OaktownBear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

My thoughts Oak. I generally am fully in lock-step with your views but am going to take exception here:

1. It's not really important to her account. Never said it was. In fact I said the opposite. She didn't need to talk about her financial status as it had nothing to do with her complaint but she did. Several times. So again, this goes to her veracity, nothing more.

2. You don't know she is lying. What if she says her parents take her on vacation but expect her to support herself? An investigation can get to the bottom of this. Oak, you would have a field day with this if you were on the other side of the argument. You often, very correctly, point out what people clearly mean as opposed to a twisted interpretation of their words. Look at her statements.

"I am a financial aid student, I am here to make money not to be some object to look at."

" I couldn't let my mom down, if I got fired she wouldn't be able to support me, so I said I was leaving for the night. "

This isn't someone saying mom and dad make me pay for my own phone plan. This is someone clearly implying she was poor and financially trapped. It's just not even remotely true.

3. It is relevant if she lied. Which is a question for an investigation. We agree.

4. That wasn't my point. To find that information creepy guys who are hoping to disprove her account have to sift through her social media account. I'm sorry but that was really pathetic behavior and THAT is what people outside Cal are going to focus on. Not that she said she was poor and she wears fancy clothes on exotic vacations. If any of the publications that love to roast Cal or the abuses of big time football get ahold of this thread, they will Have a field day with it. That is why you leave it to Cal to manage. I guess I disagree with this on two levels.

First no one has talked about her fancy clothes at all, although maybe I missed that in the 500 posts. But more fundamentally, this isn't someone who has a nice pair of shoes or a bag and is on financial aid. I'm sure that happens all of the time. This is someone whose travel itinerary reads like she's a Bond villain. I mean it's a joke. Cannes, Mykonos, Santorini, the Hamptons, Martha's Vineyard, Shanghai, X'ian, Barcelona, Istanbul, etc, etc. I mean it would be ludicrous enough in the abstract but she's got a half dozen places in here that are almost cliched examples of places only accessible to the rich and famous. Let's go back to that "I'm a financial aid student . . ." statement.

But to your broader point that this is a bad look for Cal, well I certainly get where you are coming from, but I think we're a pretty long way from Cal fans writing FAITH on the hoods of their cars. I really think this may be a generational difference that you (and I) aren't fully grasping. This isn't a case of some Cal sleuths sifting through her trash or hacking her computer. This isn't hidden. This is her very public persona. In a very real way, her Instagram is who she is and what she presents to the world. And more fundamentally it's one of the places she chose to attack Cal and take shots at the University. It's more than fair game. It's squarely in the public record and she herself made it part of the story. What's on there needs to be evaluated.

---

---

Bingo, perfectly stated.

---

+1 boy, it's a tough ask to compare the Amber case to this and in doing so is in and of itself a discredit...so I'm not sure why we go there? Why escalate? I thought this thread was fine at 444 messages notwithstanding the fact that number is really bad luck in the Chinese community.

---

My point in bringing up the Amber case was not to compare the crimes or the depth of wrongness from the community as there is no comparing the two. It was the fact that people knew she was lying because a parent said so, friends close to it didn't back her up, etc. It took a few people not to stand up for her that seemed like they would be reliable sources and then it mushroomed from there. Reliable sources sometimes have their own bias or they genuinely think they know something they don't know. Investigations bring that all out.

---

got it. Was more than ok with the thesis but thanks for clarification. I'm an oaktown guy myself, now elsewhere. Miss Arizmendi

Sebastabear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

My thoughts Oak. I generally am fully in lock-step with your views but am going to take exception here:

1. It's not really important to her account. Never said it was. In fact I said the opposite. She didn't need to talk about her financial status as it had nothing to do with her complaint but she did. Several times. So again, this goes to her veracity, nothing more.

2. You don't know she is lying. What if she says her parents take her on vacation but expect her to support herself? An investigation can get to the bottom of this. Oak, you would have a field day with this if you were on the other side of the argument. You often, very correctly, point out what people clearly mean as opposed to a twisted interpretation of their words. Look at her statements.

