Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106 Filed 06/14/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION JANE DOE 1, JANE DOE 2, JANE DOE 3, JANE DOE 4, JANE DOE 5, JANE DOE 6, JANE DOE 7, JANE DOE 8, JANE DOE 9, AND JANE DOE 10 Plaintiffs, vs. BAYLOR UNIVERSITY Defendant. § § § § § § § § § § § § § Cause No. 6:16-cv-173-RP-JCM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY TO DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL PEPPER HAMILTON MATERIALS TO THE HONORABLE ROBERT PITTMAN: COME NOW JANE DOES 1-10, Plaintiffs herein, who file this Reply in support of their Motion to Compel Defendant Baylor to produce Pepper Hamilton materials: A. Baylor has failed to sustain its burden of demonstrating the application of privilege. Baylor's response ignores well-settled principles related to the showing necessary to sustain a limited privilege much less the blanket privilege that Baylor seeks. While “the attorney-client privilege serves an important purpose, it also impedes the full and free discovery of truth and therefore should be strictly construed.” Charalambopoulos v. Grammer, No. 3:14-CV-2424-D, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41600, at *16 (N.D. Mar. 8, 2017). Baylor essentially asks this Court to broadly construe the privilege and shield documents and even then, without the necessary particularized showing. 1. Baylor failed to sustain its burden of demonstrating that Pepper Hamilton was hired for the provision of legal services. Baylor argues that the distinction between attorneys hired as investigators “does not exist in the case law” (ECF 99-2) and cites Sandra T.E. v. S. Berwyn Sch. Dist., 600 F.3d 612 (7th Cir. 2009) in 1 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106 Filed 06/14/17 Page 2 of 7 support. Sandra, however, does not stand for such a proposition that communications involving attorneys hired as investigators are per se privileged. Instead, Sandra’s holding was fact-specific and involved an entirely different set of circumstances.1 Importantly, the law firm in Sandra did not make a blanket assertion of privilege as Baylor attempts. See id. at 616. The Sandra law firm produced over one thousand documents.2 Id. The focus of the court was that the district court had completely ignored the engagement agreement between the law firm and the school board. Id. at 619. That agreement specifically said that the firm was being hired to investigate “and provide legal services in connection with the specific representation.” Id. This stands in stark contrast to the engagement agreement in this case which was only after the fact amended to include legal services.3 It must be noted that the Pepper Hamilton advice—the one thing that Sandra most protects—was fully disclosed in the form of the Pepper Hamilton recommendations. Here, Baylor desires to disclose the advice, yet hide the underlying facts. Upjohn Co. v. United States, 449 U.S. 383 (1981) and In re GM LLC Ignition Switch Litig., 80 F. Supp. 3d 521 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2015) also do not support Baylor's arguments. The employees interviewed in those cases were explicitly told that the purpose of the interviews was to assist in providing legal advice to the company and the documents were not provided to any third parties, unlike See also Wartell v. Purdue Univ., No. 1:13-CV-99 RLM-APR, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120080, *18-19 (N.D. Ind. Jul. 24, 2014)(“Sandra T.E. was very fact-specific: ... the investigation was an essential part of the legal services and advice Sidley Austin was retained to provide to the school board. Under that set of facts, but not under all sets of facts, the attorneyclient privilege can protect the attorneys' records of the interviews and eventual advice to the client.”)(emphasis added). 2 See also Rao v. Bd. of Trustees, No. 14-cv-0066, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145298, at *20 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 20, 2016)(“…the issue in Sandra was not whether the entire investigative file was work product; the law firm had turned over more than one thousand pages of its file already, and was only seeking protection over the type of internal memoranda and lawyers' notes that are at the very core of the work product doctrine. Conversely, the Defendants here are seeking to protect the entirety of its files, much of which likely does not contain the mental impressions of the attorneys performing the relevant internal investigations.”). 3 Baylor's self-serving attachments are also not sufficient for it to avail itself of limited Sandra privilege. Aside from conclusory assertions that Pepper Hamilton was hired to provide legal services—evidence that directly conflicts with testimony from Baylor’s own interim president as well as the initial contract between Baylor and Pepper Hamilton—Baylor fails to provide any evidence that its assertion of privilege has merit. For instance, Baylor did not testify that all people interviewed were told that the purpose of their interview was to gather information to assist in providing legal services to Baylor. Although Baylor contends in its response that it only disclosed findings and not facts, this is unsupported by the record before this Court. 