Chris Jans Original Thread

[shoxlax]

Are they random? Just trying to make sense of this guys tweets.

[Kung Wu]

Never said it was legit. He seems to have a bit of knowledge that checks out according to a couple of conversations on there.

Obviously a shell acct but still a bit curious

One thing's for sure: Stan Gable makes @ShockerFever look like a choir boy.

[shoxlax]

Fair enough. The motive of the tweets still remain a subplot whether warranted or not.

[jocoshock]

Out of left field..

Kenny Manigualt..
@kmangoat: Need all my followers to get on board with #bringbackjans he always stayed on me and pushed me to get better when I was at Wichita state

@ram:onClemente: Jan's recruited me from Illinois State & stuck with me the whole time. I never knew Coach Marshall I knew Jans when I signed. #BringBackJans

[1972Shocker]

The discussion on sexual harassment is interesting but not totally relevant nor, IMHO is the 4 second video. I think the most relevant document we have seen is the termination letter from BGSU.

Sexual harassment was never a topic of the letter. Chris was terminated because his conduct based on eye witness accounts and his own admissions violated the personal conduct provisions of his employment contract resulting in a breach of contract and allowing him to be fired for cause. Yes, BGSU could have given him a 2nd chance and endeavored to get Chris help but they obviously made the judgment that that was not in their best interest.

If Chris did, in fact, deny he was the BGSU head basketball coach which is alleged, although I don't think Chris admitted to that, would that not be an indication that he knew, despite being 3 sheets to the wind, that his conduct was inappropriate.

You can opine that BGSU should have given Chris a 2nd chance but they clearly are under no obligation to do so and clearly believed it was not in their interest to do so.

Chris made some bad choices on that night and he conducted himself in a bad way and now he is paying the price. A very, very steep price unfortunately. Fair, unfair? I don't know. When has life been totally fair?

I hope Chris can do what he drills into his players. Rebound, rebound, rebound.

[shoxlax]

While the obvious observation is that Chris put himself in a position that was irresponsible for a public figure, the whole role of the staff and assistants with him remain a mystery. Were they interviewed? Were they given immunity? Why in God's name didn't they drag him out of there when he started to make an ass of himself?

If my boss was acting like that and I knew my future depended on his future I would've drug him out the joint so fast there would've been a sonic boom.

[Dave Stalwart]

I get the feeling they didn't think he was acting that bad. Part of me feels like either no one is fired or all of them involved should be fired. Doesn't it say the same thing by association about "the way THEY were behaving in public?"

If the issue is the way a public figure represented the university badly, what protects the other staffers here?

I suppose the answer is that the third party wasn't interested in who the other people were and didn't make mental note of any of their actions.

[ShockTalk]

The discussion on sexual harassment is interesting but not totally relevant nor, IMHO is the 4 second video.

If one only sees the "4 second" video, I could see the harassment discussion. If you see the "7 second" video, no. Enlarge the video and you'll see the lady was not the least bit upset. Everything else in this area is probably hearsay.

[jdshock]

If one only sees the "4 second" video, I could see the harassment discussion. If you see the "7 second" video, no. Enlarge the video and you'll see the lady was not the least bit upset. Everything else in this area is probably hearsay.

The sexual harassment discussion arose because some posters were concerned that this behavior did not arise to the level of sexual harassment. Sexual harassment tends to be in a workplace, and this type of behavior is certainly sexual harassment.

Since this occurred at a bar, it is more accurate to categorize it as a sexual assault assuming there was not explicit consent. Appearing to not be "the least bit upset" is not explicit consent.

[wusphlash]

The arguments in this thread have made me lose track of what I suspected occurred.
1) The women being "harassed" were part of Chris' party? T or F?
2) The women being "harassed" have not filed complaints? T or F?
3) The video taking and e-mail were done by a 3rd party? T or F?
4) The 3rd party observer initiated contact? T or F?
5) The incident occurred around midnight? T or F?

Answers?

