INC NEWS - Duke administration to blame (espn.com)

[John Schelp]

"The bottom line is that if the university had taken
this aggressive approach when the red flags of the
lacrosse team's behavior began popping up on campus
police logs there might not be allegations of forcible
rape or images of elitest and racist conduct."

Duke administration to blame
20 April 2006, ESPN.com

The indictments finally came down.

In a case that has been lingering on the nation's
consciousness for five weeks, some finality. Or at
least the first step toward something close to the
beginning of the end. 

Or maybe just the beginning of the beginning.

On March 13, 2006, something happened.

At this point, we don't know what. A woman alleged she
was raped. She said she was raped by members of Duke
University's lacrosse team. Forty-six of the 47 team
members are white. She isn't. Most are of money. She
isn't. They are Division I athletes. She's isn't.

An uproar ensued, accusations flew, indictments made,
charges filed and for an entire month the people of
Durham, N.C., found themselves somewhere inside an
episode of "The Twilight Zone" starring Tawana
Brawley, William Kennedy Smith and O.J. Simpson -- a
mini-soap opera played out in real time. Information
was leaking and conflicting. New allegations surfaced
every day. 

Evidence mounted. A deviant and racist e-mail
surfaced. Back stories of gay-bashing assaults were
discovered, time-stamped photos emerged, DNA matches
not found. At the center of it all: an exemplary
university. 

Instead of issues of guilt or innocence empowering
thought, many black folks decided to be proactive and
many white folks decided to be protective.

All the while, the most troubling issue remains
buried. Lost in the sensationalistic aspects of the
rich men/poor woman, white men/black woman, guilty
men/lying woman angle of what will be the biggest
sports-related story of 2006 is the disturbing thought
that this could have been avoided had three men
employed some form of authoritative competence. 

Duke president Richard Brodhead, athletics director
Joe Alleva and recently resigned lacrosse coach Mike
Pressler remain unguilty. Not enough criticism has
been pointed in their direction or at the board of
trustees at Duke for their roles in allowing the
culture for the alleged assault to exist. No one wants
to identify them at the scene of the crime before the
crime was committed. No one wants to deal with the
fact that the players on Duke's lacrosse team are not
solely responsible for what happened at 610 North
Buchanan five Mondays ago.

Duke University is.

According to police records, 15 of the 47 players on
Duke's national championship runners-up lacrosse team
had been charged with misdemeanor crimes ranging from
public drunkenness and disturbance to public urination
in the previous year. Since 1999, 41 Duke lacrosse
players have been charged with misdemeanors in Durham
and Orange counties. 

As reported by the The News & Observer (Raleigh,
N.C.), according to campus records, about half the
team has had on-campus alcohol violations and other
conduct issues. Sports Illustrated reported that a
former alum's e-mail exposed stories of lacrosse
players "throwing kegs through windows" and purposely
"breaking bones" in fight club activities. Collin
Finnerty, one of the two lacrosse players indicted
Monday, was charged with assault last November in
Washington, D.C., after a man accused Finnerty and two
others of punching him and calling him "gay and other
derogatory names."

The question is: Where was the university when all of
this "buck wildness" was going down? Where was the
authority before the authorities arrived?

At any time did the university step in with any
reprimand or threats of expulsion? Or scholarships
rescinded? At any time did Brodhead, Alleva or
Pressler impose a zero-tolerance policy or investigate
the alleged incidents for validity?

At what point did Duke University not do enough to
prevent this from happening? What measures did it take
to avoid misdemeanors turning into alleged sexual
assault? At what point did it follow any of its own
imposed rules, standards, regulations and ethics?

Has it ever?

In the Mission Statement for Intercollegiate Athletics
inside of the Athletic Policy Manual of Duke
University these words appear: "The goal of the
intercollegiate program is the same as that of the
University's academic programs: excellence. In this
context, excellence includes commitment to the
physical and emotional well-being, and social
development of student-athletes as well as to the
development of their sense of citizenship 
 and
general conduct that brings credit to the University
and is a source of pride and enthusiasm for all
members of the Duke community."