1 2 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106 Filed 06/14/17 Page 3 of 7 in Baylor’s case.4 Upjohn, 449 U.S. at 394; GM, 80 F. Supp. 3d at 529.5 These courts affirmed the principle that the privilege “extends only to communications and not to facts.” Id. Rather than the authorities Baylor relies upon, this case much more closely resembles the Penn State sex scandal that also involved a Pepper Hamilton investigation. Subsequent to the filing of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel, Plaintiffs learned that in the Penn State case, the trial court ordered portions of Pepper Hamilton's file turned over.6 Also critically different from the authorities Baylor cites is the extent to which the Pepper Hamilton's investigation and its findings and actual advice were trotted out by Baylor as a public cleansing of wrongdoing, with facts detailed at Baylor’s whim such as the in a lengthy court pleading. Moreover, Baylor’s own interim president admitted that former Baylor regents were provided with the information from Pepper Hamilton, which alone is a clear privilege waiver.7 The waiver issues in this case are extensive. 2. Baylor’s privilege log is inadequate. Fifth Circuit precedent is clear that “blanket claims of privilege” do not hold and “[t]he privilege must be specifically asserted with respect to particular documents.” Nguyen v. Excel Corp., 197 F.3d 200, 206-07 n.16 (5th Cir. 1999). Baylor’s inaccurate assertion, even if true, that “its privilege log contains all of the information courts have deemed necessary for a categorical log” does not change the fact that it has not attempted to parse out what is allegedly privileged and what is not. ECF 99-2, Upjohn, 449 U.S. at 394 (“The communications concerned matters within the scope of the employees' corporate duties, and the employees themselves were sufficiently aware that they were being questioned in order that the corporation could obtain legal advice.”); GM, 80 F. Supp. 3d at 529 (“As Valukas explains in a sworn declaration, consistent with Upjohn and its progeny, ‘at the outset of each interview the interviewing attorney informed the witness that the purpose of the interview was to gather information to assist in providing legal advice to New GM, that the interview was accordingly privileged, that this privilege belonged to New GM, and that the witness should keep confidential the matters discussed in the interview.’”)(emphasis added). 5 Upjohn, 449 U.S. at 394 (“The communications concerned matters within the scope of the employees' corporate duties, and the employees themselves were sufficiently aware that they were being questioned in order that the corporation could obtain legal advice.”). 6 See http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/PATERNO%20VS%20NCAA%20OPINION%20ORDER%20 FILED%20AUGUST%2012%202016.pdf 7 See Exhibit A; Deposition of David E. Garland, May 31, 2017, Pg. 144, Lines 14-24. 4 3 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106 Filed 06/14/17 Page 4 of 7 n.7. A party claiming privilege “must also prove that the attorney-client privilege applies to each and every communication he is claiming as privileged” because "the attorney-client privilege may not be tossed as a blanket over an undifferentiated group of documents.” In re Royce Homes, LP, 449 B.R. 709, 726 (S.D. Tex. 2011) quoting United States v. El Paso, 683 F.2d 530, 542 (5th Cir. 1982)). This is because “Courts cannot accept conclusory assertions of privilege at face value.” Id. Court after court has noted that it is not enough to simply establish that there is an attorney-client relationship (which Plaintiffs dispute that Baylor has done) — because “[t]he attorney-client privilege will not attach to every communication between a client and his attorney, as the privilege ‘does not embrace everything that arises out of the existence of an attorney-client relationship.’” Id. (quoting United States v. Pipkins, 528 F.2d 559, 563 (5th Cir. 1976)). B. The Pepper Hamilton Materials are necessary to Plaintiffs' case. Plaintiffs' case is that Baylor was deliberately indifferent to rights of female students and indeed that the control group at Baylor remains so. The events of selectively releasing Pepper Hamilton investigation details, the attacks through pleadings on former employees and victims, the hiring of a professional PR firm that specializes in victim blaming, and the saying of some things in the media while doing the opposite in Court are just some examples of Baylor actions taken since this case was filed that continue to demonstrate that university operates with deliberate indifference to the rights of female students. The extent to which this deliberate indifference is pervasive and has not been eradicated even in light of the Pepper Hamilton findings is obviously relevant to whole host of issues to be submitted in the jury's charge. The recent deposition of former Interim President David Garland further illustrates the extent of the deliberate indifference. Although he was the President of the University supposedly hired to right the ship after the firing of Ken Starr, the lack of knowledge Dr. Garland had regarding basic central facts is staggering. Dr. Garland testified that he was unaware of the details of Plaintiffs' claims, 4 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106 Filed 06/14/17 Page 5 of 7 including even their names, despite having met at least one of them, and despite four of the plaintiffs being assaulted during the combined four years when Garland was President or Provost.8 Dr. Garland testified that he wrongly told the Texas Senate Committee that all administrators responsible for the failures were no longer at the university.9 Despite his long Baylor tenure, Garland was wholly ignorant of the University’s Title IX reporting procedures and was supposedly unfamiliar with why Judge Starr and Coach Briles were fired.10 He had no knowledge of the implementation of Title IX procedures nor the facts or circumstances that required the Pepper recommendations despite the fact that Dr. Garland was hired specifically to implement those same recommendations – he said he didn’t need to know, indeed he was not even interested in or even curious in the underlying problems that had necessitated the recommendation.11 Dr. Garland was so disinterested that during his one and only factual briefing by Pepper Hamilton, Garland left the briefing early in order to meet with the BIG XII about conference expansion. 