Historian and blogger KC Johnson has done it again.
This time he’s called Duke University President Richard H. Brodhead for his denial he scapegoated the Men’s lacrosse team.
In typical KC fashion, he gets right to the point:
Richard Brodhead’s recent denial of “scapegoating” the lacrosse team seems unsustainable. In the Duke president’s public response to Friends of Duke University, the sole evidence that he cited to substantiate his claim that he hasn't scaegoated the team was the existence of the Coleman Committee report.There's a lot more, all of it informative.
But he had described this document to the University community as favorable to the lacrosse team only in that it did not “confirm the worst allegations against this team”—which, of course, were that three players committed gang rape and dozens of others covered it up.
Many people would consider Brodhead’s failure to mention that the report detailed the players’ positive academic performance, excellent relations with Duke staff, and extensive record of community service confirmation of the charge of his scapegoating the team.
More important, the Coleman Committee report conclusively showed how Brodhead already had scapegoated the team when he forced the resignation of lacrosse coach Mike Pressler.
As William Gerrish, whose son captained the 2005 Duke lacrosse team, recently noted, Pressler “is perhaps the only one who did nothing wrong during this incident, and yet he ended up paying for it.”
KC cares about doing right, something we're seen little of from Duke faculty and administrators as the lacrosse hoax and frame-ups play themselves out.
7 comments:
Richard Brodhead is too spineless to take any real stand against this false accusation of rape. He won't even stand up for innocence until proven guilty.
Richard Brodhead is a coward.
Michael -
"The truth, obviously, lies somewhere in between."
Well, uh, no it probably doesn't.
The team was made up of young male athletes, with enough money to afford alcohol, cars, and girlfriends (not necessarily in that order of expense). I hardly think we need a "report" to determine that stupid stuff was going to happen.
Heck, you don't even need to single out a group of athletes. Pick any group of men at Duke - say the outdoors club. I was once a member, so I know of what I speak.
Every single thing negative in the Coleman report could have been written about us. Except the part where someone chastised us about our bad behavior at a party - our faculty "sponsor" was in the English department and didn't give a flip.
Nope, I gotta go with JinC and others: Brodhead is coward, a bully, and a fool.
-Ac
-AC
These boys should be allowed to return to class this fall, and the lying stripper should be sent to Iraq for target practice. The lying stripper, Crystal Gail Mangum, deserve worse, but I'm trying to be fair about this whole false rape case.
To Anon who said "Richard Brodhead..."
I think looking out for himself partly explains what President Brodhead has done and not done.
He also seems to be comfortable with folks like the Group of 88.
To Michael,
Thank you for commenting with detail and civility.
I can't now give your comments time for the thoughtful reply they deserve.
I hope you take a look at the Talking with Regulars post I'll have up by noon tomorrow.
I plan to reference you and comment further.
Again, thank you. I’m glad you’re visiting.
To Michael Nifong Jr.
Does your Dad know your making such comments?
Seriously, I have no wish to see harm befall the accuser beyond what the law would say is fair. I pray for her.
In many ways I think what I know of her conduct so far is more excusable than that of many others involved in the hoax and frame-up.
Best to you all,
John
Michael -
Dude, we went to Kayak events with Duke on our shirts and on our yaks. We competed head-to-head against UNC and NCSU on the Nantahala.
Are you saying that b/c we didn't get paid to play we didn't represent Duke?
If, after one of the post parties we'd gotten pulled for underage drinking, DUI, and mooning the cops (don't ask) the headline would have surely read: DUKE Students Arrested.
You're splitting hairs.
But I commend you for knowing what your students are up to. If they violate PC community standars are you ready to get fired for it and enjoy the death threats from "local activists?"
-AC
Dear AC,
Because I've often responded to your comments I hope you won't mind if I spend most of my response time with Michael.
Heck, you may now be saying to yourself something like: "I'm glad JinC's going to bother Michael and leave me alone today.
Dear Michael,
I'm glad you're back and commenting.
Please look at the Talking with Regulars post. It's up, and I mention you in it.
Without meaning to suggest I agree with all you say in your most recent comment, I want to say a few admiring words about your paragraph which begins:
"As for "PC Community Standards" comment, your 'penalty phase' of that come from two different sources."
I admire that paragraph for its reasonableness; it's suggestion that the writer holds to what I wish were still the "values of the academy;" and its economy of words.
You put an awful lot in that paragraph.
Thank you both AC and Michael.
John
Michael -
You make several good points.
I still maintain that any sponsored group of students represents the community in an equal fashion, even if they aren't treated equally by the press (opportunistic as it may be).
There was a *lot* more more capital spent on the various drama organizations than was spent on womens LAX, for example. (Three theaters vs. substandard locker rooms.) Heck, more people go see the former than the latter any given year. But if one group acted badly more than the other, you might well get a different reaction.
Did the LAX team really rack up 15x more whatevers or did they just get logged?
When I was on Trent we had wild and out of control parties any given several days of the week (sorry Mom!) but no cops. The SAE's had similar parties with cops there on a regular basis. I'm sure they looked bad compared to us, but....
-AC
Post a Comment