Jump to content

Racial Slur at BYU Game - Real or Hoax?


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

Your last comment perfectly exemplifies the woke progressive approach to truth— even when they’re wrong they’re right!

And I find it amusing that you condemn my plausible explanations for what happened at that volleyball game as hate porn (especially in light of Pamplin’s demonstrable record of being flamboyantly anti-white) while you’re apparently blissfully unaware of the fact that you’re a real first class purveyor hate porn yourself, with all of your smug calls for physical violence against those with whom you disagree. But again, this is another perfect example of how woke progressives are so lacking in self awareness. I haven’t ever called for physical violence in any of my post but you have, yet you so easily let the words “hate porn” flow from your self-righteous lips when you’re  guilty of the very thing that you unfairly accuse me of doing. But isn’t this what being woke is all about? it’s never having to take the mote out of your own eye because you’re already of such exceeding righteousness that it doesn’t matter.

No, I never said I was right or that you were right or wrong. The reveling in false flags and using it to justify contempt of others is hate porn. Whether the story is factually accurate or not has not bearing on that. It is why so many have become incurious about determining the facts. They don’t matter. The story is good propaganda either way. This is one reason we are all doomed.

I am self-righteous? I am a debased sinner driven by what God presumably considers to be impure urges I can never defeat that have a high probability of sending me straight to hell. Self-righteousness is not the hallmark of my posting. I can be sure I am right but sure I am righteous? LOL!!!!!! I am in many ways a monster. No, self-righteousness is more your wheelhouse with your continuous divine pronouncements from on high. I think you are projecting your motives for saying things onto me. Probably doesn’t matter. By scriptural standards we are both likely to end up in hell and be punished by having this discussion forever.

I call for punching Nazis and fascists. In the past this would be a self-evidently right sentiment. In these unenlightened days it is somehow ‘going too far’ by people who insist they need to be able to carry guns anywhere just in case there are ‘bad people’ around. I am saying we should punch the bad people.

Link to comment
12 hours ago, Calm said:

I would not be the least surprised if in the mass of noise Richardson heard something that sounded to her like a slur, whether because she was primed to hear it due to what she had been told about BYU by others or because of other past experiences.

Did Richardson ever claim that anyone was yelling racial slurs though? I believe the only people who have actually made such a claim have been family members not in attendance.

Her official statement merely complained that she and her black teammates were "targeted and racially heckled." That sounds an awful lot like a legalistic way of phrasing things, intentionally designed for misdirection.

What does "racially heckled" mean? Well, I suppose one meaning could be (as many assume) that she was heckled with racial slurs. However, it seems like it could also mean she believed she was being heckled because of her race.

My understanding is that there has been no first hand testimony from anyone in attendance that night - including from Richardson herself - specifically stating that racial slurs were being used. If that is the case then this just sounds like another story where the narrative got ahead of the facts.

 

Link to comment
53 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Did Richardson ever claim that anyone was yelling racial slurs though? I believe the only people who have actually made such a claim have been family members not in attendance.

Her official statement merely complained that she and her black teammates were "targeted and racially heckled." That sounds an awful lot like a legalistic way of phrasing things, intentionally designed for misdirection.

What does "racially heckled" mean? Well, I suppose one meaning could be (as many assume) that she was heckled with racial slurs. However, it seems like it could also mean she believed she was being heckled because of her race.

My understanding is that there has been no first hand testimony from anyone in attendance that night - including from Richardson herself - specifically stating that racial slurs were being used. If that is the case then this just sounds like another story where the narrative got ahead of the facts.

 

From her statement:

"I heard a very strong, negative racial slur," Richardson said. "... So I served the ball, got through the play. And then the next time I went back to serve, I heard it extremely clear again, but that was the end of the game."

But she wrongly accused a "mentally challenged" fan of saying it when we know is false.  She didn't see who said it, but said she recognized his voice when he approached her after the game mistaking her for a friend on the BYU team.

It's possible it was a black fan who called her the slur which apparently is permissible according to some.

It's possible she overheard two black fans using the slur with each other, which also is permissible.

But there are no witnesses so far who saw or heard anyone say the slurs so we can speculate all we want.

She didn't attend the last press conference for Duke, but I'm sure she's aware of the ongoing confusion about her accusations.  It'll be interesting to see if she tries to clarify any of her statements.

