Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
There is a charge from another woman who was drinking at a bar and was escorted home by two men she "thinks" were CU football players and woke up the next morning bleeding. She believes she was raped and possibly drugged.
|
Interesting discussion on KOA (Talk) Radio this morning. I didn't hear the whole thing, so I'll just hit some of the highlights as I understand them.
The program is hosted by Boulder lawyer Dan Capliss. He is a former "Legal Expert" reporter with the station where I worked. As such, he also worked with Dr. Dave Hnida, Katies' dad.
Apparantely, (I didn't hear this part) the CU president is backing down fairly dramatically on her criticism of Gary Barnett -- I think saying that she heard some of his comments out of context, and that she used language that was too harsh under the circumstances. That is my paraphrase, not her words.
Capliss had Gary Barnett on the next hour, which I heard only the end of. Barnett was fairly eloquent in defending the CU Football program. In my opinion, it may be that he really didn't understand all of the use of sex in recruitment -- which seems remarkable, but I suppose it's possible.
The two most interesting points to me, though, came from Capliss. Remember that he is a lawyer first, broadcaster second.
While professing admiration for Dr. Hnida, he points out that his daughter Katie and he have leveled some serious charges, but refused to give any details or name any names in her alleged rape. While stressing that if the rape did happen, the rapist should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, Katie Hnida was basically indicting all 75 members of the team by not naming the alleged rapist. No member of that team will be free of suspicion until a suspect is named. She has refused to release any other facts as well. That is unfair to all the rest of the team.
Capliss had a copy of the official police report for the latest allegation of rape. As I said earlier, this victim was pretty vague. Capliss read much of the report on the air. It seems that the woman was in a bar, interacted with a fairly large number of men. She remembers talking to two black guys who "might" have been CU football players, because they were "pretty big." She doesn't remember leaving the bar, or with whom, but woke up the next morning in her apartment partially clothed, bleeding from her rectum, and discovering a condom wrapper on the floor which she didn't recognize. She does not remember how she got to the apartment, or with whom. The police immediately started looking for big black men and found two CU football players who were in the bar. DNA tests have cleared at least one of them. The tests took months to be completed. So, the question becomes, was the BPD's initial investigation tainted with racism since they immediately focused in on black men at the bar? Since witnesses say she was with a number of men in the bar, it could appear that way. And her story is pretty vague.
Another alleged attack report was apparantely brought by a female employee of the CU Athletic Department. She allegedly said that if Coach Barnett took care of the problem to her satisifaction, she would not press charges. She didn't. Does that mean that Barnett did confront the alleged player or players? We don't know that, but the fact that she didn't press charges might indicate that he did.
All of this leaves me really conflicted. I was pretty well decided that Barnett was at least guilty of being remarkably unaware of what was going on in his program. What I heard on KOA leaves at least some amount of doubt. If nothing else, it was a less passionate consideration of the situation than I've heard on other local and national media. And, of course, it was an interpretation of a practicing lawyer. As we know, they tend to look at things from a different angle than we do.
Finally, from what I hear, the CU President backed way off in her comments regarding Gary Barnett.
This could get real interesting.
Which brings me to a personal delema. I've met quite a few athletes -- from high school through professional. My impressions, in MANY instances, have not been favorable. Many act like spoiled kids who believe they are above the rules. That's probably not entirely their fault, since we're the ones who place them on a pedestal and treat them like supreme beings. So what needs to be done to get this kind of alleged situation under control?
IF Barnett loses his job, will he be a well known scapegoat and will these alleged situations be allowed to go on because of big time influential alums and the big business side of sports? Or will the NCAA and universities with big time programs unite to put a stop to this kind of thing?
Or is Barnett and the CU program really out of control in comparison to the likes of Nebraska, Ohio State, Miami (Florida), and the other huge names? It's not that difficult for me to believe -- but I only know what I hear. The fact that I know some of the people involved does make it interesting, though.
Stay tuned...
Linear Mode