12 That Baylor continues to put football “above everything else” is remarkable.13 Garland answered “did not know”, “do not know”, was “not aware”, “not remember”, “do not recall” and words to that effect well over 100 times in his deposition in response to central information to the issues at hand.14 Incredibly, he even doubled down that he has no intention of finding out in the future, was not concerned and did not care or need to know. 15 On balance, the entire deposition of Dr. Garland demonstrates the degree to which the University was and remains deliberately indifferent — even going so far as to keeping its top executive in the dark. But, more to the point for this briefing, the deposition shows the extent to which detailed document production is Id. at pg. 11, lines 15-23. Id. at pg. 183, lines 14-19. 10 Id. at pg. 66, lines 10-18 (Starr); pg. 69, lines 12-18 (Briles). 11 Id. at pg. 53, lines 7-25 to pg. 54, lines 1-13; pg. 134, line 24 – pg. 135, line 21. 12 Id. at pg. 112, lines 19-20; pg. 114, lines 7-15. 13 http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/baylor-public-safety-official-admits-significant-failure-over-sexualassault-claims/; 14 See Exhibit A; Deposition of David E. Garland, May 31, 2017 - The actual number including his agreement with like questions is shown to be over 200 based on a simple word search. 15 Id. at pg. 101, lines 3-11. 8 9 5 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106 Filed 06/14/17 Page 6 of 7 necessary. In addition, the University’s reliance upon a declaration of Ms. McCraw, who Dr. Garland told the Texas Senate Pepper Hamilton found was responsible for the fact that victims “didn’t receive what we would now consider to be proper procedure,” demonstrates the need for full discovery to challenge these inconsistent positions.16 CONCLUSION & PRAYER For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs request an order to compel. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Chad W. Dunn BRAZIL & DUNN, L.L.P. Chad W. Dunn State Bar No. 24036507 K. Scott Brazil State Bar No. 02934050 4201 Cypress Creek Pkwy., Suite 530 Houston, Texas 77068 Telephone: (281) 580-6310 Facsimile: (281) 580-6362 chad@brazilanddunn.com DUNNAM & DUNNAM, L.L.P. Jim Dunnam State Bar No. 06258010 4125 West Waco Drive Waco, Texas 76710 Telephone: (254) 753-6437 Facsimile: (254) 753-7434 jimdunnam@dunnamlaw.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS 16 Exhibit B; Garland Testimony before Texas Senate, March 29, 2017, Pages 37-38. 6 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106 Filed 06/14/17 Page 7 of 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been filed by ECF and sent to counsel of record via electronic notification on June 14, 2017. /s/Chad W. Dunn CHAD W. DUNN 7 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 1 of 220 EXHIBIT A Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 2 of 220 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION 2 3 4 5 6 7 JANE DOE 1, JANE DOE 2, JANE * DOE 3, JANE DOE 4, JANE DOE * 5, and JANE DOE 6, * Plaintiffs, * * VS. * Cause No. 6:16-cv-173-RP * JURY TRIAL DEMANDED BAYLOR UNIVERSITY, * Defendant. * 8 9 ORAL VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DAVID E. GARLAND (VOLUME 1) 10 11 a witness in the above entitled and numbered cause, 12 taken by the Plaintiffs, before Lorna G. Hildebrandt, 13 Certified Shorthand Reporter #429 in and for the State 14 of Texas, commencing on the 31st day of May, 2017, from 15 10:14 a.m. to 4:41 p.m., at the Law Offices of Fulbright 16 Winniford, P.C., located at 425 Austin Avenue, 22nd 17 Floor of the ALICO Building, in the City of Waco, County 18 of McLennan, and State of Texas, in accordance with the 19 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the attached 20 "Agreement". 21 22 23 24 25 * * * * * * * * * Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 3 of 220 2 1 I N D E X 2 Oral Videotaped Deposition of DAVID E. GARLAND 3 Examination by Mr. Dunnam .......................... 4 5 6 7 A P P E A R A N C E S 8 FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: 9 10 11 12 13 Jim Dunnam, Esq. and Andrea Mehta, Esq. DUNNAM & DUNNAM, L.L.P. 4125 West Waco Drive Waco, Texas 76710 254.753.6437 254.753.7464 FAX jimdunnam@dunnamlaw.com andreamehta@dunnamlaw.com 14 - and 15 16 17 18 Chad W. Dunn, Esq. BRAZIL & DUNN, L.L.P. 4201 Cypress Creek Pkwy, Suite 530 Houston, Texas 77068 281.580.6310 281.580.6362 FAX chad@brazilanddunn.com 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 FOR THE DEFENDANT: Lisa A. Brown, Esq. THOMPSON & HORTON, LLP Phoenix Tower, Suite 2000 3200 Southwest Freeway Houston, Texas 77027-7554 713.554.6741 713.583.7934 FAX lbrown@thompsonhorton.com 5 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 4 of 220 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 (APPEARANCES CONTINUED) FOR THE DEFENDANT: David R. Ihler, Esq. OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL BAYLOR UNIVERSITY One Baylor Place #97034 Waco, Texas 76798 254.710.3821 254.710.3843 FAX David_Iler@baylor.edu 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ALSO PRESENT: Analiese Kornely, Assistant to Mr. Dunnam Mike Clark, Videographer - 254.753.3330 * * * * * * * * Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 5 of 220 4 1 E X H I B I T S 2 NUMBER: 3 1 Description: Page No.: List of Executive Council Members "Pre-Garland: Up thru May 2016" ............................... 57 List of Executive Council Members "Garland tenure Summer 2016 on" ................................. 