consultants are sandburs

Thursday, May 04, 2017

U.Mn. Twin Cities campus, football players and a purported sexual assault victim. Four questions.

For background, Strib reporting local news, two attorneys [same firm] to have a look and issue a report [presumably].

1. Do they really have any rules. Hewitt's people seemed to proceed totally ad hoc?

2. Is this CYA in anticipation of a possible "victim" lawsuit?

3. Will a written report be produced and made public?

4. Will Hewitt, now at Johns Hopkins, be requested to testify [indeed will testimony under oath be taken, or will a lesser interview process be used]?

There was no warning of right to have an attorney present when alleged victim and perps were interrogated.

It appears no interview verbatim transcripts were produced.

Despite university video equipment being in abundance, video depositions under oath were shunned, not utilized.

Make this a key Fifth Question: What proper jurisdiction should the university have, as a matter of law, and if any, how should the university differentiate things, off campus vs. on campus?

Want six? Whitewash or real? Using two different law firms might weigh more toward real and toward suggesting a lack of any hidden litigation-prep agenda.

No comments: