Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Racial Slur at BYU Game - Real or Hoax?


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, smac97 said:

We had two threads about this story:

BYU bans fan for racial slur

University of South Carolina cancels games with BYU amid alleged racist slur incident with Duke

It seems like the original story got a lot of press coverage.  

It looks like there are articles coming out claiming that the story is a fabrication.  See, e.g., here:

And here:

The above link ("was") goes to this article: Police Find No Evidence BYU Volleyball Fan Yelled ‘N-Word’ During Game

And here:

It seems that so far there is no evidence, apart from the Duke player's accusation, that anyone shouted thee N-word.

And yet BYU banned him anyway.  I hope this gets reviewed and, if appropriate, the banning is undone.

I did wonder how BYU or anyone else identified the kid who was banned.

That's . . . awkward for BYU.  

Yes, I suppose it could mean that.  

I'm curious how they made this identification.

Has anyone listened to the audio?  Seems like the slur would have been picked up if the player was able to hear it.

And yet "Duke coaches and players identified that man as the same one who yelled the N-word from the BYU student section."

And yet "Duke coaches and players identified that man as the same one who yelled the N-word from the BYU student section."

This does not look good for BYU.

Yeesh.  So far the evidence indicates that

  • A) the guy, a UVU student, "was not present when Richardson was serving {during the match's second set}, that
  • B) he "was playing on his phone" later in the game when Richardson was serving again, but 
  • C) he was nevertheless "identified" by "Duke coaches and players" as "the same one who yelled the N-word from the BYU student section," and 
  • D) the administration at BYU (not, it seems BYUPD) wanted to "ban" the guy from BYU anyway, and so had BYUPD do so.  And despite the incongruency between the evidence and the accusation,
  • E) BYUPD "is no longer looking at the video."

It looks like BYU got unjustifiably raked across the coals, but its response here is . . . bad.  

Oh.  Academic bureaucrats are taking over an investigative function previously performed by (presumably POST-certified) law enforcement officers with BYUPD.

Yeah, really not a good look for BYU here.

Why?  Why is BYUPD not running point?

It's also "unclear" whether there is a conflict of interest in the "investigation" being turned over to administrative/academic staff.

I have previously had some qualms about BYU having its own police force.  This story is strengthening those qualms.

Yep.  But will the "investigation" by administrative/academic staff be subject to public records requests?  I doubt it.

That's a weird thing to say.  

It would also behoove BYU students to go to law enforcement and, if true, state that they did not hear racial slurs being shouted.

The phrase "rush to judgment" comes to mind.

Sheesh.  The Tribune is raising entirely legitimate questions about the accusations in this story.

BYU, it seems, is not.

What is up with BYU?

Um, isn't this a significant point?

During the fourth set, during which "four ushers and an officer" were in the stands, yet the police officer states that he heard nothing (and the four ushers apparently had nothing to say either).

It was during this set, the fourth set, that the racial slurs "escalated?"

Is it, though?

More here:

The above article references "Rachel's godmother Lesa Pamplin."  Ms. Pamplin is currently running a campaign to be a judge in the County Criminal Court in Tarrant County, Texas.  She touts herself as "a former police officer, prosecutor, and current defense attorney."  From the "About" page of her website:

Her personal tweets, however, paint something of a different picture as to the "all mankind" bit:

Per the above link, "Her account is now private."

Also from the above link:

The inflammatory rhetoric, both from those supportive of the Duke player and those who believe she is pulling a Jussie Smollett, is problematic.

This link also includes a summary of Pamplin's tweets:

Also this (same link) :

A fabricated email that bolster's Pamplin's accusation of racism.  Weird.

More here:

And here (ABC 4) :

Here's a report from "Cougar Chronicle":

BYU banned a man with special needs?  Who wasn't even in the student section from whence the purported slurs came?

The Athletic Department at BYU is not exactly covering itself with glory.

Lesa Pamplin was not even at the game.

Yeesh.

More:

More (Washington Examiner) :

More:

These guys are suggesting that not only is this story a hoax, but an orchastrated one.  A shakedown:

More YouTube videos here:

A few closing thoughts:

1. The accusation seems pretty weak.  Apparently the sole earwitness was the Duke player.  No other first-person accounts.

