| Blog and Media Roundup - Wednesday, January 17, 2018; News Roundup | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 17 2018, 05:05 AM (97 Views) | |
| abb | Jan 17 2018, 05:05 AM Post #1 |
|
January 17, 2018 Duke University and the Heroic Emile Zola of America By Randolph Parrish Lynch mobs are not a pretty sight. But what is a pretty sight, even a beautiful one, is someone standing by the side of the road trying to call halt. "As we came down the steps of the Palais de Justice, we found ourselves surrounded by the roaring crowd. And then I saw the hero [Zola], more beautiful than the imagination of mankind ever pictured him[.] ... He was clumsy, shortsighted, and awkwardly carried his umbrella under his arm[.] ... But as he descended the steps one by one, in the midst of the roars of hatred, among the crowd that clamored for his death, he walked under the arch of uplifted clubs and canes like a king descending the palace stairs beneath an arch of naked swords unsheathed in his honor. ... It was a triumph of conscience, of truth, and of an individual." –Mme. Severine during the Dreyfus affair In 2006, we saw the thronging of another lynch mob, this time in Durham, North Carolina. Three Duke University students were falsely accused of rape, in a case so flimsy that it should have been dismissed in five minutes. But this was an era of politically correct minefields, and a media storm erupted. The local paper, the Herald-Sun, eventually ran over 300 articles about what became known as the Duke Lacrosse Case, almost without exception assuming the guilt of the accused and stirring the city's readership to moral outrage. The fires having been lit, the national press took up the theme. Newsweek automatically branded the accused with adjectives like "raunchy," "strutting," "macho," and "entitled," with the noun "thugs" thrown in ("What Happened at Duke," May 1, 2006). The magazine's cover for that issue featured mug shots of the arrested students, which could hardly have done more to infer their guilt and convict them in the mind of the public. The New York Times, which printed more than 100 pieces on the case, was later judged by some observers to have bent over backward to support the prosecution. In one editorial, Selena Roberts wrote of "a group of privileged players of fine pedigree entangled in a night that threatens to belie their social standing as human beings" ("When Peer Pressure, Not Your Conscience, is Your Guide," March 31, 2006). Who can manage to stay upright when a storm is blowing? On some days, network television coverage of the case exceeded that of the Iraq war. The result was predictable: "It was like a gauntlet of people just swarmed us everywhere ... all the trucks that you see outside with satellite dishes on our front yard and they were ... going after every single person they could ... and while we were walking [to the court] the Black Panthers started screaming out, "Justice will be done, rapist!" They said, "You're going to get yours, rapist!" ... I mean, that was, I was terrified[.] ... [O]nce we got in the courtroom ... there were people yelling, there were people shouting all different things, and ... I felt I was going to be real safe because once you walk in a courtroom you know then you're safe ... and we sat down ... and there was a guy behind him me in the first row that kept leaning up[.] ... [H]e said, "You're a dead man walking!" ... Mr. Nifong [the prosecutor] sort of smirked to himself at the other table ... at that point I think we understood where we were heading." –Testimony at Nifong's Bar hearing, June 15, 2007 Even the clergy sang in harmony. In the single church rally about the case, a packed congregation consisting of Durham's pastors, civic and civil rights leaders, patiently sat as keynote speakers from the New Black Panther Party denounced the accused, whites in general, and Jews. The listeners held books in their hands written by Jews. Portraits of Jews adorned their houses of worship. Yet when speakers from an organization whose leaders have called for the death of Jews took the pulpit and proceeded to attack Jews, no one got up and walked out. Not one preacher, white or black, bishop or humble deacon, then or later, ever raised his voice against the immorality of sacrificing the innocent to slake the thirst of a mob. Clemenceau said of Zola, "There have always been people strong enough to resist the most powerful kings, to refuse to bow before them; there have been very few to resist the masses, to stand up alone against the misled multitude." Steve Miller, then a student-columnist for the Duke University newspaper, stood up virtually alone against the 300 articles of the Herald-Sun. He stood up against the satellite trucks parked bumper to bumper on Duke's campus. He stood against the national networks: [A]s a student body we have a moral duty to act with dignity and to demand fair and just treatment for our peers – no slander, no abuse, no prejudice tolerated. ("Persecution," August 28, 2006) We live in a society where a single accusation can lead to ruin. ("Paranoia," September 25, 2006) There are few greater evils a person can suffer than to face trial for a heinous crime he did not commit. ("Duke Lacrosse: A Call to Action," November 6, 2006) The rest of the media pack never quite got around to admitting that. The muffled