 

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, gopher said:

From her statement:

"I heard a very strong, negative racial slur," Richardson said. "... So I served the ball, got through the play. And then the next time I went back to serve, I heard it extremely clear again, but that was the end of the game."

I hadn't seen that quote. Thank you for providing it.

 

15 minutes ago, gopher said:

But she wrongly accused a "mentally challenged" fan of saying it when we know is false.  She didn't see who said it, but said she recognized his voice when he approached her after the game mistaking her for a friend on the BYU team.

It's possible it was a black fan who called her the slur which apparently is permissible according to some.

It's possible she overheard two black fans using the slur with each other, which also is permissible.

But there are no witnesses so far who saw or heard anyone say the slurs so we can speculate all we want.

One article I read suggested the potential for simply mishearing. Some students were apparently shouting "Net" and others yelling "Cougars" which could perhaps then be misconstrued as the offensive epithet.

 

15 minutes ago, gopher said:

She didn't attend the last press conference for Duke, but I'm sure she's aware of the ongoing confusion about her accusations.  It'll be interesting to see if she tries to clarify any of her statements.

I suspect everyone just wants the story to go away at this point, so I'm doubtful we will hear too much more about it from the principles involved.

 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Some students were apparently shouting "Net" and others yelling "Cougars" which could perhaps then be misconstrued as the offensive epithet.

It’s happened before with calling the name of a mascot, Dinger.

Link to comment
32 minutes ago, Amulek said:

I suspect everyone just wants the story to go away at this point, so I'm doubtful we will hear too much more about it from the principles involved.

Richardson is part of a demographic whose voices have been notoriously ignored or discounted and treated disgracefully in the past and even in the present (just check the increased survivals rates for the generally dismally poor infant mortality rates for black women in the US if they happen to luck out and get a black female doctor).  I am not surprised if she is making the choice to trust herself and not to recant her testimony until definite evidence appears.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Amulek said:
Quote

She didn't attend the last press conference for Duke, but I'm sure she's aware of the ongoing confusion about her accusations.  It'll be interesting to see if she tries to clarify any of her statements.

I suspect everyone just wants the story to go away at this point, so I'm doubtful we will hear too much more about it from the principles involved.

Not sure about the feasibility of this story "go{ing} away": https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2022/09/08/latest-mormon-land-your-dream/

Quote

The latest ‘Mormon Land’ podcast: BYU fallout continues

• On this week’s show, BYU alum Darron Smith, who teaches sociology at the University of Memphis and is the author of “When Race, Religion & Sports Collide: Black Athletes at BYU and Beyond,” talks about the volleyball match episode, the resulting fallout, the school’s history with Black athletes, and why BYU and Latter-day Saint leaders need to do much more to combat racism on campus and within the faith — starting with an apology for the church’s former priesthood/temple ban for Black members.

Ms. Richardson's allegations do not seem to be holding up to scrutiny.  I am reminded of the Tawana Brawley incident:

Quote

Tawana Vicenia Brawley[1] (born December 15, 1971)[1][2] is an African-American woman who accused four white men of kidnapping and raping her over a 4-day period in November 1987 when she was 15 years old.

On November 28, 1987, Brawley was found in a trash bag after having been missing for four days from her home in Wappingers Falls, New York. She had racial slurs written on her body and was covered in feces. Brawley accused four white men of having raped her. The charges received widespread national attention in part because of the appalling condition in which she had been left, her young age (15), and the professional status of the persons she accused of the crime (including police officers and a prosecuting attorney). Brawley's advisers—Al Sharpton, Alton H. Maddox, and C. Vernon Mason—also helped in bringing the case to national prominence.[3]

After hearing evidence, a grand jury concluded in October 1988 that Brawley had not been the victim of a forcible sexual assault, and that she herself may have created the appearance of such an attack.[2][4] Steven Pagones, the New York prosecutor whom Brawley had accused as being one of her assailants, later successfully sued Brawley, and her three advisers, for defamation.[4]

...