"I am a financial aid student, I am here to make money not to be some object to look at."

" I couldn't let my mom down, if I got fired she wouldn't be able to support me, so I said I was leaving for the night. "

This isn't someone saying mom and dad make me pay for my own phone plan. This is someone clearly implying she was poor and financially trapped. It's just not even remotely true.

3. It is relevant if she lied. Which is a question for an investigation. We agree.

4. That wasn't my point. To find that information creepy guys who are hoping to disprove her account have to sift through her social media account. I'm sorry but that was really pathetic behavior and THAT is what people outside Cal are going to focus on. Not that she said she was poor and she wears fancy clothes on exotic vacations. If any of the publications that love to roast Cal or the abuses of big time football get ahold of this thread, they will Have a field day with it. That is why you leave it to Cal to manage. I guess I disagree with this on two levels.

First no one has talked about her fancy clothes at all, although maybe I missed that in the 500 posts. But more fundamentally, this isn't someone who has a nice pair of shoes or a bag and is on financial aid. I'm sure that happens all of the time. This is someone whose travel itinerary reads like she's a Bond villain. I mean it's a joke. Cannes, Mykonos, Santorini, the Hamptons, Martha's Vineyard, Shanghai, X'ian, Barcelona, Istanbul, etc, etc. I mean it would be ludicrous enough in the abstract but she's got a half dozen places in here that are almost cliched examples of places only accessible to the rich and famous. Let's go back to that "I'm a financial aid student . . ." statement.

But to your broader point that this is a bad look for Cal, well I certainly get where you are coming from, but I think we're a pretty long way from Cal fans writing FAITH on the hoods of their cars. I really think this may be a generational difference that you (and I) aren't fully grasping. This isn't a case of some Cal sleuths sifting through her trash or hacking her computer. This isn't hidden. This is her very public persona. In a very real way, her Instagram is who she is and what she presents to the world. And more fundamentally it's one of the places she chose to attack Cal and take shots at the University. It's more than fair game. It's squarely in the public record and she herself made it part of the story. What's on there needs to be evaluated.

---

---

Sebasta:

First of all, I am loathe to speculate about any facts publicly, but I think some minimal discussion of my thoughts on this one point helps the discussion. I think she probably lied about her financial need for the job. I think she probably did so because she knows she made some bad decisions and she knows some people will ask "why did you go to the guy's hotel room?" and dismiss her claims out of hand because of it. As you said, it wasn't a necessary lie, but I would say it wasn't necessary for you or me because we understand there are reasons why women do what she did in the situation she claims to have happened. But you know many people would dismiss her. As I said, if she lied it is relevant. Not the hammer that everything she said is a lie like some here want it to be, but it is relevant. And as we agree, the investigator should get to the bottom of it.

You are correct that the explanation I threw out is not consistent with her statement. My point was that there COULD BE an explanation. And that is what the investigation is for. I don't know what the explanation would be. I suspect there isn't one. But I've actually twice in just the past couple of months had the experience of knowing about an investigation where I swore there was only one possible explanation of what someone did and I came to find out I was completely wrong after an investigation brought out all the facts. One was very surprising, actually.

