Comments on: Integrity a two-way street

By: pwt3

pwt3 — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 01:09:55 +0000

“People should be left to say whatever they want, and even though Seeberg’s family might have bashed the university, he did so due to his distraught of losing his daughter. Anyone who experiences this kind of tragedy, whatever the facts, will do the same.”

Great. So if your daughter commits suicide you can slander anyone you want. Free pass. Good to know.

By: notredamfan558

notredamfan558 — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 08:57:58 +0000

I’ve been a Notre Dame supporter all my life, both my parents are alumni of this school. Even though the investigation is not fully complete, and many details are hazy, bashing someone who committed suicide and their grieving family is beyond me. Newspapers always take one side or another, as do TV stations, and none of them ever report only the facts, this should be well-known by now. People should be left to say whatever they want, and even though Seeberg’s family might have bashed the university, he did so due to his distraught of losing his daughter. Anyone who experiences this kind of tragedy, whatever the facts, will do the same.

By: olemantj

olemantj — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 02:43:23 +0000

Thank you, Keith. Your article shows the lack of integrity Mr. Haugh has had since his days with the South Bend Tribune. I have no respect for that man as a feature writer or as a columnist. His writing style is fine (for fiction) but his lack of attention to detail/facts is rampant. The story should be pointing out the University’s responsibility to ALL parties involved, which is the right to privacy. Remember……Ms. Seeberg’s name was NOT released by the university either…..but by her parents. The questions I have regarding this tragic situation are why did she take her life only a few days after the incident purportedly took place and where is the usual suicide note.
And for those who are trying to tie the assault investigation to the Sullivan tragedy are totally off base as well. Nowhere has any media reporting on that terrible tragedy has ever asked the following question: despite Mr. Sullivan being very expressive regarding the danger of the situation both before going up on the lift and while on the lift, at no time has it been reported if he asked not to go up or, once up on the lift, if he could come down because of the danger. We have a thirst to convict people/institions for everything that happens to us in our lives. Very rarely do we ever take responsiblity for our own faults….it’s someone else’s fault I am in my situation. And be careful when you act as attorney, judge and jury before all the facts are determined.

By: jefmaj

jefmaj — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 14:13:53 +0000

Well, Father Jenkens has spoken…

http://www.southbendtribune.com/article/20101226/News01/12260305/1129/News

and it should be noted:

Suicidality and Antidepressant Drugs
Antidepressants increased the risk compared to placebo of suicidal thinking and behavior (suicidality) in children, teens, and young adults. Depression and certain other psychiatric disorders are themselves associated with increases in the risk of suicide. Patients of all ages who are started on antidepressant therapy should be monitored appropriately and observed closely for clinical worsening, suicidality, or unusual changes in behavior. EFFEXOR XR® (venlafaxine HCl) is not approved for use in children and teens.

And, I’m sure alcohol doesn’t help………………..

By: scott153

scott153 — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 10:31:19 +0000

I’m happy to have you as a classmate. Thank you for maintaining reason (and integrity) in your understanding/perspective of this series of unfortunate events surrounding ND through this past semester. Though I can see how you or I could be biased towards ND, I like to think of us as being more levelheaded than 90% of the population. @Burke123, if you truly are a Notre Dame student, I am sorry you feel that way.

Go Irish.

By: dancer1120

dancer1120 — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 23:41:51 +0000

Integrity and perfection are not synonymous. In a situation like the one the Notre Dame football program and administration has found itself this past semester, not a course of action exists which will please everyone. While no, I do not believe the Lizzy Seeberg case was handled as it could have been, I remember that hindsight is 20/20. We can bash Notre Dame for all the things it has done wrong in the investigation and suggest better ways to have handled it, but what’s done is done. Protection of the personal privacy of a student alleged to have committed a crime, whether he is a football player with a past of aggression or not, is just as important as completing an investigation properly. On the other side of the coin, Lizzy Seeberg’s family deserves to know exactly what happened to their daughter and were let down by the University’s process of investigation. Like Keith said, there are no winners here, but Notre Dame has tried to act with integrity in the face of everything that has been going on, and the Seeberg family has acted with incredible strength and integrity in the face of the terrible tragedy they have experienced. Again, integrity is not synonymous with perfection. Being a Notre Dame student, I have witnessed the progression of events this semester with a front row seat in South Bend, further ingraining my opinion that there is no way to please everyone.