Grand jury hearings[edit]

Under the authority of New York State Attorney General Robert Abrams, a grand jury was called to hear evidence. On October 6, 1988, the grand jury released its 170-page report that concluded Brawley had not been abducted, assaulted, raped, or sodomized, as Brawley and her advisers said. The report further concluded that the "unsworn public allegations against Dutchess County Assistant District Attorney Steven Pagones" were false and had no basis in fact. Before issuing the report, the grand jury heard from 180 witnesses, saw 250 exhibits, and recorded more than 6,000 pages of testimony.[4]

In the decision, the grand jury noted many problems with Brawley's story. Among these were that the rape kit results did not indicate sexual assault. Additionally, despite saying she had been held captive outdoors for days, Brawley was not suffering from hypothermia, was well-nourished, and appeared to have brushed her teeth recently. Despite her clothing being charred, there were no burns on her body. Although a shoe she was wearing was cut through, Brawley had no injuries to her foot. The racial epithets written on her were upside down, which led to suspicion that Brawley had written the words. Testimony from her schoolmates indicated she had attended a local party during the time of her supposed abduction. One witness claimed to have observed Brawley's climbing into the garbage bag.[22] The feces on her body were identified as coming from her neighbor's dog.[23] Brawley never testified, despite a subpoena ordering her to do so.[24][25]

...

Possible motives[edit]

Much of the grand jury evidence pointed to a possible motive for Brawley's falsifying the incident: trying to avoid violent punishment from her mother and particularly her stepfather, Ralph King. Witnesses testified that Glenda Brawley had previously beaten her daughter for running away, and for spending nights with boys. King had a history of violence that included stabbing his first wife 14 times, which later escalated into him shooting and killing her. There was considerable evidence that King could and would violently attack Brawley: when Brawley had been arrested on a shoplifting charge the previous May, King attempted to beat her for the offense while at the police station. Witnesses also described King as having talked about his stepdaughter in a sexualizing manner.[28]

On the day of her alleged disappearance, Brawley had skipped school to visit her boyfriend, Todd Buxton, who was serving a six-month jail sentence. When Buxton's mother (with whom she had visited Buxton in jail) urged her to get home before she got in trouble, Brawley told her, "I'm already in trouble." She described how angry King was over a previous incident of her staying out late.[29]

Neighbors also told the grand jury that in February they overheard Glenda Brawley saying to King, “You shouldn't have took the money because after it all comes out, they're going to find out the truth.” Another neighbor heard Mrs. Brawley say, “They know we're lying, and they're going to find out and come and get us.”[28]

In April 1989, New York Newsday published claims by a boyfriend of Brawley's, Daryl Rodriguez, that she had told him the story was fabricated, with help from her mother, in order to avert the wrath of her stepfather.[30] Writing about the case in a 2004 book on perceptions of racial violence, sociologist Jonathan Markovitz concluded that "it is reasonable to suggest that Brawley's fear and the kinds of suffering that she must have gone through must have been truly staggering if they were enough to force her to resort to cutting her hair, covering herself in feces, and crawling into a garbage bag."[6]

So...

  • A provocative story about racial animus against a black woman?  Check.
  • Zero evidence, save the purported victim's say-so, of the racial animus?  Check.
  • Substantial countervailing evidence undermining the purported victim's say-so?  Check.
  • Deliberate high-profile news/media coverage?  Check?
  • "Dogpile"-style tactics by the purported victim's family?  Check.
  • Apparent exploitation of the purported victim by others for their own purposes/ends?  Check.
  • Substantial ulterior motive for the purported victim (and family)?  Check.
  • Aggravation of racial tensions?  Check.
  • Convenient indifference by many (including the media outlets that uncritically trumpeted the initial story) to whether the allegations were factually true?  Check.
  • The purported victim refusing to participate in further inquiries about the allegations?  Check.

How many of these apply to Rachel Richardson?

Jussie Smollett's race hoax also comes to mind.

I don't think BYU can afford to let this story "go away."  BYU needs to defend itself and, by extension, its students/fans, and even the Church.  All of these folks are being tarred as racists directly because of the allegations of Rachel Richardson.  They can do so with decorum and sensitivity and tact, but race hoaxes, like fake rape claims, are hugely destructive, both to the falsely-accused and to society at large.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Not sure about the feasibility of this story "go{ing} away": https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2022/09/08/latest-mormon-land-your-dream/

Ms. Richardson's allegations do not seem to be holding up to scrutiny.  I am reminded of the Tawana Brawley incident:

So...

