There is conflation here by some of due process rights in a court of law (with which we all agree) with any rights of a student who is deemed in violation of compliance with student or athletic policy code of conduct required in order to continue participating in an extracurricular activity.
They are not the same.
There is a reason no one can name one NCAA athlete who continued to participate while awaiting trial on felony rape charges.
That does not mean they are expelled from school, or even necessarily lose their scholarship that year. But representing the university on a team is not a legal right.
And while we are on the subject- most employers in Illinois are at will and can terminate an employee for any reason at any time as long as it is not illegal.
I don't think it's an accident.
A lot of people are willing to bend / ignore a lot of their stated values, and argue a lot of things, if they perceive some personal benefit to them.
As you saw by JJ's response, the presumption of innocence isn't going to apply evenly to everyone who's been charged with a crime - the JJ's of the world aren't out there ranting about how you violate some accused inner city shooter's rights by holding him in jail before he's convicted of the crime. It applies stringently when it would benefit me, and in other cases - maybe.
The real truth is that 'innocent until proven guilty' does not and has never meant 'there can be no consequences if you haven't been convicted of a crime'. The only reason people are arguing that is because they see a personal benefit.
Total Members: 142
Poll
RecentRecruiting by ThePAMan
Da Economy by alum74
WTF happened to the WTF h...
by murphstahoe