The stories this weekend about the University of Virginia’s victories in the NCAA lacrosse tournaments—men’s and women’s—were all touching and entirely believable. The grief still being felt by those involved with the two teams and at the school is clearly genuine and, especially when watching the women, one can’t help but feel sick about what happened to Yeardley Love.
That said, there was a story this past weekend in The Charlottesville Daily Progress that is disturbing. It has nothing to do with any of the kids currently playing on either team. It’s about, really, the behavior of the administration at Virginia.
As I said before, I have mixed emotions about the men’s team playing in the NCAA Tournament but I’m willing to buy into the idea that the other players on the team, even if they did know that George Huguely was an absolute jerk, had no way of knowing he was capable of doing what he did. We all knew bullies who drank too much when we were in college (and since college) but we didn’t think, ‘that guy is going to kill someone.’ We just thought he was someone worth steering clear of, especially when he was drinking.
According to The Daily Progress (Note: article found here), Virginia has issued a report in which it says that Coach Dom Starsia did nothing wrong in handling a situation that occurred in 2009 when Huguely slugged a sleeping teammate for committing the crime of kissing Love—apparently a chaste between-friends kiss, but enough to set Huguely off.
This story was initially reported by The Washington Post. Everyone knows I am a contributor to The Post and have been associated with the paper for more than 30 years. So, if you want, call me biased. I don’t think that’s the case. UVA at first demanded a correction of The Post story, saying it implied that Starsia somehow ‘covered-up,’ the incident when he didn’t. When outgoing UVA President John Casteen (who no doubt wishes he retired a year ago) was asked about the story a week ago, he called it, ‘hearsay.’
Apparently not. According to the UVA report, Huguely and the un-named teammate went to see Starsia after the incident. They said there’d been a scuffle but everything was okay. Starsia—still according to the report—asked the kid who had gotten slugged to stay after Huguely had left and asked him what had really happened. The kid told Starsia there was nothing more to tell and Starsia let it go.
Okay, I’m not here to say Starsia failing to pursue it was a firing offense or the tragedy would have been avoided if he had pursued it. Let’s be clear on that.
But let’s go back a minute and be Starsia. Two kids walk in, one of them sporting a shiner. They tell you they scuffled. It is pretty clear one kid is a lot worse off post-scuffle than the other. They HAD to come and talk to you because you’re going to notice the injury at practice so let’s not give them any brownie points for, ‘coming forward.’
Starsia asked the kid who is injured to tell him what happened—alone. Did he do this because he thought the kid was intimidated by Huguely’s presence? Did he, after three years of coaching Huguely have a sense that Huguely had a violent streak in him? He sensed SOMETHING but didn’t pursue it.
What SHOULD he have done? There’s one thing athletes respond to: the threat of lost playing time. “Look, I’m not going to necessarily do anything but I want to know what happened. If you want to play this weekend, tell me.”
If the kid refuses, bench both players until they tell you the truth. In the meantime, maybe you check and see if Huguely has been in trouble you didn’t know about before? Maybe you ask the UVA police to run a check to see if he’s had any problems with the police before? (Which would have turned up the incident in Lexington that no one at Virginia knew about before Love’s murder.)
Is all of this a second-guess? Yes. But it isn’t as if Starsia had never had kids in trouble before. It isn’t as if SOMETHING in his gut didn’t tell him there was more to the incident than they were telling him. But he didn’t pursue it. Can we at least agree that was a mistake? Again, no one is saying it was a life-and-death decision.
That said, it takes a lot of nerve on the part of UVA’s officials to demand a correction from The Post. The story is right: the incident took place and Starsia didn’t pursue it. That’s the crux of it and the important part of it. Virginia should apologize to The Post and should probably NOT be going around on a high horse about this.
Starsia is walking a very fine line when he claims on the one hand that he didn’t talk to his team about the incident but seems to remember talking to them about not fighting and the importance of, ‘being a family.’ There’s also the Virginia spokeswoman who says if Starsia HAD known the specifics of the incident he would have handled it in an “entirely different way.” Well, whose fault is it that Starsia didn’t know the specifics. He just took the two players at their word—even though he was clearly concerned something untoward had taken place—and never tried to pursue the truth.