Regarding your last paragraph,
1. Okay, I'm sorry I brought up the Amber case. I explained why in a separate post. It was in no way to compare what happened there to here in the manner you describe
2. I stand by Cal needing to manage the messaging and I stand by this being a bad look. As I said, fair or not, the statements here are just complete fodder for someone trying to do a hit piece. And they do not absolve anyone of wrongdoing and they won't do so to anyone outside this community. Comments about how she dresses and her bikini pictures are so in the wheelhouse of looking like an implication that she deserved her treatment WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE STATEMENT, that I can't believe posters were not wise enough to see that and not make that point.
3. Regarding the generational difference first point, well, if it is, the generations that see this as I think you think I see it still make up a majority of the population and need to be messaged to.
4. I don't see looking at social media as the same as going through her garbage can. Her social media is fair game. Employers look at social media all the time. I think it is perfectly appropriate for the investigators to look at her social media. I think it is appropriate for Cal to look at it and the attorneys for Cal, and the coaches. HOWEVER, there is a big difference between the investigators doing that, or the parties doing that and random people on a sports board doing it.
5. And this is where I'm getting to this being a bad look. It looks like yet again a community circling the wagons around its football program. Sebasta do you think people who searched through her social media went on there 1. Because they wanted to do a neutral investigation of the facts or 2. Because they wanted to find material that could poke holes in her story? Figuratively look me in the eyes and really tell me you think it is #1. A specific player was named in the accusation. Did anyone go on his social media to see if there was any material that could be used to corroborate the notion that he was the kind of guy that would engage in that behavior. Did anyone go on any of the coaches' or players' social media to see if they had disparaging comments towards women? Or specifically talked about the accuser the way she claims? Did anybody search the internet to see if they could find any similar allegations about any of our coaches on staff? I'm going to tell you, generationally speaking, you can find stuff on social media on just about anybody under 30 that puts them in a bad light. What people here did was go to her social media, look around until they found material that could be portrayed in a bad light, not ask any follow up questions about it, and posted it or commented about it to portray her in a bad light. And going after the accuser like that in a one sided fashion is a bad look. The same thing happened with the football player that punched the frat guy over his dog. People posted pictures of the guy, pictures of the dog, talked about the dog's breed, and generally mocked both the guy and his dog. And in this case, the sexual harassment component makes it even more politically charged. And I'm telling you many people outside are going to look at it and say that the fans don't care whether she was harassed or not, they just don't want their football team hurt and there will be backlash. It isn't their job. It is the job of the investigators. It is the job of Cal's spokespeople who are paid to make people see Cal in the most favorable light. We do not know what we are doing in this realm.

Forget about this woman. Forget about Cal football. Forget about the facts of this case. Is this what you want the community doing with people who accuse somebody of a crime against them? Hey, Sebasta got punched in a bar by a popular person in the community. Oh, look he's holding a glass of wine on his Facebook page. He must be a drunk. Oh, yeah, his buddy's Facebook page has a picture of him with a lampshade over his head. He probably was drunk and belligerent and instigated the punch.

Or, do you really want every girl who accuses somebody of a sexual related incident to have random people in the community pulling her spring break pictures down off her social media? Or for that matter, every guy who is accused have the same treatment.
Again. You are right that the accuser's social media is relevant. It is relevant to the investigator who can look at it and evaluate the context and ask follow up questions and who has a duty to do an even handed investigation. It is relevant to the accused and their representatives who do not have any duty to do an even handed investigation, but where they will present it within the process where she and her representatives have an opportunity to both respond and also have the accused's social media be equally fair game to them. Here, it is just presented in a one sided fashion with the accuser having no realistic chance to respond unless you think it is realistic to find every post on the internet. This is not the way to do things if the interest is to get at the facts. It is only the way to do things if you want a particular outcome regardless of the facts.

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking'or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking'or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

---

If you are talking about my posts, I never said the "perps" have to sit back. They and their representatives should do what they think is best. I said others should leave it to them and that it is unwise to try to do it for them.

Personally, I think how she has handled the situation is unwise also, but that is her problem. And, by the way, I think if people that support her were to start trying to find stuff on Cal and the coaches and the players I would say the same things to them - let the investigation happen. I pretty much was saying exactly that earlier in the thread but the truth is, nobody was defending that strategy because nobody was doing that so it became a one sided conversation.

A well thought out post Oak. Will just note two things. First on the motivation for why people went on her Instagram page, I think you may be being a bit harsh. To say people must have done it to discredit her is painting with too broad a brush. I know I looked at it because this is one of the places she was talking about Cal football. The pictures in question were literally on the same page. It would have been hard not to see them and be struck by the juxtaposition of someone who summers in the French Riviera and has climbed the Great Wall claiming to be a financial aid student.