  • A provocative story about racial animus against a black woman?  Check.
  • Zero evidence, save the purported victim's say-so, of the racial animus?  Check.
  • Substantial countervailing evidence undermining the purported victim's say-so?  Check.
  • Deliberate high-profile news/media coverage?  Check?
  • "Dogpile"-style tactics by the purported victim's family?  Check.
  • Apparent exploitation of the purported victim by others for their own purposes/ends?  Check.
  • Substantial ulterior motive for the purported victim (and family)?  Check.
  • Aggravation of racial tensions?  Check.
  • Convenient indifference by many (including the media outlets that uncritically trumpeted the initial story) to whether the allegations were factually true?  Check.
  • The purported victim refusing to participate in further inquiries about the allegations?  Check.

How many of these apply to Rachel Richardson?

Jussie Smollett's race hoax also comes to mind.

I don't think BYU can afford to let this story "go away."  BYU needs to defend itself and, by extension, its students/fans, and even the Church.  All of these folks are being tarred as racists directly because of the allegations of Rachel Richardson.  They can do so with decorum and sensitivity and tact, but race hoaxes, like fake rape claims, are hugely destructive, both to the falsely-accused and to society at large.

Thanks,

-Smac

Really? Tawana Brawley? I'm just amazed at people on both sides who are acting like this is either the worst incident of racism in history or a diabolical anti-white hoax. People need to calm down. We still don't have all the facts, and even if we did, we don't know what Ms. Richardson perceived or why. 

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Really? Tawana Brawley? I'm just amazed at people on both sides who are acting like this is either the worst incident of racism in history or a diabolical anti-white hoax. People need to calm down. We still don't have all the facts, and even if we did, we don't know what Ms. Richardson perceived or why. 

We on this board carry very little weight in shaping public perception. Those who are piling on against BYU are very much more in the public eye and can potentially (if not already?) contribute to doing serious damage to BYU's reputation and by extension, the Church. Though I might not conjure up the Tawana Brawley story to push back, it will be interesting to see the other side conjure up horrific images/events from our nation's past to justify excoriating BYU for this incident. I'm glad there is also considerable push back in social media questioning the veracity of her allegations. Again, it does not have to be a lie (see Tawana Brawley) to cause serious PR damage to our own... : (

Link to comment
Just now, Vanguard said:

We on this board carry very little weight in shaping public perception. Those who are piling on against BYU are very much more in the public eye and can potentially (if not already?) contribute to doing serious damage to BYU's reputation and by extension, the Church. Though I might not conjure up the Tawana Brawley story to push back, it will be interesting to see the other side conjure up horrific images/events from our nation's past to justify excoriating BYU for this incident. I'm glad there is also considerable push back in social media questioning the veracity of her allegations. Again, it does not have to be a lie (see Tawana Brawley) to cause serious PR damage to our own... : (

I agree. I'm just saying that both sides seem to be ratcheting up the hyperbole and hysteria. Not helpful, IMO.

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Really? Tawana Brawley?

Really.  Tawana Brawley.  And Jussie Smollett as well.  And the Duke Lacrosse case also.  The similarities are there.

Going with an Argument from Incredulity, are ya?  Or are we headed into an "Identity Fallacy"?

37 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I'm just amazed at people on both sides who are acting like this is either the worst incident of racism in history or a diabolical anti-white hoax.

I have said nothing of the sort.

This is a Strawman Fallacy.  And/or an "Appeal to Extremes" ("Erroneously attempting to make a reasonable argument into an absurd one, by taking the argument to the extremes").

37 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

People need to calm down.

This seems like both a Strawman and an "Appeal to Motive" fallacy.

I am quite calm.

37 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

We still don't have all the facts, and even if we did, we don't know what Ms. Richardson perceived or why. 

We seldom have "all the facts."