2. Much of the news coverage arises from vitriolic commentary from the player's "godmother" who A) was not present, B) was previously involved in a scam involving a fabricated email to impute racism against a judge, and C) has a long and well-documented history of saying some pretty awful things about white people.

3. BYU, to its credit, apparently sent both a police officer and four ushers to monitor the student section, none of which reported any racial slurs during times when the Duke player said they were happening.

4. The folks from Duke somehow accused a special needs guy of being the one who yelled the slurs, even though A) he wasn't in the student section during one portion of the game during which slurs were purportedly yelled, B) during another portion of the game when the slurs were purportedly flying, he was playing with his phone, and C) he is apparently special needs.

5. BYU has asked for anyone who saw/heard anything, or recorded anything, to come forward.  Nobody has done so.

6. The entire game was recorded, yet nobody has been able to detect any racial slurs in the recordings.

7. BYUPD has turned the "investigation" over to administrative staff, who have no particular training or expertise in examining video/audio footage.

8. BYUPD, having summarily banned a UVU student (who is apparently also a special needs person), is not presently investigating this matter further.

9. The Salt Lake Tribune, an unofficial BYU student paper (the "Cougar Chronicle"), and various YouTubers who have no connection to BYU have done far more in examining this issue, in terms of evidence and investigation and analysis, than BYU and is police department have done.

10. The differentiation in perspectives on this story is apparently not along racial lines (several of the YouTubers commenting on this story as being a hoax are black).  Nor are the lines ideological in terms of religion (pro- or -con BYU and the Church), as several articles examining this apparent hoax are very critical of BYU's handling of this issue, several have little to nothing to say about BYU's status as a "religious" school affiliated with the Church, and the Tribune hardly has any reason to carry water for BYU  (kudos to their reporting of this, BTW).  

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

What if it’s neither? It could be that she thought she heard racist taunts. Whatever the case may be, it’s probably best to see what comes of the university’s investigation. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

What if it’s neither?

I think the "narrative" is too long for that.

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

It could be that she thought she heard racist taunts.

That doesn't account for the Duke player's characterization of “'very distinctly' heard a 'very strong and negative racial slur.'"

That doesn't account for the Duke player's claim of also having been threatened on her way out to the bus ("watch your back").

That doesn't account for the Duke player apparently being the only person who heard the racial slurs.

That doesn't account for the police officer and ushers who were present in the student section when some of the slurs were purportedly yelled, yet none of them heard anything.

That doesn't account for the utter absence of forensic evidence.  Again, the entire game was recorded, and the recordings have been extensively reviewed, yet nobody has been able to discern any audible racial slurs.  Nobody has come forward as an earwitness or an eyewitness or with their own recording.  The people who have come forward have said that they did not hear any racial slurs.

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Whatever the case may be, it’s probably best to see what comes of the university’s investigation. 

The "investigation" being . . . the one that BYUPD handed off to the school administration?

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Again, it’s entirely possible she misheard something from the stands.

Okay.

It's also "entirely possible" that she fabricated the whole thing for personal gain and notoriety.

7 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I get it that you have a black-and-white approach to this (no pun intended), but there’s no need to label this a malicious hoax. 

If it's a hoax, it is per se malicious.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
Just now, smac97 said:

Okay.

It's also "entirely possible" that she fabricated the whole thing for personal gain and notoriety.

If it's a hoax, it is per se malicious.

Thanks,

-Smac

I guess I don’t see why a college athlete would invent something to cause this much distraction to her team and herself. Of course it’s possible it was a malicious hoax. I’m just not comfortable jumping to that conclusion. 

Link to comment

Rachel Richardson, from the Outside The Lines excerpt on Jason Whitlock's podcast: "I know that meeting anger with anger, it just starts a vicious cycle ..."

Then you should talk to your Godmother, Ma'am.  (I doubt she'll listen, though: she's too busy turning these baseless allegations to her political advantage, as though she had said: I have fought for the citizens of this community!  In fact, I'll fight injustice anywhere, including racism directed at my Goddaughter from those racist racists in Utah ...)

:rolleyes:<_< 

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, smac97 said:

... That doesn't account for the Duke player's characterization of “'very distinctly' heard a 'very strong and negative racial slur.'" ...

