Legal docs reveal Briles, other coaches actively intervened in rape cases

[Auctoritas 2,828]

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/18609288/art-briles-baylor-bears-assistants-buried-player-misbehavior-documents-say

Former Baylor coach Art Briles and his assistant coaches actively intervened in the discipline of football players, worked to keep their cases under wraps and tried to arrange legal representation for their players, according to a series of emails and text messages released by three university regents in a legal filing Thursday.

The document filed in a Dallas County court was in response to a libel lawsuit that former football director of operations Colin Shillinglaw had filed Tuesday against the school and several members of its senior leadership.

The regents' response alleges Briles and his coaching staff created a disciplinary "black hole" into "which reports of misconduct such as drug use, physical assault, domestic violence, brandishing of guns, indecent exposure and academic fraud disappeared."

Shillinglaw and former assistant athletic director Tom Hill were fired in May, after lawyers with Philadelphia law firm Pepper Hamilton, hired by Baylor to assess the school's handling of sexual violence complaints, found systematic failures in the way Baylor responded to allegations of sexual assault and other violence by students, including football players. The investigation led to the firing of Briles, the demotion and eventual departure of university president and chancellor Ken Starr, and the sanctioning and resignation of athletic director Ian McCaw.

In an email to ESPN, Shillinglaw's attorney, Gaines West, called Thursday's filing "very unorthodox."

"It's really hard to discern just what it is these defendants assert. We are anxious for the complete truth to come out, instead of just a bunch of disconnected accusations," he wrote.

Ever since the university issued a summary of Pepper Hamilton's findings in May, there has been an outcry -- particularly vocal among supporters of Briles and the football program -- to release the specific findings from the investigation, with the belief by some that those details would exonerate the coaches.

Rampant misconduct by Baylor football players under former coach Art Briles was detailed in a series of emails and text messages released by three university regents in a legal filing Thursday. Joe Faraoni/ESPN Images

On Wednesday, Briles dropped his defamation suit against three regents and Baylor vice president Reagan Ramsower, less than a week after another woman filed a Title IX lawsuit against the school, in which her attorneys allege there were 52 sexual assaults committed by "not less" than 31 players from 2011 to 2014.

Among the information released in Thursday's legal filing is a description of what happened when the former girlfriend of Baylor defensive end Shawn Oakman reported that Oakman physically abused her. She made a report to Waco police, and brought a copy of it to Shillinglaw and "two other people she believed to be assistant football coaches." The response to the lawsuit states, "There was no evidence that Shillinglaw or anyone in the football program shared the report with Baylor officials outside of the athletics department. Worse, when Pepper Hamilton questioned Shillinglaw about the incident and showed him evidence of his involvement, Shillinglaw insisted he did not recall anything about it."

The woman, a Baylor student, declined to pursue the criminal case and left the state. She returned to Baylor in the summer and fall sessions of 2013 but withdrew after more encounters with Oakman. In January 2015, the woman and her mother met with a learning accommodation specialist at Baylor who, upon hearing her story, immediately contacted judicial affairs, the Title IX office, the student life office and the office of general counsel. The legal filing states the specialist wrote, "I haven't seen a student as scared and upset as she was in a long time. She mentioned that she lives in constant fear, 24 hours a day she is scared that [Oakman] or his friends will come beat her up. The mom also talked about Baylor protecting the guy because he is a Baylor football player and that he had an assault record before he was at Baylor."

According to the response, the first allegation of gang rape involving Baylor football players surfaced in April 2013, when a female student-athlete confided in her coach that five players raped her at an off-campus party in early 2012. According to the response, the woman told her coach that the incident "started with one football player and the other players were soon 'all over her.'" She identified each of the players who allegedly sexually assaulted her, and the coach wrote their names on a piece of paper.

The regents' response says the woman's coach -- Outside the Lines previously confirmed the coach was former Baylor volleyball coach Jim Barnes -- addressed the woman's allegations with McCaw, who told him to talk to Briles. The response says Barnes showed Briles the names of the players, and he replied, "Those are some bad dudes. Why was she around those guys?" The response says Briles "offered no defense of his players and told the coach he should have his student-athlete inform the police and prosecute." McCaw allegedly told the coach that if his player didn't press charges, there wasn't anything the athletic department could do.

The response says the woman's mother later met with a football assistant coach at an off-campus delicatessen and provided him the names of two of the five players who allegedly sexually assaulted her daughter. The assistant talked to the players, who claimed it was consensual and "fooling around" and "just a little bit of playtime." The assistant coach said he contacted other Baylor coaches. According to the legal filing, their "apparent response was to engage in victim-blaming." The assistant concluded the accusations were in a "gray area," and Pepper Hamilton attorneys found that no one, including Briles, notified police, judicial affairs or anyone outside of athletics about the alleged gang rape.

