|
|
Post by jdogge on Jun 8, 2017 9:26:04 GMT -8
If they don't, what will you do? Will they lose you as a 'fan'. Yes I will cancel all my season tickets in every sport etc.................is that what you want to hear? Removing yourself from Benny's House might be a good start. |
|
bbfan
Freshman
Posts: 204 
|
Post by bbfan on Jun 8, 2017 9:26:25 GMT -8
I know he pleaded guilty and is a registered sex offender...good grief I cant believe you are defending this Were you there in court? Have you seen (1) the investigative report or (2) any trial transcript? An 18 year old man can have sex with a woman one day before her 18th birthday and end up a registered sex offender for it. So, unless you know some facts that we don't or believe completely what is printed in contemporary newspapers [Sorry, I don't], you are jumping to some very inappropriate conclusions. Please share what you know. I am going off of the facts as presented. Also we do know it wasn't an 18 year old/17 year old situation |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jun 8, 2017 9:32:44 GMT -8
Agreed. The 2nd part is where I get hung up I guess. What's the end game? Is it to let the world know that LH did something horrible and despicable when he was 15? Is it to bring about awareness and reform when it comes to the university admissions process and vetting by the athletic department? If that's the case, are we saying that SO's should not have the opportunity to go to school and to participate in athletics? Or is it because it's a juicy topic that's sure to bring about discussion, clicks, comments? There is no end game. They're not a social justice organization, they're a newspaper. It's an informative story about a person the public has interest in at this point in time. You can say it's not relevant, but then you'd have to say that about any story pertaining to any athlete about something that happened in their past, good or bad....and nobody seemed to have an issue with the article written about Tres Tinkle dealing with the death of a friend while in high school, or any other off the field issue a kid is dealing with. They are not a social justice organization. you are correct. By they are an important and influential component of society. They are a news organization and they have to be aware of what is both moral and ethical to do. They have a duty to be aware of the outcome of what they write. We all have a duty to be aware of the consequences of our actions. It is impossible for a newspaper to divorce itself from the implications of what they write. because it is impossible for a newspaper to completely and totally report on all things without bias. A newspaper always strives to publish "news worthy" things. which means they will always target people in the spot light or activities of public interest. which means that newspapers will disproportionately affect the lives of people in the spot light, or the events of social consequence. They cannot, in good ethics, remove consideration of how their reporting will affect the player and the victim and all the other parties involved. you have to balance the impact of what will happen with apparent social good or change that will come from the reporting. This article gives us no actions to take, and is the retelling of something negative, which has reached conclusion. There is no point to the story other than to be "news worthy". That is of course what a newspaper wants to do, but there was no other consideration taken. in other words, there is no social good, no social change but large potential impact to the parties being reported. When a newspaper reports on un actionable things, say.. the local bowling alley burned down... there is not negative consequences to the parties involved. In fact, usually the opposite, as sympathy is gained. This is a story that the only potential social outcome is negative to both Luke and the victim and Oregon State, but conversely positive to the paper and its desire for notoriety and money. This was a self-serving story that left a sea of emotion, anger and confusion in its wake. |
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Jun 8, 2017 9:36:28 GMT -8
Funny how people only question negative information. Nobody says "I don't trust the Oregonian" when it's a positive story with far less factual support than what's reported in this story.