57 Defendants Cary Gray, Ron Murff, and David Harper's Original Answer ........................ 73 Baylor University Board of Regents Findings of Fact ............................................ 98 4 2 5 6 3 7 4 8 9 5 "David E. Garland, guest columnist: Baylor Committed to preventing sexual violence, Improving dialogue" Article ..................... 188 11 6 Transcription of Excerpts from Senate Hearing ... 109 12 7 Baylor University Report of External and Independent Review Recommendations .............. 150 10 13 14 (NOTE: Document initially marked as Exhibit 5 on Page 108 was withdrawn, and subsequently a new Exhibit 5 was marked on Page 188) 15 * 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 * * * * * * * Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 6 of 220 5 00:00:25 1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: 10:14:26 2 Today is Wednesday, May 31st, 2017. 10:14:30 3 10:14 a.m. 4 Garland. 5 6 Going on the record. The time is This is the video deposition of David E. THE REPORTER: And, President Garland, if you would, please raise your right hand to be sworn. 7 DAVID E. GARLAND, 8 having been duly sworn to tell the truth, the whole 9 truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as follows: 10 EXAMINATION 10:14:48 11 BY MR. DUNNAM (10:14 a.m.): 10:14:48 12 Q. Please tell us your name. 10:14:48 13 A. David E. Garland. 10:14:50 14 Q. And what is the correct way I should address you 10:14:54 15 10:14:58 16 A. It doesn't matter to me. 10:14:59 17 Q. Well, I just want to be consistent, and it 10:15:01 18 10:15:04 19 A. I'm still the President as of today -- 10:15:06 20 Q. Okay. 10:15:06 21 A. -- so I guess President would be fine. 10:15:08 22 Q. I will do my best to do that. 10:15:10 23 A. Okay. 10:15:11 24 Q. I've referred to you as "Dr. Garland" so many 10:15:14 25 today? Dr. Garland, Mr. Garland, President Garland? doesn't matter to me, other than I want to be proper. times, I may -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 7 of 220 6 10:15:15 1 A. That's fine. It doesn't matter to me. 10:15:18 2 Q. So you told us your name. 10:15:20 3 you've ever taken a deposition or given a deposition 10:15:23 4 before? 10:15:23 5 A. I have not. 10:15:24 6 Q. I don't want to ask you what your attorneys told 10:15:28 7 you, but -- so let me just go over some things. 10:15:31 8 sure you've been told these things, but you understand 10:15:33 9 you're under oath today? 10:15:34 10 A. Yes. 10:15:35 11 Q. And you understand that we've got a court 10:15:38 12 10:15:39 13 A. Yes. 10:15:39 14 Q. And we've got a videographer taking everything. 10:15:44 15 10:15:49 16 here and in a conference room of an attorney, you're 10:15:53 17 aware that this is the same as if you were sitting in 10:15:56 18 front of a jury? 10:15:56 19 A. Yes. 10:15:57 20 Q. And can we count on your answers today under 10:15:59 21 oath, even if this matter doesn't go to trial for a 10:16:02 22 period of time? 10:16:03 23 A. Yes. 10:16:04 24 Q. You're going to have an opportunity to read this 10:16:06 25 I want to know if I'm reporter taking everything down? You know today, just because we might be informal deposition and make any corrections. You know that? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 8 of 220 7 10:16:09 1 A. I did not know that. 10:16:11 2 Q. Okay. 10:16:13 3 10:16:15 4 A. Okay. 10:16:15 5 Q. And -- but as we sit here today, I'd like your 10:16:19 6 10:16:20 7 A. Sure. 10:16:22 8 Q. And so because of that, if I ask any questions 10:16:26 9 10:16:30 10 A. Sure. 10:16:30 11 Q. I'll probably even confuse myself. 10:16:34 12 sure that you understand the question before you answer. 10:16:37 13 Is that fair? 10:16:37 14 A. Mm-hmm. 10:16:39 15 Q. And I know for sure that despite both of our best 10:16:43 16 efforts, we're going to talk over each other, because in 10:16:46 17 conversation it's normal that people talk over one 10:16:50 18 another in conversation. 10:16:53 19 know what my question is before I'm finished, and we 10:16:59 20 have a tendency to go ahead and answer and that type 10:17:01 21 thing. 10:17:05 22 I'll try to let you finish your answer before I start 10:17:07 23 another one, and we're going to do that. 10:17:10 24 video, the jury will be able to understand everything, 10:17:14 25 but it will make our court reporter's job -- You will, if your attorney requests it, which I'm sure she will. best answers today. Is that fair enough? that you don't understand, just tell me. So just make Fair. You're going to understand or Let's try to avoid that. I'll try to avoid it. With the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 9 of 220 8 10:17:15 1 A. Right. 10:17:16 2 Q. -- a lot easier. 10:17:18 3 A. Yes. 10:17:18 4 Q. Do you have any other questions about the process 10:17:20 5 10:17:21 6 A. No. 10:17:21 7 Q. Have you ever given any answers -- I understand 10:17:26 8 you've given a lot of statements to the press, is that 10:17:29 9 right, about these issues we're here today about? 10:17:31 10 A. Some, yes. 10:17:32 11 Q. Okay. 10:17:37 12 10:17:40 13 A. You mean the Senate? 10:17:41 14 Q. Yes. 10:17:42 15 A. Senate Hearing? 10:17:44 16 Q. And you understand those statements were -- even 10:17:46 17 though it wasn't in the courtroom, those were made under 10:17:48 18 oath? 10:17:49 19 A. Yes. 10:17:51 20 Q. And in fact -- 10:17:54 21 A. I did not know it at the time, really. 10:17:56 22 10:17:58 23 10:18:00 24 realize you were under oath, I mean would the statements 10:18:02 25 you gave -- Is that fair enough? here today? And I understand you've given at least one set of statements under oath; is that right? Yes. I wasn't fully conscious of it, but -Q. Well, can we -- you know -- even if you didn't Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 10 of 220 9 10:18:02 1 A. I tried to be as truthful as possible. 