Second, I am deeply hurt that you did not comment on my line that her travel itinerary makes her look like a Bond villain. I thought that was a good one.

OaktownBear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking'or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

---

If you are talking about my posts, I never said the "perps" have to sit back. They and their representatives should do what they think is best. I said others should leave it to them and that it is unwise to try to do it for them.

Personally, I think how she has handled the situation is unwise also, but that is her problem. And, by the way, I think if people that support her were to start trying to find stuff on Cal and the coaches and the players I would say the same things to them - let the investigation happen. I pretty much was saying exactly that earlier in the thread but the truth is, nobody was defending that strategy because nobody was doing that so it became a one sided conversation.

---

was not referring to your posts at all, but we seem to be losing in the court of public opinion...in fact it's really in damage control now.

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

---

I suppose Duncan, as a person who is named, could give an interview if he wanted but it probably wouldn't gain him anything. In regards to Knowlton and Wilcox, they can't really do anything and any unnamed coaches probably should keep quiet as well.

Is it fair that she gets to try the case in the media? No.

Yogi Bear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

---

I suppose Duncan, as a person who is named, could give an interview if he wanted but it probably wouldn't gain him anything. In regards to Knowlton and Wilcox, they can't really do anything and any unnamed coaches probably should keep quiet as well.

Is it fair that she gets to try the case in the media? No.

---

i don't know. I'm going to retreat again. I chimed in because this incident was compared to a gang rape and now this media blitz. Is zero counter a strategy? Maybe so. Too hard to watch.

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

I hope the producers and hosts read about The Rolling Stones UVA experience as preparation..

Sebastabear said:

---

A well thought out post Oak. Will just note two things. First on the motivation for why people went on her Instagram page, I think you may be being a bit harsh. To say people must have done it to discredit her is painting with too broad a brush. I know I looked at it because this is one of the places she was talking about Cal football. The pictures in question were literally on the same page. It would have been hard not to see them and be struck by the juxtaposition of someone who summers in the French Riviera and has climbed the Great Wall claiming to be a financial aid student.

Second, I am deeply hurt that you did not comment on my line that her travel itinerary makes her look like a Bond villain. I thought that was a good one.

---

It was a good line, although 007 himself could probably compete in that area himself.

cal83dls79 said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking'or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

---

If you are talking about my posts, I never said the "perps" have to sit back. They and their representatives should do what they think is best. I said others should leave it to them and that it is unwise to try to do it for them.

Personally, I think how she has handled the situation is unwise also, but that is her problem. And, by the way, I think if people that support her were to start trying to find stuff on Cal and the coaches and the players I would say the same things to them - let the investigation happen. I pretty much was saying exactly that earlier in the thread but the truth is, nobody was defending that strategy because nobody was doing that so it became a one sided conversation.

---

was not referring to your posts at all, but we seem to be losing in the court of public opinion...in fact it's really in damage control now.

---

I completely understand it is hard. But there is a reason that the most common strategy is silence. It doesn't pay in the long run to do otherwise. The important thing is what people think of Cal a year from now and beyond, not a week from now.

Honestly, and I'm going to be violating my own rule here, if she is represented and they are driving the current strategy, they look to me like attorneys who don't have a very good case who are trying to push a settlement by being a public relations nightmare. If the facts are on your side, you usually play the long game. Honestly, I don't think it will work with Cal, but I could be wrong.

She made a lot of claims that are traceable, so the facts should come out in the long run.

OaktownBear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking'or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

---

If you are talking about my posts, I never said the "perps" have to sit back. They and their representatives should do what they think is best. I said others should leave it to them and that it is unwise to try to do it for them.

