ONTD Political

Diverging Stories of a Rhodes Candidacy [TW: discussion of sexual abuse]

9:25 pm - 01/27/2012
Diverging Stories of a Rhodes Candidacy

It may have been the sharpest day of extremes in the young life of Patrick J. Witt, star student and athlete at Yale University.

On Oct. 31, 2011, Witt learned he had been selected as a finalist for a Rhodes scholarship, a prestigious award given for achievements in academics, athletics and personal character. That same day, Witt, the quarterback on the school’s football team, received an e-mail message from the Yale professor in charge of the university committee that handles allegations of sexual misconduct.

“This meeting should have priority over other commitments you may have at that time,” read the e-mail from the professor, Michael Della Rocca.

Witt, by his own account, met the next day with Della Rocca and W. Marichal Gentry, Yale’s dean of student affairs. A female student on campus had accused him of sexual assault. At the meeting’s end, Witt was told to stay away from his accuser. No other action was taken.

The complaint and its outcome remained secret, with no word sent to officials with the Rhodes scholarship trust. And Witt went on to be the often glowing subject of news media coverage, held up as an exemplar of brains, brawn and character, a young man torn between attending a required final Rhodes interview on Nov. 19 and taking part in the football team’s season highlight, the game against Harvard the same day.

But in early November, the Rhodes Trust informed Yale administrators that it had learned of the allegation against Witt, according to people with knowledge of the episode who were granted anonymity to discuss confidential matters. Rhodes officials informed Yale that Witt’s candidacy had been suspended, and Yale would have to decide whether to re-endorse Witt if it wanted his candidacy to remain viable, the people said.

On Nov. 13, Yale and Witt announced that he was withdrawing his candidacy and that he would play against Harvard. There was no mention that any concerns had been raised by the Rhodes officials.

Witt, who provided his version of events through his agent Friday, denied that he ever had been told his candidacy had been suspended. And he insisted he made his decision to play the annual game against Harvard, rather than pursue the scholarship, before the Rhodes Trust ever knew of the allegation.

A statement released by the sports management firm representing Witt, while acknowledging a sexual assault allegation had been made against the quarterback, noted that the university’s inquiry “yielded no disciplinary measures, formal reports or referrals to higher authorities.”

Mark F. Magazu, II, Witt’s agent, said Friday that Witt and the female student had a casual relationship, and that any contact between them was purely consensual.

The fact that no formal investigation of the allegation was done and no finding of guilt or innocence rendered was dictated by the fact that Witt’s accuser had chosen to pursue what Yale calls an informal complaint process. Under that process, no independent investigators are appointed and both parties understand that the resolution of the allegation will not be part of the accused’s formal record.

Magazu, in an interview Friday, insisted that Witt’s Rhodes candidacy “was never suspended.”

“The only thing out of the ordinary is Rhodes saying, ‘Let’s have Yale re-refer him,’ ” said Magazu, president of Atlas Strategies, a communications and management firm. There was no indication, he said, that without a second endorsement, Witt could not proceed to the final interview.

Those with knowledge of the action taken by the Rhodes Trust said otherwise. They said Witt’s candidacy was set aside pending a re-endorsement by Yale — otherwise, they say, there was no point in asking for it — and that Witt was told that explicitly.

Yale officials have declined to discuss the matter, leaving it unclear whether the administrators involved in handling the Rhodes candidacy knew of the allegation before it was reported to the Rhodes Trust. What is clear is that no one at Yale formally notified Rhodes, nor did Witt.

source has the rest of the article.
mollywobbles867 28th-Jan-2012 06:48 am (UTC)
Morning Joe was ranting about this Friday morning and he kept saying that no complaint at all had been made and that there wasn't even an accuser and that whatever paper he was holding up had secret sources and how dare they ruin his reputation. It was disgusting.
omgangiepants 28th-Jan-2012 09:07 pm (UTC)
Ugh Joe. I like him sometimes because he seems to be the only rightie who has the guts to call out the party but he's such a gross typical white man.
anolinde 28th-Jan-2012 06:56 am (UTC)
Oh, wow, that's really interesting. I've actually heard of this guy before - my dad/brother are big sports fans, and they'd been talking about a Yale athlete who turned down his eligibility for the Rhodes scholarship in order to play his last senior year football game (although his team wound up losing). At the time, we all thought it was just a tough-luck case of having to pick one important commitment over the other. I had no idea that a sexual assault case was involved.
roseofjuly 29th-Jan-2012 08:46 am (UTC)
Maybe my bias is showing here, but I think it's kind of stupid to turn down the chance at a prestigious, life-changing scholarship like Rhodes to play a football game you've already played 3 times. Sure, it's the last one of your senior year, but it's not like he hadn't been playing football forever already.

