Re-read the interview CAB did not claim exoneration for all wrongdoings...just SA cases "It exonerates me from any wrongdoing in any sexual assault case," You need to quit taking quotes out of context.Bearish said:There is a big difference between acknowledging a lack of any personal, direct involvement with a sexual assault claimant, as was done in the letter, and an "exoneration of all wrongdoing," as Art claims. What Holmes did, in a very specific letter with a narrow lens, was attempt to alleviate concerns of Briles' personal involvement in some of the horrible incidents summarized in the PH report (e.g. coaches meeting directly with alleged victims).Eball said:How does it not? CAB limited it to SA cases? I just don't know what you mean...how else would he have been responsible to any victims of SA?Bearish said:
"You can look at the letter from Chris Holmes. It exonerates me from any wrongdoing in any sexual assault case," Briles said.
No, Art. It doesn't.
From the letter:
"In particular, at this time we are unaware of any situation where you personally had contact with anyone who directly reported to you being the victim of sexual assault or that you directly discouraged the victim of an alleged sexual assault from reporting to law enforcement or University officials."
What Holmes did not address was Art's knowledge of any of those specific events, or the appropriateness of his response thereto. For example, if Kendal was the one doing these things and Art knew about it for years and let it slide, would you consider that outside the scope of "wrongdoing?" I wouldn't, but that isn't what Holmes addressed. Again, very specific, with a narrow lens.
So tell us all what CAB did wrong in SA cases at Baylor?