That said, at this point we do know a fair number of things:

  • We know that Richardson claims that she  “very distinctly” heard a “very strong and negative racial slur” come from the student section during Friday’s match while she was serving, which she said escalated throughout the match and “grew into threats which caused [her] to feel unsafe.”
  • We also know that Richardson's "godmother" asserted the fan used the N-word repeatedly and also “threatened” Richardson by telling her “to watch her back going to the team bus.”
  • We also know that so far Richardson has not made any public statement disputing her godmother's statements.
  • We also know that so far none of Richardson's teammates has publicly corroborated her accusations.
  • We also know that so far nobody who was in attendance at the game as spectators has come forward with corroborating information or evidence.
  • We also know that nobody, including BYUPD, who has listened to the recorded game has heard any racial slurs shouted from the student section when Richardson said they happened (as she was serving).
  • We also know that BYUPD has essentially exonerated the UVU student that the Duke folks accused of making the racist statements.
  • We also know that so far no news outlets are reporting the existence of any corroborating testimony or evidence as to Richardson's claims.
  • We also know that BYU, and by extension the Church, have been disparaged because of this story.

I think this is enough to reach a (preliminary and rebuttable and subject-to-further-information-and-evidence) conclusion that this is a race hoax.  YMMV.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97
Link to comment
31 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Really? Tawana Brawley? I'm just amazed at people on both sides who are acting like this is either the worst incident of racism in history or a diabolical anti-white hoax. People need to calm down. We still don't have all the facts, and even if we did, we don't know what Ms. Richardson perceived or why. 

I appreciate your instinct to wait for all the facts instead of rushing to judgment. The problem is that while we wait, BYU and the church are getting blasted. There’s enough evidence at this point to start pressing back really hard against this accusation. I want to give this girl the benefit of the doubt but it’s really starting to look like this is a hoax and maybe even an orchestrated attack. 

Link to comment
Just now, smac97 said:

Really.  Tawana Brawley.

Going with an Argument from Incredulity, are ya?  Or are we headed into an "Identity Fallacy"?

I have said nothing of the sort.

This is a Strawman Fallacy.  And/or an "Appeal to Extremes" ("Erroneously attempting to make a reasonable argument into an absurd one, by taking the argument to the extremes").

This seems like both a Strawman and an "Appeal to Motive" fallacy.

I am quite calm.

We seldom have "all the facts."

That said, at this point we do know a fair number of things:

  • We know that Richardson claims that she  “very distinctly” heard a “very strong and negative racial slur” come from the student section during Friday’s match while she was serving, which she said escalated throughout the match and “grew into threats which caused [her] to feel unsafe.”
  • We also know that Richardson's "godmother" asserted the fan used the N-word repeatedly and also “threatened” Richardson by telling her “to watch her back going to the team bus.”
  • We also know that so far Richardson has not made any public statement disputing her godmother's statements.
  • We also know that so far none of Richardson's teammates has publicly corroborated her accusations.
  • We also know that so far nobody who was in attendance at the game as spectators has come forward with corroborating information or evidence.
  • We also know that nobody, including BYUPD, who has listened to the recorded game has heard any racial slurs shouted from the student section when Richardson said they happened (as she was serving).
  • We also know that BYUPD has essentially exonerated the UVU student that the Duke folks accused of making the racist statements.
  • We also know that so far no news outlets are reporting the existence of any corroborating testimony or evidence as to Richardson's claims.
  • We also know that BYU, and by extension the Church, have been disparaged because of this story.

I think this is enough to reach a (preliminary and rebuttable and subject-to-further-information-and-evidence) conclusion that this is a race hoax.  YMMV.

Thanks,

-Smac

I guess this sort of assumption of the worst intent and actions appeals to some people out there, but not to me. And if you are calm, perhaps you should consider ratcheting down the rhetoric so as to not inflame others. 

Link to comment
Just now, JarMan said:

I appreciate your instinct to wait for all the facts instead of rushing to judgment. The problem is that while we wait, BYU and the church are getting blasted. There’s enough evidence at this point to start pressing back really hard against this accusation. I want to give this girl the benefit of the doubt but it’s really starting to look like this is a hoax and maybe even an orchestrated attack. 

I haven't blasted BYU, but I don't believe we have enough information to press back really hard. I hate seeing my school "blasted" for racism, particularly when there isn't conclusive evidence for it. That said, I'm just not seeing this obvious, orchestrated hoax that smac has been telling us about. Believe it or not, I do care about BYU's reputation, especially if it is not deserved. 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, JarMan said:

I appreciate your instinct to wait for all the facts instead of rushing to judgment. The problem is that while we wait, BYU and the church are getting blasted. There’s enough evidence at this point to start pressing back really hard against this accusation. I want to give this girl the benefit of the doubt but it’s really starting to look like this is a hoax and maybe even an orchestrated attack. 