[Dave Stalwart]

Answers?

All true I believe.

[SHOXAAC]

If one only sees the "4 second" video, I could see the harassment discussion. If you see the "7 second" video, no. Enlarge the video and you'll see the lady was not the least bit upset. Everything else in this area is probably hearsay.

I didn't realize one could CSI style analyze 7 seconds of video, ascertain what was said and done prior and after the video...and to read her mind as to her psychological mind set. I'm impressed.

[_kai_]

I didn't realize one could CSI style analyze 7 seconds of video, ascertain what was said and done prior and after the video...and to read her mind as to her psychological mind set. I'm impressed.

https://youtu.be/msX4oAXpvUE

[ShockTalk]

The sexual harassment discussion arose because some posters were concerned that this behavior did not arise to the level of sexual harassment. Sexual harassment tends to be in a workplace, and this type of behavior is certainly sexual harassment.

Since this occurred at a bar, it is more accurate to categorize it as a sexual assault assuming there was not explicit consent. Appearing to not be "the least bit upset" is not explicit consent.

I didn't realize one could CSI style analyze 7 seconds of video, ascertain what was said and done prior and after the video...and to read her mind as to her psychological mind set. I'm impressed.

Gentlemen. We simply do not know if there was or was not consent (most likely not). I felt the 7 second video put more doubt on the situation than the 4. Harassment was not mentioned in the termination letter and has not, at this time anyway, been acted upon by anyone. However, now that the evenings events have made national news, I wouldn't be surprised that someone who may not have taken any offense to Jans actions (even if we do), might now see $ signs.

I am not in the least bit condoning what Jans was doing and, had I been there, would be upset to see such actions. However, unless certain circumstances warranted it, I should ignore it, complain to the establishment, or, better, leave, and then make my point with BGSU. My position with the video is that had she turned, looked upset, or slapped Jans, a sexual harassment/assault would have been highly likely and a point of discussion. As it was, it may be or not fit the completed definition of the act. @SHOXMVC:, I simply stated what I saw, not what was in her mind. She may have very well been boiling inside. I don't know. We're all guessing. @jdshock:, if she had turned and said "I wondered when you'd notice me", I'll grant that Jans act may still legally be sexual assault (I'm not an attorney), but what would be the purpose, except for his inappropriateness. I felt the discussion was more viable talking about what was admitted, his actions in general being inappropriate, and not living up to BGSU standards that would terminate his contract.

[SHOXAAC]

Gentlemen. We simply do not know if there was or was not consent (most likely not). I felt the 7 second video put more doubt on the situation than the 4. Harassment was not mentioned in the termination letter and has not, at this time anyway, been acted upon by anyone. However, now that the evenings events have made national news, I wouldn't be surprised that someone who may not have taken any offense to Jans actions (even if we do), might now see $ signs.

I am not in the least bit condoning what Jans was doing and, had I been there, would be upset to see such actions. However, unless certain circumstances warranted it, I should ignore it, complain to the establishment, or, better, leave, and then make my point with BGSU. My position with the video is that had she turned, looked upset, or slapped Jans, a sexual harassment/assault would have been highly likely and a point of discussion. As it was, it may be or not fit the completed definition of the act. @SHOXMVC:, I simply stated what I saw, not what was in her mind. She may have very well been boiling inside. I don't know. We're all guessing. @jdshock:, if she had turned and said "I wondered when you'd notice me", I'll grant that Jans act may still legally be sexual assault (I'm not an attorney), but what would be the purpose, except for his inappropriateness. I felt the discussion was more viable talking about what was admitted, his actions in general being inappropriate, and not living up to BGSU standards that would terminate his contract.

I appreciate your take. Please don't take offense to my ramblings. What about this...girl that was slapped on the trunk by CJ knew it was CJ. If it was a schmo like me, she very well would have put her high heel in my low crotch. Because she knew it was the high profile basketball coach at BGU, she frooze not knowing how to react immediately.