apologies that came later were measured and qualified. Like Zola, Miller found himself trying to yell above a hurricane. He may not have been the perfect embodiment of every virtue society seeks. But at the required time, he was there. And how proud should the rest of the media – who like to posture as the guardians of civic morality – be of their response? It was his moment by default. We owe Steve Miller a debt and an acknowledgement. Journalism owes him a debt. Justice owes him a debt. France was fortunate to have had a Zola. For America – or at least certainly for Durham and Duke University – Miller was cast in the part and played it admirably. I would not have agreed with everything Zola wrote about France, socialism, or religion. But he will be forever honored for his stand against the inflamed masses. I may not agree with everything Miller does with regard to future politics, but nothing should detract from the honor he is due for opposing mob justice during what would have been a blot on America's escutcheon, a Scottsboro II, imbued with all the passions and prejudices of the original version. Thank you, Mr. Miller, for that. Randolph Parrish is the author of The Duke Lacrosse Case: A Documentary History and Analysis of the Modern Scottsboro (2009). Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/01/duke_university_and_the_heroic_emile_zola_of_america.html#ixzz54R1dp2lW Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook |
![]() |
|
| abb | Jan 17 2018, 05:10 AM Post #2 |
|
The piece that should have been written by the editorial board of The (Duke) Chronicle, but never was. And never will be. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Jan 17 2018, 05:18 AM Post #3 |
|
https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2018/01/16/larry-nassar-michigan-state-amanda-thomashow/1034302001/ Woman who reported Nassar in 2014: 'It destroyed me but I lived' Matt Mencarini, Lansing State Journal Published 7:00 a.m. ET Jan. 16, 2018 LANSING - Amanda Thomashow's phone rang 16 months ago. It was an East Lansing number she didn't recognize. She answered, as she was getting into her car in a parking lot, and heard the voice of a Michigan State University police detective. Larry Nassar, then still a famed MSU and USA gymnastics doctor, was being investigated for sexually assaulting a patient. Thomashow got this call because more than two years earlier she had told police and MSU the same thing, that Nassar sexually assaulted her during a medical appointment in his university office. Her report, in April 2014, prompted investigations by both MSU police and the university. MSU's Title IX investigation cleared Nassar. The police investigation, which lasted more than a year, ended when prosecutors declined to charge him. Thomashow spoke to the State Journal in 2016 for a story about how MSU handled its investigations of sexual assault and harassment. At her request, the story did not identify her. Now Thomashow says she's ready for people to know who she is, because she won't let what happened to her define her. "What defines me is where I go from here and how I use my scars to help strengthen myself and other women, and not letting it be this horrible thing that just destroyed me," she said in an interview on Monday. "Instead, it's this horrible thing that destroyed me but I lived and I'm here to tell my story. And I'm here to lift while I climb." Since Thomashow got that call from an MSU police detective, more than 140 women and girls have said Nassar abused them. He's been convicted on federal and state charges. He was sentenced to 60 years in federal prison. And by the end of this week, Nassar will be sentenced on seven sexual assault charges, following several days of victim-impact statements from Thomashow and 87 other women and girls. "It's nice to not be alone, but also, I kind of wish I was alone in this," Thomashow said. "I don't want all these people suffering all of the time." More: Larry Nassar and a career filled with ‘silenced’ voices At MSU: Assault, harassment and secrecy 'They allowed it to happen' In early 2014, Thomashow, who was then a recent MSU graduate, walked into Nassar's university office seeking treatment for hip pain. During that appointment, Nassar cupped her buttocks and then, about an hour into the appointment, he sent the only other person present, a female resident, out of the examination room. Then he massaged her breast and vaginal area. She told him to stop, but he didn't. He only stopped when she physically removed his hands from her. Thomashow reported to MSU what happened. The university started a Title IX investigation and its police department started a separate criminal investigation. Relying on the medical opinions of four MSU employees who had close ties to Nassar, the Title IX investigator determined Thomashow received an appropriate medical procedure and likely misinterpreted it as sexual assault because she wasn't familiar with osteopathic medicine and wouldn’t know the "nuanced difference." When the university cleared Nassar, he and the dean of the College of Osteopathic Medicine agreed on new protocols required for Nassar to return to clinical duties, including that he wear gloves and fully explain what he was doing. However, those protocols included no mechanism to ensure Nassar's compliance, and Nassar's boss later