Home General
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.

OSU Investigation report....

13

Comments

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,569 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @MinnesotaDawg -- actually, I'm not wondering why Meyer should be fired. I want to know why Smith wasn't prosecuted if there was an arrest for domestic violence. My question is more about whether police/DA were complicit. My underlying concern is the police arrest and then prosecution is a safety net for the victim.

  • tiger_62082tiger_62082 Posts: 1,722 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @JayDog said:

    @Bankwalker said:

    @JayDog said:
    I have not read the report so I don't know the details. But I have a question to ask unrelated to the character of the coach. If a coach reports ALLEGATIONS of abuse to his administration, if the accused denies the allegations, if the police are called and no charges are filed--should the mere accusation of abuse get a person fired? Was this generally the situation here?

    I don't know the law in Ohio, but in some states the police must press charges in a domestic violence call if evidence of abuse is found.

    Careful. I discussed these issues 2 weeks ago and was called a while bunch of stuff, including a woman abuser myself, by a bunch of younger posters.

    The answer SHOULD be NO, that a person does not get fired over allegations, especially when the police have investigated and declined charges.

    What the report states is what I've suspected all along - they don't have the evidence the fire with cause and $38 million is too much money to eat when the truth is that you would prefer to keep your coach. Now time will tell if this matters on the recruiting trail. I'm skeptical it will matter very much at all.

    I think you are right about the reason Urban Liar wasn't fired. What I've been trying to wrap my head around is why, if there was an arrest, why wasn't there enough evidence to fire? To me an arrest after police went to the home and observed the fresh bruises makes the Urban Liar's sins that much worse. If there was an arrest, why didn't the state prosecute without the victim's pressing charges?

    Ok, well you guys should read the report. Even with the whitewash and even if you believe everything that Meyer claims (they expressly do not), they concluded that he violated his contract. Instead of suspending him without pay, they could have fired him. No question.The rationale (for Gene Smith, too) is failure to follow protocol in response to the allegation.

    In addition, the report itself suggests that if they pursued any of the following, that Meyer could be fired for: (1) Lying to the media at Big Ten media day (2) Failing to tell Gene Smith about Zach Smith's past at his hire and throughout the Zach Smith drama-filled OSU career (3) destroying evidence in immediate advance of investigation and (4) Lying to the investigators (they explicit note that they didn't believe key parts of his self-serving story).

    You'll note that ALL of this separate and apart from whether the police decided to pursue charges against Zach Smith with respect to the allegations of spousal abuse. Personally, I find that most of the hypothetical, "what if"/"does this mean..." scenarios that people bring up as complicating factors (as you describe) above simply do not apply in this situation. Bottom line is that Meyer DID have a contractual obligation to report findings to compliance staff who could have made an independent determination what the appropriate next course would have been (investigation, further questioning, history of allegations, actually talking to victim). Instead, a biased and self-serving Meyer (along with Smith) erroneously decided to keep the info (and his knowledge of Smith's history) to himself.

    Did you see his response when asked to address the victim (Courtney Smith)? It was utterly disgraceful. Only thing worse was the statement Zach Smith’s attorney prepared for him that night. I would like to think there’s more dirt out there that someone will release. They were just waiting to see if the University was prepared to do the right thing. Either that or the feds take a look. Destroying evidence is a serious issue

  • MinnesotaDawgMinnesotaDawg Posts: 552 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:
    @MinnesotaDawg -- actually, I'm not wondering why Meyer should be fired. I want to know why Smith wasn't prosecuted if there was an arrest for domestic violence. My question is more about whether police/DA were complicit. My underlying concern is the police arrest and then prosecution is a safety net for the victim.

    My response was mostly to @Bankwalker re his opinion of whether they could have fired him for cause. His opinion was to doubt that they could and would have had to eat the money if they made an "ethical" determination to fire him.