She has bionic hearing.  In a crackerbox gym, filled with 5,000 raucous fans (note to the clueless: No, "raucous" and "racist" are not synonyms <_< :rolleyes: ) she "very distinctly" heard a racist slur. 

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I guess I don’t see why a college athlete would invent something to cause this much distraction to her team and herself.

The motives for bogus hate crime claims are varied.  See, e.g., hereHate crime hoaxes, like Jussie Smollett's alleged attack, are more common than you think

Quote

The hate attack on Empire star Jussie Smollett is now alleged to be a hoax. That shouldn’t surprise anyone.

Smollett’s story was bizarre, bordering on the absurd. He claimed to have been attacked — at 2:00am in Chicago — by two men, in some early reports, wearing red MAGA hats, who called him “that Empire n_____,” yelled “this is MAGA country,” and poured bleach on him while putting a noose around his neck.

The questions here are obvious. How many Trump supporters even exist in the downtown of a city that went 83% for Hillary Clinton — and how many of them watch "Empire?" How many guys looking for a fight carry rope and bottles of bleach around with them? Almost every normal citizen had questions like these about this incident, and we were justified in having them.

That this case turned out to be a hoax shouldn't come as too big of a shock. A great many hate crime stories turn out to be hoaxes. Simply looking at what happened to the most widely reported hate crime stories over the past 4-5 years illustrates this: not only the Smollett case but also the Yasmin Seweid, Air Force Academy, Eastern Michigan, Wisconsin-Parkside, Kean College, Covington Catholic, and “Hopewell Baptist burning” racial scandals all turned out to be fakes. And, these cases are not isolated outliers.

Doing research for a book, Hate Crime Hoax, I was able to easily put together a data set of 409 confirmed hate hoaxes. An overlapping but substantially different list of 348 hoaxes exists at fakehatecrimes.org, and researcher Laird Wilcox put together another list of at least 300 in his still-contemporary book Crying Wolf. To put these numbers in context, a little over 7,000 hate crimes were reported by the FBI in 2017 and perhaps 8-10% of these are widely reported enough to catch the eye of a national researcher.

Why do hoaxers hoax? In some cases, the motivations are tawdry and financial. Jussie Smollett allegedly wanted to make himself a sympathetic figure to boost his salary.

However, the motivations of many hoaxers are honorable if misguided. In college campus hate hoax cases (Kean College, U-Chicago), the individuals responsible almost invariably say that they staged incidents to call attention to real incidents of racist violence on campus. Certainly, the media giants that leap to publicize hate crime stories later revealed to be fakes, and the organizations that line up to defend their “victims” — the Southern Poverty Law Center, Black Lives Matter, CAIR — think that they are providing a public service by fighting bigotry.

Given the Duke player's rhetoric (as well as the rhetoric of her godmother), "honorable if misguided" may be an apt descriptor.  More from the article:

Quote

However, hate crime hoaxers are “calling attention to a problem” that is a very small part of total crimes. There is very little brutally violent racism in the modern USA. There are less than 7,000 real hate crimes reported in a typical year. Inter-racial crime is quite rare; 84% of white murder victims and 93% of Black murder victims are killed by criminals of their own race, and the person most likely to kill you is your ex-wife or husband. When violent inter-racial crimes do occur, whites are at least as likely to be the targets as are minorities. Simply put, Klansmen armed with nooses are not lurking on Chicago street corners.

In this context, what hate hoaxers actually do is worsen generally good race relations, and distract attention from real problems. As Chicago’s disgusted top cop, Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson, pointed out yesterday, skilled police officers spent four weeks tracking down Smollett’s imaginary attackers — in a city that has seen 28 murders as of Feb. 9th, according to The Chicago Tribune. We all, media and citizens alike, would be better served to focus on real issues like gun violence and the opiate epidemic than on fairy tales like Jussie’s.

Yep. 

Here is Richardsons' posted-on-Twitter statement:

FbQzP15agAANjI8?format=jpg&name=large

FbQzP12UIAAJjZL?format=jpg&name=large

FbQzP2NXoAAaNzP?format=jpg&name=large

A few observations:

1. She was purportedly "heckled {from the stands} throughout the entirety of the match."  And yet nobody from the stands heard anything.  Not any students.  Not any of the members of the nearby men's b-ball team (many of whom are black), not the police officer stationed nearby after the claim was made, not the four ushers who were also stationed there.

