D. C. Bear said:
Y'all keep going back and forth about Briles, but this is about Baylor. If Barnes' letter as reported is accurate, it seems that Baylor acted in a despicable and duplicitous manner in how it framed information in the volleyball player's case. If that is in fact true, it is good evidence for part of what the lawyer claimed about Baylor in the filing that was based on McCaw's deposition.
The Barnes thing is sort of the whole flaw in the FofF. By the way, the Fact part in the FofF is about as factual as anything Rex posts - 2nd or 3rd hand knowledge of selectively released data.
The problem that I have with Barnes instance, the FofF, and many of the posters on this forum is a rush to a conclusion without any context of time. Pages 5-9 line out many failures by Baylor. No time line for this. Lack of reporting training is a key issue. If you have not had basic Title IX training that says you report everything whenever you hear it from great conversation to rumor letting that office sort it out, then how what standard was in place. And what was policy on who to report this to - direct superior or JA or Baylor PD? The FofF doesn't layout policy changes with dates to know if Briles erred in the volleyball reporting from a Title IX policy standpoint. I take Garland ' s depo at its word that he, a department chair and twice interim president, did not know the requirements of a basic policy in education. I think there was not a specific violence against a protected class reporting mandate. That's a Title IX failure on Baylor's part summarized in the FofF.
However, there was a student code policy (as many of us know as a history as a student) referenced in the FofF. The anti-alcohol policy is archaic to most of us but it was there. JA was in place to deal with student code infractions from being in possession of a can of beer to assault/sexual assault. Were there violations from the football staff in reporting to JA? Did they try to keep things away? You guys know the answer to that one even if you are not honest enough to admit it. Hard to violate a Title IX mandate that did not exist.
I think the convictions, failures to implement Title IX opening up the school to millions in liability, and hiding or discouraging complaints are pretty clear reasons to fire Starr, RR, McCaw, and the head of Baylor PD (who had already left). Intentional or not on their part - they were the head of departments that f'ed up.
To me, Briles was a call they could make as the captain of the ship where two sailors just made horrible headlines. How you can make that call without having fired (bought out) RR and McCaw is the cronism that I think is the most harmful to Baylor.
To those so upset over a few controlling regents acting badly: Welcome to the Party! Where have you been the last dozen or so years. Nice that you finally woke your butt up.