10:18:04 2 Q. Let me get my question out. 10:18:08 3 what I was going to ask you, but even though you were 10:18:12 4 under oath but you didn't realize it, which may be 10:18:15 5 normal, is it fair that my clients can assume that what 10:18:18 6 you told the Texas Senate was truthful? 10:18:20 7 A. It's fair. 10:18:21 8 Q. Fair for us to assume that? 10:18:23 9 A. Yeah. 10:18:24 10 Q. Are you aware of the claims of the 10 young women 10:18:31 11 10:18:31 12 A. I am not fully aware of their claims. 10:18:35 13 Q. Do you know anything about them? 10:18:37 14 A. I do not know -- I don't know what their claims 10:18:42 15 are. 10:18:49 16 to, an appeal to me when I was President, but that's the 10:18:54 17 only one that I am aware of. 10:18:56 18 10:18:58 19 President this time or the first time you were 10:19:00 20 President? 10:19:01 21 A. This time. 10:19:02 22 Q. Okay. 10:19:04 23 put this on the record. 10:19:07 24 Doe" designations for these young women, but we've 10:19:11 25 agreed that if somebody says their name, then we can go And I know you knew that I represent? Q. I am familiar with perhaps one that I -- that came And was that appealed to you when you were And today, and just -- I think we should We're going to try to use "Jane Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 11 of 220 10 10:19:14 1 back and substitute the appropriate Jane Doe for their 10:19:17 2 name; so I don't want you to be too concerned about 10:19:21 3 that. 10:19:25 4 thinking about that rather than thinking about your 10:19:28 5 answer. 10:19:28 6 A. 10:19:29 7 10:19:31 8 10:19:32 9 10:19:36 10 the confidentiality of student names, and if we 10:19:39 11 inadvertently use a real name, that we will substitute 10:19:43 12 after the fact a pseudonym. 10:19:48 13 BY MR. DUNNAM: 10:19:48 14 10:19:52 15 10:19:55 16 A. I have forgotten the name. 10:19:57 17 Q. You don't know. 10:20:00 18 10:20:01 19 A. I've forgotten it, yes. 10:20:04 20 Q. Do you know the circumstances that -- of her 10:20:06 21 10:20:07 22 10:20:12 23 10:20:15 24 10:20:19 25 I mean I don't want you to be spending your time Okay? Okay. Yeah. MR. DUNNAM: And is that correct, Counsel? That's our agreement? MS. BROWN: Q. Okay. Yes, our agreement is to protect While we're thinking about it, do you know which Jane Doe the one is that made the appeal to you? So you do not know the young woman's name? situation? A. I have a vague memory of the appeal, but other than that, I don't remember the details. Q. Now, you've been President of -- Do you know whether or not any of -- so let's go -- Let me go back a Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 12 of 220 11 10:20:23 1 minute so the jury understands your connection. 10:20:26 2 10:20:29 3 10:20:30 4 A. That's correct, Interim President. 10:20:32 5 Q. And you've been the Acting President of the 10:20:34 6 10:20:35 7 A. June 1 of last year. 10:20:38 8 Q. Did you understand the subject matter that we 10:20:47 9 10:20:50 10 or have any understanding about what we were going to 10:20:53 11 talk about today? 10:20:54 12 10:20:58 13 ask. 10:21:01 14 sexual assaults that you're representing. 10:21:03 15 10:21:06 16 women who have brought claims that they were sexually 10:21:09 17 assaulted, and it involves their treatment by the 10:21:12 18 university. 10:21:16 19 A. I'm aware that you represent them, yes. 10:21:18 20 Q. And despite that, you sit here today, and you 10:21:20 21 don't know anything about our clients' claims except one 10:21:24 22 of them might have filed an appeal to you? 10:21:25 23 A. No, I do not. 10:21:26 24 Q. Are you not interested in it? 10:21:28 25 A. I am always interested in victims, but -- who are As you sit here today, you're the President of Baylor University; is that correct? university since when? were going to talk about today? A. Q. Did you anticipate it I'm not fully aware what kind of questions you'll I have a general idea that it would be about the And you are aware that we represent 10 young You're aware of that? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 13 of 220 12 10:21:32 1 becoming survivors, but I don't know their individual 10:21:34 2 cases. 10:21:35 3 Q. You don't know anything about it? 10:21:37 4 A. I do not know anything except the one. 10:21:41 5 Q. Do you have an opinion of whether their claims 10:21:43 6 10:21:44 7 10:21:48 8 10:21:51 9 10:21:54 10 you're the President of the university and you knew we 10:21:57 11 were going to talk about their claims? 10:21:58 12 MS. BROWN: 10:22:02 13 MR. DUNNAM: 10:22:05 14 MS. BROWN: 10:22:09 15 10:22:14 16 10:22:15 17 10:22:15 18 THE REPORTER: 10:21:51 19 "So why didn't you become familiar with 10:21:53 20 them, if you're the President of the 10:21:55 21 university and you knew we were going to 10:21:57 22 talk about their claims?" 10:22:31 23 10:22:31 24 Q. Can you answer that question? 10:22:33 25 A. I assume that this is held in part of the legal are just? A. I don't know their claims to be able to make that evaluation. Q. I don't know the facts of the case. So why didn't you become familiar with them, if Objection to form. And what would that be? I think the question is vague and also intrudes on attorney-client privilege. MR. DUNNAM: Can you read the question again? Yes, sir. BY MR. DUNNAM: Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 14 of 220 13 10:22:37 1 process that our lawyers would be taking care of. 10:22:41 2 President doesn't normally get involved in all of the 10:22:45 3 lawsuits. 10:22:45 4 10:22:51 5 10:22:52 6 A. No. 10:22:52 7 Q. You just chose not to? 10:22:55 8 A. I was not -- it was not presented as an -- as an 10:23:00 9 option. 