Briles and other coaches would state that any failure to report accusations of assault or related behavior was due to the fact that Baylor lacked any clear instructions on what to do, noting that the university did not have a Title IX office until November 2014 and that none of the coaches received proper training. But the response filed Thursday would note that Briles should have been aware that judicial affairs had jurisdiction in investigating allegations of sexual assault because on April 23, 2013, "the very same day Coach Briles learned about the student-athlete's account of being gang raped -- he was forwarded a letter stating that Judicial Affairs had investigated and cleared another one of his players of sexual assault allegations."

The 54-page response to the lawsuit notes several other incidents that football coaches knew about but were never reported to judicial affairs. On Feb. 11, 2013, when a coach notified Briles that a female student-athlete complained that a football player had brandished a gun at her, it states that Briles responded, "what a fool -- she reporting to authorities." The legal filing then states the assistant responded, "She's acting traumatized ... Trying to talk to her calm now ... Doesn't seem to want to report though."

In one of the messages, dated April 8, 2011, the response notes that Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach, referencing a freshman defensive tackle who was cited for illegal alcohol consumption, "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name - did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? ... Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks. ... "

In reference to a player who was arrested for assault and threatening to kill a non-athlete, a football operations staff member "tried to talk the victim out of pressing criminal charges," the document states. The correspondence from Sept. 20, 2013, quotes Briles in a text to McCaw, "Just talked to [the player] - he said Waco PD was there - said they were going to keep it quiet - Wasn't a set up deal ... I'll get shill [Shillinglaw] to ck on Sibley." (Sibley was in reference to Waco attorney Jonathan Sibley.) It states McCaw responded, "That would be great if they kept it quiet."

Briles again referenced having Shillinglaw contact Sibley on behalf of an athlete in an Aug. 15, 2015, exchange regarding a player who was arrested for possession of marijuana. Briles texts an unidentified assistant coach and asks, "Do we know who complained?" The response to the lawsuit states the assistant coach responded that it was the superintendent at the player's apartment complex, to which Briles replied, "We need to know who (sic) supervisor is and get him to alert us first."

Some of the other exchanges were:

• A September 2013 text from Shillinglaw to Briles about a player who allegedly exposed himself to a masseuse, who had a lawyer and was asking the athletic department to handle the situation with discipline and counseling. Briles responded, "What kind of discipline ... She a stripper?" and after Shillinglaw responded that the player was at a salon and spa for the massage, Briles texted, "Not quite as bad."

• In October 2013, Shillinglaw and Briles corresponded about a player who was suspended for repeated drug violations. "Bottom line, he has to meet with [Vice President for Student Life Kevin] Jackson tomorrow morning. If Jackson does not reinstate President will," Shillinglaw wrote.

• A May 2014 exchange showed Briles and an assistant coach arranging for a player who was caught selling drugs to transfer to another school, noting the offense was never reported to judicial affairs. The assistant coach is quoted as texting, "Him just hanging around Waco scares me. [Another school] will take him. Knows baggage."

The regents' response also claims Briles personally appealed to Starr on behalf of former Bears defensive lineman Tevin Elliott when he was charged with a second count of plagiarism, which made him ineligible for the 2011 season. After Elliott missed an April 2011 appeal deadline, according to the response, Briles "personally took up Elliott's cause more than two months later" in June.

"The coach notified President Starr in an email that Elliott wanted to appeal the suspension," the response says. "The unusual request by Coach Briles triggered concern among top Baylor administrators, who complained to President Starr and among themselves that overturning Elliott's suspension after the appeal deadline would send a message that athletes were above the rules."

The response says Elliott's appeal letter was suspect and "appeared to have been authored by an academic adviser in the Athletics Department. Nevertheless, President Starr ignored the decision of his Provost and overturned the suspension."

In another break with university policy, according to the response, Starr put Elliott under the probationary watch of the athletic department and not judicial affairs, which was responsible for overseeing enforcement of the school's honor code. Because of Starr's decision, the athletic department became the sole arbiter of whether Elliott was complying with the terms of his probation and what consequences he should suffer if he failed to adhere to them, according to the response.

In the fall of 2011, according to the response, Elliott had "attendance problems, was in danger of flunking his human performance class and was caught cheating on quizzes." On Oct. 21, 2011, an athletic department employee wrote to McCaw: "Wow, what is this kid thinking?" McCaw replied: "Unbelievable!"

On April 1, 2012, a woman told Waco police that Elliott raped her at her apartment three days earlier. Two weeks later, on April 15, Jasmin Hernandez told police that Elliott raped her behind a pool house near one of his teammates' townhomes. When the coaches learned of the allegation, an assistant coach texted Briles and told him that Elliott "firmly denies even knowing the girl." But, after interviewing Elliott the next day, the assistant told Briles that Elliott "admitted he lied to us. He was with her and said when she said stop he did."

"Wow - not good - I'll call you later," Briles replied.

When the assistant texted Briles later and told him that Elliott had been contacted by Waco police, Briles replied: "Dang it."

On Jan. 24, 2014, Elliott was convicted of raping Hernandez and was sentenced to the maximum 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. His trial would reveal accusations by three other women that he raped them and a conviction of misdemeanor physical assault of another.

"The Athletics Department's unwillingness to crack down enabled Elliott to stay at Baylor and play football," the regents' response says.

But Thursday's legal filing notes that the messages were collected by the Pepper Hamilton law firm that was investigating Baylor's response to sexual violence. "There could be dozens more, but Pepper Hamilton believed it had compiled enough to support a conclusion that those in charge of the football program, including Shillinglaw, improperly covered up disciplinary problems other than sexual assault," it states.

The response to Shillinglaw's libel suit filed Thursday was on behalf of three regents he had named as defendants -- chairman Ron Murff, Cary Gray and David Harper -- who are represented by Houston attorney Rusty Hardin. Hardin said the regents felt compelled in defending themselves personally against the lawsuit to release the information, even though Hardin said it does expose the university even more in the defense of its six pending Title IX lawsuits, four of which include women who said they were raped by football players. The response reads less like a legal document and more like a narrative for Baylor's entire sexual assault saga, explaining why the regents had remained mostly silent but were pressured to release details of the evidence against Briles and the coaching staff in light of the groundswell of opposition to his firing -- widely seen this past fall at football games in which people wore black T-shirts or carried black banners with the hashtag #CAB for "Coach Art Briles."

Thursday's legal filing recounts a meeting that Baylor alumni and donors had with regents, who were unwilling to share more details of the investigation, citing privacy concerns. It states that the regents tried to explain why they couldn't keep people whom they found responsible for Title IX failure because that would not uphold the "mission of the university." It quotes a donor as responding, "If you mention Baylor's mission one more time, I'm going to throw up. ... I was promised a national championship."

The response notes that the regents could no longer "allow Coach Briles' supporters to continue polluting the record" and had a "right and a duty to set the record straight."

"When a college football coach goes 6-7, 5-7, and 5-7 for three consecutive years, no one blinks an eye when the coach is fired. But when at least 17 women report sexual and physical assaults involving at least 19 football players, including allegations of four gang rapes, why is anyone shocked by his dismissal?" it states. "Contrary to some people's belief, Briles was not a 'scapegoat' for the University's larger problems -- he was part of the larger problem."

Briles' attorney, Ernest Cannon, could not be reached Thursday for comment and did not respond to a text message or email.

With social media reaction already calling for the NCAA to take action against Baylor in light of the new information, Hardin said Baylor should be commended for hiring Pepper Hamilton, releasing the highly critical results of the investigation and firing its head coach at a time when most other colleges confronted with such allegations would just quietly pay off the victims and not investigate further.

"At the end of the day, I'm hoping that the NCAA and others will recognize that instead of punishing Baylor, they ought to be saluted," he said. "I think they ought to be held up as a model for how to respond."

[corchjay 5,311]

This is what the "win at all cost" mentality gets you.  That's all I gotta say about that...

 

[Dshep4au 266]

Yes they have actual text messages so it is pretty clear what happened. This is a terrible situation for the victims and what was allowed to go on by the coaching staff. I can't believe there are still AB defenders. 

[meh130 1,043]

Here is some more on the text messages:

Mediaite: ‘Would Be Great If They Kept It Quiet!’: Shocking Texts Suggest Possible Cover Up in Baylor FB Scandal

[meh130 1,043]

1 hour ago, Dshep4au said:

Yes they have actual text messages so it is pretty clear what happened. This is a terrible situation for the victims and what was allowed to go on by the coaching staff. I can't believe there are still AB defenders. 

Fair point. I was thinking AB for an off-the-field position. Not any more.

Honestly, I expect a barrage of negative comments this fall if JS is the starting QB. Every TV announcer will comment about the Baylor situation, question if JS was involved, and mention CGM's and AB's "close friendship". Oh, and I'm sure Kevin Scarbinsky is working a column on this as I write this, and Finebaum will no doubt start his usual s--t stirring during the off-season.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

I feel like I'm reading a story about bama or LSU... we all know that they "keep it quiet" when their players have minor infractions and have connections with the police, judges, etc to get them off otherwise. Heck, half of it is documented in the paper. Then there's OU who has two proven woman beaters on the team that played us in the Sugar Bowl.

That being said, I also feel like I'm reading an article that's trying to build a conspiracy around Briles that is going to get shredded in court. What I read above was that Shillinglaw, McCaw, Sibley, and the President of the University colluded on major issues and Briles was more about covering up minor issues like drugs and plagiarism.. which is sadly par for the course with most college coaches. His reactions to the big issues read more like "stupid kid... now I have something else to deal with".

My biggest hope is that, because this is being aired in public, like it is, that there will be a nation wide crack-down on players getting away with breaking major laws.   

[bigbird 60,521]

1 hour ago, lionheartkc said:

That being said, I also feel like I'm reading an article that's trying to build a conspiracy around Briles that is going to get shredded in court. What I read above was that Shillinglaw, McCaw, Sibley, and the President of the University colluded on major issues and Briles was more about covering up minor issues like drugs and plagiarism.. which is sadly par for the course with most college coaches. His reactions to the big issues read more like "stupid kid... now I have something else to deal with".

 

That's the word around the state in some coaching circles. It will be very interesting if it goes to court. I've heard  Baylor really doesnt want that. They are trying to try it in the court of public opinion.

The "minor" stuff like drugs, guns, alcohol, fights, and grades and such happen everywhere...even AU.  If players are charged then things have to be dealt with. If there aren't charges filed coaches try and handle things, right or wrong.

[Strychnine 1,802]

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

That's the word around the state in some coaching circles. It will be very interesting if it goes to court. I've heard  Baylor really doesnt want that. They are trying to try it in the court of public opinion.

The "minor" stuff like drugs, guns, alcohol, fights, and grades and such happen everywhere...even AU.  If players are charged then things have to be dealt with. If there aren't charges filed coaches try and handle things, right or wrong.

 

I do not think anyone involved wants it to go to court.

[PowerOfDixieland 3,226]

If Emmert gets the NCAA involved, you may be reading about me in the paper.  

It's a CRIMINAL case and it should be prosecuted posthaste as such.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

47 minutes ago, PowerOfDixieland said:

If Emmert gets the NCAA involved, you may be reading about me in the paper.  

It's a CRIMINAL case and it should be prosecuted posthaste as such.

Its actually a civil case... none of the people in question committed the crimes, they just didn't report them through university channels and kept them out of the news.  In fact, in several situations, it's noted that Briles recommended going to the police.  Now the question is still out if the police or prosecutors were covering things up.  If so, I believe that IS a crime.

[mcgufcm 4,096]

Well, that "none of the people in question have committed the crimes" part is still up for debate. From what I understand, district attorney there is looking into whether charges should be filed for obstruction of justice based on concealing crimes or complaints. It wouldn't startle me if a D.A. went  ahead with charges. If you want to be cynical, it's a good way to grab a piece of the headlines. If cynicism isn't your thing, such charges may be warranted for men covering up sexual assault crimes. In any event, I've seen reports that criminal charges are still possible. This thing is a full-on mess.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

15 minutes ago, mcgufcm said:

Well, that "none of the people in question have committed the crimes" part is still up for debate. From what I understand, district attorney there is looking into whether charges should be filed for obstruction of justice based on concealing crimes or complaints. It wouldn't startle me if a D.A. went  ahead with charges. If you want to be cynical, it's a good way to grab a piece of the headlines. If cynicism isn't your thing, such charges may be warranted for men covering up sexual assault crimes. In any event, I've seen reports that criminal charges are still possible. This thing is a full-on mess.

Obstruction would be hard to charge against anyone who wasn't either the police or part of the DA's office who were colluding to cover things up. The only way you can charge with obstruction in the school is if they prevented someone from reporting crimes to the police, or if someone was investigating and they hid evidence. As was quoted in several situations, Briles encouraged people to go to the police. Obviously we can't speak for others involved, since the whole story hasn't come out. Still, so far, I've heard nothing about that kind of thing happening.  Now, if they wanted to go for accessory after the fact, the can sure try, but they'd be setting a heck of a precedent. There is no law that says when a University student accuses someone of something you have to go to the university judicial organization. There's not even a law that says you have to go to the police. There is a law that says you can't stop them from going to the police and another that says the police/DA/judges can't just let something go because they are fans of the football team (though the judges are pretty hard to prosecute).

[Auctoritas 2,828]

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/18615626/ncaa-continues-investigate-potential-rules-violations-baylor-bears

Big 12 commissioner: Baylor scandal 'just continues to ooze'

NCAA enforcement staff has interviewed former Baylor administrators, Title IX investigators and some of the women who alleged football players sexually assaulted them, as it continues to investigate whether its rules were violated during the school's sexual assault scandal, sources familiar with the investigation told Outside the Lines on Friday.

Sources said NCAA investigators haven't yet focused on specific allegations of wrongdoing, instead casting a wide net to determine if any NCAA rules might have been violated. The NCAA is also asking whether Baylor players might have been provided improper recruiting inducements and other illegal benefits while playing for the Bears.

An NCAA spokesman declined to comment when reached by ESPN on Friday. A Baylor spokesman also declined comment; the NCAA discourages its member schools from commenting on ongoing investigations.

Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby, speaking Friday while at a regularly scheduled conference board meeting in Dallas, said the scandal at the Baptist university in Waco, Texas, "just continues to ooze."

 

"I think everybody's pretty much in the barrel, but I don't know if anybody knows where the bottom of the barrel is," he told ESPN.

On May 25, the day Baylor's board of regents released details about law firm Pepper Hamilton's investigation into how the university responded to allegations of sexual assault by students, including football players, a handful of regents and senior administrators flew to Indianapolis to meet with NCAA officials, sharing their findings and vowing to fully cooperate if the organization wanted to further investigate.

On Thursday, in a court filing in response to former football director of operations Colin Shillinglaw's libel lawsuit against the school and several members of its senior leadership, the university released text messages and emails that indicated former Baylor coach Art Briles and his assistants actively intervened in the discipline of football players, worked to keep their cases under wraps and tried to arrange legal representation for their players.

Bowlsby told ESPN on Friday that the NCAA could be looking into some of the issues raised in the text messages as they pertain to extra benefits.

"I doubt very much that most students have anybody available to steer them to legal counsel," he said.

Bowlsby noted that he would need to know the specific circumstances; referring a student-athlete to a lawyer might not qualify as an extra benefit, but transporting him to an attorney's office and negotiating a payment might.

"It's the kind of thing that will raise the antenna of NCAA investigators, that those are exactly the kind of things that are athletic-related that the NCAA's investigation will certainly look into."

Asked whether helping a student circumvent the school's student conduct code also could be considered, Bowlsby added: "Yeah, I think that would likely constitute an extra benefit as well. ... Anything that a student-athlete received that other students wouldn't be privy to, there could certainly be a case made to consider it an extra benefit."

The 54-page response by Baylor on Thursday also claimed Briles personally appealed to then-university president Ken Starr on behalf of former defensive lineman Tevin Elliott when he was charged with a second count of plagiarism, which made him ineligible for the 2011 season. After Elliott missed an April 2011 appeal deadline, according to the response, Briles "personally took up Elliott's cause more than two months later" in June.

Commissioner Bob Bowlsby said the Big 12 is planning to wait and see what happens with the NCAA's investigation into Baylor. AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez

"The coach notified President Starr in an email that Elliott wanted to appeal the suspension," the response says. "The unusual request by Coach Briles triggered concern among top Baylor administrators, who complained to President Starr and among themselves that overturning Elliott's suspension after the appeal deadline would send a message that athletes were above the rules."

The response says Elliott's appeal letter was suspect and "appeared to have been authored by an academic adviser in the Athletics Department. Nevertheless, President Starr ignored the decision of his Provost and overturned the suspension."

Bowlsby said the Big 12 is not poised to take any action against Baylor, noting that the conference itself doesn't have an investigative arm. Bowlsby said the Big 12 is planning to wait and see what happens with the NCAA's investigation.

"We have some tools at our disposal, but I think there's a right time to use those and a right situation to use them, and it's an ongoing process," he said.

Bowlsby noted there was a desire and a "shared frustration" among the members to get to the bottom of what happened and figure out all the parties involved.

Bowlsby said he had not previously seen any of the correspondence that was in the legal filing Thursday. Baylor Interim President David Garland was among the university presidents at the conference headquarters near Dallas on Friday for a regularly scheduled Big 12 board meeting, at which the issues -- but not the text messages specifically -- were discussed.

"I think he was appalled as anyone at the things that keep coming out," Bowlsby said of Garland, declining to go into detail about the conversation. "We all kind of have the same feelings. It's awful. It's appalling. And the more graphic the information, the worse it seems."

Bowlsby noted that the only time the so-called death penalty -- the most severe of NCAA penalties -- was used was when it was possible to find "tangible athletics violations and money that changed hands and benefits that were provided that shouldn't have been." He noted that the death penalty wasn't even used for Penn State -- a situation where the NCAA ended up having to back off the sanctions it imposed.

"I don't know that anybody's going to get the death penalty without a pretty thorough finding of athletics violations that go wide and deep, and as far as I know, that hasn't been documented yet," Bowlsby said. "These are heinous things that happened and many of the things that happened involved athletes, but it's not clear that either the conference or the NCAA have real standing in this."

Stuart Brown, an Atlanta-based attorney who works in NCAA-related matters, said he didn't think the NCAA would investigate how the school responded to allegations of sexual assault, and it might not seek to impose penalties for moral issues, like it did in the Jerry Sandusky scandal at Penn State. He said he believes the NCAA would focus more on recruiting violations, coaches' actions and whether the school altered its conduct code or academic standards for players.

If Baylor was found to be in violation of NCAA rules in those areas, it could face failure to monitor or lack of institutional control. Briles could also face a show-cause penalty, which would require a school that hires him to appear before the NCAA infractions committee. If his assistant coaches broke rules, he could be charged with failing to monitor a staff member, which is what the NCAA charged Louisville basketball coach Rick Pitino with after its investigation into allegations made by an escort.

"All of those would still be on the table, depending on what in fact the NCAA gets and they could pursue all of those without getting into the societal judgment part of it," Brown said. "There are a couple of things the NCAA can look into and address without looking at the underlying social issues that are beyond its jurisdiction. There are other forums -- mainly the court system -- where those issues are better resolved."

[meh130 1,043]

On 2/3/2017 at 11:25 AM, lionheartkc said:

I feel like I'm reading a story about bama or LSU... we all know that they "keep it quiet" when their players have minor infractions and have connections with the police, judges, etc to get them off otherwise. Heck, half of it is documented in the paper. Then there's OU who has two proven woman beaters on the team that played us in the Sugar Bowl.

That being said, I also feel like I'm reading an article that's trying to build a conspiracy around Briles that is going to get shredded in court. What I read above was that Shillinglaw, McCaw, Sibley, and the President of the University colluded on major issues and Briles was more about covering up minor issues like drugs and plagiarism.. which is sadly par for the course with most college coaches. His reactions to the big issues read more like "stupid kid... now I have something else to deal with".

My biggest hope is that, because this is being aired in public, like it is, that there will be a nation wide crack-down on players getting away with breaking major laws.   

This seems worse. This seems like Oklahoma back in the day, or Miami recently. SMU got the death penalty for systemically paying players, but the NCAA has never brought the hammer down heavily on criminal student athlete behavior. They did on the coaching staff at Penn State.

[doc4aday 1,887]

On ‎2‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 9:22 PM, Auctoritas said:

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/18615626/ncaa-continues-investigate-potential-rules-violations-baylor-bears

Big 12 commissioner: Baylor scandal 'just continues to ooze'

NCAA enforcement staff has interviewed former Baylor administrators, Title IX investigators and some of the women who alleged football players sexually assaulted them, as it continues to investigate whether its rules were violated during the school's sexual assault scandal, sources familiar with the investigation told Outside the Lines on Friday.

Sources said NCAA investigators haven't yet focused on specific allegations of wrongdoing, instead casting a wide net to determine if any NCAA rules might have been violated. The NCAA is also asking whether Baylor players might have been provided improper recruiting inducements and other illegal benefits while playing for the Bears.

An NCAA spokesman declined to comment when reached by ESPN on Friday. A Baylor spokesman also declined comment; the NCAA discourages its member schools from commenting on ongoing investigations.

Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby, speaking Friday while at a regularly scheduled conference board meeting in Dallas, said the scandal at the Baptist university in Waco, Texas, "just continues to ooze."

 

"I think everybody's pretty much in the barrel, but I don't know if anybody knows where the bottom of the barrel is," he told ESPN.

On May 25, the day Baylor's board of regents released details about law firm Pepper Hamilton's investigation into how the university responded to allegations of sexual assault by students, including football players, a handful of regents and senior administrators flew to Indianapolis to meet with NCAA officials, sharing their findings and vowing to fully cooperate if the organization wanted to further investigate.

On Thursday, in a court filing in response to former football director of operations Colin Shillinglaw's libel lawsuit against the school and several members of its senior leadership, the university released text messages and emails that indicated former Baylor coach Art Briles and his assistants actively intervened in the discipline of football players, worked to keep their cases under wraps and tried to arrange legal representation for their players.

Bowlsby told ESPN on Friday that the NCAA could be looking into some of the issues raised in the text messages as they pertain to extra benefits.

"I doubt very much that most students have anybody available to steer them to legal counsel," he said.

Bowlsby noted that he would need to know the specific circumstances; referring a student-athlete to a lawyer might not qualify as an extra benefit, but transporting him to an attorney's office and negotiating a payment might.

"It's the kind of thing that will raise the antenna of NCAA investigators, that those are exactly the kind of things that are athletic-related that the NCAA's investigation will certainly look into."