Personally, I think how she has handled the situation is unwise also, but that is her problem. And, by the way, I think if people that support her were to start trying to find stuff on Cal and the coaches and the players I would say the same things to them - let the investigation happen. I pretty much was saying exactly that earlier in the thread but the truth is, nobody was defending that strategy because nobody was doing that so it became a one sided conversation.

---

was not referring to your posts at all, but we seem to be losing in the court of public opinion...in fact it's really in damage control now.

---

I completely understand it is hard. But there is a reason that the most common strategy is silence. It doesn't pay in the long run to do otherwise. The important thing is what people think of Cal a year from now and beyond, not a week from now.

Honestly, and I'm going to be violating my own rule here, if she is represented and they are driving the current strategy, they look to me like attorneys who don't have a very good case who are trying to push a settlement by being a public relations nightmare. If the facts are on your side, you usually play the long game. Honestly, I don't think it will work with Cal, but I could be wrong.

She made a lot of claims that are traceable, so the facts should come out in the long run.

---

That would be my question right now: Is Cal going to pay to get this over with, or pursue it, to try and reveal the truth? And does Athletics have a say in that decision? (I'm sure the answer to the first question depends on what the investigation turns up.)

Oaktown,
Appreciate your words as usual. I agree with the above that I think you're short changing this community. I don't see a rabid, blind fan base that's circling its wagons around the program. I think we all know there's shady stuff that happens all the time in college sports programs, including recent history in Cal basketball and football. I think people have, for the most part, been fair with the extreme comment here and there (which shouldn't be used to characterize the rest of our dialog).

I would also add that we've had a lot more exposure to Wilcox and Knowlton than we have of PC, so it's natural to question the accusations since many of us think the coach and AD are stand up people.

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

I have been at work all day. Has the Today Show been plugging this all day? I will make a note to watch. I hope she cooperates with the Office for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination at Cal, so they can get all the details from her as well as the other individuals involved.

cal83dls79 said:

---

Yogi Bear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

---

I suppose Duncan, as a person who is named, could give an interview if he wanted but it probably wouldn't gain him anything. In regards to Knowlton and Wilcox, they can't really do anything and any unnamed coaches probably should keep quiet as well.

Is it fair that she gets to try the case in the media? No.

---

i don't know. I'm going to retreat again. I chimed in because this incident was compared to a gang rape and now this media blitz. Is zero counter a strategy? Maybe so. Too hard to watch.

---

It's certainly no Amber Wyatt situation. There doesn't seem to have been any actual rape. i don't even think anything that could be considered attempted rape. Certainly sexual harassment if there ends up being any truth to the claims.

I don't think it's gonna have a lot of legs in the media though. Until the investigation is complete, there's really nothing else to talk about once you cover her side of the story, as opposed to the tree-sitters who were in the trees every day.

SonomanA1 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

I have been at work all day. Has the Today Show been plugging this all day? I will make a note to watch. I hope she cooperates with the Office for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination at Cal, so they can get all the details from her as well as the other individuals involved.

---

No clue. I only know about it because she posted in her IG story.

I will say her behavior seems very weird for someone who retained legal counsel.

BearDown2o15 said:

---

SonomanA1 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

I have been at work all day. Has the Today Show been plugging this all day? I will make a note to watch. I hope she cooperates with the Office for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination at Cal, so they can get all the details from her as well as the other individuals involved.

---

No clue. I only know about it because she posted in her IG story.

I will say her behavior seems very weird for someone who retained legal counsel.

---

I am skeptical that she has legal counsel and if she does, it's not someone reputable

freshfunk said:

---

Oaktown,
Appreciate your words as usual. I agree with the above that I think you're short changing this community. I don't see a rabid, blind fan base that's circling its wagons around the program. I think we all know there's shady stuff that happens all the time in college sports programs, including recent history in Cal basketball and football. I think people have, for the most part, been fair with the extreme comment here and there (which shouldn't be used to characterize the rest of our dialog).

I would also add that we've had a lot more exposure to Wilcox and Knowlton than we have of PC, so it's natural to question the accusations since many of us think the coach and AD are stand up people.