In Section II, the Trustee Responsibility section
includes: "
 (it) will reflect levels of performance
in which the Duke community can take pride 
"

In Section III, Provision 14, the Code of Ethical
Conduct reads: "Individuals employed by, or associated
with, a member institution to administer, conduct or
coach intercollegiate athletics and all participating
student-athletes shall deport themselves with honesty
and sportsmanship at all times so that intercollegiate
athletics as a whole, their institutions and they, as
individuals, shall represent the honor and dignity of
fair play and the generally recognized high standards
associated with wholesome competitive sports." 

And most coincidentally appropriate for this case 


"(1) Conduct by a student-athlete or an institutional
staff member that may be considered unethical
includes, but is not limited to: (a) Refusal to
furnish information relevant to investigation of a
possible violation of an NCAA regulation when
requested to do so by the NCAA or the individual's
institution 
"

Whether it's a criminal or an NCAA investigation we
would want to think that the board of trustees at a
university with Duke's reputation would adhere to each
with a seriousness that fits the crime.

We would like to think that a police investigation
carried a little more weight than one sanctioned by
Myles Brand and that Duke would do right by criminal
law even if it meant sacrificing a part of the family
that isn't run by Krzyzewski. 

We would like to think that the three men at the
center of power in this situation would have taken the
higher moral ground and punished team members with
suspensions or removal of scholarships -- none of
which happened -- while the athletes continually threw
ethics out of their BMW 3 Series windows.

We'd like to think a lot of things. But we can't be
that naïve. 

The reason I blame this scandal on the university and
not the players is because all this evidence of prior
misbehavior. While it has nothing to do with the
specific allegation, it has everything to do with its
existence. The behavior was allowed to happen
throughout last season as the lacrosse team battled
into the national title game against Johns Hopkins. 

It's the evidence of a team gone wild, with stories
and police records of an accepted behavior that the
university possibly ignored because it might upset
"friends" of the school whose families have made
handsome donations over generations. Or because of
intra-racial reasons that may not have been ignored
had 46 of the 47 players on the lacrosse team been the
color of the one player not required to provide a DNA
sample.

And even though a faculty committee will begin a
review of disciplinary procedures so the university
can get a better handle on out-of-control student
behavior and Brodhead, to his credit, has established
a five-step program to look into what needs to be done
to avoid future situations such as this, it's 365 days
late and probably a million dollars short. 

The bottom line is that if the university had taken
this aggressive approach when the red flags of the
lacrosse team's behavior began popping up on campus
police logs there might not be allegations of forcible
rape or images of elitest and racist conduct. There
might not have been a stripper at one of the lacrosse
parties to begin with -- at least not one the players
hired. The fact that the administration allowed this
team to behave in the worst interest of the university
and still apparently not be held accountable for any
of its actions leading up to the alleged rape of a
woman is beyond irresponsible -- it should be
punishable by law. 

But it won't be. Society doesn't roll like that.
Especially against the elite. 

My mother used to call it "being indignant." It's the
complex of superiority. The sense of entitlement of an
upscale sport at an upscale school. And just like kids
will be kids and male athletes will be male athletes,
adults needed to be adults. 

But powerful rich old men will be powerful rich old
men. They will impose policy only where it doesn't
directly affect them or their money. That's how they
roll.

But I can't go out ignorantly. That would make me as
guilty as the three men and administration I'm
accusing. As a member of the media, I also played a
role in allowing this to happen. 

Because we don't cover lacrosse with the same
intensity or passion that we cover NCAA football or
basketball, because recruits from Delbarton Academy
don't excite us the way recruits from Oak Hill Academy
do, since lacrosse hasn't been an A-list assignment
since Jim Brown revolutionized the sport at Syracuse,
we also ignored the deviant behavior and allowed the
administrative negligence to exist.

And don't get me wrong, Duke University is not the
only place where this behavior goes on; it just
happens to be the institution of higher learning that
got caught.

But just because the media doesn't cover lacrosse
doesn't mean a university -- especially one of such
prestige as Duke -- can absolve itself of holding
student-athletes to the standards of excellence
documented in the school's mission statement.

If Elton Brand, Grant Hill, Sean Dockery, Daniel
Ewing, Corey Maggette, Chris Duhon and Shelden
Williams are going to be held to a certain behavioral
standard while attending Duke, then Collin Finnerty,
Reade Seligmann and Ryan McFadyen needed to be held to
the same level of responsibility.

Because they, too, represent the Duke University. Just
as much as their parents' endowments.