re: Someone please explain to me how Briles was the Baylor scapegoat

You're right, it does say that. Well....

I also read the AD denied it from the beginning and eventually admitted he was informed.

Sounds like this falls on his lap morally and legally moreso than Briles.

What a fricked up situation.

quote:

---

They can prove he knew of allegations of several of his players and either didn't punish them or lightly punished them.

---

A) He was waiting for actual evidence before dubbing his players guilty

B) False rape accusations DO HAPPEN and ruin lives

C) It wasn't his area of the program, there were lots of other positions that failed/weren't in place to handle things properly.

D) Its SO EASY to dump all the guilt on to the most notable name at Baylor during the time.

quote:

---

Sounds like this falls on his lap morally and legally moreso than Briles

---

Briles getting 20 million in a settlement out of court is an eye opener to me. If Briles is as guilty as the media/public make him out to be, he isn't getting that cash. No chance

quote:

---

Briles getting 20 million in a settlement out of court is an eye opener to me

---

Correct. He sued them for wrongful termination and had witnesses and evidence to prove that every scrap was bullshite.

The bigger picture screams cover up for many mishandlings of rapes by non athletes. The university made him a sacrificial lamb to try and save their name and reputation.

It is also interesting that anybody who is an employee is forbidden to speak about any of it. Can't have the real story getting out there.

quote:

---

The WSJ article referenced multiple gang rapes. That seems really bad.

---

The WSJ also published multiple articles about Donald Trump raping a 12 year old girl over 10 years ago. The accusations was completely unfounded and has never entered any courtroom.

quote:

---

I still find it hard to believe that he wouldn't feel the need to let someone else know. I understand not wanting to interfere, but at some point you can't help what you've been heard.

---

Because you can't just go around crying rape without learning the facts first. He was testing to see if that girl was telling the truth or not. He didn't want to run around calling his players rapists without evidence. IT DOES HAPPEN. False rape cries still ruin lives.

quote:

---

MO the whole thing reads like he wanted it to go away,

---

Thats your own personal bias on it, and sorry you can't eliminate your own personal feelings, luckily they don't make what you believe true.

quote:

---

he wasn't going to take it any further, for fear of the damage it could cause. Again, JMO.

---

He COULDN'T, because what if the girl was lying or trying to extort the university?

Do you believe in due process? Do you believe in collecting evidence as a means to convict or exonerate someone? Do you believe in justice at all?

quote:

---

Here are a couple of articles.

---

The first article said that it had not been reported to officials. Briles was told that it had. All officials said they had never been informed. Almost three years later the AD finally admitted that he had been informed.

Briles did wrong by not reporting it to Judicial because he was told by the girl's coach that it had been reported. The rules in place at the time stated that he should have reported it anyway. He was wrong technically but morally he thought the right thing had been done, based on the statements given to him by the girl's advocate, her coach.

The second link, while more informative, is pretty ambiguous in regards to the athletic department. 99% of the blame is placed on the school administration for not following title IX. It blamed the football team for having an internal mechanism set up for some of their discipline.

An example could be if two players got angry and fought at practice, instead of making them run stadiums, it should have been sent to the Judicial dept. for review. All indiscretions, no matter the size, should have been reported. The internal discipline was said to have led to an atmosphere of athletes being above the rules.

There were two athletes convicted of rape. While the report did not state it, neither of them ever played another down of football once the accusation was made. Once again, Briles urged police involvement.

No details are given of any wrongdoing on his part, yet he is still tainted. As many have said, he will not be LSU's OC because he is tainted, not because he did anything wrong.

The report did show the university dragging their feet and turning the other cheek where non athletes are concerned. It is my opinion that they fired Briles to show they were tough on crime and to try and save their reputation, not due to any misdeeds from him.

Here is another question I always have when this, Paterno, etc. comes up. The universities all have a policy that Paterno, Briles, etc. report it to their superiors.

Their superiors do not have badges and guns. How about changing the policies to reporting crimes to the police, not judicial compliance, campus police, the AD, or whoever.

Get some detectives involved.