---

Let me clarify, freshfunk, if I have not made myself clear. I think largely the community has been fair with lots of posts saying to just let the investigation happen. I do think there are individuals that are circling the wagons, but there are always going to be a spectrum of reactions. My point to those posting some of these things is what they can be made to LOOK LIKE. People "love" the "and then person X was victimized all over again by internet" story. Again, what I'm saying is let the facts come out. Let Cal message it.

Big C said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

barfing in mouth now. Can we get back to Wyking'or even Baldwin? So let me get this straight the "victim" can litigate in the mass media and the "perps" just sit back? Wow.

---

If you are talking about my posts, I never said the "perps" have to sit back. They and their representatives should do what they think is best. I said others should leave it to them and that it is unwise to try to do it for them.

Personally, I think how she has handled the situation is unwise also, but that is her problem. And, by the way, I think if people that support her were to start trying to find stuff on Cal and the coaches and the players I would say the same things to them - let the investigation happen. I pretty much was saying exactly that earlier in the thread but the truth is, nobody was defending that strategy because nobody was doing that so it became a one sided conversation.

---

was not referring to your posts at all, but we seem to be losing in the court of public opinion...in fact it's really in damage control now.

---

I completely understand it is hard. But there is a reason that the most common strategy is silence. It doesn't pay in the long run to do otherwise. The important thing is what people think of Cal a year from now and beyond, not a week from now.

Honestly, and I'm going to be violating my own rule here, if she is represented and they are driving the current strategy, they look to me like attorneys who don't have a very good case who are trying to push a settlement by being a public relations nightmare. If the facts are on your side, you usually play the long game. Honestly, I don't think it will work with Cal, but I could be wrong.

She made a lot of claims that are traceable, so the facts should come out in the long run.

---

That would be my question right now: Is Cal going to pay to get this over with, or pursue it, to try and reveal the truth? And does Athletics have a say in that decision? (I'm sure the answer to the first question depends on what the investigation turns up.)

---

These days, a settlement is an admission of guilt in the court of public opinion. I hope if the evidence is good for Cal that they don't cave.

OaktownBear said:

---

freshfunk said:

---

Oaktown,
Appreciate your words as usual. I agree with the above that I think you're short changing this community. I don't see a rabid, blind fan base that's circling its wagons around the program. I think we all know there's shady stuff that happens all the time in college sports programs, including recent history in Cal basketball and football. I think people have, for the most part, been fair with the extreme comment here and there (which shouldn't be used to characterize the rest of our dialog).

I would also add that we've had a lot more exposure to Wilcox and Knowlton than we have of PC, so it's natural to question the accusations since many of us think the coach and AD are stand up people.

---

Let me clarify, freshfunk, if I have not made myself clear. I think largely the community has been fair with lots of posts saying to just let the investigation happen. I do think there are individuals that are circling the wagons, but there are always going to be a spectrum of reactions. My point to those posting some of these things is what they can be made to LOOK LIKE. People "love" the "and then person X was victimized all over again by internet" story. Again, what I'm saying is let the facts come out. Let Cal message it.

---

What may appear to be circling the wagons is, I think in many cases, healthy skepticism in the face of a several posts (and a more generalized attitude) that suggests you must "believe all woman" or at least that alleged victims in these situations cannot be questioned. Even among those who have been skeptical, most if not all have acknowledged the possibility that some or all of the allegations could be true. For example, she could have been harassed (or in a relationship of some sort) with the grad assistant, but at the same time it could be that Wilcox, Knowlton et al. had no notice or idea that there was an issue. And let's face it, the woman's facebook post was incendiary and made several claims that were hard to believe - such as that the incidents had been reported and Cal didn't respond.

In fact, as Cal alums, most of us think there's a decent chance Cal has or will screw this up somehow. That is Cal. We are skeptiCAL.