Notre Dame is NOT perfect. I don’t expect it to be, as burke127 seems to expect. What I expect is that Notre Dame take responsibility for its actions and recognize its shortcomings. That, to me, is integrity, and I will never back down in my assertion that Notre Dame possesses integrity. And what I have to say to burke127 is that it seems as if you have some pent up dislike towards Notre Dame and if you can’t wait to leave in May, then maybe this university was not a fit for you. I know everyone does not love ND but if you are going to entrust your undergraduate education to a university you are doing yourself a disservice if you do not respect it and enjoy your time there. I feel bad for you burke, and I hope you did not stay here just to get that Notre Dame stamp on your diploma. I wish you luck in the future, and hope that you don’t regret your decision to graduate from a university that you will not be able to proudly name as your alma mater.

By: richardalfonse

richardalfonse — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 10:45:14 +0000

Keith,
Thank you for your excellent and wonderfully controlled article. That the Chicago Tribune printed such poorly substantiated, extremely slanted articles (and most of them deliberately in prime newspaper space) strongly indicates at least some of the editorial staff was involved in this misuse of a newspaper to satisfy personal agendas.

It would be helpful to Tribune readers to feel that the newspaper’s reporters and editors are trying to inform their readers, not manipulate them.
Reply

By: Keith Arnold

Keith Arnold — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:01:57 +0000

Watch it yourself… http://www.und.com/allaccess

By: jefmaj

jefmaj — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 22:42:36 +0000

She’s passed and since her dad was on ABC trashing ND’s handling of a “Felony”… HIPPA no longer is a concern, he’s opened several doors, and her medical/mental health reports, and her written statements, should be released (he claimed to have them off her hard drive)….. that’s a good start to full discosure……..

By: dmacirish

dmacirish — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 21:47:49 +0000

Duke. Anyone? Duke. How are those guys doing since their names were released and then later shown not to be guilty? Hmmmm….

By: jefmaj

jefmaj — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 19:58:04 +0000

Keith…. I spoke with Bill Beck from the Elkhart Truth, which ran the Haugh article in its entirety. One defense was that Dave writes for a newspaper and many sources are blogs…. we were discussing the issue as to whether Haugh had taken Kelly’s integrity statement out of context…… you quote a question from Haugh and then a larger response from Kelly than Haugh reported. Where you present to hear the question asked or what was your source for the question and BK’s fuller answer?

By: bgnd91

bgnd91 — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 18:41:30 +0000

i like how people bashing on the university for keeping quiet are completely disregarding privacy laws that ND is obligated to uphold. It really is a lose-lose for ND; they don’t say anything and they get hammered for not being ‘proactive’ and if they went out and into the media with this situation they would get hammered for violating the accused’s privacy. This is America people, you are innocent unless they can prove you guilty, not the other way around. In fact, there was so little evidence in this case that the DA didn’t even feel it was worth it to file charges! It’s not like that was a decision by ND, that was a decision by the prosecutors. Seriously, why do people have to find guilt in everything, even when the PROSECUTORS are basically admitting that there is nothing that they can go off of? As stated above, the Duke lacrosse circus proves nothing constructive happens when you blast out of the game on nothing but here-say. As for the people above acting like the university owes them some sort of explanation … why? What else can they possibly add to, “The DA didn’t feel they could file criminal charges”? Will that provide closure to the family? Absolutely not, but that’s where this thing is at and attempting to speculate that this is just all some big coverup by ND to protect its name is just foolish.

