This case came to light a few days ago, when rumors of why exactly Ukwuachu had been "soft-spended" from the football team following his transfer from Boise State started coming to light. Today, Texas Monthly ran a story on the background of this case, as well as the university and athletic department's responses to the case at the local (campus) level.
These responses, if Texas Monthly's reporting is true, are unacceptable.
But after the school’s investigation (so insufficient, according to the court, that the judge sustained a motion from the prosecution to restrict the defense from referencing it during the trial), Baylor took no action to discipline Ukwuachu, even while charges were still pending. From Baylor’s brief investigation, to its failure to consider disciplinary action, to its defensive coordinator’s statements this summer about the player’s expected return, the school’s idea of how to respond to serious rape allegations is seriously out of step with that of the courts.
How can I in good conscience throw my support behind a university that seemingly cared not about someone who so direly needed care?
One of Baylor Football's favorite things to tout is how this is a university (and an athletic program) of second chances. That forgiveness and help are Christian values, and how a good environment and support from strong coaches can change someone's life. These are admirable traits, taken at face value, and there have been proven success stories from this program.
In the shadow of second chances, however, can be found the possibility for deep shame. When does a second chance become an excuse to keep a talented player, rather than an attempt to help a human being?
When does athletics trump the human mission of the school...and when does the "Christian" mission of the school create problems when dealing with crimes of a sexual nature?
It keeps coming back to this: What if Jane Doe had been me? How can I feel comfortable in recommending my friends, the young women I know and love, go to a university that has shown what appears to be only a passing interest in treating potential victims of horrible crimes with respect?
I went to Baylor. I love Baylor, the institution, the professors I had, the education I received, the traditions I passed down, the family I gained. I also understand Baylor - and what the good and the bad of the religious mission can be.
However: Even if you, in your misguided ivory towers, think that a young woman (or man) who is reporting an assault of a sexual nature somehow "sinned" in the crime committed against them - even if you don't believe their tale until it is proven in court - even though "innocent until proven guilty" is the technical law of the land - how can you in any good faith force a victim, even an alleged one, to share classes, to share rooms, with the accused? How can you put that burden on them - that they must bend themselves and their injured selves to your will, when they are hurting - is not the Christian mission one of healing?
There should not be a cherry-picking of forgiveness away from aiding those who are hurting.
I know that there is more still to be seen in this case - but by being silent, statements are said.
