Baylor University internal investigation into sexual assault allegations and its oversight structure

We rolled into action. A crisis management team was set up, the Board of Regents promptly informed (first through the leadership), and an initial recommendation made. Specifically, | commissioned Baylor’s Faculty Athletic Representative (a post required under NCAA procedures) to conduct an internal inquiry into the charges. By design, the “FAR” operates outside of and independent of the Athletic Department. Serving in a watchdog capacity, a form of “check and balance,” the FAR reports directly to the president. Respected law professor Jeremy Counsellor took on the role, and within several days, reported back — in a one-page summary that contained only the background of his appointment and his solitary recommendation — that an outside investigation should be conducted. That is, no one inside or connected to the university should be retained to provide a truly independent, honest assessment of the situation. So it was that Pepper Hamilton, a respected Philadelphia law firm, was retained. Their work began in early September 2015, and came to conclusion in May 2016. To assure the independence of its work, the Pepper Hamilton lawyers reported directly to a special three-person committee of Baylor’s Board of Regents. That structure remained in place throughout the lengthy process, culminating in a verbal report — with numerous power point slides — to the Board of Regents in mid-May 2016. The final work product was two-fold: a set of findings of fact, reported by the Board of Regents, and a lengthy set of recommendations from the law firm. There was no “report” in the traditional sense. The Board’s findings and Pepper Hamilton’s recommendations were publicly released, leading to events that | describe in the next chapter. The findings were deeply troubling. Moral outrage was the order of the day, throughout the country. This was page one, above-the-fold news. Searing criticism unfolded, not simply of the football program but overall the University’s stewardship with respect to interpersonal violence (including sexual assault) was found wanting. The criticisms were directed atincluded what | call “first responders,” including campus law enforcement, health services and counseling. Pepper Hamilton’s findings were summarized as a “fundamental failure” on the part of the University. This quickly became the prevailing narrative. The narrative was reinforced by additional victims coming forward — some of whom had graduated — about their tragic experiences. These were chronicled in dramatic ways by ESPN’s go-for-the-jugular program, “Outside the Lines.” Baylor — not just the football program — became a pariah. Victims’ stories moved the thoughtful observer or listener to a powerful combination of empathy and outrage. One’s heart goes out to the victim; a second later, waves of outrage wash over the empathetic observer. How could this have happened? Who fell asleep at the switch? Who failed to protect these young women, and why? Did coaches turn a blind eye to reports of unconscionable acts by superstar players — or even non-superstars who abused (or worse) young women?. Did “first responders” on the University’s payroll turn a deaf ear to distraught complaints of sexual violence, including rape? How could this be, especially at a self-professed Christian university? HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031535