Starr is not only trying to cover Baylor's backside but his own. There are more questions that need to be asked outside of the ones already posted. Bottom line Baylor and Star and the AD are in deep deep kimchi. They are doing what ever they can to try to contain what is going to be a flood. The dam has many crack in it and not even Starr can stop it. He is try to throw out fixes after the fact. Here are some other questions that I would love to ask.
1. Did Ken Starr know about the rape indictment, if not why not, if so when did he know?
2. When Starr found out about the indictment what did he do about it?
Any time a girl reports a rape on campus, such as this, if I am the President of any university let alone an avowed Christian one, I want to know it ASAP. If I am the AD I want to know it ASAP if it involves one of my players, I want to know ASAP. Or is this such a common occurrence that it is left in the hands of underlings?
One has to ask if this was reported to higher ups then why not? If so when, what is the chain of command here? I have to assume that the reporting of campus rapes is not a common thing is it?
3. That leads me to another question, how many reports of sexual assault have been reported either to police over the last 5 years whether by athlete or not?
If I am the girls attorney I am going after the top guys. I will not allow a patsy to take the fall, I get the big settlement and I get the sleaze bags out as well. I also, make a big example for others. They will get their house in order on this stuff across the board.
4. Baylor (under Starr) has a horrible history of hold their coaches and athletes accountable. There has been a massive double standard when it comes to athletes.
1. Griner -- Baylor has a conduct code that is pretty straight forward. They kicked students out for posing in Playboy. Yet it was common knowledge that BG was a homosexual, she made no efforts to hide this. Mulky knew this, she did not care. This was a direct violation of the code of conduct requirements at Baylor. The point being that athletes, especially top class athletes do not have to abide by the code of conduct that all other students need to ascribe too. This basically undermines the very fabric of Baylor's "Christian moral values" Starr is going to be proven to be a hypocrit, and Baylor as an institution should be forced to make a consistent stand and hold all students to the same standards and discipline. IT IS 100% CLEAR that this is not the case at Baylor. And they cannot point finges at A&M or tu as we do not claim to be a "Christian base university".
2. Baylor has history of hiring shady coaches who will do anything to win and they do nothing about it unless they are caught. Then after being caught they are told to keep quiet or are fired only because they were caught beyond a shadow of doubt and then Starr and Baylor goes 'Oh my we didn't know!" Nonsense, they should know, and especially after all the other nonsense that has gone on before like::
3. Dunn--- We know Dunn punched a girl in the face (under Starr) yet very little was done. Dunn was playing again in short order. Baylor has a bad habit of hiding behind the law and the girl friend was quickly silenced and did not file a charge though she originally was going to. Starr knew this, shoot even I knew this. He did little.
4. Drew-- It is well known and there have been many articles about Drew recruiting kids who were huge behavioral risk, especially early. He went after guys that other school could not go after. Especially early.
5. Briles-- SU is not the first thug that he has recruited. Dixon was a 4 star recruit that virtually no major school went after because of his known thuggish character.
One has to ask a question. would accept any of these students if they were not athletes, OF COURSE NOT. They are only interested in "second chances" for those who are athletes and can help them win. Baylor athletics has never been about second chances or a program of high moral standard or character at least, not since Teaff. Unlike Stanford, Notre Dame and most other top notch private schools who do not recruit kids unless they meet certain standards in the classroom and have no observable issues outside it, Baylor does the opposite, they use their private school privileges to go get thugs, grade risk, etc and do it all in the name of giving them a second chance. If SU was the fist of this sort of thing it could be forgiven and called an anomaly. However this is far from the anomally, THIS IS THE NORM and now Baylor's private designation is going to bite them in the butt big time. No immunity and not set limits.
The only reason Starr goes with an outside council is to cover his butt. He is the first guy I go after.
I am going to ask him,
"Why now Ken are you doing all these things to get a handle on your athletes when you have a public record of having events major events with your athletes in the recent past?"
Another question I ask is.
"Coach Briles, did you make any effort to find out the reason SU was dismissed from Boise? You are on record as not having any info and then when Coach Peterson said HE INITIATED a call to you, you admitted that 1. He did call and 2. Said something about problems with a girlfriend. So my question is where you not interested to find out the specifics concerning why a freshman all American had been dismissed from another D-1 schools football program? If no why not? Do you not care that you could be bringing in a risk to not only Baylor but it's students? Or is all about winning at any cost for you coach? Do you really believe that you have no responsibility in this? So why would you not be the one to initiate a call to the Coach Peterson or someone in the Boise program to ascertain the details of why he was dismissed? We already know that another program (Florida) passed on this player because of the behavioural risk he represented. Why didn't you?