It seems we can't go a single day without a new story of current or former college football players being violent toward women.
If we learned anything from the Art Briles saga, it's that universities -- the entire institution, from the top down -- don't take sexual assault accusations serious enough, thinking they can be handled in house or, in Baylor's case, that some sort of magical halo covers the campus that prevents that type of thing from happening here. From the Pepper Hamilton report:
While individual administrators sought professional training opportunities, they were not adequately trained in the dynamics of sexual and gender-based harassment and violence, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking, the neurobiological impacts of trauma, the evaluation of credibility, consent and the role of alcohol as it relates to 8 consent and alcohol-facilitated sexual assault. In addition, the investigations were conducted in the context of a broader culture and belief by many administrators that sexual violence “doesn’t happen here.”
And now, this week, two stories have popped up that prove Pepper Hamilton's report.
First, Baylor offensive lineman Rami Hammad was suspended on charges of felony stalking (see above), but an Outside the Lines investigation found Hammad was accused of sexually assaulting a different Baylor student and then violating a no-contact order. And the Baylor Title IX office did nothing. The no-contact order came on Sept. 30. He attempted to intimidate the accuser -- to the point where two bystanders felt compelled to intervene -- on Oct. 2. He played against Texas Tech on Oct. 3.
"That's when it really hit us that Baylor wasn't doing anything at the time," a witness against Hammad said of seeing him play 24 hours after breaking the no-contact order.
Hammad played in every game last season, and was only suspended after the new charges came to light. His accuser, meanwhile, says she was told by Baylor's Title IX office to alter her routes around campus to avoid Hammad -- and not the other way around -- and was then told the university could not share the result of her Title IX hearing after she found the adjudication entire process so frustrating and unhelpful it would be fruitless of her to attend.
But, okay, that's Baylor. We already knew their Title IX office had problems last year.
That brings us to today's story at Florida.
Last December, a woman accused wide receiver Antonio Callaway and quarterback Treon Harris of sexually assaulting her. The pair was suspended for the spring semester, but Callaway is back on the team now. (Harris has since transferred after being told he would no longer play quarterback.)
Their Title IX case was set to be heard today, but the accuser, her family and five witnesses elected not to attend after a former Florida track and field athlete and current season ticket holder for football and basketball Jack Shickel was chosen as judge for the case.
"Quite frankly, short of finding a relative of Mr. Calloway, I'm not sure how UF could have found someone with more conflicts [than] Mr. Schickel," the woman's lawyer John Clune wrote in a letter to UF's deputy general counsel Amy Hass, which was provided to OTL.
Florida responded with this statement:
"Any hearing officer and all committee members are trained and vetted for their impartiality. A hearing officer or committee member would not be disqualified or lack objectivity simply because he or she had been a student athlete decades earlier or purchases athletic tickets as more than 90,000 people do each year."
Perhaps so, but asking a case involving a Florida football player to adjudicate a case in which the judge pays thousands of dollars per year to watch him play does not give off the appearance of impartiality, nor does it give off the appearance that Florida even cared about the appearance of impartiality.
Furthermore, it's not clear who Florida's Title IX office is attempting to serve here. It doesn't serve McElwain, who will have to answer for whatever result comes of an apparently stacked case. It doesn't serve Florida students and alums. And most importantly it doesn't serve Callaway or his accuser. If Callaway is found not guilty, it's because a donor was his judge. If he's found guilty, it's because Florida looked bad by having a donor as his judge.
So, what can football coaches do about this?
This is a university-wide issue. And it's not just a football issue, either. But we've well established by now that athletes and coaches have voices that boom and echo far beyond the locker room. Sexual assaults coming to a complete and permanent stop would be the preferred outcome, obviously. Unfortunately, life doesn't work that way. And when the next case happens, it would be nice for the head coach involved to stand up and demand complete and total transparency -- for the benefit of the accuser, the accused and every person attached to the university.