|
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Jun 8, 2017 9:46:48 GMT -8
When a newspaper reports on un actionable things, say.. the local bowling alley burned down... there is not negative consequences to the parties involved. In fact, usually the opposite, as sympathy is gained. This is a story that the only potential social outcome is negative to both Luke and the victim and Oregon State, but conversely positive to the paper and its desire for notoriety and money. This was a self-serving story that left a sea of emotion, anger and confusion in its wake. I think the danger there, of course, is the social outcome of them sitting on this information if (God forbid) Heimlich were to commit a similar offense in the future. I mean...how do you NOT report this if you know about it? I am NOT comparing Luke Heimlich to Jerry Sandusky, but it seems like not reporting his past transgressions made the situation far worse in retrospect. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jun 8, 2017 9:48:14 GMT -8
Funny how people only question negative information. Nobody says "I don't trust the Oregonian" when it's a positive story with far less factual support than what's reported in this story. It comes back to outcome and social impact. fluff pieces make people seem nice, sure. but the impact is limited and they are all easily forgotten. Filler fluff pieces get read because people like a big story, but the ultimate impact of the writing is neutral. It only becomes unethical when the "positive" thing being reported could be hugely influential in their life. then it is really important to ensure it is accurate. Google Luke Heimlich right now. The first return is the O-live article about him being a sex offender. This is a large impact. |
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Jun 8, 2017 10:00:22 GMT -8
Were you there in court? Have you seen (1) the investigative report or (2) any trial transcript? An 18 year old man can have sex with a woman one day before her 18th birthday and end up a registered sex offender for it. So, unless you know some facts that we don't or believe completely what is printed in contemporary newspapers [Sorry, I don't], you are jumping to some very inappropriate conclusions. Please share what you know. I am going off of the facts as presented. Also we do know it wasn't an 18 year old/17 year old situation I didn't say it was a 17/18 year old situation. And unless you were part of the investigation or sat on the jury you only know what was published on O-Live which isn't always accurate. So you need to leave it to the University to handle and support this kid for the 6+ years he's spent turning his life around. |
|
bbfan
Freshman
Posts: 204
|
Post by bbfan on Jun 8, 2017 10:06:29 GMT -8
He very well may have turned his life around. This whole thread started with how awful the Oregonian was for publishing the article. They have the right to report this story and everyone can make of it what they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by jrbeavo on Jun 8, 2017 10:15:20 GMT -8
When a newspaper reports on un actionable things, say.. the local bowling alley burned down... there is not negative consequences to the parties involved. In fact, usually the opposite, as sympathy is gained. This is a story that the only potential social outcome is negative to both Luke and the victim and Oregon State, but conversely positive to the paper and its desire for notoriety and money. This was a self-serving story that left a sea of emotion, anger and confusion in its wake. I think the danger there, of course, is the social outcome of them sitting on this information if (God forbid) Heimlich were to commit a similar offense in the future. I mean...how do you NOT report this if you know about it? I am NOT comparing Luke Heimlich to Jerry Sandusky, but it seems like not reporting his past transgressions made the situation far worse in retrospect. I will tell you exactly why, because in the case of Penn State there are two important distinctions. First, obviously we are talking about the acts of a 15 year old vs an adult. Second, in the case of Penn State, the apparatus around the school and the athletic department conspired to keep a predator safe from prosecution. There were crimes being committed contemporaneously, but they were being concealed in the interest of the football program. This situation appears to be isolated to one event (or several events with one victim) and it was reported and prosecuted. Punishment was meted out as the law saw fit, and by all measures it appears that Luke has not stepped out of line since. The question is, and it is a fair one, what does society want to do with those who commit heinous acts at a young age? After being punished and complying with court orders..is he then banished to a life of isolation and shame? If you say you can't play baseball, does that mean he can't be a garbage hauler, or a landscaper? Where do we draw the line on what is and what is not acceptable? Would you have a problem with him attending college, or is it just that we have to take away sports? At what point do we ask the Oregonian to conduct criminal background checks on all subjects of news in their paper? Did they investigate the three heroes on the MAX train who were killed or attacked? If so, would they consider it newsworthy to report any disagreeable findings? As much as some of you want to parse this whole thing to defend the article as performing some greater function for society, I call BS. This did nothing other than harm Luke and by extension the little girl. Unfortunately for Luke, he is responsible for that ultimately. |
|
sabzi
Freshman
Posts: 157
|
Post by sabzi on Jun 8, 2017 10:31:39 GMT -8
Absolutely disgusting news. Remove him from the team just like teams are removing him from their draft boards.