2. She says that both she and her "fellow African American teammates ... were targeted and racially heckled."  And yet no news reports I have read give any indication that any of her teammates are corroborating her story.

3. She says that the "slurs and comments grew into threats which caused us to feel unsafe."  Again, there is no indication that any of other black players in the "us" are corroborating Richardson's story.

4. She speaks of "racist, ignorant, and asinine behaviors that were exhibited by their {BYU's} fans during the match" and "racist bigots."  So how many "fans" were involved?  What did they say?  And why did nobody else but Richardson hear these things?  And why were these "behaviors" not picked up on any video/audio recording?

5. Her rhetoric about "administrators have a chance to educate," "you must demonstrate that you are anti-racist," her endorsement of "A Long Talk," seems a bit contrived and opportunistic.

I can't altogether dismiss the self-interested motives, such as notoriety, praise, etc.  None of us knew who Rachel Richardson was before this story.  Now we all do.

See, e.g., here:

Quote

Just to review: Duke’s Rachel Richardson accuses a BYU fan of yelling racial slurs at her. Her godmother — who is running for public office in Texas and has a history of racist remarks against white people — tweets that Richardson was called the “N-word” repeatedly throughout the match.

ESPN then interviews Richardson on ”Outside The Lines” in which they do not question her story in the slightest, even though by then there were several reasons to be skeptical. No evidence or witnesses support her claims.

A slew of left-leaning colleges and out of touch woke media outlets use the completely unsubstantiated claims made by Richardson to grandstand and preach that racism is bad, implying BYU is racist.

Rachel Richardson is hailed as a brave hero worthy of celebration. When the only thing that’s clear at this point in time is that Richardson’s claims are worthy of far more scrutiny.

And here:

Quote

The University of South Carolina women's basketball team has cancelled its scheduled home-and-home series with BYU for the 2022-23 and 2023-24 seasons, the program announced Friday. The decision is in response to Duke volleyball player Rachel Richardson saying she heard racial slurs directed toward her and other Black players from the BYU student section at a recent match.

The Gamecocks were set to open their season vs. BYU on Nov. 7. South Carolina is now working on finalizing another opponent for the game at Colonial Life Arena.

"As a head coach, my job is to do what's best for my players and staff," said Gamecocks head coach Dawn Staley in a statement. "The incident at BYU has led me to reevaluate our home-and-home, and I don't feel that this is the right time for us to engage in this series."

...

Friday was not the first time Staley commented publicly on Richardson's incident. The 2022 Naismith Women's Coach of the Year replied to the Duke sophomore on Twitter on Aug. 28.

Quote

Rachel you and your teammates are incredibly brave. This is one more hurdle black athletes have to leap because they are black. Rachel…your mental strength and endurance should not have been tested in this manner….but when it was you passed. Godspeed to you all!

 

More here:

Quote

As we have reported here on OutKick, details continue to emerge about the allegations made by Duke volleyball player Rachel Richardson. The 19-year-old sophomore alleges that a BYU fan called her a racial slur several times during their match on Friday.

OutKick has obtained a copy of the police report from that night, provided by the BYU Police. According to the report, the officer that was placed near the BYU student section — following complaints from the Duke players and staff — heard no “inappropriate comments or language.”

BYU Police Det. Sgt. Richard Laursen was summoned to stand next to the man who was alleged to have made the racial comments. That fan has since been banned for life from BYU athletic venues.

According to a police report filed by Laursen the night of the incident, the man did not make any racial remarks while he was standing near him. That included the fourth set when Richardson alleged to have heard a slur while she was serving in front of the ROC (Roar of the Cougar) student section.

“During the game and while I was standing on the sideline between the Duke players and the ROC section, I didn’t hear or observe any inappropriate comments or language from the ROC section,” Det. Sgt. Laursen wrote in the police report.

The man in question asked why Laursen was summoned over to the section.

“I told him I was there listening for inappropriate comments toward the Duke players and the fan told me that he hadn’t heard any inappropriate comments,” Laursen responded. “He said he told the players that they shouldn’t hit the ball into the net, but that was the only comment he made to the Duke players.”

Laursen later described the man as potentially having a developmental disability.