I think the skepticism is a good thing. When Wilcox issued his statement on Friday with its unusual and somewhat ambiguous language, people were skeptical and analyzed it to the 99th degree. If Cal were to issue a press release on these issues, people should be skeptical and demand evidence. When Knowlton held a press conference explaining Wyking Jones' termination and the timing/reasons therefore, people were skeptical since the explanation was contrary to what had been reported and didn't fully make sense.

I have no problem with the "look for Cal" of demanding evidence and expressing skepticism. I don't think its a bad look at all as long as the complainant is not truly "****shamed" (which I haven't seen). In fact, I think the skepticism and search for truth (Fiat Lux) is entirely consistent with the University broader purpose - arguably the search for truth/knowledge is the university's primary purpose. And I don't think that Alumni (or for that matter anyone else) is obliged to wait for the University's process to play out given that the woman chose to press her claims in a public forum as opposed to the confidential university process.

freshfunk said:

---

I don't see a rabid, blind fan base that's circling its wagons around the program.

---

I suppose that depends on who the rabid fanbase is trying to bite. Some may beg to differ.

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

BearDown2o15 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

---

watching this show today was just torture, can't be unseen

BearDown2o15 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

---

I'm skeptical that this is for real. Why would the Today Show want to talk to her about her mental illnesses rather than the sexual harassment allegations? They could interview any number of people about mental illness; there's nothing special about hers.

pingpong2 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

---

I'm skeptical that this is for real. Why would the Today Show want to talk to her about her mental illnesses rather than the sexual harassment allegations? They could interview any number of people about mental illness; there's nothing special about hers.

---

Sorry it's not just mental illness they want to talk about. Per her IG story it's "her struggles with mental illness and sexual harassment trauma"

OaktownBear said:

---

freshfunk said:

---

Oaktown,
Appreciate your words as usual. I agree with the above that I think you're short changing this community. I don't see a rabid, blind fan base that's circling its wagons around the program. I think we all know there's shady stuff that happens all the time in college sports programs, including recent history in Cal basketball and football. I think people have, for the most part, been fair with the extreme comment here and there (which shouldn't be used to characterize the rest of our dialog).

I would also add that we've had a lot more exposure to Wilcox and Knowlton than we have of PC, so it's natural to question the accusations since many of us think the coach and AD are stand up people.

---

Let me clarify, freshfunk, if I have not made myself clear. I think largely the community has been fair with lots of posts saying to just let the investigation happen. I do think there are individuals that are circling the wagons, but there are always going to be a spectrum of reactions. My point to those posting some of these things is what they can be made to LOOK LIKE. People "love" the "and then person X was victimized all over again by internet" story. Again, what I'm saying is let the facts come out. Let Cal message it.

---

Yes, in the internet culture there is definitely a phenomenon around piling and trial by popular opinion (eg "has Justine landed yet?").

I think the public opinion (outside of this board) tilts towards the accuser since she's a woman accusing a sports program and typically women are the victims and sports programs have been known to have sketchy histories .

On the board, however, it probably tilts more towards the program because we are better acquainted with the personalities of Wilcox and Knowlton. Furthermore, there's the scuttlebutt from people connected (albeit by several degrees) to the accuser and accused.

However, I don't think we've come even close to a situation where the internet has made a decision on either side. Aside from a couple extreme comments, people have been measured.

I agree we should let it play out but usually the details are swept under the rug and all that comes out is the result (settlement or dropped case). I would be surprised if we got a very public showing of what actually happened. It's not surprising that a Cal sports fan base wants to know more details about what happened, the accused and the accuser.

I think it's still problematic that we have had those extreme comments. We had a reputable poster here claim she was a morally bankrupt individual with (in my opinion, tenuous without attribution) evidence. Such judgements, no matter how rare, do not look good when we haven't gotten an inkling of where this investigation is going.

pingpong2 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

---

I'm skeptical that this is for real. Why would the Today Show want to talk to her about her mental illnesses rather than the sexual harassment allegations? They could interview any number of people about mental illness; there's nothing special about hers.