told police he never intended to follow up to make sure Nassar followed them. More: MSU Dean William Strampel, Larry Nassar's former boss, steps down for medical reasons MSU let Larry Nassar see patients for 16 months during criminal sex assault investigation Larry Nassar's downfall started with an email to IndyStar On the day Nassar began seeing patients again, he was still under criminal investigation by the university's police department. He would be for another 16 months, until prosecutors declined to charge him. At least a dozen women and girls later told police they were abused by Nassar at MSU after the university allowed him to resume seeing patients, police records show. The university has been criticized by many for the way it handled the 2014 investigation into Thomashow's complaint, which included Nassar recommending one of the four MSU colleagues whom the investigator used as experts to determine if Nassar's actions were indeed part of a medical treatment. An elite Michigan sports doctor who possessed child pornography and assaulted gymnasts was sentenced Thursday to 60 years in federal prison in one of three criminal cases that ensure he will never be free again. (Dec. 7) AP Some also have questioned why the investigator wrote two final reports, with one for Thomashow having less information than one prepared for Nassar and the university. Although the documents are not public, the Lansing State Journal uncovered the existence of two reports while reviewing emails about Nassar sent between the investigator and the dean. Thomashow said this week that the university simply didn't want to believe her. "Though they did not sexually assault me personally, they allowed it to happen," she said. "And they allowed for an environment that covered for this doctor. Just because, what, he brought in a lot of money to the university or he was a big name?" Column: Community deserves more insight into what went wrong in Nassar case Jason Cody, an MSU spokesman, reiterated on Monday that the university vehemently denies any accusation that MSU covered up Nassar's sexual assaults or looked the other way. He said that the 2014 investigation followed university procedures at the time. Thomashow is among the women and girls who are suing MSU and others in federal court. Last week, the university moved to dismiss those lawsuits. Among its arguments is that MSU "retains absolute immunity from liability" for Nassar's actions. MSU spokesman Kent Cassella said last week that insurance companies require a vigorous defense against lawsuits, but that's "in no way a reflection of our view of the victims, for whom we have the utmost respect and sympathy." MSU's response to her report and those the other women and girls, Thomashow said, "is a good example of what is wrong with our world today." Thomashow wants the university to acknowledge its mistakes, apologize and change the environment on campus. "It's going to have to be a big culture shift, but I think that MSU still has an opportunity to fess up and acknowledge what they've done and help the victims. But the longer that they keep on fighting and saying that they had nothing to do with this, it's just hurting the people who have already been hurt." More: Nassar victims: Response from MSU, USA Gymnastics 'heartbreaking' 'A chorus that makes change' When Thomashow walked into Nassar's office in 2014 she was thinking about enrolling in medical school. That changed after. She found herself struggling to trust men and doctors. She shifted her career path to one where she'd mostly be around women. She no longer trusted the systems put in place to protect women and bring predators to justice. These were among the scars that were healing, when she got that call from an MSU police detective. They've now been joined by fresh wounds. Thomashow expects to be one of the 88 women and girls who give victim-impact statements this week during a four-day sentencing hearing for Nassar, who will face another sentencing hearing in Eaton County later this month. Preparing her statement has forced her to acknowledge her feelings and all the ways this has affected her, things that are just easier to ignore. "I'm just so frustrated by this whole situation and that this is still happening," she said. "I know there's no way to change the past and all we can do is move forward and try to make positive change from here on, but I'm just so frustrated. "How is this still my life? How do I still have to go and talk about this? Wasn't me talking about is enough back when it happened? Why do I have to continue to relive this horrible thing that happened to me just because they didn't believe me the first time? How is that fair to me? Have I not been traumatized enough? But here we are." Larissa Boyce addresses Michigan State University failings on Larry Nassar following his federal sentencing on child pornography charges Thursday, Dec. 7. Justin A. Hinkley/Lansing State Journal For all the trauma,frustration and loss of faith, Thomashow said she still has hope. She has hope that the systems will improve to protect women, girls, men and boys from abuse. She has hope that one day she'll no longer feel like a victim, even though she admits she doesn't think that will happen. But she has to have hope, it's what gets her up and into the world, and what led her to tell her story once again. "My voice didn't matter four years ago," she said. "But maybe this time, at least my voice can be part of a chorus that makes change." Contact Matt Mencarini at (517) 267-1347 or mmencarini@lsj.com. Follow him on Twitter @MattMencarini. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Jan 17 2018, 05:24 AM Post #4 |