“He seemed to be more interested in talking to me than cheering for BYU. It was evident based on the individual’s comments, stuttered speech and mannerisms that he has special needs,” Laursen wrote.

“Based on my training and experience in Crisis Intervention Training, he may have (A)sperger syndrome or could have autism. The individual was articulate, but socially awkward. The individual kept scrolling through his phone and didn’t seem too involved in the game.”

BYU-Incident-Rep-Records-1152x486.jpg

Laursen also revealed that he received mixed reviews on his performance in the situation, praised by one Duke player but chided by other players and coaches.

“I was thanked by one of the Duke players. She shook my hand and said thanks for having their team’s back,” he said. Later, he wrote he “was told the Duke players and coaches were very upset with what happened during the game and that the racial comments toward the Duke players was still happening during the fourth set that that (sic) I didn’t do anything about the comments being made.”

“I told the (BYU) Athletic staff that I never heard one racial comment being made,” he added.

Despite Laursen reporting to the BYU staff that he did not hear any racially-charged language, they issued a lengthy apology denouncing the behavior that has yet been proven to have occurred.

...

Laursen also reported to have reviewed film of the game following the event to see if he could observe the behavior reported by the Duke team and Rachel Richardson.

“There was nothing seen on the game film that led me to believe (he) was the person who was making comments to the player who complained about being called the ‘N’ word,” Laursen wrote.

“During the second set, when the comment was reported to having been made, (he) was not present when the player was serving,” Laursen added. “On her second time serving during the set, (he) was on his phone and didn’t appear to be paying attention to the game.”

Despite Laursen’s report that directly contradicted Duke’s account, BYU still banned the fan from all athletic venues.

I guess I appreciate that BYU took this issue seriously, but I think they now need to continue to do so.  Not just sweep it under the rug.

21 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Of course it’s possible it was a malicious hoax. I’m just not comfortable jumping to that conclusion. 

Nor am I.  No "jumping" needed at this point, nor a "conclusion."  Like you, I want this matter fully examined and reported.  And if it is a hoax, that deserves just as much attention as the original story did.

The Deseret News just posted an Op-Ed:

Quote

BYU on trial in the court of public opinion

BYU volleyball incident made national headlines, but where do we go from here?

 

The court of public opinion is now in session and BYU is on trial for a racist incident, one in which a fan is accused of yelling the word-you-do-not-say at a visiting player. In the court of public opinion, the university (or whomever is accused) is guilty until proven otherwise — and maybe not even then, because once the accusation is made, whether it’s proven true or false, the stain remains.

This is where things stand after Duke volleyball player Rachel Richardson, who is Black, claimed that she heard “a very strong and negative racial slur” from the student section during a recent volleyball match at BYU’s Smith Fieldhouse.

...

The problem is — and this is a pretty big one — no one else heard the racial slurs. So far, not one person has come forward to say he or she heard anything that was inappropriate. Not the police officer who was posted near the BYU student section. Not the students watching the match just a few feet from the court. Not even Richardson’s Duke teammates. BYU officials can’t find any evidence of it on video, either (since the fans sit close to the court, they are clearly seen on video). The only other people who made the accusation are Richardson’s godmother and father and they weren’t at the match; they were 1,200 miles away, in Texas, and still the first to post the incident via Twitter.

I'm glad to see a bit of clarification on this issue.

Would be better coming from BYU, though.

Quote

And yet condemnation has been swift. No one waited to see what actually happened. South Carolina coach Dawn Staley canceled a home-and-home basketball series with BYU over the incident. College volleyball teams have rushed to post tweets about “Black Outs” to rally behind Richardson — #BlackoutRacism, #StandWithRachelRichardson. The American Volleyball Coaches Association, via tweet, is urging the volleyball community to wear black to stand against racism in response to Richardson. The Deseret News reported that a death threat was made against the BYU volleyball coach. The accusations spread like wildfire in the media throughout the country.

Even BYU, hypersensitive to these issues like all universities, was quick to ban the fan who is at the center of the allegations, before the facts were clear. Richardson singled out one man for yelling the slurs — she said they occurred during the second and fourth sets — but Laursen observed the man and the student section closely in the fourth set after being made aware of the accusations. He said he never heard anything offensive.