I agree with you up until the exclusive characterization of it starting to look like a hoax or orchestrated attack. Why can't she simply be mistaken without suggesting nefarious motives?

Link to comment
Just now, jkwilliams said:

I haven't blasted BYU, but I don't believe we have enough information to press back really hard. I hate seeing my school "blasted" for racism, particularly when there isn't conclusive evidence for it. That said, I'm just not seeing this obvious, orchestrated hoax that smac has been telling us about. Believe it or not, I do care about BYU's reputation, especially if it is not deserved. 

I know you haven’t blasted BYU. I’m talking about the media, the South Carolina basketball team, the comment sections in the articles etc. People are entitled to defend themselves against such attacks. And they don’t need to wait until they know what this woman perceived. We will never know that, seeing as she’s the only one who can tell us and her credibility is zero at this point. (Zero being the exact amount of corroborating evidence at this point.)

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Vanguard said:

I agree with you up until the exclusive characterization of it starting to look like a hoax or orchestrated attack. Why can't she simply be mistaken without suggesting nefarious motives?

I hope she’s just mistaken. The problem is she described several incidents directed at her and also her black teammate. Plus the whole “watch your back” thing. She described a pervasive pattern not a one off yell that could have been misheard. 

Link to comment
Just now, jkwilliams said:

I guess this sort of assumption

I am not assuming.  My original assumption was that the story was as initially reported.  I thereafter encountered further evidence that has resulted in me provisionally concluding that Richardson's story is a race hoax.

Surely you appreciate the distinction between an assumption and a borne-of-evidence-and-analysis conclusion?

Just now, jkwilliams said:

of the worst intent

I don't think I have speculated as to Richardson's intent.

Just now, jkwilliams said:

and actions appeals to some people out there, but not to me.

Meh.  The evidence is not supporting, and is instead leaning substantially against, the credibility of Richardson's claim.

I am not condemning her, nor imputing motives onto her.  But her claim was not a whoopsy-daisy, and it's a serious one.  It needs to be addressed.  

Just now, jkwilliams said:

And if you are calm, perhaps you should consider ratcheting down the rhetoric so as to not inflame others. 

Richardson did the inflaming.

I am expressing borne-of-evidence-and-analysis skepticism of the credibility of her inflammatory accusations.  I am not advocating violence or anything untoward in response to her accusations.  I am leaning toward this being a "race hoax."  Is it that phrase which you find inflammatory?  If so, what alternative descriptor would you prefer to see?

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
1 minute ago, JarMan said:

I hope she’s just mistaken. The problem is she described several incidents directed at her and also her black teammate. Plus the whole “watch your back” thing. She described a pervasive pattern not a one off yell that could have been misheard. 

Absent corroborating evidence, it would be nice at some point for her to concede it could have been a mistake what she thought she heard. Regardless, my suspicion is that others will suggest that even though she could be wrong, this experience is at least a reminder that we (i.e., USA, BYU, the Church) have a long way to go in righting the wrongs of the past. In other words, they'll thank her for the reminder even though she could have been mistaken. Yuck. 

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I don't think BYU can afford to let this story "go away."  BYU needs to defend itself and, by extension, its students/fans, and even the Church.  All of these folks are being tarred as racists directly because of the allegations of Rachel Richardson.  They can do so with decorum and sensitivity and tact, but race hoaxes, like fake rape claims, are hugely destructive, both to the falsely-accused and to society at large.

I don't believe it's a hoax. A hoax is when somebody is intentionally misleading people, but I don't know that that's the case here.

I genuinely believe that she thinks she heard someone use a racial slur, at least at one point during the game. And I don't have a problem with her reporting what she heard.

Now, I am more than a little bit skeptical about whether or not somebody was actually hurling racial epithets (repeatedly?) during the game and, even if they were, I find it suspicious that she was the only one to hear them.

Maybe she has supersonic hearing or something, because I've been to packed volleyball games in the Smith Fieldhouse before, and once the score gets past 15 the crowd gets up and gets loud - I'm talking really, flippin', loud - and it doesn't let off until the game ends. Maybe she was able to pick out that one word among the din, but (again) I have some doubts. I think it far more likely that she simply misheard something in the heat of the moment.