---

The Today Show cares about everyday people and the everyday struggles they face. This has NOTHING to do with her being a rich, good-looking young blond who has gotten a boost of fame during the past week.

They should also have Olivia Jade on to discuss her issues of having to go to school and not being able to focus on her true passion....partying.

Big C said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

---

I'm skeptical that this is for real. Why would the Today Show want to talk to her about her mental illnesses rather than the sexual harassment allegations? They could interview any number of people about mental illness; there's nothing special about hers.

---

The Today Show cares about everyday people and the everyday struggles they face. This has NOTHING to do with her being a rich, good-looking young blond who has gotten a boost of fame during the past week.

---

Is there any real confirmation from NBC that this will be a segment on the Today show?
If so, I look forward to watching it.

If not, (and she's the one saying there will be a segment), that makes perfect sense to someone more than familiar with Bi-Polar disorder.

Alkiadt said:

---

Big C said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

---

I'm skeptical that this is for real. Why would the Today Show want to talk to her about her mental illnesses rather than the sexual harassment allegations? They could interview any number of people about mental illness; there's nothing special about hers.

---

The Today Show cares about everyday people and the everyday struggles they face. This has NOTHING to do with her being a rich, good-looking young blond who has gotten a boost of fame during the past week.

---

Is there any real confirmation from NBC that this will be a segment on the Today show?
If so, I look forward to watching it.

If not, (and she's the one saying there will be a segment), that makes perfect sense to someone more than familiar with Bi-Polar disorder.

---

Yeah, I've been trying to find confirmation of this and can't. If she's actually going to be on an NBC show tomorrow you'd think there would be something about it on one of their pages or their Twitter account or something.

sycasey said:

---

Alkiadt said:

---

Big C said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

---

I'm skeptical that this is for real. Why would the Today Show want to talk to her about her mental illnesses rather than the sexual harassment allegations? They could interview any number of people about mental illness; there's nothing special about hers.

---

The Today Show cares about everyday people and the everyday struggles they face. This has NOTHING to do with her being a rich, good-looking young blond who has gotten a boost of fame during the past week.

---

Is there any real confirmation from NBC that this will be a segment on the Today show?
If so, I look forward to watching it.

If not, (and she's the one saying there will be a segment), that makes perfect sense to someone more than familiar with Bi-Polar disorder.

---

Yeah, I've been trying to find confirmation of this and can't. If she's actually going to be on an NBC show tomorrow you'd think there would be something about it on one of their pages or their Twitter account or something.

---

If she's the source that she will appear on the Today Show, I'm dubious.

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Alkiadt said:

---

Big C said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

BearDown2o15 said:

---

Tune in to the Today Show at 7:40 tomorrow. You can see the alleged victim speak about her mental illness.

---

She has now indicated it will air on Wednesday (I assume the same time slot).

---

I'm skeptical that this is for real. Why would the Today Show want to talk to her about her mental illnesses rather than the sexual harassment allegations? They could interview any number of people about mental illness; there's nothing special about hers.

---

The Today Show cares about everyday people and the everyday struggles they face. This has NOTHING to do with her being a rich, good-looking young blond who has gotten a boost of fame during the past week.

---

Is there any real confirmation from NBC that this will be a segment on the Today show?
If so, I look forward to watching it.

If not, (and she's the one saying there will be a segment), that makes perfect sense to someone more than familiar with Bi-Polar disorder.

---

Yeah, I've been trying to find confirmation of this and can't. If she's actually going to be on an NBC show tomorrow you'd think there would be something about it on one of their pages or their Twitter account or something.

---

If she's the source that she will appear on the Today Show, I'm dubious.

---

Certainly not everything she's claimed so far has held up to scrutiny, so I wonder about this.

Which of course does NOT mean that she was NOT sexually harassed by a coach. It's still possible that this happened. It does mean that you can't take everything she says at face value, though.

This is shaping up to be like that Kevin Hart thing all over again.