By: cailin05

cailin05 — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 16:34:54 +0000

Thank you, Keith, for writing what many of us feel, but don’t have the platform to disseminate the ideas.

By: nick3ed

nick3ed — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:36:28 +0000

There’s a very good reason why the University has not been as “transparent” as many would prefer. It’s a federal law called Family Eucational Rights and Privacy Act (see Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Educational_Rights_and_Privacy_Act).

In short, the University cannot disclose the facts without the accused studen’ts consent. As for Lizzy’s side, her parents have waived their rights under FERPA by going to the press.

As far as I can tell, the University has taken painstaking measures to comply with FERPA for the proper protection of the accused (and uncharged student) here. Although FERPA has many drawbacks, I think this is a very appropriate example of what works about it and I’m glad it’s there for the protection of my own children if and when needed.

I’m very sorry of the tragic events here, but I don’t believe the University is culpable morally or legally in any way.

By: vitaspes

vitaspes — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:19:10 +0000

Keith, why don’t you call Regis and ask him for a spot on his show.

By: vitaspes

vitaspes — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:17:37 +0000

The family wants answers – I do not know think they are going to get them, no matter how much they bash the accused and/or Notre Dame in the court of public opinion.

Good lawyers might explain this to them.

By: vegasmark

vegasmark — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 03:16:18 +0000

Very well done KA.

By: schuey73

schuey73 — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 01:04:28 +0000

I used to work in Higher Education at a small, private Catholic University (not Notre Dame). There was a report of a student being sexually assauled. The next day a student approached me and asked, “we all (students) want to know why a girl was raped and nothing is being done about it?” I looked at him and as nicely as I could I asked him, “Do you or your friends work for the university? Do you know something that I don’t? Then how do you know nothing’s being done? You might as well get used to this now, because you’re not going to hear any more about it.” I wasn’t trying to be mean or insensitive to his concerns, but the fact is there are laws that prohibit the university from talking about the details.

I saw a female student interviewed on the news after it was announced that no criminal charges would be filed. She said, “We want answers.” I’m sorry, but you’re never going to get them. Wether you like it or not the accused student has rights too. For some reason, many journalists (Keith not included) don’t seem to understand that parents and students can say what they want, but the university cannot. Right or wrong, it is what it is.

By: cbhoov144

cbhoov144 — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 00:01:18 +0000

Keith, Your reply is thoughtful, measured and well-written. Thank you. As a former journalist, I was often amazed by colleagues unable or unwilling to acknowledge that they came to a live evolving story with an inherent bias toward a particular explanation of events. Rather than tell the story, journalists often want to shape it to fit their worldview. I am not so blinded by my affinity for Notre Dame to think that the University or its football program are incapable of making mistakes. But the unprofessional vigor with which David Haugh and the Tribune has pursued this story, with little appreciation for due process and the facts, is disturbing. I enjoyed reading Haugh when he was the South Bend Tribune beat reporter covering the Irish. I don’t know what happened while he was in South Bend or since he departed for Chicago, but it seems clear that he has serious issues with the way the university functions. So many of Brian Kelly’s comments were taken out of context in order to make him appear insensitive and out of touch with the gravity of the issues at hand. (Haugh’s editors are at fault too for their misleading headlines.) He was/is a good writer. Unfortunately it appears that his ambition to be the reporter who breaks the big story is leading him to be irresponsible with his talents. Thank you, Keith, for responding as you did.

By: mburke2485

mburke2485 — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 21:15:55 +0000

Thanks Keith, much appreciated.

By: Keith Arnold

Keith Arnold — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 21:14:25 +0000

Let’s keep this civil. Deleted a few comments for obvious reasons. This site is better than personal attacks.

By: vitaspes

vitaspes — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:52:02 +0000

Great article Keith – I admire your restraint.