    As your question re Powell police: In a nutshell, we don't know because the Powell police refuses to release the police report and any of the evidence they collected. Why? First, they argued that it was still an open investigation (3 years later). When that rationale was shredded, there new rationale is that the report would reveal the name of the "uncharged suspect"...as if we didn't already know. Lawyers in this area dismiss such an argument because such reports are commonly released with redactions, if necessary. Anyway, at this point, records are still secret.

    Other suspicious factors:

    The only thing that was released was the cover page to the reports...and this page indicated that Zach Smith was arrested in 2015. AFTER the story by McMurphy, the Powell police chief edited the cover page, saying that the arrest notification was a clerical error. Umm, ok.

    Why wasn't Smith charged (or arrested)? I will do my best to provide facts only without commentary (even though I have plenty):

    Powell police chief first said that he consulted with prosecutor's office and they decided not to pursue charges. When prosecutors office was asked why, they said they only make such determinations in felony cases. This was not a felony case because in Ohio, DV is only a felony if (1) there was a previous arrest/conviction in state for DV or (2) alleged victim was pregnant. So prosecutor could not legally pursue felony here. Prosecutor did not know why police chief did not pursue misdemeanor instead. In response to this new understanding, police chief said he couldn't respond, but generally they weigh the evidence. For the record, city spokesman stated that suspect “was investigated and believed to have committed an offense".....and didn't know why arrest/charges did not follow.

    Also, Powell police chief claimed that he never "officially" talked to Urban Meyer about investigation. Leaving the question about unofficial conversations unanswered. And now, according to the Investigation Report, Shelly Meyer admits to being in contact with the Powell police throughout the investigation.

  • WCDawgWCDawg Posts: 17,293 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @allyw said:
    @SoFL_Dawg I would really like to see a 30 for 30 on this...

    I'm sure it's coming.

  • MinnesotaDawgMinnesotaDawg Posts: 552 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @tiger_62082 said:

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @JayDog said:

    @Bankwalker said:

    @JayDog said:
    I have not read the report so I don't know the details. But I have a question to ask unrelated to the character of the coach. If a coach reports ALLEGATIONS of abuse to his administration, if the accused denies the allegations, if the police are called and no charges are filed--should the mere accusation of abuse get a person fired? Was this generally the situation here?

    I don't know the law in Ohio, but in some states the police must press charges in a domestic violence call if evidence of abuse is found.

    Careful. I discussed these issues 2 weeks ago and was called a while bunch of stuff, including a woman abuser myself, by a bunch of younger posters.

    The answer SHOULD be NO, that a person does not get fired over allegations, especially when the police have investigated and declined charges.

    What the report states is what I've suspected all along - they don't have the evidence the fire with cause and $38 million is too much money to eat when the truth is that you would prefer to keep your coach. Now time will tell if this matters on the recruiting trail. I'm skeptical it will matter very much at all.

    I think you are right about the reason Urban Liar wasn't fired. What I've been trying to wrap my head around is why, if there was an arrest, why wasn't there enough evidence to fire? To me an arrest after police went to the home and observed the fresh bruises makes the Urban Liar's sins that much worse. If there was an arrest, why didn't the state prosecute without the victim's pressing charges?

    Ok, well you guys should read the report. Even with the whitewash and even if you believe everything that Meyer claims (they expressly do not), they concluded that he violated his contract. Instead of suspending him without pay, they could have fired him. No question.The rationale (for Gene Smith, too) is failure to follow protocol in response to the allegation.

    In addition, the report itself suggests that if they pursued any of the following, that Meyer could be fired for: (1) Lying to the media at Big Ten media day (2) Failing to tell Gene Smith about Zach Smith's past at his hire and throughout the Zach Smith drama-filled OSU career (3) destroying evidence in immediate advance of investigation and (4) Lying to the investigators (they explicit note that they didn't believe key parts of his self-serving story).

