|
|
|
|
|
Honegger reinstated to basketball team after Athletics Committee investigation
Feb. 22, 2001
NOTE: Attached is a summary of the recommendations of the Athletics Committee received by IU President Myles Brand on Feb. 21.
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- The Indiana University Athletics Committee's investigation of student-athlete misconduct is complete and was accepted today (Feb. 22) by IU President Myles Brand.
As a result, IU women's basketball player Rachael Honegger was reinstated to the team effective today. The committee unanimously concluded that the senior forward and single mother had been sufficiently sanctioned, noting that she is making restitution and already has served a four-game suspension.
"The committee reviewed both the specifics of her situation and the procedures in place internally and externally to deal with student-athlete misconduct," said Bruce L. Jaffee, chairman of the IU Athletics Committee.
The 19-member group then concluded in its report that Honegger's case was not properly handled by the Athletics Department "through no fault of her own."
Brand two weeks ago requested the special Athletics Committee review of how Honegger's situation was handled by the IU Athletics Department after learning about her conviction from sources outside the Athletics Department.
The committee report concluded that improvements are needed in communication within the Athletics Department as well as among the Athletics Department, the Athletics Committee, the dean of students and the president.
J. Terry Clapacs, vice president for administration, saluted the committee's report.
"Once again, the Athletics Committee has done fine work. They identified a problem and offered helpful recommendations and corrective measures to improve our system. I am confident that the Athletics Department will act expeditiously to effect all necessary changes to ensure that we do not revisit these issues."
"I was impressed by the unanimous and strongly held opinion of the Athletics Committee," Brand said in accepting the report.
The following is a summary of the recommendations the IU Athletics Committee submitted to IU President Myles Brand:
I. What went wrong.
It is perhaps best to characterize the handling of this case as a problem that involved lapses in management and lapses in communication. Here are our concerns:
We are concerned by the fact that Coach Kathi Bennett evidently did not know the key Athletics Department personnel who should have been informed of ongoing progress in this case. We believe her when she says that she went immediately to the athletics director, assuming that was the right place to start. We are disturbed that she did not know about the roles others -- in particular, the compliance officer and the associate athletics director for student welfare -- should have played. In short, a new coach, no matter when hired, needs to be socialized into the structure and function of the department.
We are further disturbed by what seems to be a continual failure during the summer and the fall of interested parties to communicate, both within the department and between the department and other key offices on campus (specifically, offices of the dean of students and the president). The fact that an issue of this nature could "slip through the cracks," as we were repeatedly told had happened, is more than surprising.
We understand, too, that the timing and turmoil surrounding the "zero-tolerance policy" regarding Coach Bob Knight likely played a role in perceptions of the relative importance of issues. Likewise, the general unsettled atmosphere in Athletics during the fall (the impending departure of the academic adviser, the departure of Coach Knight and the beginnings of the search for a replacement for the athletics director) likely diverted attention from the case.
II. Recommendations.
What follows are general recommendations drawn from our investigation. We are guided in the recommendations both by the newly adopted Statement of Principles on the Conduct of Participants in Student Athletic Programs and by the knowledge that overall leadership of IU Athletics will change during the next months. We frame these recommendations in the idea that appropriate committees will soon take up the issues to work out details.
A. Implementation of the recently adopted Statement of Principles on the Conduct of Participants in Student Athletic Programs.
This recently adopted code certainly provides guidelines to handle misconduct cases. We have heard reasoned arguments supporting the notion that student-athletes should be considered innocent until proven guilty, especially in cases that are likely to make their way into the court system. Such arguments suggest that coaches might well allow players to continue practicing and playing until their cases are resolved outside the university. We also have heard arguments that support the language of the new code (Sec. 2.4) that say that participants represent the university and are expected to exhibit a higher standard of behavior than might be expected of students. Implied is that athletic competition for the university is a privilege and not a right. This perspective suggests that in some cases a harsher sanction should be imposed even before a case is resolved.