 

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I haven't blasted BYU, but I don't believe we have enough information to press back really hard. I hate seeing my school "blasted" for racism, particularly when there isn't conclusive evidence for it. That said, I'm just not seeing this obvious, orchestrated hoax that smac has been telling us about.

I don't think I have said anything about an "orchestrated" hoax.  But so far Richardson and her godmother are apparently complicit in the accusations against BYU.  They both made serious accusations against BYU about the same incident.  Did they collude with each other?  Have they "orchestrated" this issue?  I have no idea. 

If anything, I'm inclined toward a Tawana-Brawley-style explanation.  I suspect Richardson fabricated the accusations, and it has now grown beyond her control.

12 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Believe it or not, I do care about BYU's reputation, especially if it is not deserved. 

So am I.

Believe it or not, I do care about racial harmony in the United States, which is why I find race hoaxes so detestable.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I am expressing borne-of-evidence-and-analysis skepticism of the credibility of her inflammatory accusations.  I am not advocating violence or anything untoward in response to her accusations.  I am leaning toward this being a "race hoax."  Is it that phrase which you find inflammatory?  If so, what alternative descriptor would you prefer to see?

Thanks,

-Smac

My preference would be something that doesn't suggest it could only be a hoax. She seemed like a nice young lady. She could simply be sorely mistaken.

Link to comment

The following verses from Matthew 5 seem an appropriate reaction from BYU, and the church, if the charges prove to be unfounded.

 

38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An aeye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not aevil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right bcheek, cturn to him the other also.

40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

42 aGive to him that asketh thee, and from him that would bborrow of thee turn not thou away.

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt alove thy bneighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44 But I say unto you, aLove your benemies, cbless them that dcurse you, do egood to them that fhate you, and gpray for them which despitefully use you, and hpersecute you;

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/nt/matt/5?lang=eng

 

We should be looking to extend love and fellowship to all involved.

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Amulek said:

I don't believe it's a hoax. A hoax is when somebody is intentionally misleading people, but I don't know that that's the case here.

I genuinely believe that she thinks she heard someone use a racial slur, at least at one point during the game. And I don't have a problem with her reporting what she heard.

Now, I am more than a little bit skeptical about whether or not somebody was actually hurling racial epithets (repeatedly?) during the game and, even if they were, I find it suspicious that she was the only one to hear them.

Maybe she has supersonic hearing or something, because I've been to packed volleyball games in the Smith Fieldhouse before, and once the score gets past 15 the crowd gets up and gets loud - I'm talking really, flippin', loud - and it doesn't let off until the game ends. Maybe she was able to pick out that one word among the din, but (again) I have some doubts. I think it far more likely that she simply misheard something in the heat of the moment.

 

I also think there would be droves of others who came down on the alleged instigator for saying what s/he allegedly yelled - I know I certainly would have. I find it hard to believe someone could hurl these awful descriptors and get away with no one knowing s/he did. 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I am not assuming.  My original assumption was that the story was as initially reported.  I thereafter encountered further evidence that has resulted in me provisionally concluding that Richardson's story is a race hoax.

Surely you appreciate the distinction between an assumption and a borne-of-evidence-and-analysis conclusion?

I don't think I have speculated as to Richardson's intent.

Meh.  The evidence is not supporting, and is instead leaning substantially against, the credibility of Richardson's claim.

I am not condemning her, nor imputing motives onto her.  But her claim was not a whoopsy-daisy, and it's a serious one.  It needs to be addressed.  

Richardson did the inflaming.

I am expressing borne-of-evidence-and-analysis skepticism of the credibility of her inflammatory accusations.  I am not advocating violence or anything untoward in response to her accusations.  I am leaning toward this being a "race hoax."  Is it that phrase which you find inflammatory?  If so, what alternative descriptor would you prefer to see?

Thanks,

-Smac

There's a huge difference between understanding that supporting evidence is lacking and insisting it's a "hoax." The latter implies intent, evil or otherwise. That you compare it to Tawana Brawley merely strengthens the accusation of evil intent. I understand that there is so far no supporting evidence, but that does not mean she engaged in a hoax. There are all kinds of possibilities here, and it's dismaying that so far, there are really only two camps, each condemning the other. 

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...