Put yourself in the shoes of DePauw University officials and then ask yourself this question: Should a prospective student
be accepted if he has been charged with a high-profile crime?
DePauw yesterday decided the answer is no, and indefinitely deferred the enrollment of Robert Kitzinger. Kitzinger is one
of the four Carmel High School basketball team members charged with battery and criminal recklessness in connection with hazing
incidents on a bus and in a locker room last winter.
The accusations, investigations and, finally, in March, the charges, made headlines for weeks. Kitzinger, whose father, Kirk
Kitzinger, played for DePauw in the late ’70s, has been charged with four misdemeanors.
A DePauw statement said it was in the best interests of Kitzinger and other students to delay his enrollment because the
allegations are up in the air. The university will reconsider his enrollment after the criminal and civil cases are resolved,
the statement said. Ken Owen, DePauw’s executive director of media relations, refused further comment.
In other words, DePauw had to weigh respect for due process and Kitzinger’s presumed innocence against the almost-certain
circus on campus. Imagine the school paper covering the trial blow-by-blow.
Legal liability is another wild card. Every campus has its share of students with potential to stir controversy, but would
DePauw have stuck its neck out by allowing Kitzinger on campus? What if he joined a fraternity and a hazing accusation erupted?
Even if Kitzinger were nowhere near the incident, the cloud would be thicker.
What are your thoughts? Could Kitzinger have assimilated into campus life? Did the officials make the right call?
- Home
- NEWS
- REGIONAL
- THIS WEEK'S PAPER
- BLOGS
- Multimedia
- OPINION
- A&E
- LISTS
- PEOPLE
- EVENTS
- Classifieds
- Subscribe
Welcome to the archives for NewsTalk, an IBJ blog published from November 2007 through December 2010.
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
-
liek the rest of America
-
These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.
-
It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.
-
No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.
-
whoa!
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
IBJ Conversations
14 Comments
Add Comment
DePauw should not be playing the role of finding guilt or punishing a person. DePauw may develop a policy where ALL students under criminal investigation are to be rejected. But to select this one student is clearly unfair.
Dupree
Imagine *one*, just *one* slip-up where they appear in the media. "John Q Public, who ... is currently employed as a at . Some of the postings to Twitter and Facebook reveal..." If you won't talk to the media, your friends & relatives won't rat you out, they're going to have to find *something*, *anything* which they can scoop someone else on. Social networking sites have become a juicy place which saves time over retracing the steps of someone.
Are you aware of the fact the Library of Congress is keeping a copy of *every* tweet (since the day of inception)?
Indiana is one of those states which permits employment/termination at-will. If you're a black eye for your employer, how long do you think they'll keep you around?
Prospective employers will frequently do things such as obtain a copy of your credit rating. Is this any different?
The news media had convinced most of you that they were guilty, because of all the attention and headlines. Right? How many schools has the team manager involved in this lawsuit attended in the last 4 years?Don't know, well check it out, why did he leave them? Seems to me over 2 million dollars is really involved here!!!!! DePauw would welcome him with open arms,Right?