|
https://thefederalist.com/2018/01/16/revoking-obamas-sex-assault-letter-wont-end-campus-witch-hunts/ Why Revoking Obama’s Sex Assault Letter Won’t End Campus Witch Hunts Even as the courts continue to find them unconstitutional, universities appear likely to follow Obama's rules until they're given legally binding regulations. By Adam Candeub January 16, 2018 The Obama administration’s 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter presented universities, colleges and other higher education institutions with an ultimatum: create Title IX kangaroo courts to adjudicate claims of campus sexual assault, or face an end to all federal funding. The schools and their “diversity” offices complied, in some cases cheerfully, and if President Trump wants to reverse the damage done by the letter, he’ll have to do more than simply revoke the letter. Universities were instructed to treat treat sexual assault broadly in the letter from Obama’s Department of Education, essentially to get involved in any and all sexual conduct between students. Further, they were encouraged to abandon in their systems the protections Americans enjoy in the court system when accused of criminal acts, including the right to effective counsel, cross-examination of witnesses, object to false or prejudicial evidence, and a high standard of proof. The letter’s non-binding recommendations, like some sort of cultural Marxist CIA, “activated” fellow travelers in the universities to regulate campus sexual relations. Universities expelled countless young men on flimsy accusations. Many of those men in turn sued universities for depriving them of due process — and the courts have generally looked favorably on their claims, at least when they come from state universities. The Trump administration has rescinded these much-derided Title IX sexual assault guidelines. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos has vowed to open a rulemaking procedure to set forth legally binding guidelines. But will liberty return to the universities, and due process and fairness to student disciplinary proceedings? And will the insanity of university bureaucrats adjudicating assault allegations disappear and die? Sadly, to quote “The Princess Bride,” the insanity is only mostly dead. And, that means it is more than slightly alive. Why? Because the nature of the administrative state and its ideological allies in higher education will together ensure nothing much will change. The new regulations will take years to be promulgated and settle after an inevitable court challenge. In the meantime, the universities will cling to the Obama-era non-binding rules. The Title IX regulation serves as an admonitory tale to show how the administrative state and its sympathizers can so easily evade democratic oversight to promote their agenda in hidden ways. Title IX’s original purpose was simply to guarantee better funding for girls’ sports, commensurate with their interest. But, the Department of Education and university bureaucrats perverted this mandate. First, it became an edict requiring equal funding for boys and girls sports, thus eliminating many boys’ teams and leaving many girls’ teams rosters unfilled. In addition, Title IX, mirroring development in Title VII, which prohibits sexual discrimination in employment, also began to mandate elimination of sexual harassment on campus. And Obama’s Department of Education took the next step in the “Dear Colleague” letter by requiring universities to come up with sexual assault guidelines. University administrators seemed happy to be “forced” to grow their bureaucratic empires and hire more investigators and Title IX resource coordinators. The Obama administration’s decision to regulate sexual assault in this way was a huge and bizarre legal step. Sexual harassment for the most part includes things that are generally legal outside an employment context. Men can say sexually demeaning things to women who are on the street or guests in private homes without legal, if not social, consequence. But sexual assault is already illegal. The criminal law handles rape, fondling, and all unwanted physical contact. What the Obama administration’s letter did was require universities to create shadow courts to enforce already prohibited behavior. Beyond instituting duplicative enforcement mechanisms, the letter was notable for its unlawfulness. Agency regulations adopted after a rulemaking procedure require public comment and permit subsequent court challenge, and they have the force of law. In contrast, the “Dear Colleague” letter, later formulated as a “policy guidance,” never became a formal, binding regulation, and so avoided public input and judicial oversight. Instead, the policy guidelines constituted a threat — follow our rules or we’ll withhold your funding. “You don’t like that?” the Obama administration said, “See ya’ in court.” And not surprisingly, there was not a single college or university in the country that said: “We won’t set up these stupid pseudo-courts. We