Asked whether helping a student circumvent the school's student conduct code also could be considered, Bowlsby added: "Yeah, I think that would likely constitute an extra benefit as well. ... Anything that a student-athlete received that other students wouldn't be privy to, there could certainly be a case made to consider it an extra benefit."

The 54-page response by Baylor on Thursday also claimed Briles personally appealed to then-university president Ken Starr on behalf of former defensive lineman Tevin Elliott when he was charged with a second count of plagiarism, which made him ineligible for the 2011 season. After Elliott missed an April 2011 appeal deadline, according to the response, Briles "personally took up Elliott's cause more than two months later" in June.

Commissioner Bob Bowlsby said the Big 12 is planning to wait and see what happens with the NCAA's investigation into Baylor. AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez

"The coach notified President Starr in an email that Elliott wanted to appeal the suspension," the response says. "The unusual request by Coach Briles triggered concern among top Baylor administrators, who complained to President Starr and among themselves that overturning Elliott's suspension after the appeal deadline would send a message that athletes were above the rules."

The response says Elliott's appeal letter was suspect and "appeared to have been authored by an academic adviser in the Athletics Department. Nevertheless, President Starr ignored the decision of his Provost and overturned the suspension."

Bowlsby said the Big 12 is not poised to take any action against Baylor, noting that the conference itself doesn't have an investigative arm. Bowlsby said the Big 12 is planning to wait and see what happens with the NCAA's investigation.

"We have some tools at our disposal, but I think there's a right time to use those and a right situation to use them, and it's an ongoing process," he said.

Bowlsby noted there was a desire and a "shared frustration" among the members to get to the bottom of what happened and figure out all the parties involved.

Bowlsby said he had not previously seen any of the correspondence that was in the legal filing Thursday. Baylor Interim President David Garland was among the university presidents at the conference headquarters near Dallas on Friday for a regularly scheduled Big 12 board meeting, at which the issues -- but not the text messages specifically -- were discussed.

"I think he was appalled as anyone at the things that keep coming out," Bowlsby said of Garland, declining to go into detail about the conversation. "We all kind of have the same feelings. It's awful. It's appalling. And the more graphic the information, the worse it seems."

Bowlsby noted that the only time the so-called death penalty -- the most severe of NCAA penalties -- was used was when it was possible to find "tangible athletics violations and money that changed hands and benefits that were provided that shouldn't have been." He noted that the death penalty wasn't even used for Penn State -- a situation where the NCAA ended up having to back off the sanctions it imposed.

"I don't know that anybody's going to get the death penalty without a pretty thorough finding of athletics violations that go wide and deep, and as far as I know, that hasn't been documented yet," Bowlsby said. "These are heinous things that happened and many of the things that happened involved athletes, but it's not clear that either the conference or the NCAA have real standing in this."

Stuart Brown, an Atlanta-based attorney who works in NCAA-related matters, said he didn't think the NCAA would investigate how the school responded to allegations of sexual assault, and it might not seek to impose penalties for moral issues, like it did in the Jerry Sandusky scandal at Penn State. He said he believes the NCAA would focus more on recruiting violations, coaches' actions and whether the school altered its conduct code or academic standards for players.

If Baylor was found to be in violation of NCAA rules in those areas, it could face failure to monitor or lack of institutional control. Briles could also face a show-cause penalty, which would require a school that hires him to appear before the NCAA infractions committee. If his assistant coaches broke rules, he could be charged with failing to monitor a staff member, which is what the NCAA charged Louisville basketball coach Rick Pitino with after its investigation into allegations made by an escort.

"All of those would still be on the table, depending on what in fact the NCAA gets and they could pursue all of those without getting into the societal judgment part of it," Brown said. "There are a couple of things the NCAA can look into and address without looking at the underlying social issues that are beyond its jurisdiction. There are other forums -- mainly the court system -- where those issues are better resolved."

I will be so glad when this done and over with. Justice prevailing

[lionheartkc 6,150]

9 hours ago, doc4aday said:

Asked whether helping a student circumvent the school's student conduct code also could be considered, Bowlsby added: "Yeah, I think that would likely constitute an extra benefit as well. ... Anything that a student-athlete received that other students wouldn't be privy to, there could certainly be a case made to consider it an extra benefit."

Wow... this is a can of worms... if they want to go there, then every school in the NCAA is in violation.

[Auctoritas 2,828]

2 hours ago, lionheartkc said:

Wow... this is a can of worms... if they want to go there, then every school in the NCAA is in violation.

And the problem with that is? I really don't care if "everyone does it", it's still ethically wrong to do so (in most cases, and at face value. There's some interesting ethical arguments about helping disadvantaged students try to succeed in overcoming one of the major gates to life success: having a degree)

I mean, "everyone" speeds (well except these idiots in southwest FL) and only a select few get penalized for it - but just because it's not able to be 100% enforced doesn't mean the roads are therefore safe. 

