(02-15-2021, 05:44 PM)Mikey Wrote:

(02-15-2021, 09:05 AM)Bullseye Wrote: The applicable  case law strongly disagrees with you.

As to your closing question, what kind of proof do you expect?!?

To my knowledge, there has been no civil suit filed against Doyle on these matters.  If there were a civil suit filed, the standard the plaintiffs would have to meet is liability by a "preponderance of the evidence" which means unlike the criminal standard of "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt," all a civil plaintiff/group of plaintiffs would have to do is have as little as 50.1% of the evidence in their favor. Taking the facts as we know them, there are over FIFTY (50) players alleging various sorts of mistreatment and effectively two people denying it. 

Given the environment of a football locker room, it is doubtful Doyle would have reduced the racially tinged chastisements to writing.

But to be honest, there are those who would not accept any proof of racial discrimination as acceptable or persuasive.  There have been countless examples of this on these boards over my close to two decades here.

This article states that Doyle and Ferentz are plaintiffs in a suit filed by 13 former players. I assume that is a civil suit, disconnected from the allegation that led to his dismissal. I wonder if there is anything more severe being withheld pending this litigation, as others have noted the ones who have come forward are not alleging anything earth-shattering, just a coach being a meathead with poor choice of words and motivational tactics.

I'm still glad he stepped down, he needs to get in at the ground level and build up trust before you give him a highly responsible position.

Point of clarification:  if the 13 former players filed the suit against Doyle and Ferentz, Doyle and Ferents would likely be the defendants, not the plaintiffs.  If Ferentz and Doyle countersued, they would still be considered the original defendants.

As far as Doyle being a "meathead,"and using a poor choice of words, doing so frequently or habitually could lead to legal liability.

Note:  I read the same article, and missed the closing paragraph referencing the litigation by the 13 former players.  Without reading the complaint any possible supporting documents obtained through discovery, it seems there are at least 13 players who complained about racial discrimination, several others who have complained about it in some form who did not join the suit, and the outside investigation referenced.  While I do not know if it will ultimately be enough to overcome the rebuttable presumptions by the defendants to meet their standard of preponderance of the evidence, to say there is no proof whatsoever is disingenuous.

---