There’s a big gap between making a mistake you wish you could correct and criminal negligence. Being innocent of criminal negligence doesn’t mean you handled a situation correctly. The people at Virginia need to understand something: THEY aren’t the victims in this any more than they are the perpetrators. Yeardley Love was the victim. Her family and friends were the victims. Dom Starsia sure as hell wasn’t the victim. The people he’s working for need to understand that.
*******
I wanted to throw some kudos today in the direction of the people who ran The Gaithersburg Book Festival on Saturday. I am always leery of book festivals and book fairs, in part because there is no guarantee anyone will show up, in part because they often are very poorly organized.
This one—first time out of the box—was run with precision timing; lots of volunteers who knew what they were doing and good crowds—helped no doubt by a perfect weather day. The audience I spoke to had plenty of people and enthusiasm, which was terrific.
It was a little different than my first book fair experience—which was in Miami in 1988. When I showed up I was directed to, “The Children’s Alley.” The guy said, “yeah, sports book, we put you there.”
So, I sat down to do a book signing with six other authors alongside—each having written a book on about the same level as, “Good Night Moon.” Along came various moms and their four-year-olds, none especially interested in a book about college basketball. Thirty minutes went by; I had signed zero books.
Finally—FINALLY—a guy came up and said, “Hey, are you John Feinstein?” Thank God, I thought, at least I’ll sell one book. Maybe I can get this guy to stand here and talk to me for the next 20 minutes.
“Yes, I am,” I said gratefully.
He looked at his program then looked at me. “So you’re the Miami Heat mascot?”
“WHAT?”
“Right here in the program, it says, ‘4 o’clock—John Feinstein, Miami Heat Mascot.’”
He showed me the program. That’s exactly what it said. Apparently I was speaking at the same time the Miami Heat mascot was performing. But the program made it look like I WAS the Miami Heat mascot.
“Sorry,” I said. “I’m not the Miami Heat mascot.”
“Too bad,” he said—and left.
Never did sell a book that day.
Saturday was a LOT better. Not a mascot in sight.
--------------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
To listen to 'The Bob and Tom Show' interview about 'Moment of Glory', please click the play button below:
Showing posts with label Yeardley Love. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yeardley Love. Show all posts
Monday, May 17, 2010
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
The tragic death of Yeardley Love
News flash: Hank Haney ‘resigns,’ as Tiger Woods’ swing coach 24 hours after Woods says everything is, “the same,” with Hank. I’m just not going there today. I will leave it for others to point out the obvious.
Instead, I’m going to write about a subject I’ve avoided for a week now in large part because I’m not sure there is anything that can be said that adds to what we all already know. That would be the murder of Yeardley Love. There’s a reason why some things are described as, ‘unspeakable.’ I find this almost unwriteable.
The most over-used word in sports is tragic. There’s no missed putt or missed shot or missed tackle or dropped fly ball that is anywhere close to tragic. THIS is tragic, not only because a 22-year-old college senior is dead, but because another human being—not some awful disease—killed her.
I’m not going to defend George Huguely on any level—obviously. Whatever defense his lawyer or lawyers come up with is up to them but the fact that the best his lawyer had on the day he was formally charged was to call this a, “tragic accident,” does not bode well for him in court. To me, based on the facts that we know as described by police—and not denied by anyone to date—the very best Huguely can hope for is to plead down to murder in the second degree and escape the death penalty, which does exist in Virginia. Remember, pre-meditation, which is the test for first degree murder, can be seconds—as in kicking in a door can be proof of pre-meditation.
Enough legal mumbo-jumbo. I’m no lawyer.
Let’s also deal with the so-called, “Duke/Landon,” angle of the case. Because the case involves two lacrosse players and because the accused went to the same prep school that one of the three accused Duke players went to, parallels have been drawn including the notion that this is another example of rich kids out of control.
