Chronicle’s Brodhead interview: My take

Today’s Chronicle contains a lengthy interview with President Richard H. Brodhead. But there’s not any new news in it that I could see.

Reporter Rob Copeland asked some tough, informed questions, but Brodhead avoided answering them, and Copeland didn’t press with follow-ups.

For example, look what happened when Copeland asked why AD Joe Alleva and VP Larry Moneta weren’t held responsible for anything related to Men’s lacrosse while Coach Pressler was fired:

Copeland: Why did you not hold Athletics Director Joe Alleva responsible for the team as well? Why not ask for the resignations of Larry Moneta, vice president for student affairs, or any of the other administrators who were previously aware of the lacrosse team's issues. Why stop at coach Pressler?

Brodhead: The party was a team event. It wasn't just a group of people, it was something convened by the captain of the team. The Pressler resignation was not my attempt to say that he was responsible for the situation. It was simply a resignation of the inevitability that given where we were, we would need to make some differences to go forward with lacrosse.(Brodhead's syntactically confused response is reproduced here exactly as it appears in The Chronicle. - JinC)

As he has for months, Brodhead offered his “it was all so confusing” excuse for his obvious mishandling of events last March and since. Here’s today’s version of “it was all …”

"Once the situation existed, it had to be dealt with. I'm really not immune to self-criticism in any way, I believe we've handled this as straightforwardly and honorably as we could have, given the extraordinary nature of the situation and the changing nature of the facts."

Brodhead may not be immune to self-criticism but I sure couldn’t find what I thought was genuine and serious self-criticism in any of his responses.

Certainly there was nothing, for instance, like an admission that he should have met on Mar. 25 with the parents of the lacrosse players who were on campus that day.

Or that he should have spoken out on May 18 when racists threatened Reade Seligmann, first as he walked to the Durham County Courthouse ("Justice will be done, Rapist."); and then again inside the courtroom with the threats this time including death threats ("Dead man walking.")

Of course, it may just be that Brodhead doesn't think he should have met with the parents or spoken out to condemn those threatening Seligmann and to support and comfort him and his family.

A hat tip to Reporter Copeland. He had prepared for the interview but was up against someone who’s very adept at dodging questions.

If there’s a “next time” Chronicle interview with Brodhead, here are a few of the questions Brodhead should have answered many months ago. I’ve put them in the form they’d be asked in a face-to-face interview.

You knew, President Brodhead, before the story broke on Mar. 24 that the lacrosse captains had been exceptionally cooperative with Durham Police investigators. You knew the “wall of solidarity” report in the Mar. 25 Raleigh News & Observer and other media was false.

Later that day when you issued your statement supporting the cancellation of the lacrosse games, it said physical coercion and sexual assault had no place at Duke but it said nothing about the players’ cooperation.

Why did you decide to make no mention of their cooperation?

Why did you decide to instead say:

I urge everyone to cooperate to the fullest with the police inquiry while we wait to learn the truth.

AD Alleva also knew of the players' cooperation with police. But his Mar. 25 statement, like yours, makes no mention of their cooperation.

Did you and Alleva coordinate your statements? Did you jointly agree to make no mention of the players' cooperation? Or was it simply coincidental that both your statements omitted mention of the players’ cooperation?

Were your and Alleva's Mar. 25 statements reviewed prior to release by any trustees or senior administrators who were aware of the players' cooperation?

If the statements were reviewed by such people, did one or more of them raise the issue and/or recommend including in yours, Alleva's or both your statements mention of the players' cooperation?

If yes, why wasn’t that done?

By Mar. 29 "Vigilante" posters targeting the players and demanding they abandon what the posters falsely claimed was a refusal to cooperate with police were circulating and posted on campus.

You didn't at the time condemn the "Vigilante" poster or speak out against those circulating and posting it. Why not?

You still haven’t condemned the poster or spoken out against those who circulated and posted it. Why not?

On Apr. 5 you issued a statement in which you said:

I urge everyone to cooperate to the fullest with the police inquiry while we wait to learn the truth.

Since you knew by then even more than you knew on Mar. 25 about all the cooperation the players’ had provided police; and since you had seen them falsely and dangerously targeted for remaining silent, why did you decide not to mention their cooperation in your Apr. 5 statement?

There are many other questions I'd like you to answer, President Brodhead, but these are enough for one interview.

Now please answer them.
______________________________________________

The entire Chronicle interview is here.