10:23:00 10 10:23:05 11 me ask you this: 10:23:08 12 what happened to these young women, the President and 10:23:10 13 the former Provost and the former President or some 10:23:13 14 lawyers that were hired last year? 10:23:15 15 10:23:19 16 the circumstances were those who were directly involved 10:23:22 17 with the -- with the complainants. 10:23:26 18 10:23:28 19 and the people that were in charge of the investigation 10:23:31 20 and the people that were in charge of righting the 10:23:33 21 wrongs and correcting the procedures at the university? 10:23:39 22 Should they not know anything about the underlying 10:23:42 23 facts? 10:23:43 24 MS. BROWN: 10:23:44 25 MR. DUNNAM: Q. The So were you told not to become familiar with the facts in this case? Q. A. Q. Well, it was not presented as an option. So let Who's in a better position to know The persons who would be best able to understand What about the people that were supervising them Objection to form. And what would that be? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 15 of 220 14 10:23:46 1 MS. BROWN: Compound and calls for 10:23:48 2 speculation. 10:23:48 3 BY MR. DUNNAM: 10:23:48 4 Q. Go ahead and answer. 10:23:49 5 A. I can't speculate what they knew or did not know. 10:23:52 6 Q. Let's talk about your history. 10:23:55 7 10:23:56 8 A. 1997. 10:23:57 9 Q. And why did you come to Baylor, or how did you 10:23:59 10 10:24:00 11 A. I was asked by the university to come. 10:24:03 12 Q. And where had you been? 10:24:05 13 A. I was in Louisville, Kentucky, Southern Baptist 10:24:11 14 10:24:11 15 10:24:13 16 10:24:14 17 A. What do you -- 10:24:15 18 Q. Well, just, you know, where you come from, where 10:24:17 19 did you grow up, where did you go to school, just -- you 10:24:22 20 know -- just a general background so we know who you 10:24:24 21 are. 10:24:24 22 10:24:28 23 went to the Naval Academy. 10:24:32 24 Baptist University. 10:24:34 25 When did you come to Baylor University? come to Baylor? Where were you? Theological Seminary. Q. Give us -- give the jury a little understanding of your background. A. Q. I went to -- I grew up in Baltimore, Maryland. I transferred to Oklahoma I did my -- How long did you serve in the Navy? I Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 16 of 220 15 10:24:35 1 A. I was six years, two years active, four years 10:24:39 2 10:24:39 3 Q. And what was your rank? 10:24:41 4 A. I was E-5. 10:24:43 5 Q. And did you serve in the States, overseas? 10:24:47 6 A. Only in the States. 10:24:48 7 Q. And what type of service was it? 10:24:49 8 A. Naval Reserve. 10:24:51 9 Q. And what was your degree? 10:24:52 10 A. My degree was Bachelor of Arts, a Master of 10:24:59 11 10:25:00 12 Q. 10:25:03 13 matter? 10:25:03 14 A. Master of Divinity. 10:25:05 15 Q. Okay. 10:25:08 16 A. No. 10:25:11 17 Q. Okay. 10:25:14 18 understand the process, and as I understand it, maybe 10:25:18 19 the Naval Academy is different, but you get an 10:25:20 20 undergraduate degree, and then you go get a Master's -- 10:25:21 21 10:25:23 22 10:25:27 23 Q. Okay. 10:25:27 24 A. -- where I received my Master of Arts. 10:25:27 25 Q. In ... Active Reserve. Divinity and a Ph.D. A. And Master of Arts in any particular subject So that was an undergraduate degree -It's a Master of Divinity Master degree. So let me go back because I might not I went there -- I went there for two years, transferred to Oklahoma Baptist University -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 17 of 220 16 10:25:29 1 A. In Philosophy. 10:25:30 2 Q. Okay. 10:25:32 3 10:25:33 4 10:25:37 5 long? 10:25:38 6 A. 10:25:43 7 10:25:44 8 10:25:47 9 10:25:49 10 10:25:49 11 A. Was Naval Reserve. 10:25:49 12 Q. -- became Reserve; so you were -- 10:25:51 13 A. Active Naval Reserve. 10:25:51 14 Q. When you say you were in the Reserve, Active 10:25:53 15 10:25:54 16 A. Four years. 10:25:54 17 Q. And -- Okay. 10:25:59 18 10:26:00 19 A. 19 ... oh, my goodness, 1973. 10:26:05 20 Q. And where did you go to work, or what did you do 10:26:09 21 10:26:10 22 A. I was a pastor and a full-time Ph.D. student. 10:26:16 23 Q. And where was that? 10:26:17 24 A. In Louisville, Kentucky. 10:26:23 25 That's -- I'm sorry. That's what I was trying to get at. Okay. And so you served active duty for how At the Naval Academy as considered active duty is two years. Q. So while you were at the Naval Academy you were active duty, but when you were transferred to Oklahoma you -- Naval Reserve how long? So when did you get your Master's of Divinity? after you -- Shepherdsville, Kentucky. And my pastorate was in Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 18 of 220 17 10:26:24 1 Q. So you were in the University of Kentucky? 10:26:25 2 A. No. 10:26:30 3 10:26:30 4 10:26:33 5 10:26:33 6 10:26:36 7 A. A Master of Divinity and a Ph.D. 10:26:39 8 Q. Okay. 10:26:44 9 A. In 1977. 10:26:45 10 Q. And what did you do after that? 10:26:47 11 A. I was asked to stay on the faculty. 10:26:49 12 Q. And what did you teach? 10:26:50 13 A. I taught New Testament and Greek. 10:26:52 14 Q. I assume you're Baptist? 10:26:54 15 A. Yes. 10:26:54 16 Q. Okay. 10:26:57 17 10:27:00 18 10:27:05 19 10:27:10 20 Q. Okay. 10:27:13 21 A. -- to teach at the George W. Truett Theological 10:27:17 22 10:27:17 23 10:27:22 24 10:27:24 25 I was at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Q. Okay. I'm sorry if you already said that. I missed it. So you got your ... is it a Ph.D. or -- And when did you attain the Ph.D.? So just walk us through your employment history through coming to Baylor. A. I taught at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary for 21 years, left, and came to Baylor in 1997 -And -- Seminary. Q. Okay. And I guess you start as an associate professor or assistant professor or what? A. I started as a full professor. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 19 of 220 18 10:27:26 1 Q. 10:27:30 2 time you went into any administrative role with Baylor 10:27:34 3 University? 10:27:34 4 10:27:40 5 10:27:43 6 Q. At Truett? 10:27:44 7 A. At Truett. 10:27:45 8 Q. And Truett is the seminary? 10:27:48 9 A. Theological Seminary of Baylor. 10:27:51 10 Q. And you were the Associate Dean. 10:27:55 11 10:27:57 12 A. Basically, what Deans do is -- 10:28:05 13 Q. That's what I'm asking. 10:28:07 14 10:28:08 15 10:28:16 16 10:28:19 17 Q. 10:28:22 18 issues? 10:28:23 19 A. Not directly. 10:28:24 20 Q. Well, what about indirectly? 10:28:26 21 A. Only the person who -- the Dean of Student 10:28:31 22 Affairs would have had the direct contact with student 10:28:37 23 conduct issues, and appeals would come to the Dean. 10:28:41 24 Q. Not you? 10:28:43 25 A. Well, as Associate Dean, I basically did -- I did A. dates. Full professor. Okay. I believe it was 2002. And when was the first I'm always fuzzy on And I became Associate Dean. What were your responsibilities as Associate Dean? might know. A. I don't know. The jury They might know, but I don't know. They hire faculty, direct the faculty, and are in charge of recruiting students and those kinds of things. Do you have any involvement in student conduct Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 20 of 220 19 10:28:47 1 those, yes. 10:28:48 2 10:28:52 3 10:28:52 4 A. Yes. 10:28:53 5 Q. And walk us through that procedure that has 10:28:56 6 existed. 10:29:01 7 told me the other day, but let me make sure I've got it. 10:29:04 8 10:29:07 9 10:29:11 10 10:29:12 11 10:29:18 12 one of them was to consider appeals that came out of the 10:29:24 13 Department of Student Affairs on corrective action -- 10:29:28 14 A. Only at the seminary, yeah. 10:29:31 15 Q. Right. 10:29:34 16 coming out of a disciplinary issue, I guess ... is that 10:29:38 17 what you would call it? 10:29:38 18 A. Yes. 10:29:39 19 Q. ... for a student conduct violation, the process 10:29:43 20 10:29:45 21 10:29:49 22 with it, but it also went through the Baylor University 10:29:52 23 student disciplinary process. 10:29:54 24 10:29:56 25 Q. So the appeals for any student conduct violation would go to you? Now, this is -- let me go back, and somebody So you're the Associate Dean starting when? A. I think it was 2002. It may be 2001. I can't remember the precise date. Q. Okay. So from that point forward of your tasks, So any seminary student that had an issue would end on your desk, and then -A. Q. The process is actually I would become familiar Okay. So walk us through the process that existed at that time. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 21 of 220 20 10:29:57 1 A. Well, it depends on what the offense was. If it 10:30:03 2 were -- 10:30:03 3 Q. Well, a student conduct violation. 10:30:05 4 A. A student conduct violation can be a matter of 10:30:09 5 cheating. 10:30:12 6 Honors Council. 10:30:14 7 Q. 10:30:17 8 minute. 10:30:20 9 types of personal behavior that are subject to student 10:30:24 10 10:30:26 11 10:30:30 12 10:30:32 13 Q. What does that include? 10:30:34 14 A. Well, use of pornography, any kind of violation 10:30:42 15 10:30:44 16 Q. What about consensual premarital sex? 10:30:48 17 A. That was also, at the seminary, considered to be 10:30:55 18 not acceptable for those who are training to be 10:30:59 19 ministers in the Baptist Convention. 10:31:02 20 10:31:05 21 code of conduct, the official policy of the university. 10:31:08 22 That would have applied to the seminary; is that 10:31:10 23 correct? 10:31:10 24 A. 10:31:14 25 It would be sent to the Baylor University Okay. So let's take cheating off the table for a Let's talk about -- so let's -- Describe for me conduct violations at this time. A. Well, we had a fairly extensive list, but it would be sexual misconduct. or assault, sexual assault. Q. Well, I want to -- Let's stick to the student The seminary had a stricter policy because of the fact that we're training persons for ministry. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 22 of 220 21 10:31:17 1 Q. Okay. So I assume that the -- and if I ever 10:31:22 2 assume anything that's inaccurate, please correct me. 10:31:24 3 Okay? 10:31:26 4 A. Mm-hmm. 10:31:26 5 Q. One of the things I neglected to add is because 10:31:31 6 10:31:34 7 A. Yes, yes. 10:31:34 8 Q. Most people understand "uh-huh" and "huh-uh" -- 10:31:37 9 A. Yeah. 10:31:37 10 Q. -- but for the court reporter to write down 10:31:40 11 10:31:40 12 A. Okay. 10:31:41 13 Q. So while it's normal to answer the way you just 10:31:48 14 10:31:48 15 A. Yes. 10:31:49 16 Q. -- answer audibly. 10:31:50 17 10:31:53 18 to this period of time when -- starting in 2001 when you 10:31:56 19 were Associate Dean of Academic Affairs of Truett. 10:32:01 20 -- There was a university-wide student code of conduct; 10:32:04 21 is that correct? 10:32:05 22 A. Yes. 10:32:06 23 Q. And then in addition, there was a separate ... 10:32:12 24 call it addendum code of conduct that applied to Truett 10:32:16 25 only? Fair enough? -- the video can take you shaking your head. "uh-huh" or "huh-uh", it's hard to understand them. did, if you would try to -- So at the time -- And let's just limit ourselves You Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 23 of 220 22 10:32:17 1 A. We had -- we had our own code of conduct -- 10:32:20 2 Q. Is it written? 10:32:22 3 A. -- in addition to -- Yes, it was written in the 10:32:24 4 catalog. 10:32:25 5 Q. 10:32:28 6 sexual misconduct. 10:32:31 7 sexual assault, you mentioned pornography, and 10:32:35 8 consensual sex you say was a violation of the Truett 10:32:40 9 separate code of conduct. 