But we all know it's illegal, and the only reason we don't fly around like it's the Autobahn is because those rules exist and we are afraid of what happens if we get caught. 

[lionheartkc 6,150]

19 minutes ago, Auctoritas said:

And the problem with that is? I really don't care if "everyone does it", it's still ethically wrong to do so (in most cases, and at face value. There's some interesting ethical arguments about helping disadvantaged students try to succeed in overcoming one of the major gates to life success: having a degree)

I mean, "everyone" speeds (well except these idiots in southwest FL) and only a select few get penalized for it - but just because it's not able to be 100% enforced doesn't mean the roads are therefore safe. 

But we all know it's illegal, and the only reason we don't fly around like it's the Autobahn is because those rules exist and we are afraid of what happens if we get caught. 

The problem is, that statement makes a lot of things that were heretofore not a violation into a violation. There are a TON of things that players get as part of their daily lives on campus that are not afforded to other students, that no one even bats an eye at, and are not considered in any way ethically wrong. This means that if the NCAA uses that as a measuring stick to punish one school, the cannot legitimately ignore those things at other schools.  It means that being investigated by the NCAA guarantees sanctions, because once they are there, there is almost no chance they won't find something that the players are receiving that Joe and Jane student aren't.

In short, it's making the rules unnecessarily broad.

On a secondary note... I like to think that at least a decent portion of society doesn't fly around like they are on the Autobahn because they realize that it's dangerous to themselves and others... not just because they are afraid of getting caught.

[doc4aday 1,887]

At one point, I was willing to give Briles the benefit of doubt. However, there is no doubt that Briles was guilty of one of the worst things I have ever seen in my life in all of collegiate sports. Hopefully, nothing like this will ever happen again. Then again, win at all costs will one day rear its ugly head, and we will wonder if anything was learned from this horrific situation.

[Auctoritas 2,828]

1 hour ago, lionheartkc said:

 

On a secondary note... I like to think that at least a decent portion of society doesn't fly around like they are on the Autobahn because they realize that it's dangerous to themselves and others... not just because they are afraid of getting caught.

I disagree. There have actually been studies on it - I will see if I can an did them up and find what the findings are. But from what I remember people on the road are more concerned about personal consequences, either bodily injury or fines. But now I am curious. Let me go look. 

[lionheartkc 6,150]

5 minutes ago, Auctoritas said:

I disagree. There have actually been studies on it - I will see if I can an did them up and find what the findings are. But from what I remember people on the road are more concerned about personal consequences, either bodily injury or fines. But now I am curious. Let me go look. 

I'm sure you're right... we are a very selfish society... it just makes me sad.

[Auctoritas 2,828]

1 hour ago, lionheartkc said:

The problem is, that statement makes a lot of things that were heretofore not a violation into a violation. There are a TON of things that players get as part of their daily lives on campus that are not afforded to other students, that no one even bats an eye at, and are not considered in any way ethically wrong. This means that if the NCAA uses that as a measuring stick to punish one school, the cannot legitimately ignore those things at other schools.  It means that being investigated by the NCAA guarantees sanctions, because once they are there, there is almost no chance they won't find something that the players are receiving that Joe and Jane student aren't.

In short, it's making the rules unnecessarily broad.

How so? Your quote was about someone being guided around student code of conduct violations. I don't exactly think that is something "offered" in any sanctioned way. 

[Auctoritas 2,828]

(I need to be clear: I am playing devil's advocate. Feel free to ignore me!)

[lionheartkc 6,150]

5 minutes ago, Auctoritas said:

How so? Your quote was about someone being guided around student code of conduct violations. I don't exactly think that is something "offered" in any sanctioned way. 

This part... " Anything that a student-athlete received that other students wouldn't be privy to, there could certainly be a case made to consider it an extra benefit." That's dangerous waters he's treading in.

[AU64 10,122]

1 minute ago, lionheartkc said:

This part... " Anything that a student-athlete received that other students wouldn't be privy to, there could certainly be a case made to consider it an extra benefit." That's dangerous waters he's treading in.

I guess the exceptions would be the things indicated in the scholarship/contract with the players.   Sure they get lots of stuff, including free tutoring and the like but you make a good point about where the line might be drawn.     I'm guessing that free legal advice might not be included which is a good reason for a coach to stay hands off when a guy gets in trouble with the local law.    

None the less......bet the paperwork on what a scholarship provides is about to get a lot more thorough with a detailed list of "includes" and "excludes".  I can just imagine it....will sound like one of those warnings you get when you get your next prescription medicine...makes you afraid to take it.