    You'll note that ALL of this separate and apart from whether the police decided to pursue charges against Zach Smith with respect to the allegations of spousal abuse. Personally, I find that most of the hypothetical, "what if"/"does this mean..." scenarios that people bring up as complicating factors (as you describe) above simply do not apply in this situation. Bottom line is that Meyer DID have a contractual obligation to report findings to compliance staff who could have made an independent determination what the appropriate next course would have been (investigation, further questioning, history of allegations, actually talking to victim). Instead, a biased and self-serving Meyer (along with Smith) erroneously decided to keep the info (and his knowledge of Smith's history) to himself.

    Did you see his response when asked to address the victim (Courtney Smith)? It was utterly disgraceful. Only thing worse was the statement Zach Smith’s attorney prepared for him that night. I would like to think there’s more dirt out there that someone will release. They were just waiting to see if the University was prepared to do the right thing. Either that or the feds take a look. Destroying evidence is a serious issue

    I know. As if we didn't already know...the press conference further revealed Meyer as an uncaring, fraudulent, piece of trash. His dead-eyed, robotic, non-human statement made it clear that he still doesn't think he did anything wrong and makes me wonder whether he has legitimate psychopathic tendencies. I think he truly believes his own lies. He only has sympathy or compassion when talking about himself.

  • greshamdiscogreshamdisco Posts: 2,674 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    I work in the data forensics field. (Sorry for the length...) Here’s what’s likely: (1) It sounds like Meyer used a scrubbing program to delete the messages from at least his own phone. However, at least one other person would have been receiving them and would have to also have used deletion software. So, maybe the second person would have the other copies. There’s also a likely “everyone delete this stuff” call that went out. (2) Phones are backed up on networks, and it’s likely OSU would have a copy of the messages in an archive. It’s also possible he plugged his phone in to his personal computer (for music or to charge), and copies reside there. (3) Deleted text messages (if not found through 1 or 2 above) could be recovered, probably in-part, but it depends on how thoroughly they were erased. (4) Meyer’s timing of the deletions would correspond to his knowledge of the investigation’s targeting of the messages. That says a lot of he destroyed it around that time. In a criminal or civil case, that would be illegal or considered purposeful spoliation (like shredding documents). However, this was an internal investigation, so the “judge” is OSU, and it’s likely someone told him to do it or helped him so they couldn’t find anything. There’s no one to punish him for it if OSU would rather not judge him. There may be some kind of open records issue, but it likely doesn’t cover 1+ year old text messages.

  • MinnesotaDawgMinnesotaDawg Posts: 552 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @greshamdisco said:
    I work in the data forensics field. (Sorry for the length...) Here’s what’s likely: (1) It sounds like Meyer used a scrubbing program to delete the messages from at least his own phone. However, at least one other person would have been receiving them and would have to also have used deletion software. So, maybe the second person would have the other copies. There’s also a likely “everyone delete this stuff” call that went out. (2) Phones are backed up on networks, and it’s likely OSU would have a copy of the messages in an archive. It’s also possible he plugged his phone in to his personal computer (for music or to charge), and copies reside there. (3) Deleted text messages (if not found through 1 or 2 above) could be recovered, probably in-part, but it depends on how thoroughly they were erased. (4) Meyer’s timing of the deletions would correspond to his knowledge of the investigation’s targeting of the messages. That says a lot of he destroyed it around that time. In a criminal or civil case, that would be illegal or considered purposeful spoliation (like shredding documents). However, this was an internal investigation, so the “judge” is OSU, and it’s likely someone told him to do it or helped him so they couldn’t find anything. There’s no one to punish him for it if OSU would rather not judge him. There may be some kind of open records issue, but it likely doesn’t cover 1+ year old text messages.

    Good info. And I think your conclusion is right on. If this whole episode has proven anything, it's that Urban Meyer is the boss of the school. Just like former OSU president Gordan Gee "joked": "Let me be very clear. I'm just hopeful the coach doesn't dismiss me!" So, short of Meyer calling for reinvestigation into his own actions, nothing likely to happen with the texts on OSU's side.