believe in due process and fairness and freedom for our students! See you in court, Department of Education.” Instead, the universities welcomed these rules. And why not? University administrators seemed happy to be “forced” to grow their bureaucratic empires and hire more investigators and Title IX resource coordinators. With government-guaranteed student loans funding the whole show, universities can always pass on these costs to students. Working hand-in-glove, the universities helped the Obama administration stuff the university staffs with more fellow-travelers committed to regulating and politicizing sexual relations. The Obama administration demonstrated the power of agencies to transform culture without a democratic mandate in another “Dear Colleague” letter about transgender students sent to schools in May, 2016. This DOE letter instructed educational institutions to let transgender students use the bathrooms and locker rooms corresponding to their stated sex identification, and made referring to an individual using the biologically correct pronoun a civil rights offense. The position outlined in this second letter has little public support outside of leftwing cultural hideouts. But the universities again cheerfully complied, taking advantage of their already well-staffed diversity bureaucracies. Notice the absurdity of this situation. Unmoored from its original intent involving girls’ sports, Title IX had become a well-funded mechanism to shove leftwing ideas alien to most Americans down their throats. Both public and private institutions were forced to sing — and fund — the same song. Then, there was the unexpected election of Trump. DeVos revoked the transgender letter as one of her first acts as head of the DOE. She has also recently revoked the sexual assault letter. In its place, the DOE has published “Interim Guidance” and has promised to initiate a rulemaking procedure that will provide definitive (and legally binding) requirements for sexual assault proceedings on school campuses. Though hardly perfect, the Trump administration’s guidance is a marked improvement over MSU’s current guidelines. For instance, the guidance mandates equal access to evidence and witnesses. Yet, the guidance still fails to guarantee certain basic protections, leaving key matters up to the discretion of universities. For instance, it gives universities the option of adopting a clear and convincing evidence standard, while allowing universities to maintain the less protective “preponderance of evidence” standard that the “Dear Colleague” letter required. Have universities vowed to abandon their old procedures based upon the revoked “Dear Colleague” letter in favor of the Interim Guidance? No. Even as U.S. Courts of Appeal continue to find them unconstitutional, universities appear likely to keep the Obama-era rules until the DOE forces their hand with legally-binding regulations that could take years to come. “At this time, we will continue to follow our current polices and procedure for addressing matters of sexual misconduct on our campus,” University of Michigan spokeswoman Kim Broekhuizen said in what has been a typical response to DeVos’s revocation. “We will be following the rulemaking process closely.” The hypocrisy here is staggering. When the Obama administration publishes its non-binding letter, the universities act as if the instructions are law. They choose not to challenge the letter in court. But when the Trump administration revokes that letter and replaces it, the universities yawn. They continue Obama’s policy, and happily spend the money defending those policies in court as more and more judges rule them unconstitutional. Perhaps, the right word is not hypocrisy, but collusion. Democratic government and academic bureaucrats have the same political agenda and the same economic and social incentives to further each other’s goals. Even when the Democrats are out of political power, their allies in academia continue their work. They receive good press. After all, they couch their arguments in terms of campus safety for women — which is of course a proper goal. The university at which I teach, Michigan State, has yet to decide what to do about the Obama-era sexual assault guidance. When DeVos revoked the transgendered guidance, MSU announced that the revocation “does not have any immediate impact on the way we interpret our policies or provide protections on our campus.” And that seems to be the reaction of other universities. So what can be done to force the hand of the wayward academic bureaucrats to follow the U.S. Constitution absent endless trips to the federal courts? When DeVos announced the Interim Regulations, she also promised the DOE will initiate a rulemaking process for binding regulations that the universities would have no choice but to follow. This DOE rulemaking is a chance to return due process and common sense to campus. The obviously correct policy is to refer allegations of criminal behavior to those trained to deal with it: the police and the court system. Until there is an arrest, college administrators should use their common sense to ensure the safety of students involved in allegations of sexual assault. Administrators should take immediate protective action if necessary, perhaps after consulting law enforcement. Once the criminal justice system has done