Then it is irresponsible for so many people to pop up on this board and claim that they have sufficient insight to make pronouncements about Lathon's character. I guarantee that they have not read the actual complaint, either.
"Incident that happened on a recruiting trip" (Lathon)
- Thread starter FeralFelidae
- Start date
I know as much as Sergeant Shultz and my legal background comes from watching Law & Order. I am not bothered by the scholarship revocation. Even if the offense were lesser, its our scholarship and at best he showed poor judgment on an overnight. If we smeared him, yes that would bother me. But based on how little has come out, its just hard for me to believe that. If we started telling 60-70 colleges around the country that he hit or assaulted a woman, that would have made its way onto this forum in some way, shape or form. But like the great Sergeant Schultz once said, I know nothing.
Correct-- heck, don't even know with absolute certainty that Lathon's is kne of the plaintiffs here, and it actually seems odd that he would be, given accounts that he is happy at UTEP (a team that shpild be significantly better this season, btw) and such a lawsuit is likely to be resolved years from now (the Vassar case is STILL in the courts) when the remedy he is allegedly seeking will be moot...
There are a bunch of anti-Sergeant Schultzes on this board who do claim to know what happened. So, for those of you who apparently know, is there anything in that article that contradicts what you know? If the allegation that you know about Lathon is NOT for sexual assault, for example, then we can rule out that the article pertains to Lathon.
But if it is, then I'm especially troubled that an instance of sexual assault would not be prosecuted in a real court. Does that not bother anybody? The fact that nobody, none of these many people who know, has spoken up to contradict the article is very telling to me.
I’m not proclaiming any right or wrong, but in this day and age, if there is something of this nature swirling around somebody, I think most institutions are going to err on the side of backing away from these circumstances. They should get as much information as they have available to them, and decide whatever they see fit for them.
We’ll likely never know everything that happened, and we probably shouldn’t. I can only assume that any school that contacted NU was given whatever information they could have reasonably expected, and decided from there if it was something they wanted to continue pursuing.
We’ll likely never know everything that happened, and we probably shouldn’t. I can only assume that any school that contacted NU was given whatever information they could have reasonably expected, and decided from there if it was something they wanted to continue pursuing.
I thought attending NU, receiving an athletic scholarship, and (even more so) attending NU on an athletic scholarship are all privileges, not rights.
Many sexual assault victims choose not to want to go through what pursuing a criminal case may entail. That or other facts the facts could readily be why there was no criminal proceeding. It does not begin to mean nothing inappropriate occurred.
That said, if NU had a complaint or knowledge of inappropriate actions, whether criminal or not, it had a responsibility to act. As others have noted, attending NU generally, & particularly on an athletic grant is a privilege (& not a right) that NU is mostly free to revoke in its discretion.
If there was any alleged misconduct of a sexual nature, & I have no information whatsoever as to whether that is true, erring on the side of caution in the current environment is prudent by NU.
I very much doubt NU is saying anything about the situation except the fact that admission was withdrawn.
BTW, you may find interesting Harvard's recent withdrawal of admission to a pro-gun Parkland survivor because of some old inappropriate Twitter or Facebook posts.
That said, if NU had a complaint or knowledge of inappropriate actions, whether criminal or not, it had a responsibility to act. As others have noted, attending NU generally, & particularly on an athletic grant is a privilege (& not a right) that NU is mostly free to revoke in its discretion.
If there was any alleged misconduct of a sexual nature, & I have no information whatsoever as to whether that is true, erring on the side of caution in the current environment is prudent by NU.
I very much doubt NU is saying anything about the situation except the fact that admission was withdrawn.
BTW, you may find interesting Harvard's recent withdrawal of admission to a pro-gun Parkland survivor because of some old inappropriate Twitter or Facebook posts.
I wasn’t asked to signed anything that I can recall prior to my official or unofficial visits.
I think the concern is whether NUs handling of the allegations negatively impacted Layton’s opportunities at other institutions. And I’m on the side of due process.
Doubtful. As for due process, he could have called the Weinberg dean's mom fat and NU would have been on firm ground revoking his admission. He lost a privilege...it is what it is.
It bothers me that such a low percentage of sexual assaults get prosecuted. It does not bother me that a private institution has a different burden of proof than the state, which has the power to lock you up.
So the flip side is that a non student is accused of assault and NU brings him on campus on scholarship in the midst of me too movement. The environment at NU is not conducive to this. Look at what happened with Mayfest a few weeks ago where they issued all sorts of apologies to marginalized groups before the event. Sure - Collins could have gone full Steve Alford at Iowa but do you really want that? These are almost always no win situations. It’s also really easy to paint institutions as the bad guys after u do something wrong - the president is a master at this.
