David Boren

[Midtowner]

^

There may be issues since Boren is still employed by the university. particularly if they have reason to believe there have been other incidences, perhaps more recently.

I forgot about that. The outside law firm makes more sense now. I can definitely see the current administration being concerned about being sued by Boren as a public employee against an employer.

[Mr. Blue Sky]

^

That bible thing was in 1978 and after his opponent publically stated Boren was gay.

Things were very, very different in 1978, especially in Oklahoma and especially around this issue. So much so, that these types of accusaions were enough to ruin someone's life, even if they weren't a politician.

I knew a lot of people who were deeply in the closet at that time, and none were public figures. Couldn't even be honest with themselves, let alone others. And frankly, that is more a commentary on the culture at the time.

It's entirely possible Boren didn't believe he was gay when he made that pronouncement and we still don't know if he is or isn't.


But who cares if he's gay, bi or otherwise? Sexual harassment is the issue. The fact that it keeps being brought up that he may be gay or have those tendancies tells me that many still view that as some sort of huge character flaw in itself.

And even if you take the leap and believe Boren completely lied about his sexuality, do the same people that have a big issue with that -- something that happened over 40 years ago -- have the same condemnation for politicians and public figures that openly and frequently lie about things that actually matter?

I know it was 1978. I also said in my post that coming out as gay then would have been the political kiss of death. I never said it matters if he is gay or not - only his lying about it for political purposes. And yes, he knew he was gay then. He had already been caught at a state lodge by Reuel Little, a politician in his own right, cheating on Little’s daughter with a young man. I think it does matter and revisionism by excusing his deceptiveness because of any reason is just wrong.

To Dan, Your post was clearly referencing Pete’s and what I wrote. I am not a bigot. I said everything you and Pete said. I just don’t excuse lying at great lengths about it to just win political office.

Too many things go way back. Not being gay, the blatant deception which I can’t accept. We can agree on disagreeing about that. But I felt very much like my words were taken wrong by you and Pete both. I don’t care about his sexual orientation, but only feel his word means little when it comes to things about his life - straight, gay or otherwise. That’s why it matters - to me - today with these accusations.

[Pete]

OSBI now taking charge of the investigation:

https://newsok.com/article/5627176/o...tigating-boren

[Pete]

Mr. Blue Sky, my comments were more general in nature, as almost every article about these issues with Boren brings up the homosexuality angle, and thus conflates it with very serious allegations which could be criminal in nature.

I'm not a Boren apologist but just in general, I wouldn't judge anyone who was forced into denying being gay in the late '70s, particularly in Okahoma. And he was forced by his opponent. He didn't have the luxury of not denying, as that would have been equally devastating to his career and aspirations. And importantly, his sexuallity had no bearing on his qualifications for public office or anything else, so who was harmed?

While lying is never a good thing, there are degrees and this seems like a pretty minor transgression in the grand scheme of things.

[catch22]

^ I’d say even today in Oklahoma it’s a risky proposition to be openly gay in any role of power or authority. James Cooper in OKC really just now broke that ceiling, and time will tell if others can do the same.

[Midtowner]

^ I’d say even today in Oklahoma it’s a risky proposition to be openly gay in any role of power or authority. James Cooper in OKC really just now broke that ceiling, and time will tell if others can do the same.

Cooper is in maybe the bluest political subdivision in the entire State. Let's not pretend James Cooper would win a race in Hobart.

[Pete]

Cooper is in maybe the bluest political subdivision in the entire State. Let's not pretend James Cooper would win a race in Hobart.

You could argue he would have a tough time in almost any other city council ward. And there are at least a few where being openly gay would have effectively killed his chances.

[catch22]

Cooper is in maybe the bluest political subdivision in the entire State. Let's not pretend James Cooper would win a race in Hobart.

That’s my point. It’s political suicide in most of the state even in 2019. It’s excusible to lie about it, IMHO. It’s a no-win situation really.

[Pete]

Boren accuser praised him to investigators hired by OU

https://newsok.com/article/5627300/b...rs-hired-by-ou

The OU graduate now accusing retired President David Boren of sexual battery told investigators in February "that never happened."

"It's just been clear ... that there's just a political vendetta against him," Jess Eddy, 29, told attorneys for Jones Day, the law firm hired by the University of Oklahoma last fall to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct against Boren. "That's what's going on."

Eddy praised Boren, 77, for "the quality of his character."

"He was nothing ever to me but encouraging, supportive," Eddy said, according to a transcript of the 90-minute interview.

