clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

ScoopWatch: Day Three

No new developments in ScoopGate (and yes, I know it's considered gauche to use the -Gate suffix and how it doesn't actually make sense as to why we apply it to every conspiracy/mystery that happens but you know what, it works, so shove it and go back to watching PBS). While we continue to wait and see what really went down (assuming we'll ever truly find out), we can at least explain why it is we don't know what we don't know (huh)?

Donna Ditota mentions that SU can cite "federal law and university policy" in not making it public what Scoop has done. Axeman takes it one step further and points us in the direction of the Family Education Rights & Privacy Act which protects the rights of students.

Jardine has not been charged with any crime and he remains an active student at SU which...well, that doesn't really clear anything up. However, Donna notes that Scoop seems to have committed a no-no that falls under the SU Judicial Review Board's mighty law-giving fist. Their power is, well, a little too Gitmo for my liking:


Generally, any student accused of violating the SU conduct code is informed of the complaint and is scheduled to meet with a member of the Judicial Affairs office to resolve the matter informally. If no informal agreement can be reached, the case proceeds to a Judicial Review Board hearing. During that hearing, board members determine whether the student violated the Code of Conduct. If the board decides the student is guilty, it imposes sanctions...Those hearings are private and involve only members of the SU community (students, faculty or SU staff). The university cannot officially say whether the student in question has so much as appeared before its Judicial Review Board.

Axe has a personal rundown of what going before Father The Judicial Review Board can entail and I'm sure some of you no-good-niks made an appearance in front of them in your day as well. And so we wait.

If I can make a suggestion, it is to withhold all judgement especially in the face of what many folks and posters and sources are saying. I've seen some swear its just an infraction, other note that their source says its one thing while another swears by their source who says another and I've had a commenter (anonymous, natch) imply that the sky is about to fall on SU and all of them write with the conviction that they are correct even though 90% of them are clearly wrong. Let's focus our energy on the more pressing issue...how the hell we're going to turn this season around with one of the shortest benches and youngest line-ups around.

(AP Photo/Kevin Rivoli)