Last edited:
Am I naive to wonder how the University allowed Lathon to get himself into such a compromising situation? When Northwestern hosts a minor (I assume Lathon wasn't 18), wouldn't you think there is a big focus on ensuring the kid doesn't get himself into trouble? For any former athletes, what does a typical overnight look like for recruits? I just always assumed that the hosts are asked to keep things rated G and to ensure the kid enjoys himself but more importantly stays safe. Maybe my image of a night hanging out in a dorm or apartment playing Go Fish is way off the norm. Or are we on the spectrum of the recruiting arms race that brought hookers to Louisville? Are hosts taking kids out to parties, letting them drink, etc? I can see how it might be tempting to show a kid a good time but I just cannot imagine the University condoning that. BTW, I admit I'm making an assumption that Lathon was in a compromising situation (party, perhaps alcohol) prior to the incident. Whatever happened, it feels like an epic fail on the University's part that this happened in the first place.
I don’t buy into the “let’s blame the school” for the actions/choices of an individual. That’s dangerously close to enabling.
I would disagree when the student is a minor. From a purely legal standpoint, Northwestern has a responsibility. From a maturity standpoint though, my oldest is 17, has a 4.6 and just posted a 34 ACT. He's a GREAT kid but if he were to take an overnight at a college, I'd be nervous as hell. I know what he's drinking on weekends these days and its not Sprite. Regardless, my question was less about blaming NU and more about how much risk the school tolerates on these overnights. Are we "entertaining" these kids in ways that might be inappropriate or do we toe the line (especially when it comes to alcohol)? When Louisville hires hookers to sleep with their recruits, you can tell there is an arms race going (or a race to the bottom). Not suggesting we're Louisville, I'm just curious what an overnight entails because I do think NU has a responsibility to protect someone's child.
Permitting higher education to police itself on these matters is a terrible idea. I don't know what and/or how convinced our law enforcement system to hand over jurisdiction to university administrators, but it never made sense to me, and makes less sense now.
Heck, Oberlin showed us how dumb universities can be in trying to preside over non-felonious matters, such as mere shoplifting. What a boondoggle for that school.
I still believe in personal accountability. If Lathon can’t act like a decent human being on a campus visit, he absolutely shouldn’t be allowed to enroll. He doesn’t have a right to be there.
I’m ok with that part. I’m not ok w a school unilaterally serving as judge, jury and executioner for the kids options outside NU. We don’t think this is a good idea for our country, so I can’t see what would make it a good idea to appoint NU that role.
Also, if this is exposed to be true, I see a negative impact on recruiting. Go for OV at NU at the risk of all your options. Not likely true but a realistic selling point by other programs.
I can’t say we need yet another roadblock in the recruiting department.
As long as it remains wholly internal and confidential. Once you allow private institutions to be judge, jury and executioner - the loss of checks and balance can lead to a host of problems.
Two of my recruiting trips were full of booze, girls, even MJ was on the table. On mine, there are plan activities all day, but the nights are wide open. You are assigned a host - a player - and they are supposed to watch over you, keep you out of trouble and make sure you want to come back.
We are all talking about possibilities, Mr Board Cop. Hopefully, we will get some evidence eventually of whatever happened. I’m excited as heck that some more details are coming to light. I doubt this is the end. We can revisit everybody’s theories at that time. Archives, baby, archives.
We're on the same page in that regard. Even if we took offense because he used the wrong fork at a dinner party, we have the right to pull the offer. By the way, that's why I always eat with my hands.
That "Complaint #1" in the recently linked article alleges that:
"The athletic recruit accused the University of discrimination on the basis of race, sex and age, as well as retaliation. He was accused of sexual violence against a student and apparently received disciplinary action from Northwestern. He is asking NU to 'reverse & expunge the Title IX findings and/or allow' him 'to have due process for the Title IX proceedings.'
'Either process would allow [redacted] to reinstate his name, character and reputation so he can be admitted into a Division 1, high major university,' the complaint reads. 'This reverse process should also amend [redacted] ability to be admitted into a prestigious university with reputable academic, afford more career prospects and increase his earning potential.'
The complaint also asks for Northwestern to publicly post the findings of its investigation on social media, submit documents to 'each college that declined his admission' and provider clearer information and Title IX resources to its coaches, recruits and parents."
This implies that there is some sort of record or black list as a result of Title IX proceedings that was used to prevent the student from being accepted at other institutions. This is an allegation at this point and might or might not be true. But if it is true that the results of NU's investigation have been used as part of a record or a black list that has been used by other institutions as the basis for denying his admission, are you okay with things being done this way? Especially if he has no apparent recourse to contest it?
OK, that's shitty but is it NU shitty or NCAA shitty? As others have stated, a scholarship offer is a privilege, not a right. We don't owe Lathon another day, even if it was a kangaroo court. It seems to me that the shitty piece is that the NCAA took our findings and put them into some sort of system that has blackballed Lathon elsewhere. To me, that's where the due process is lacking. Let some other school do their due diligence if they want Lathon and then let them request he be re-instated. I'm not an attorney but logic to me seems like he should be pursuing the NCAA for discrimination, not us. Pretty sure we can revoke a scholarship if we don't like the way a guy sneezes.
By the way, just look at Maurice Washington at Nebby to see how inconsistently applied this stuff is in the NCAA. He shared sexts of his underage girlfriend, now drug charges (granted just weed) and he'll still likely be the game 1 starter. I don't think the NCAA wants a more fair system because what we did (remove a player) is the exception to the rule. Usually the lack of due process comes from looking the other way so they can keep their product on the field.
