.  He strikes me as very candid guy.  I am sure he was fully forthcoming to the Adminstration from the beginning.  I believe they have had the same information as JRob for some time and public reaction forced this decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of that happened, but surely you are not so cynical as to suggest it is only about a CYA?

 

They sent him the whole manual. So in light of them sending him the manual, if, and this seems to be the important question here, they learn he did not follow it properly on a subject like drug dealing, this assumes the dealing aspect of the story is true, then they surely would be in the right to dismiss. No? 

 

This is the part that bothers me - J-Rob apparently notified higher-up of a problem - and they responded by sending him a policy manual!?  No specific direction, guidance as to how it should apply to the situation at hand?  No follow up to see how J was handling this?  No input from University counsel?

 

Sounds like abdication of authority at the top level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure that a significant part of what you just listed has yet to be substantiated.  J Rob has always been a no nonsense guy.  He strikes me as very candid guy.  I am sure he was fully forthcoming to the Adminstration from the beginning.  I believe they have had the same information as JRob for some time and public reaction forced this decision.

 

 

 

What I asked is unsubstantiated at this point, so the first bolded part of your post is accurate. Based on what is publicly known, there is no way of us fans knowing exactly what they knew and when they came to know it. But this then contradicts your second bolded type where you say you are sure he was fully forthcoming to the Admin. How can you be sure of that? 

 

You then say you believe the Admin had the same information as JRob for some time. What is that based on? I get that you believe him, which is fine. But it would seem you would then also have to believe they are throwing him to the curb and foot stomping him for good measure all in a pure CYA move without any regard for the truth in the matter. 

 

Let me ask, do you believe the drug dealing claim is even true? Or just all made up in their effort to get rid of J Rob? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the part that bothers me - J-Rob apparently notified higher-up of a problem - and they responded by sending him a policy manual!?  No specific direction, guidance as to how it should apply to the situation at hand?  No follow up to see how J was handling this?  No input from University counsel?

 

Sounds like abdication of authority at the top level.

 

 

 

They have compliance officers whose job it is to provide guidance and follow up, as well as sanction when policies are not followed. How do you know there was no specific guidance or follow up? Seems to me only they and J Rob would know that and neither has addressed that issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the part that bothers me - J-Rob apparently notified higher-up of a problem - and they responded by sending him a policy manual!?  No specific direction, guidance as to how it should apply to the situation at hand?  No follow up to see how J was handling this?  No input from University counsel?

 

Sounds like abdication of authority at the top level.

Which is what happens when you have interim folks in charge, which has been the case at Minnesota where B. Goetz has been the interim AD and a candidate for the AD position until Coyle was recently named for that position and started this week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I asked is unsubstantiated at this point, so the first bolded part of your post is accurate. Based on what is publicly known, there is no way of us fans knowing exactly what they knew and when they came to know it. But this then contradicts your second bolded type where you say you are sure he was fully forthcoming to the Admin. How can you be sure of that? 

 

You then say you believe the Admin had the same information as JRob for some time. What is that based on? I get that you believe him, which is fine. But it would seem you would then also have to believe they are throwing him to the curb and foot stomping him for good measure all in a pure CYA move without any regard for the truth in the matter. 

 

Let me ask, do you believe the drug dealing claim is even true? Or just all made up in their effort to get rid of J Rob? 

Obviously, my saying I am sure is only based on a strong belief.  None of us posting in this topic can have enough information to be 100% sure of anything related to this case.  I simply believe JRob's original release through his agent and the visible actions by the Administration, along with the amount of time between JRob's initial reporting and his being put on leave appear to be "political" move by the University.

 

Are you seriously asking the last 2 questions?  I don't doubt there was drug dealing and JRob knew about it.  I simply believe the University knew the same things JRob has for some time and it is easier to separate themselves from JRob than step in and inevitably have to take responsibility for every action that has been taken since JRob found out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously, my saying I am sure is only based on a strong belief.  None of us posting in this topic can have enough information to be 100% sure of anything related to this case.  I simply believe JRob's original release through his agent and the visible actions by the Administration, along with the amount of time between JRob's initial reporting and his being put on leave appear to be "political" move by the University.

 

Are you seriously asking the last 2 questions?  I don't doubt there was drug dealing and JRob knew about it.  I simply believe the University knew the same things JRob has for some time and it is easier to separate themselves from JRob than step in and inevitably have to take responsibility for every action that has been taken since JRob found out.

 

 

Let's assume both J Rob and the Admin knew for quite some time it was drug dealing. If this is so, a big if in this case as this is not established as fact, then they'd be doing a CYA. But so would J Rob be doing a CYA by not coming clean thru his talkative agent/lawyer on his knowledge of the drug dealing.

 

Keep in mind that, one, this is not established, and two, his lawyer/agent has stated emphatically he thinks there is nothing to the idea of J Rob knowing about drug dealing. I believe his choice of words on this question was "absurd", so his lawyer doesn't even share this view. 

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He and the university knew of the "alleged" drug dealing. The absurd comes from saying he had 1st hand knowledge of it happening and any culpability.

 

 

 

I think he told the University of suspected drug use, not suspected drug dealing. This was sometime in March.

 

The story about alleged drug dealing is pretty recent, like when this thread was started last week. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he told the University of suspected drug use, not suspected drug dealing. This was sometime in March.

 

The story about alleged drug dealing is pretty recent, like when this thread was started last week.

The public stories may be very recent, but I would be willing to bet both JRob and the University knew there were accusations a considerable amount of time prior to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not in defense of J, nor an attempt to sort out how serious the charges might be re. the wrestlers who apparently participated. What I do know is that University administrations are extremely averse to anything that smacks of litigation, often failing to take appropriate action until the point at which some other law enforcement/judicial entity has to step in.

Edited by carp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Willieboy

 

Punished accordingly. Punishment fits the crime, not all crimes should have the same consequences but all should have some sort of consequence. I'm sure there will be some sort of discipline handed out when it's all over, wether it's the right one remains to be seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And no charges are being filed.

 

 

Did I not say this would end up "Much-a-do-about-nothing."

No charges being filed does not mean the university won't dump him.

 

By the way, it is "ado" not "a do".

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...