“(The man) seemed to be more interested in talking to me than cheering for BYU,” Laursen reported. “It was evident, based on the individual’s comments, stuttered speech and mannerisms, that he has special needs. Based on my training and experience in crisis intervention training, he may have (A)sperger syndrome or could have autism.”

Right from the start, the accusations coming from the Duke volleyball player seemed suspect, and nothing since then has made them seem otherwise. It’s difficult to believe that in this era of hypersensitivity that someone could yell an emotion-charged racial epithet — repeatedly — in a crowd without any objection from those around him. Especially among students. Especially on college campuses. Especially at BYU, where students, obligated by the school Honor Code, are required to report anything that violates school standards.

Yeah, this story doesn't quite pass the smell test.  

Quote

A BYU student newspaper — The Cougar Chronicle — interviewed fans who were sitting in the student section during the match and could not find anyone that corroborated Richardson’s accusations. Several fans went on record to say that they heard no racial slurs and some said they were not aware there was a problem until after the match. According to the Chronicle, the mother of a BYU student says she personally knows five people who were in the student section during the match — one on the court and two on the first row — and none heard a racial slur.

All of this sounds a lot like a similar incident that involved University of Utah basketball player Britton Johnsen many years ago. Following the semifinals of the 1998 Final Four, a North Carolina player accused Johnsen of calling him the word-you-do-not-say. Johnsen denied it and had the full support of his coach and team. It created the predictable media fuss, but the UNC player eventually recanted and apologized.

None of this is to say Richardson didn’t hear something. She says she heard it “very distinctly.” But is it possible she only thought she heard it, that the word was something else?

We will probably never know. Either way, the damage has been done. The court of public opinion has already spoken.

I don't know.  Richardson's claim of having heard it "very distinctly" makes a mishearing less tenable.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The motives for bogus hate crime claims are varied.  See, e.g., hereHate crime hoaxes, like Jussie Smollett's alleged attack, are more common than you think

Given the Duke player's rhetoric (as well as the rhetoric of her godmother), "honorable if misguided" may be an apt descriptor.  More from the article:

Yep. 

Here is Richardsons' posted-on-Twitter statement:

FbQzP15agAANjI8?format=jpg&name=large

FbQzP12UIAAJjZL?format=jpg&name=large

FbQzP2NXoAAaNzP?format=jpg&name=large

A few observations:

1. She was purportedly "heckled {from the stands} throughout the entirety of the match."  And yet nobody from the stands heard anything.  Not any students.  Not any of the members of the nearby men's b-ball team (many of whom are black), not the police officer stationed nearby after the claim was made, not the four ushers who were also stationed there.

2. She says that both she and her "fellow African American teammates ... were targeted and racially heckled."  And yet no news reports I have read give any indication that any of her teammates are corroborating her story.

3. She says that the "slurs and comments grew into threats which caused us to feel unsafe."  Again, there is no indication that any of other black players in the "us" are corroborating Richardson's story.

4. She speaks of "racist, ignorant, and asinine behaviors that were exhibited by their {BYU's} fans during the match" and "racist bigots."  So how many "fans" were involved?  What did they say?  And why did nobody else but Richardson hear these things?  And why were these "behaviors" not picked up on any video/audio recording?

5. Her rhetoric about "administrators have a chance to educate," "you must demonstrate that you are anti-racist," her endorsement of "A Long Talk," seems a bit contrived and opportunistic.

I can't altogether dismiss the self-interested motives, such as notoriety, praise, etc.  None of us knew who Rachel Richardson was before this story.  Now we all do.

See, e.g., here:

And here:

More here:

I guess I appreciate that BYU took this issue seriously, but I think they now need to continue to do so.  Not just sweep it under the rug.

Nor am I.  No "jumping" needed at this point, nor a "conclusion."  Like you, I want this matter fully examined and reported.  And if it is a hoax, that deserves just as much attention as the original story did.

The Deseret News just posted an Op-Ed:

I'm glad to see a bit of clarification on this issue.

Would be better coming from BYU, though.

Yeah, this story doesn't quite pass the smell test.  

I don't know.  Richardson's claim of having heard it "very distinctly" makes a mishearing less tenable.

Thanks,

-Smac

It doesn’t require a full treatise to see we’re basically on the same page: let the school investigate and see what they find. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, smac97 said:

We had two threads about this story:

BYU bans fan for racial slur

University of South Carolina cancels games with BYU amid alleged racist slur incident with Duke

It seems like the original story got a lot of press coverage.  

