well the article said they didn't have enough info so innocent until proven guilty is apparently still a thing
Sure, but one could assume they were in communication with the St Attn in that county about the nature of the allegation, the known evidence from police report and sexual assault initial screening protocols which are pretty standardized now as to protect rights of alleged victims and alleged perpetrators, and timeline for issuing a warrant: and
might have made a proactive cautionary decision in the interim to hold him out of games until the matter was clarified.
Maybe there was not enough info. Who knows.
University policies are very strict these days for students in any situation regarding harassment or sexual misconduct.
DIA said they didn't have enough to warrant taking action. Could be accurate.
They certainly do not want to look like 2002 and the Iowa and Pierre Pierce/Alford bullshit. I would think that UI probably considered all elements in today's highly sensitized environment. It also was not an incident on campus with another UI student so maybe that factored in.
But it is complicated I am sure. We have some lawyers on the forum here. Maybe they have some thoughts.
RecentTRANSFER PORTAL 2026 by Reacher
Total Members: 142