|
|
|
|
Post by jrbeavo on Jun 8, 2017 10:41:44 GMT -8
Absolutely disgusting news. Remove him from the team just like teams are removing him from their draft boards. The only way that you can legitimately do that is if the school discovered this news at the same time we all did. If that is the case, then there would be some justification for immediate suspension. If what I believe is true is actually true, then they understood the situation and did their diligence and decided that having him play baseball at Oregon State was acceptable. Casey is someone I trust, and if he decided that Luke's character was such that he would be welcome, then he can't very well turn around and say that it was okay for him to play until such time as everyone found out, then we had to get rid of him. Does that make any sense? |
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Jun 8, 2017 10:44:01 GMT -8
Google Luke Heimlich right now. The first return is the O-live article about him being a sex offender. This is a large impact. This is, of course, because he IS a sex offender, and that should carry a large impact. I don't care if he was 15. A 17 year old was building pipe bombs to attempt some sort of attack at West Albany High School a few years back....should we not report about that six years later if he becomes notable for something positive later in life? He was a minor, his crimes landed him in the juvenile system same as Luke. I guess I'm not clear why one is a sealed record and the other is public knowledge. The Oregonian is not the bad guy here.....it's a crappy situation, but to blame the Oregonian is just insane. Luke committed the crime, Luke failed to make his required check in that would've kept this from being public record....I don't think he has anyone to blame but himself for what's coming his way now. My sincere hope is that he's able to weather the storm and continue to have a positive impact on society. |
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Jun 8, 2017 10:47:59 GMT -8
I can tell you that my 7-year-old son got autographs from all of the OSU draft eligible players after an ACU game EXCEPT for Luke. Don't know if typically interacts with kids, but he certainly did not on that day. really dude? what color were his shoe laces? WTF was this response? The question was asked if Luke participated in OSU baseball camps, and I simply stated that he didn't interact with kids on the day I was at a baseball game, while many other players did. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jun 8, 2017 11:24:32 GMT -8
Google Luke Heimlich right now. The first return is the O-live article about him being a sex offender. This is a large impact. This is, of course, because he IS a sex offender, and that should carry a large impact. I don't care if he was 15. A 17 year old was building pipe bombs to attempt some sort of attack at West Albany High School a few years back....should we not report about that six years later if he becomes notable for something positive later in life? He was a minor, his crimes landed him in the juvenile system same as Luke. I guess I'm not clear why one is a sealed record and the other is public knowledge. The Oregonian is not the bad guy here.....it's a crappy situation, but to blame the Oregonian is just insane. Luke committed the crime, Luke failed to make his required check in that would've kept this from being public record....I don't think he has anyone to blame but himself for what's coming his way now. My sincere hope is that he's able to weather the storm and continue to have a positive impact on society. they are in a position of power and influence. The end result here is extra-judicial punishment. Luke Heimlich serving additional punishment that may or may not be appropriate. The problem is, there is no way to determine if the extra punishment is fair or just. All we get is what the paper chose to print and the story it chose to tell. You have clownzano writing stories about the outrage of it all, and bringing Brenda Tracy back into the fold now. I do not disagree that ultimately in the end, this is his fault. But how can a man possibly ever move on when people wish to continue to throw things back in his face? How can you justify this disconnect? Is a person allowed to move on in life or not? yes or no. If they are allowed to move on in life, after serving punishment, how is it possible to move on if it is continually brought up? You cannot defense the simultaneous notions that people should be allowed to move on, rehabilitate and join society AND that we all have a right to at all times bring up the past, publish it publicly and force this person to deal with the fallout over and over again, when doing so interferes with the ability to move on. They are mutually exclusive ideas. |
|
|
|
Post by badwack on Jun 8, 2017 11:26:13 GMT -8
Casey needs to make a statement. This is a terrible Story for all involved. I only question the timing of the revelation of the News. If Luke has been honest with OSU and the Staff I see no reason to bash Luke, OSU Baseball or Pat Casey. The Oregonian has extracted their Pound of Flesh. Likely rattled the entire Teams Composure and made everything more difficult. Just sickening and sad.
|
|