Exactly! It’s also a reason we can respect our school. There’s still something to be said for doing things the right way.
Actually, I stated somewhere, months ago, that my guess was Lathon got embroiled in an he said / she said sexual assault during his visit. Not enough for criminal charges, but enough for NU to throw the book at him. How it turned into a thing that ruined all his other legit offers baffles me. I doubt there was due process since he is not a student and the school holds no power over him.
I suspect he kept his head down, swallowed some pride and ultimately got to UTEP. He probably looks to transfer to a traditional P5 school but must clean his name first. Since he has a schollies, has kept clean, he can now afford to drop the Mr Nice Guy routine. He hires a lawyer and here we go with another b-ball lawsuit.
I also think this doesn’t reflect well on the program. I can see this stuff causing potential recruits to summarily dismiss NU and probably shuts the path from the AAU and high school for the foreseeable future.
But I get it. I had two tremendous recruiting trips for non-major revenue sports and signed with one of them. I played host for recruits. There were always parties, often arranged introductions to some of the looser moraled coeds and so forth. I can’t imagine how major revenue sports handle it - but I have a guess. And NU has failed big time. Even if it’s the common thing, even if it usually is a good time for the guys involved, this shit happens. And NU holier than thou needs to put stronger constraints on these OVs.
At any rate, the only problem I would have is if NU externalized something that led to Lathon losing all his options. It should have been kept private and confidential - or sent to the police. But it should not be investigated and ruled upon by the school for external purposes. Maybe it wasn’t. Maybe the alleged victim was the vocalizer. I just would like to know as I’m curious.
Well wait a second. Scholarship or not, if the results of their investigation are not true, then it’s libel. The false (assumption for purpose of discussion) statements distributed to other institutions have directly injured Lathon. He has to prove it and truth of the underlying event would serve as a defense.
But in this David v Goliath, I would like to see David get his day in Court. If NU is right, great, they can afford the defense. If NU overstepped and hurt this kids future, shame on them and I hope they get massacred w a nice big punitive award. But let justice have its day.
Dude, I have a life outside this board. I usually answer questions. And I did. But geez, I’m not your dancing monkey.
But it just makes no sense that we blacklisted the young man, if it is indeed Lathon. If we wanted to blacklist him, what would be the possible motive? And why would we keep the matter so quiet if we wanted to ruin the kid? I mean in this age of investigative reporting and social media, almost nothing involving an athlete is removed from public scrutiny as much as the Lathon case was. For months, we didn't even know that the admission revocation was due to activity on a recruiting trip, and only people liked me guessed it was something sexual in nature, but with zero inside knowledge.
Exactly. NU was so very tight lipped about it. They did what they had to do and moved on without smearing him.
I actually feel that the first plaintiff, if it was Lathon, feels he is innocent and was wronged (I have no idea about the second plaintiff, that seems to be a wild story he is spinning in the report of the complaint, if the reporter described it accurately). Otherwise ,why would be pursue this allegation for the remedy he is seeking, which will likely be moot since this case will drag on in court for years? Only one reason for that; to clear his name. If he felt he was guilty of whatever transgression caused his admission to be revoked, the last thing he would due would be to put this back out in the media again for further scrutiny.
But, without actually reading the full complaint, which we can't, this is pure conjecture on my part.
Last edited:
What evidence do you have that NU externalized anything or participated in some sort of black list? I am confused because you simultaneously complain about not having any information--because NU has been so mum about this--and also accuse of if externalizing its findings.
I would be shocked if anyone from NU said anything specific on the reasons for Lathon’s revoked offer. This is a cautious institution by all measures.
Like you, I went on a few visits at schools for a non-revenue sport and hosted several more. I can tell you there wasn’t a single one where going to a party wasn’t an option. All the parties had plenty of booze and women. It was called college. These parties were not arranged for recruits, they were what happened every single weekend. Anyone, that thinks the school can totally protect the student is being naive. The visits is supposed to give the recruit a view into what it would be like to be part of that school/program. I doubt you can effectively recruit if the visit is so sanitized that the player sees right through it. Not every recruit drank or even talked to The ladies, but everyone I can remember at least went to the party. The same guys we recruited that didn’t drink before college or during college became future hosts and brought new recruits to plenty of parties. I was never once told as the host to not take a recruit to a party. You were expected to keep them safe and out if trouble with other students or the law. This is about all the school can do to protect the kid from themselves.
Of course, my experience was in the Stone Age, but I can only imagine what a Desired P5 Revenue sport recruit is shown on an OV.
The how is explained in the rest of that post that you cut out.
I don’t have enough information to make an informed decision. I presume he’s innocent since he’s not DJT but would like to know more.
All I have is the complaint cited above. These are just my thoughts. I await more information. Only those afraid of the truth are afraid of justice. Let the evidence be heard and then we can publicly deliberate.
Btw, externalize is not limited to a press release. Any divulgence outside the university or law enforcement would have been a poor choice.
But you skipped the part where I said maybe it’s the alleged victim that is the vocalizer. We just don’t know. Yet.