We have three recommendations.
(1) The administrators and coaches in the Athletics Department need to talk through and establish a uniform approach to misconduct cases, recognizing the responsibility of coaches to develop and enforce their own team rules in conformity with this uniform approach (Sec. 3.5.5).
(2) In cases in which there is evidence of potentially felonious or other unusual criminal misconduct, investigation of cases, enforcement of the code, and assessment of penalties should be made by an independent panel, perhaps designated as a student-athlete misconduct panel.
(3) The president, athletics director, administrator for the sport, coach and player would be informed in writing of any case referred to the student-athlete misconduct panel. These individuals also would be informed in writing of the decisions made by the panel.
B. Establishment of a student-athlete misconduct panel.
As stated above, this panel would be prepared to make decisions in unusual cases. Our intent is not for this group to usurp the authority of appropriate people within Athletics; rather, we think it would be a good idea to have a board that could be quickly assembled to help think through difficult cases. (We believe this recommendation fits the spirit of the new code of conduct.)
In connection with the establishment of this panel, it would be useful for an appropriately representative group (members of the Athletics Department, the Athletics Committee and the Dean of Students Office) to meet soon to develop guidelines for sanctions, recognizing the need for flexibility depending on the particulars of any individual case. We think there would be value in reviewing the codes followed by other Big Ten schools to see what might be learned from how others deal with similar cases. The structure of the misconduct panel might be patterned after the Athletics Financial Aid Hearing Panel, which deals with cases of non-renewal, reduction or revocation of tenders and has a substantial portion of its membership from outside of the Athletics Department. Membership might include:
(1) The Athletics Department administrator responsible for student welfare (normally an associate athletics director).
(2) The compliance coordinator for the Athletics Department.
(3) A faculty member from the University Athletics Committee appointed by the chair of that committee.
(4) A faculty member designated by the Dean of Students Office.
(5) A student member designated by the student body president from the pool of students with experience in campus grievance hearings.
C. Improved cooperation and sharing of information between the Athletics Department and the Dean of Students Office.
Information on student-athlete misconduct cases has been shared between the Dean of Students Office and the Athletics Department over the years. There has been substantial cooperation and not infrequent meetings over specific cases of misconduct. The Dean of Students Office regularly provides the Athletics Department with information on these cases. However, the Athletics Department evidently has not always reciprocated in providing information to the Dean of Students on potential or actual misconduct by student athletes that might be in violation of the Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities and Conduct (CRRC). Because student-athletes sometimes are rather highly visible people, complaints registered against them often first go to the Athletics Department. For this reason, the Athletics Department should promptly inform the Dean of Students Office in writing if there is knowledge of a possible violation of the CRRC.
It should be noted that the Athletics Department has never in any way interfered with the judicial process of the Dean of Students Office.
On this issue, we recommend a meeting soon between appropriate people in the Dean of Students office (Pam Freeman) and the Athletics Department (Steve Downing and Jennifer Brinegar).
D. Resolution of the case of Rachael Honegger.
Rachael Honegger has been penalized by a court of law. She is a repentant first offender, serving her time, and is making restitution. One can argue that she should have been suspended at the time of her arrest or suspended and even dismissed from the team at the time of her conviction. Her case at that time was not handled properly by the Athletics Department through no fault of her own. Subsequently, she has been besieged by negative press from the media and many individuals and suspended for four games (at the time of the completion of this report). Furthermore, her teammates have been penalized by her absence. Since she remains on strict probation, we see no purpose to additional penalties and recommend that her suspension be lifted at this time (February 20, 2001).
Respectfully submitted by the subcommittee on February 20, 2001:
Bonnie Brownlee (elected faculty member), co-chair
David Towell (elected faculty member), co-chair
Daniel Maki (elected faculty member)
Jennifer Sinclair (alumna)
Meredith Suffron (IUSA president)
James Wimbush (elected faculty member)