It looks like there are articles coming out claiming that the story is a fabrication.  See, e.g., here:

And here:

The above link ("was") goes to this article: Police Find No Evidence BYU Volleyball Fan Yelled ‘N-Word’ During Game

And here:

It seems that so far there is no evidence, apart from the Duke player's accusation, that anyone shouted thee N-word.

And yet BYU banned him anyway.  I hope this gets reviewed and, if appropriate, the banning is undone.

I did wonder how BYU or anyone else identified the kid who was banned.

That's . . . awkward for BYU.  

Yes, I suppose it could mean that.  

I'm curious how they made this identification.

Has anyone listened to the audio?  Seems like the slur would have been picked up if the player was able to hear it.

And yet "Duke coaches and players identified that man as the same one who yelled the N-word from the BYU student section."

And yet "Duke coaches and players identified that man as the same one who yelled the N-word from the BYU student section."

This does not look good for BYU.

Yeesh.  So far the evidence indicates that

  • A) the guy, a UVU student, "was not present when Richardson was serving {during the match's second set}, that
  • B) he "was playing on his phone" later in the game when Richardson was serving again, but 
  • C) he was nevertheless "identified" by "Duke coaches and players" as "the same one who yelled the N-word from the BYU student section," and 
  • D) the administration at BYU (not, it seems BYUPD) wanted to "ban" the guy from BYU anyway, and so had BYUPD do so.  And despite the incongruency between the evidence and the accusation,
  • E) BYUPD "is no longer looking at the video."

It looks like BYU got unjustifiably raked across the coals, but its response here is . . . bad.  

Oh.  Academic bureaucrats are taking over an investigative function previously performed by (presumably POST-certified) law enforcement officers with BYUPD.

Yeah, really not a good look for BYU here.

Why?  Why is BYUPD not running point?

It's also "unclear" whether there is a conflict of interest in the "investigation" being turned over to administrative/academic staff.

I have previously had some qualms about BYU having its own police force.  This story is strengthening those qualms.

Yep.  But will the "investigation" by administrative/academic staff be subject to public records requests?  I doubt it.

That's a weird thing to say.  

It would also behoove BYU students to go to law enforcement and, if true, state that they did not hear racial slurs being shouted.

The phrase "rush to judgment" comes to mind.

Sheesh.  The Tribune is raising entirely legitimate questions about the accusations in this story.

BYU, it seems, is not.

What is up with BYU?

Um, isn't this a significant point?

During the fourth set, during which "four ushers and an officer" were in the stands, yet the police officer states that he heard nothing (and the four ushers apparently had nothing to say either).

It was during this set, the fourth set, that the racial slurs "escalated?"

Is it, though?

More here:

The above article references "Rachel's godmother Lesa Pamplin."  Ms. Pamplin is currently running a campaign to be a judge in the County Criminal Court in Tarrant County, Texas.  She touts herself as "a former police officer, prosecutor, and current defense attorney."  From the "About" page of her website:

Her personal tweets, however, paint something of a different picture as to the "all mankind" bit:

Per the above link, "Her account is now private."

Also from the above link:

The inflammatory rhetoric, both from those supportive of the Duke player and those who believe she is pulling a Jussie Smollett, is problematic.

This link also includes a summary of Pamplin's tweets:

Also this (same link) :

A fabricated email that bolster's Pamplin's accusation of racism.  Weird.

More here:

And here (ABC 4) :

Here's a report from "Cougar Chronicle":

BYU banned a man with special needs?  Who wasn't even in the student section from whence the purported slurs came?

The Athletic Department at BYU is not exactly covering itself with glory.

Lesa Pamplin was not even at the game.

Yeesh.

More:

More (Washington Examiner) :

More:

These guys are suggesting that not only is this story a hoax, but an orchastrated one.  A shakedown:

More YouTube videos here:

A few closing thoughts:

1. The accusation seems pretty weak.  Apparently the sole earwitness was the Duke player.  No other first-person accounts.

2. Much of the news coverage arises from vitriolic commentary from the player's "godmother" who A) was not present, B) was previously involved in a scam involving a fabricated email to impute racism against a judge, and C) has a long and well-documented history of saying some pretty awful things about white people.