Much “commentary” and discussion has asked the reader, “put yourself in the Seeberg’s position.” I have and I do not know what I would do. Maybe the same thing they are. Thus far, their actions are not in question.

However, no “commentray” has asked the reader, “put yourself in the accused’s parents’ position.” I have done that. If my son told me, “dad, I did nothing wrong,” I would hope that the Notre Dame leadership protected his rights while investigating the case.

The Tribune and other less reputable commentary (hard to read sarcasm on the internet – that was it) have completely avoided the second question. Thank you for your attempt.

Ironically, most authors on the subject are guilty of the precise sin of which they accuse Notre Dame – financial gain without regard to a young person’s life.

By: papadec

papadec — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:30:43 +0000

Just how transparent would any student or journalist want the story to be – if they were alleged to have committed a sex crime?

By: papadec

papadec — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:15:20 +0000

If you are really that upset – why wait until May? Don’t go back after Christmas break. Or, would that require too much integrity on your part?

By: 1historian

1historian — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 19:04:01 +0000

How would you define transparency? By revealing the name of the accused?
To quote Mr. Arnold – “St. Joseph County Prosecutor Michael Dvorak declined to file any charges after spending a month reviewing a ‘voluminous report’ turned over by Notre Dame to the county prosecutors…..”
That means that neither Notre Dame nor the County Prosecutor found any grounds on which to accuse the young man.
If your wish for transparency had been granted from the beginning, the young man’s name would be public and the fact that he is a member of the Notre Dame football team would make the story irresistible to any and all rags looking for a juicy story.

His innocence? Not worth reporting. But his name would be MUD for the rest of his life.

By: 1historian

1historian — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:46:13 +0000

It seems to me that the University did a thorough investigation and came to the conclusion that there were no grounds on which to accuse the young man.
If at any point in the investigation the young man accused had been named – no matter what followed his name would have been mud and the accusation – false – would have followed him for the rest of his life. His name should not be divulged no matter what people like Haugh say.

By: socalgold

socalgold — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:45:59 +0000

I think you might want to reconsider that notion. What if the information was damaging to the girl and her family? This story based on the known facts has the chance to boomerang back at a family that wants to cherish a memory that they hold.

By: irishmj86

irishmj86 — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:40:21 +0000

The accused have rights, too. Actual rights. Just like you. Just like me.

And in this case, he is not even the accused! The county prosecutor has done his investigation and declined to press charges, so remember that minor fact before you take this kid to the gallows.

And remember to pray for this poor family, that they can somehow find some comfort for their unbearable loss of a daughter. My heart goes out to them.

By: bradwins

bradwins — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:16:44 +0000

I’m not sure I understand your sense of entitlement (or the Tribune’s) regarding information from the University detailing its investigation. The only honorable thing for the University to do is to remain silent. Maybe it has information that would exonerate its own actions and make the girl look bad. People seem to want a public admonishment of the accused boy, and anything short of that will be insufficient. The possibility that the boy may not have done anything warranting action by the authorities or the University seems to have been dismissed before it was even considered.

Regardless, I am not sure why so many people feel an explanation is owed to them. Maybe the University should issue an apology for not satisfying your voyeuristic needs.

By: skim18

skim18 — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 17:59:29 +0000

As a student attending the University of Notre Dame, it is disappointing that Notre Dame has not been transparent on the issue. Although I want to believe that it is not the case, the University may be trying to hide additional information. It really is disheartening…

I don’t find the report by the tribune “one sided” at all. Notre Dame has failed repeatedly to explain anything about the incident or the steps the University took to investigate the incident. The information that the public has are the personal accounts of the Seebergs, who are justifiably not happy with the whole process. The only reports I have received as a student have been “clarifying” emails about the tribune stories, as if the University would not have sent them had their been no articles written about the story.

I love to root for my University because I am forever indebted to it and it makes up a large part of my identity as a student. Yet, I cannot defend this situation given its gravity and its lack of transparency.