its work, universities can do theirs, either by expelling guilty students, who for whatever reason are not imprisoned, or by imposing some other sanction. But, the universities and their diversity bureaucrats will be fighting for their lives in this rulemaking. And, they receive good press. After all, they couch their arguments in terms of campus safety for women — which is of course a proper goal. In response, DOE in its rule making must be made to see that kangaroo courts will not be an effective bulwark against sexual assault. Experience shows that university bureaucrats can protect the rights of neither accused nor accusers — and, in the end, unjust procedures create little more than contempt for the law. The new DOE regulations can solve this problem by making universities first take immediate measures to protect students, and then use the tried and true methods for judging those accused of crimes: the courts and the U.S. Constitution. Adam Candeub is a professor of law at Michigan State University where he teaches administrative law and directs its IP and communications law program. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Jan 17 2018, 05:28 AM Post #5 |
|
http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/sports/college/auburn/2018/01/16/after-auburns-title-ix-sanctions-lifted-landon-rice-lands-jacksonville-state/1036946001/ After Auburn's Title IX sanctions lifted, Landon Rice lands at Jacksonville State Matthew Stevens, Montgomery Advertiser Published 12:46 p.m. CT Jan. 16, 2018 AUBURN – Landon, Rice, the player Auburn University found “responsible” for a sexual assault while a freshman tight end, has agreed to transfer to Jacksonville State. The news was reported via a Twitter message sent out Monday evening by Jacksonville State tight ends coach J.R. Sandlin. JSU athletics director Greg Seitz issued a media statement on the matter saying JSU “conducted a very thorough investigation surrounding all of the facts on Landon Rice, just like we do on any of our recruits.” “After speaking with several officials from Auburn University and getting all of the facts surrounding the investigation, and after meeting with Landon, we decided to allow Landon to enroll at JSU and join our football program,” Seitz’s statement read. More: Landon Rice’s attorneys claim a grand jury declined to indict former Auburn TE Rice, a former four-star prospect from Rome, Ga., was dismissed before ever playing a game for Auburn after being accused of and investigated in regards to a sexual assault allegation. The Auburn University Title IX investigation ultimately found him “responsible” from an incident dating back to April 2016 but Rice was never charged with a crime. Auburn denied Rice’s attempts to appeal the school’s ruling, and at the time, the university banned him from stepping foot on campus until the fall of 2024. Seitz’s statement also cited an Auburn memorandum of final disposition, issued by Auburn University Title IX coordinator Kelley Taylor on Nov. 7, 2017, saying sanctions levied against Rice as a result of Auburn’s Title IX investigation have been lifted. “This memorandum is to confirm that, effective September 26, 2017, all sanctions imposed upon Landon Jerry Rice as a result of (the Title IX probe) expired,” the memorandum stated. “And, as of that date, he was returned to the status of ‘good standing’ at Auburn University.” In multiple text messages released to the Montgomery Advertiser by attorney Jeff Herman, Rice apologizes to the alleged victim despite the alleged victim repeatedly telling Rice to discontinue any contact immediately. According to the released text messages, the alleged victim began a text conversation with Rice just six days after she claims to have been raped by the former Auburn tight end. Auburn head coach Gus Malzahn announced after the 51-14 victory over Arkansas State on Sept. 10 that Rice, a four-star prospect, had left the football program for “personal reasons.” Malzahn refused any comment on the situation involving Rice Landon Rice Statement Augusta Dowd, who was one of three attorneys hired to represent Rice in this matter, stated the accusations made against the former Auburn tight end were “false accusations and fundamental unfairness” and also claimed a state grand jury declined to indict Rice for any crime after he alledgedly passed a lie detector test while being questioned on the matter. “Landon was projected to start as tight end for the Aubrn Tigers, but two days before their opening game against Clemson, false accusations and fundamental unfairness combined to prevent that from happening,” Dowds statement reads. “For the past several days, Landon and his family have been subjected to prejudicial and incorrect commentary in an environment that has not permitted them a full opportunity to be heard. Landon has not been charged with any criminal offense. When the true facts are revealed, those who made false accusations and vilified Landon will be held accountable.” The 6-foot-5, 250-pound Rice spent last season at Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College where he caught eight passes for 102 yards in nine games. Rice an early enrollee to Auburn’s 2016 recruiting class, was ranked as the 10th-best tight end coming out of high school. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |







9:17 AM Jul 11