3. BYU, to its credit, apparently sent both a police officer and four ushers to monitor the student section, none of which reported any racial slurs during times when the Duke player said they were happening.

4. The folks from Duke somehow accused a special needs guy of being the one who yelled the slurs, even though A) he wasn't in the student section during one portion of the game during which slurs were purportedly yelled, B) during another portion of the game when the slurs were purportedly flying, he was playing with his phone, and C) he is apparently special needs.

5. BYU has asked for anyone who saw/heard anything, or recorded anything, to come forward.  Nobody has done so.

6. The entire game was recorded, yet nobody has been able to detect any racial slurs in the recordings.

7. BYUPD has turned the "investigation" over to administrative staff, who have no particular training or expertise in examining video/audio footage.

8. BYUPD, having summarily banned a UVU student (who is apparently also a special needs person), is not presently investigating this matter further.

9. The Salt Lake Tribune, an unofficial BYU student paper (the "Cougar Chronicle"), and various YouTubers who have no connection to BYU have done far more in examining this issue, in terms of evidence and investigation and analysis, than BYU and is police department have done.

10. The differentiation in perspectives on this story is apparently not along racial lines (several of the YouTubers commenting on this story as being a hoax are black).  Nor are the lines ideological in terms of religion (pro- or -con BYU and the Church), as several articles examining this apparent hoax are very critical of BYU's handling of this issue, several have little to nothing to say about BYU's status as a "religious" school affiliated with the Church, and the Tribune hardly has any reason to carry water for BYU  (kudos to their reporting of this, BTW).  

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

If this is indeed another race hoax, a-la Jussie Smolett’s deceitful and cynical quest for heroic status and glory, then the most likely reason why Pamplin and Richardson thought they could successfully’ ‘pull it off’ is because they believed they could count on the widespread and unfair stereotyping among the woke progressives that the Latter-Day Saints are hateful, hardwired racists who will protect and cover for each other as they carry out their crimes of hate.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

If this is indeed another race hoax, a-la Jussie Smolett’s deceitful and cynical quest for heroic status and glory, then the most likely reason why Pamplin and Richardson thought they could successfully’ ‘pull it off’ is because they believed they could count on the widespread and unfair stereotyping among the woke progressives that the Latter-Day Saints are hateful, hardwired racists who will protect and cover for each other as they carry out their crimes of hate.

get a life already

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Duncan said:

get a life already

Dare I say it’s obvious that you’re spending much more time wasting your life away on this board than I am? Also, are you so naive that you believe only conservatives can be Machiavellian connivers, and that all woke progressives are unassailable in their actions and as pure as the wind driven snow in their motives? 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

Dare I say it’s obvious that you’re spending much more time wasting your life away on this board than I am? Also, are you so naive that you believe only conservatives can be Machiavellian connivers, and that all woke progressives are unassailable in their actions and as pure as the wind driven snow in their motives? 

you would only know that if you yourself are "spending much more time wasting your life on this board than I am". No, I think your kind of people poison things and then blame others. Like I said, get a life

Link to comment
Quote

Oh.  Academic bureaucrats are taking over an investigative function previously performed by (presumably POST-certified) law enforcement officers with BYUPD.

Yeah, really not a good look for BYU here.

Do you really want police (in general) to start policing speech? You don't think it's a crime to yell racial slurs, do you?

Link to comment
2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

If this is indeed another race hoax, a-la Jussie Smolett’s deceitful and cynical quest for heroic status and glory, then the most likely reason why Pamplin and Richardson thought they could successfully’ ‘pull it off’ is because they believed they could count on the widespread and unfair stereotyping among the woke progressives that the Latter-Day Saints are hateful, hardwired racists who will protect and cover for each other as they carry out their crimes of hate.

Which is exactly what happened with all of the news stories and coverage of the event.

Link to comment

There is also a huge vacuum of information about this case. Smac’s news articles are more an admission that we know almost nothing and everyone is trying to fill in the holes with something.

I want to know more about the banned guy. One dubious report has him following her back to the van and saying something that isn’t well described. Somehow this became the person was banned for saying the original slurs. Isn’t it more likely the fan was banned for what they said to the person later by the bus? There seems to be a big lack of journalistic curiosity here.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...