The portrait that has emerged in news reports about Huguely is certainly that of a rich kid who was used to getting his way. The Duke kids, as we now know, committed no crime. As a team they had earned a reputation for partying hard—too hard at times—and there’s no doubt what went on that night in 2006 wasn’t the sort of thing that would make their parents proud. But that’s as far as it went and prosecutor Mike Nifong’s refusal to drop the case after the DNA testing came back negative ultimately caused him to be disbarred.
There’s no parallel here. The Duke kids were boys behaving badly—very badly. This is MURDER. Even if Huguely’s lawyer convinces a jury that his version of events is true he will be convicted at least of manslaughter.
That said, I don’t buy the notion that some have put forth that people at Virginia should have seen this coming. We all know bullies and we all know bad guys. Do we ever think they’re going to commit murder? I don’t think so. If, as some people have reported, Huguely had hit Love in the past, she or someone close to her probably should have taken some action. Then again, there are all sorts of reasons why women don’t take action—I’m not saying they’re right but we know it happens—against men who hit them. Sometimes they’re scared. Sometimes they have feelings for them. Sometimes they think they’ll end up the subject of ridicule. Tragically, we’ll probably never know any answers to those questions.
All we know is that Huguely went way across a line very few people imagine someone will cross. He had a history of acting like an out-of-control jerk when he drank too much. I’m still not sure that means people should have seen this coming.
There’s also the question of whether the Virginia men should be playing in the NCAA Lacrosse Tournament this weekend. Again, I don’t have a clear answer in my head about this. The women should play. They should play to honor Love and because there isn’t a soul watching—other than those with a connection to whomever they are playing—who won’t want to see them succeed. It’s corny, but I’m sure they all know that Love would want them to play and play well.
The Love family has told UVA that it wants the men to play too. I think that’s important and the school was right to take that into consideration. It’s also clearly true that none of the other members of the team had anything to do with what happened. The fact that other team members have been arrested in the past on alcohol-related offenses really isn’t relevant. Should the culture that exists within the team be examined or re-examined going forward? Absolutely—as with many teams at many colleges I’m sure.
But should they not play? I don’t know. The reason not to play is this: it would be an acknowledgment that one of their own committed a horrific act, one that can’t possibly be fixed in any way by playing lacrosse. It would send a message that would say this: we are so horrified by what our teammate did that our hearts can’t possibly be in competing. Instead, we’ll go to the women’s games and lead the cheers for Yeardley Love’s team. That would be awfully powerful, wouldn’t it?
Here’s the other side of the argument: the Love family has said the men should play. The players on the men’s team no doubt feel a terrible sense of loss and guilt and should be allowed to move on with their lives. Lacrosse is their escape from the tragedy, even if only for a few hours a time.
I’m just not sure on this one. I do know I found myself wincing when I heard Coach Dom Starsia talking on Monday about what a challenging schedule his team had played. I know he didn’t mean it that way, but it almost sounded disrespectful to bring it up.
I guess all I know is this: I hope the Virginia women, who are seeded sixth, find some special strength the next couple of weeks and win the national championship. I just don’t know what to say about the Virginia men. I have nothing against any of the kids who will be in uniform this weekend. No doubt they’ve earned the No. 1 seed in the tournament. That said, I don’t think I want to see them win the championship. That may be unfair but it is the feeling I have in my gut. I suspect I’m not alone.
----------------------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and will be in bookstores nationwide May 13th. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
-
Instead, I’m going to write about a subject I’ve avoided for a week now in large part because I’m not sure there is anything that can be said that adds to what we all already know. That would be the murder of Yeardley Love. There’s a reason why some things are described as, ‘unspeakable.’ I find this almost unwriteable.
The most over-used word in sports is tragic. There’s no missed putt or missed shot or missed tackle or dropped fly ball that is anywhere close to tragic. THIS is tragic, not only because a 22-year-old college senior is dead, but because another human being—not some awful disease—killed her.