So that's why I don't believe that he just did it of his own accord and it had nothing to do with the accusations.
anolinde 29th-Jan-2012 05:01 pm (UTC)
To be fair, though, he's been on the team for four years. So even though it's technically "just" a football game, it's also his last time playing with his team - the players, the coach, etc. They could very well be a second family to him, and I'd imagine anyone in that situation would be worried about "letting the team down." Plus, he might be in a position where he doesn't need scholarship money.
roseofjuly 29th-Jan-2012 08:59 pm (UTC)
The Rhodes isn't really about the money so much as the prestige. I figure few American students were probably planning on getting a master's at Oxford anyway before they got eligibility for the Rhodes. And I would think my second family would try to be understanding of the incredible opportunity I've just been offered - not only to have the prestige of the Rhodes name but also a master's from Oxford and the chance to study in another country free of charge.

"For more than a century, Rhodes scholars have left Oxford with virtually any job available to them. For much of this time, they have overwhelmingly chosen paths in scholarship, teaching, writing, medicine, scientific research, law, the military and public service. They have reached the highest levels in virtually all fields."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/20/AR2009112003374.html

Yale football players don't tend to go on to the NFL, and even for Ivy League graduates money for graduate school is hard to come by unless one intends on a PhD. That's why I'm saying from my perspective, I'm having a hard time seeing why anyone would turn the opportunity down. I understand the nostalgia factor - especially against their biggest rival Harvard. But at the same time, Yale certainly isn't like Michigan or Ohio. Given that it's the last game of the year, I'm sure that many a player has had to miss it to interview for Rhodes.
yeats 28th-Jan-2012 02:50 pm (UTC)
ugh yale. i'm not surprised, though -- they've only been accepting women since 1969. they're still trying to find their feet.

#sarcasm
#almamaterfeelings
roseofjuly 29th-Jan-2012 08:47 am (UTC)
Columbia didn't start accepting women until 1983. They had Barnard to use as an excuse.

But I've read several stories about Yale turning the other way after someone (sometimes faculty) had been accused of sexual assault or misconduct.
tabaqui 28th-Jan-2012 04:27 pm (UTC)
I'm really tired of sports jocks being let off super-easy over this kind of thing, and the women involved either being dismissed or vilified.

A woman's person and her safety is not < a football game.
phamos818 28th-Jan-2012 04:55 pm (UTC)
I will simply never understand people who put loyalty to an athlete/team over everything else. The JoePa thing has been reminding me so much of the Roethlisberger stuff, and now OBVIOUSLY this guy is an upstanding citizen b/c quarterback/YaleYaleYale. I don't even understand how, before any of this even came out, people could be commending him for choosing the Harvard game over the Rhodes interview. I mean, first of all it's ridiculous that Rhodes couldn't change the date of an INTERVIEW to accommodate him (although maybe the reason such accommodation was never made was, obviously, because the interview had secretly been canceled), but really? A football game? Yes, a big football game, and teammates responsibility commitments etc, but RHODES SCHOLARSHIP. But that would mean valuing intellect over athleticism, and that's one of the least valued things in our country...along with respect for women, obvs.
roseofjuly 29th-Jan-2012 08:52 am (UTC)
I'm not surprised that Rhodes wouldn't change the interview date for him - I don't know whether they do multiple interviews in one day, but that could've been a consideration - that he wasn't the only one. But even if he was, these prestigious scholarships are notoriously rigid and sometimes require sacrifices like that from students during their senior year. It's a sign of commitment.
This page was loaded May 23rd 2013, 6:44 pm GMT.