    Now it's all about image rehab for Meyer at OSU. No doubt, there is a team in place to craft this new story. I'm surprised it hasn't already happened, but my prediction is that one of the next steps is for the OSU, Gene Smith, and Meyer personally to throw money at a non-profit dedicated to domestic abuse issues. This will be greatly applauded by the likes of Kirk Herbstreit, who I've lost any remaining respect for in the past week. His response to this whole episode ("confused" at findings, "happy to see" Meyer keep job, glad about "closure") was pathetic. Pretty obvious that any sense of objectivity is trumped by Herbstreit's friendship with Meyer and relationship with Ohio State. So just say so, and spare us your mealy-mouth garbage.

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,569 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @JayDog said:
    @MinnesotaDawg -- actually, I'm not wondering why Meyer should be fired. I want to know why Smith wasn't prosecuted if there was an arrest for domestic violence. My question is more about whether police/DA were complicit. My underlying concern is the police arrest and then prosecution is a safety net for the victim.

    My response was mostly to @Bankwalker re his opinion of whether they could have fired him for cause. His opinion was to doubt that they could and would have had to eat the money if they made an "ethical" determination to fire him.

    As your question re Powell police: In a nutshell, we don't know because the Powell police refuses to release the police report and any of the evidence they collected. Why? First, they argued that it was still an open investigation (3 years later). When that rationale was shredded, there new rationale is that the report would reveal the name of the "uncharged suspect"...as if we didn't already know. Lawyers in this area dismiss such an argument because such reports are commonly released with redactions, if necessary. Anyway, at this point, records are still secret.

    Other suspicious factors:

    The only thing that was released was the cover page to the reports...and this page indicated that Zach Smith was arrested in 2015. AFTER the story by McMurphy, the Powell police chief edited the cover page, saying that the arrest notification was a clerical error. Umm, ok.

    Why wasn't Smith charged (or arrested)? I will do my best to provide facts only without commentary (even though I have plenty):

    Powell police chief first said that he consulted with prosecutor's office and they decided not to pursue charges. When prosecutors office was asked why, they said they only make such determinations in felony cases. This was not a felony case because in Ohio, DV is only a felony if (1) there was a previous arrest/conviction in state for DV or (2) alleged victim was pregnant. So prosecutor could not legally pursue felony here. Prosecutor did not know why police chief did not pursue misdemeanor instead. In response to this new understanding, police chief said he couldn't respond, but generally they weigh the evidence. For the record, city spokesman stated that suspect “was investigated and believed to have committed an offense".....and didn't know why arrest/charges did not follow.

    Also, Powell police chief claimed that he never "officially" talked to Urban Meyer about investigation. Leaving the question about unofficial conversations unanswered. And now, according to the Investigation Report, Shelly Meyer admits to being in contact with the Powell police throughout the investigation.

    It all stinks. That is a messed up law in Ohio. Apart from that--it has always seemed wrong that there was never an arrest. Always felt the police were not doing their job.

  • tiger_62082tiger_62082 Posts: 1,722 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited August 2018

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @greshamdisco said:
    I work in the data forensics field. (Sorry for the length...) Here’s what’s likely: (1) It sounds like Meyer used a scrubbing program to delete the messages from at least his own phone. However, at least one other person would have been receiving them and would have to also have used deletion software. So, maybe the second person would have the other copies. There’s also a likely “everyone delete this stuff” call that went out. (2) Phones are backed up on networks, and it’s likely OSU would have a copy of the messages in an archive. It’s also possible he plugged his phone in to his personal computer (for music or to charge), and copies reside there. (3) Deleted text messages (if not found through 1 or 2 above) could be recovered, probably in-part, but it depends on how thoroughly they were erased. (4) Meyer’s timing of the deletions would correspond to his knowledge of the investigation’s targeting of the messages. That says a lot of he destroyed it around that time. In a criminal or civil case, that would be illegal or considered purposeful spoliation (like shredding documents). However, this was an internal investigation, so the “judge” is OSU, and it’s likely someone told him to do it or helped him so they couldn’t find anything. There’s no one to punish him for it if OSU would rather not judge him. There may be some kind of open records issue, but it likely doesn’t cover 1+ year old text messages.