I’m not going to defend George Huguely on any level—obviously. Whatever defense his lawyer or lawyers come up with is up to them but the fact that the best his lawyer had on the day he was formally charged was to call this a, “tragic accident,” does not bode well for him in court. To me, based on the facts that we know as described by police—and not denied by anyone to date—the very best Huguely can hope for is to plead down to murder in the second degree and escape the death penalty, which does exist in Virginia. Remember, pre-meditation, which is the test for first degree murder, can be seconds—as in kicking in a door can be proof of pre-meditation.
Enough legal mumbo-jumbo. I’m no lawyer.
Let’s also deal with the so-called, “Duke/Landon,” angle of the case. Because the case involves two lacrosse players and because the accused went to the same prep school that one of the three accused Duke players went to, parallels have been drawn including the notion that this is another example of rich kids out of control.
The portrait that has emerged in news reports about Huguely is certainly that of a rich kid who was used to getting his way. The Duke kids, as we now know, committed no crime. As a team they had earned a reputation for partying hard—too hard at times—and there’s no doubt what went on that night in 2006 wasn’t the sort of thing that would make their parents proud. But that’s as far as it went and prosecutor Mike Nifong’s refusal to drop the case after the DNA testing came back negative ultimately caused him to be disbarred.
There’s no parallel here. The Duke kids were boys behaving badly—very badly. This is MURDER. Even if Huguely’s lawyer convinces a jury that his version of events is true he will be convicted at least of manslaughter.
That said, I don’t buy the notion that some have put forth that people at Virginia should have seen this coming. We all know bullies and we all know bad guys. Do we ever think they’re going to commit murder? I don’t think so. If, as some people have reported, Huguely had hit Love in the past, she or someone close to her probably should have taken some action. Then again, there are all sorts of reasons why women don’t take action—I’m not saying they’re right but we know it happens—against men who hit them. Sometimes they’re scared. Sometimes they have feelings for them. Sometimes they think they’ll end up the subject of ridicule. Tragically, we’ll probably never know any answers to those questions.
All we know is that Huguely went way across a line very few people imagine someone will cross. He had a history of acting like an out-of-control jerk when he drank too much. I’m still not sure that means people should have seen this coming.
There’s also the question of whether the Virginia men should be playing in the NCAA Lacrosse Tournament this weekend. Again, I don’t have a clear answer in my head about this. The women should play. They should play to honor Love and because there isn’t a soul watching—other than those with a connection to whomever they are playing—who won’t want to see them succeed. It’s corny, but I’m sure they all know that Love would want them to play and play well.
The Love family has told UVA that it wants the men to play too. I think that’s important and the school was right to take that into consideration. It’s also clearly true that none of the other members of the team had anything to do with what happened. The fact that other team members have been arrested in the past on alcohol-related offenses really isn’t relevant. Should the culture that exists within the team be examined or re-examined going forward? Absolutely—as with many teams at many colleges I’m sure.
But should they not play? I don’t know. The reason not to play is this: it would be an acknowledgment that one of their own committed a horrific act, one that can’t possibly be fixed in any way by playing lacrosse. It would send a message that would say this: we are so horrified by what our teammate did that our hearts can’t possibly be in competing. Instead, we’ll go to the women’s games and lead the cheers for Yeardley Love’s team. That would be awfully powerful, wouldn’t it?
Here’s the other side of the argument: the Love family has said the men should play. The players on the men’s team no doubt feel a terrible sense of loss and guilt and should be allowed to move on with their lives. Lacrosse is their escape from the tragedy, even if only for a few hours a time.
I’m just not sure on this one. I do know I found myself wincing when I heard Coach Dom Starsia talking on Monday about what a challenging schedule his team had played. I know he didn’t mean it that way, but it almost sounded disrespectful to bring it up.
I guess all I know is this: I hope the Virginia women, who are seeded sixth, find some special strength the next couple of weeks and win the national championship. I just don’t know what to say about the Virginia men. I have nothing against any of the kids who will be in uniform this weekend. No doubt they’ve earned the No. 1 seed in the tournament. That said, I don’t think I want to see them win the championship. That may be unfair but it is the feeling I have in my gut. I suspect I’m not alone.
----------------------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and will be in bookstores nationwide May 13th. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)