I swear, it’s almost like Maryland resents Ohio State sucking all the oxygen out of the media tent.
Before he resigned from his post as the University of Maryland’s athletic director, Kevin Anderson intervened in a sexual misconduct case involving two student-athletes, which a university statement said showed a “serious lack of judgment.”
In 2017, Anderson authorized the use of $15,000 in funds controlled by the athletic department for legal representation of two football players accused of sexual misconduct. Later, he did not follow orders from the university administration to cut ties with the lawyers, according to the statement, and the administration conducted an internal investigation into his actions.
The information about the payment, which was obtained by The Diamondback through a public information request and interviews with sources familiar with the matter, provides details about the months leading up to Anderson’s departure from the university, which had previously been shrouded in mystery.
It gets better.
The attorneys began representing the players in June 2017. About two months later, then-executive athletic director Damon Evans — who had not been consulted in the decision to hire the attorneys — notified the administration of the payment, and the university president’s office directed Anderson to cut ties with the attorneys, according to the statement. The next month, they learned he had not done so, prompting an internal investigation…
Anderson could not be reached by The Diamondback prior to publication. In comments to The Washington Post later Thursday night, Anderson said: “That report is inaccurate.”
Pffft… kids, running a student newspaper. What do you expect, right?
Um… not so fast, brother.
On August 29, 2017, university administration first learned that the then-Athletic Director directed the hiring of an attorney, who had been representing two student-athletes in a sexual misconduct case for approximately two months. The attorney had been promised funds controlled by the Athletic Department to represent the accused.
This was brought to the attention of the President’s Office immediately by the then-Executive Athletic Director after first learning of the arrangement when the lawyer submitted an invoice to the department. The President’s Office, the Office of General Counsel, the Athletic Compliance Office and the then-Executive Athletic Director were not involved in or consulted on the original decision made to hire and pay the lawyer. Protocols requiring General Counsel to retain outside counsel had not been followed in the hiring.
In response, the President’s Office immediately directed the then-Athletic Director to cut ties with the attorney.
NCAA bylaws allow member institutions to pay for legal counsel for proceedings that might affect a student-athlete’s eligibility to participate in intercollegiate athletics. However, the decision to hire this lawyer showed a serious lack of judgement in a sexual misconduct case, given the university’s commitment to a fair and impartial handling of all such matters.
On September 27, it came to the attention of the President’s Office that its previous instruction to cut ties with the attorney had not been followed. The President’s Office directed the Office of General Counsel to immediately launch an internal investigation to determine why this had happened.
A sexual misconduct scandal and a dead player, all in one summer. Helluva conference you’re running there, Delany.