    Good info. And I think your conclusion is right on. If this whole episode has proven anything, it's that Urban Meyer is the boss of the school. Just like former OSU president Gordan Gee "joked": "Let me be very clear. I'm just hopeful the coach doesn't dismiss me!" So, short of Meyer calling for reinvestigation into his own actions, nothing likely to happen with the texts on OSU's side.

    Now it's all about image rehab for Meyer at OSU. No doubt, there is a team in place to craft this new story. I'm surprised it hasn't already happened, but my prediction is that one of the next steps is for the OSU, Gene Smith, and Meyer personally to throw money at a non-profit dedicated to domestic abuse issues. This will be greatly applauded by the likes of Kirk Herbstreit, who I've lost any remaining respect for in the past week. His response to this whole episode ("confused" at findings, "happy to see" Meyer keep job, glad about "closure") was pathetic. Pretty obvious that any sense of objectivity is trumped by Herbstreit's friendship with Meyer and relationship with Ohio State. So just say so, and spare us your mealy-mouth garbage.

    I lost all respect for Herbstreit when he used his ESPN bully pulpit to personally lobby for Ohio State to get into the “playoffs” and simultaneously did all he could to discredit Baylor and TCU. The fact that the four letter network allowed him to do so on multiple platforms - including while commentating on games - mean that they are worse! With that being said, I’m not surprised about Herbe’s take on this thing. He’s a deep throated homer.

  • levanderlevander Posts: 4,481 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited August 2018

    @Reeldawg said:

    @PTDawg said:
    I know I'm treading dangerously here but hearing the investigation report and then the conclusion reminded so much of the Comey report about Clinton's emails/server scandal. Phrases like "poor judgement" and "a reasonable person would have known better" thrown around. Then when you get to the end of the report - recommendation for consequences? Nah, not really...

    It’s probably best to keep politics out of the forum.

    If you’re not mature enough to handle an occasional political reference, why don’t you make sure not to mention politics? Most posters on this board are mature enough to handle it.

    The only thing against board rules is political rants. That post was far from a rant.

  • StatDawgStatDawg Posts: 34 ✭ Freshman

    I have reservations about Meyer....He lied at media days......He also hired a coach who he knew had some domestic violence issues........So Meyer is sort of a "Do what it takes to win" kind of guy....I kinda look at it like this: How many times did the cops come to this guys house? Was he ever charged and tried for domestic violence? Was this Meyer's responsibility?

  • dbrown7494dbrown7494 Posts: 1,372 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Taking this story to another level. Brett just reported that Texas’s coach Todd Herman was also at **** club with Zach Smith. Things just keep getting better.

    I’m just trying to avoid another thread.

  • pgjacksonpgjackson Posts: 18,975 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @StatDawg said:
    I have reservations about Meyer....He lied at media days......He also hired a coach who he knew had some domestic violence issues........So Meyer is sort of a "Do what it takes to win" kind of guy....I kinda look at it like this: How many times did the cops come to this guys house? Was he ever charged and tried for domestic violence? Was this Meyer's responsibility?

    To be fair, I wouldn't say he lied at media days. He's not under any obligation to answer sensitive legal questions at a simple media interview. He would be an idiot to say "Yes, I knew all about it" at something like that.

  • MinnesotaDawgMinnesotaDawg Posts: 552 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    So, he didn't lie at media days because only an idiot would have told the truth? That's a helluva defense.

    No, he was under no obligation to answer ANY questions at media days. But he DID. He didn't "no comment" or "can't discuss this legal matter at this time" it. He said he didn't know anything about the 2015 incident and he claimed this NINE different times to different questioners throughout the day. That's LYING. Further, he trashed the report/reporter for reporting about the 2015 incident that Meyer might have known....which in hindsight was probably Meyer's biggest mistake.

Sign In or Register to comment.