News broke this morning that there will be no trial (originally scheduled for spring 2018) in the Title IX lawsuit against the University of Tennessee. UT will pay just under $2.5 million to the eight women who brought the lawsuit.
As is the case in most settlements, the university admits no wrongdoing. Money for the settlement will be drawn from both central administration and athletics. Stories suggest that no taxpayer money will be used, but at a state university I wonder how easy it is to keep it all separated.
From the plantiffs' lawyer:
We are satisfied that, while universities everywhere struggle with these
issues, the University of Tennessee has made significant progress in
the way they educate and respond to sexual assault cases. My clients and
I are also convinced that the University's leadership is truly
committed to continue its exemplary efforts to create a model as it
relates to sexual misconduct.
From UT Chancellor Jimmy Cheek:
Like many institutions, we are not perfect, but our goal is to continue
to be the best we can be at creating awareness, educating and preventing
discrimination and abuse in any form and to continue to be equally
prepared when it does happen and to deal with it promptly, sensitively,
fairly and effectively. We've come a long way in recent years, and we
are working every day to be even better.
No one listed the measures UT has taken to ensure that Title IX is being correctly and effectively implemented.
ESPN has a list of the specific incidents here. But as a reminder, these date back to the mid-90s and involved UT athletes who were either not investigated or not punished for sexual assault.
As a wrap-up, I want to note the trends or similarities that these charges have with other cases we have covered.
1. Athletes have special protections. These manifested in the following ways in this case: not being investigated; found guilty but not punished or lightly punished; other entities intimidating victims discouraging them from filing complaints or charges (in this case it was teammates of perpetrators).
2. Passing the buck: In at least one case at UT, an offending athlete was found guilty, allowed to finish out his season and then transfer. Remember, the SEC passed a rule that prevents member schools from accepting transfer athletes who have histories of sexual assault. Apparently, they have no issue sending those students to non-SEC schools.
3. Female athletes as victims. Because tracking the intricacies of sexual assault is difficult--at best, we don't know how many perpetrators are athletes nor do we know are many victims are athletes and at what level they play. But UT is not the first time we have heard about male athletes at DI institutions assaulting female athletes with few repercussions (Missouri, Iowa, New Mexico). Keeping things in the "family" (i.e., athletics department) clearly has serious negative consequences. Female athletes are pressured not to report assaults; they are told things will be handled internally. In this case, that pressure was also exerted on a male athlete who attempted to come to the defense of one of the victims and was assaulted and called a traitor by Coach Butch Jones (Jones denies this.).