[okatty]

This story is written up in The NY Times

David Boren, Former University of Oklahoma President, Faces Sexual Misconduct Allegations

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/201...stigation.html

[Pete]

http://www.oudaily.com/news/alleged-...e765b91b2.html

Eddy said he believes the report was filed by Belinda Biscoe, senior associate vice president of university outreach, in November 2018. If Eddy’s allegation is true, the report came after months of personal and professional dispute between Biscoe and Eddy when they worked together from July 2017 to March 2018.

Eddy said he told Biscoe the details of Boren’s alleged misconduct in 2017 in a private conversation he never meant to be shared, and Biscoe was the only current university administrator who knew of Eddy’s story.

While Biscoe is a mandatory reporter under OU’s Title IX system, more than a year passed between the time Eddy said he told her about his alleged interactions with Boren, and the November 2018 Title IX report.

By way of backround, people in positions where they are deemed mandatory reporters under Title IX are required to report 'as soon as they become aware' of an incident.

Why would this woman report this a full year after she was allegedly told about it?

[Lafferty Daniel]

http://www.oudaily.com/news/alleged-...e765b91b2.html




By way of backround, people in positions where they are deemed mandatory reporters under Title IX are required to report 'as soon as they become aware' of an incident.

Why would this woman report this a full year after she was allegedly told about it?

Is this a serious question? Because unless I'm missing something, the answer is pretty obvious. She was trying to protect either her job or Boren or both. Which is why this wasn't made public until after Boren left.

[Pete]

Is this a serious question? Because unless I'm missing something, the answer is pretty obvious. She was trying to protect either her job or Boren or both. Which is why this wasn't made public until after Boren left.

Boren's last day was August 1st. This report was filed in November.

[Lafferty Daniel]

Boren's last day was August 1st. This report was filed in November.

That's.....exactly what I said. She wasn't going to bring this up while Boren was still her boss.

[Pete]

That's.....exactly what I said. She wasn't going to bring this up while Boren was still her boss.

He had not been the boss of anyone for over 3 months before she filed her report.

[Lafferty Daniel]

He had not been the boss of anyone for over 3 months before she filed her report.

Am I taking crazy pills? Why can't you understand this? She wasn't going to make this public when Boren was her boss. Do we agree on that? Because to me that's pretty easy to see.

So, you think since he resigned August 1st that she should have made this public August 2nd? Waiting until November, which is only three months, is just too long for you?

[Pete]

Am I taking crazy pills? Why can't you understand this? She wasn't going to make this public when Boren was her boss. Do we agree on that? Because to me that's pretty easy to see.

So, you think since he resigned August 1st that she should have made this public August 2nd? Waiting until November, which is only three months, is just too long for you?

Yes, because law states she is REQUIRED to report as soon as she was made aware.

So even if you want to use the excuse you are providing (which is highly speculative and still does not absolve her) then she had zero excuse to wait three more months.

And a reminder, the non-reporting of similar issues at Penn State caused the university president, their footballl coach and lots of others to lose their jobs.


I happen to believe at least some of these allegations against Boren are likely to be true.

But there is also a separate issue of why this is coming out now, especially given everything else that has been happening at OU with Gallogly and the regents.

[jn1780]

Probably not the right thread. But, I wonder if any of this post Boren saga is related.

https://newsok.com/article/5631228/s...s-ou-president

[OKCretro]

https://oklahoman.com/article/563259...false-rankings

[jerrywall]

https://oklahoman.com/article/563259...false-rankings

Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't pick a school based on some ranking/listing. And if I did, it wouldn't be the 45th one down the list. I could see choosing a top 10 school, but I feel like when you're getting much lower on the list than that, you'd be looking at other factors. It's not like OU is an unknown quantity.

[Pete]

Also, the numbers that were fudged were a very small percentage of the total ranking.

Any impact on the final rank had to have been very minimal.

[Jeepnokc]

Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't pick a school based on some ranking/listing. And if I did, it wouldn't be the 45th one down the list. I could see choosing a top 10 school, but I feel like when you're getting much lower on the list than that, you'd be looking at other factors. It's not like OU is an unknown quantity.

And...she transferred to Univ of Houston which is ranked much lower than OU with a 171st overall and 95th in Business school category. Wonder when she transferred?

[David]

That lawsuit looks like a waste of time and money, and I suspect there is more to the story.

[ditm4567]

And...she transferred to Univ of Houston which is ranked much lower than OU with a 171st overall and 95th in Business school category. Wonder when she transferred?

Spring 2018 semester

[Lafferty Daniel]

Also, the numbers that were fudged were a very small percentage of the total ranking.

Any impact on the final rank had to have been very minimal.

That's not true. They went from being ranked #98 in 2017 to in the 120's in 2018. So it obviously dropped them quite a bit.