10:32:44 10 10:32:44 11 10:32:46 12 10:32:49 13 10:32:53 14 10:32:56 15 A. Anything in violation of the law. 10:32:59 16 Q. Okay. 10:33:06 17 happen, how -- Let's just say there was an allegation of 10:33:11 18 consensual premarital sex at Truett. 10:33:16 19 process when you were Associate Dean? 10:33:18 20 2001. 10:33:19 21 A. 10:33:24 22 10:33:27 23 Q. What about homosexuality? 10:33:30 24 A. This did not -- Well, there was this -- A case 10:33:37 25 So let's go back to where we were talking about Obviously, we've got issues of Was it a violation of the university-wide code of conduct? A. I was not familiar with the university-wide. I only had to deal with the Truett Seminary. Q. Okay. Any other personal -- personal conduct that -- other than cheating, that applied? So walk us through a process of what would What was the This is back in This, frankly, did not occur; so I -- you know -- I can't remember what our process would have been. did occur, but it did not come to any kind of process at Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 24 of 220 23 10:33:41 1 the seminary. The person -- 10:33:42 2 Q. What process? 10:33:44 3 A. The person was receiving a scholarship from the 10:33:49 4 Baptist General Convention of Texas, which depends upon 10:33:53 5 being a member in good standing of a Texas Baptist 10:33:59 6 General Convention of Texas church. 10:34:02 7 Q. Congregation member? 10:34:04 8 A. Congregation, in good standing. 10:34:08 9 10:34:12 10 10:34:17 11 10:34:19 12 A. Not that I'm aware of. 10:34:21 13 Q. Okay. 10:34:26 14 you handled the appeals during this period of time, you 10:34:30 15 are not aware, sitting today, of what the process was 10:34:33 16 prior to it reaching your desk? 10:34:36 17 10:34:40 18 through the Student Life, and then we would have a 10:34:46 19 committee look at this, and then -- then it became clear 10:34:50 20 that we needed to go through the Baylor University 10:34:51 21 process. 10:34:52 22 Q. And that process was what? 10:34:54 23 A. Sending it to the Honors Council for them to 10:34:57 24 deliberate. 10:35:02 25 dishonesty. The -- And the church withdrew the support, and the student then withdrew. Q. So there's never been a student expelled from Truett for being homosexual? A. So you're not aware -- even though that The process for the seminary would be to go We were primarily talking about academic Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 25 of 220 24 10:35:05 1 Q. And so you cannot recall a time or an incident 10:35:08 2 during this period of time where a student was 10:35:10 3 disciplined for personal behavior violations of the code 10:35:15 4 of conduct at the -- at Truett? 10:35:18 5 A. I honestly cannot recall. 10:35:21 6 Q. Okay. 10:35:25 7 10:35:26 8 A. Mm-hmm. 10:35:27 9 Q. -- alleged sexual misconduct. 10:35:32 10 10:35:34 11 disciplined, put on probation, any type of adverse 10:35:36 12 action taken against them -- 10:35:38 13 A. I do not recall. 10:35:38 14 Q. -- for alcohol? 10:35:39 15 A. I do not recall. 10:35:40 16 Q. Okay. 10:35:45 17 -- Well, let me go back and make sure I cover this, but 10:35:48 18 -- And you don't recall any incidences of reported 10:35:51 19 sexual assault or nonconsensual sexual allegation, 10:35:56 20 inappropriate behavior while you were -- during this 10:35:59 21 period of time from 2001 until, I guess 2005 when you 10:36:03 22 became -- you resigned as Associate Dean? 10:36:06 23 10:36:09 24 10:36:13 25 And let's include alcohol, because we've only talked about sexual issues -- Do you recall anything where someone was A. So you remained as the Associate Dean of I think I did not resign as Associate Dean. became the Dean in 2007. Q. Okay. So -- I Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 26 of 220 25 10:36:13 1 A. 10:36:17 2 time. 10:36:17 3 Q. 10:36:27 4 Tribune-Herald back in January of 2005 that you had 10:36:30 5 stepped down as the Associate Dean position that you 10:36:35 6 held since 2001, and it would be shocking if the 10:36:40 7 newspaper were ever wrong, but you don't recall that? 10:36:42 8 10:36:46 9 10:36:48 10 Q. Okay. 10:36:49 11 A. -- in 2007. 10:36:50 12 Q. All right. 10:36:55 13 distinction between being the Associate Dean of Academic 10:36:59 14 Affairs and the Association -- Associate Dean, the 10:37:04 15 position that you obtained in -- or the Dean of the 10:37:11 16 seminary. 10:37:13 17 10:37:19 18 internal academic affairs. 10:37:21 19 also external affairs, financial budgeting, as well as 10:37:28 20 raising money. 10:37:29 21 10:37:39 22 that the person that's ultimately responsible for 10:37:41 23 running that department within the university? 10:37:44 24 10:37:50 25 A. But I do not recall a -- an incident during that Okay. So there was a report in the Waco I did not step down as Associate Dean until I became appointed as the Dean -- A. Q. A. So when you -- Tell us the What was the distinction? Well, Associate Dean is primarily concerned with The Dean is concerned about Is the Dean of the college or the seminary, is Ultimately responsible for what happens in the -- in the school. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 27 of 220 26 10:37:50 1 Q. 10:37:54 2 Affairs, would appeals for personal misconduct other 10:37:57 3 than cheating come to your desk, things like drinking or 10:38:01 4 sexual misconduct? 10:38:02 5 A. Will you ask -- 10:38:03 6 Q. Why would appeals for student conduct violations 10:38:08 7 other than cheating come to you for an appeal if you 10:38:12 8 were just the Associate Dean of only Academic Affairs? 10:38:15 9 10:38:22 10 10:38:26 11 Q. Do you recall any appeals? 10:38:36 12 A. I do not recall any appeals, except I'm sure 10:38:40 13 there were academic dishonesty issues, but I don't 10:38:47 14 recall specific appeals. 10:38:49 15 10:38:51 16 10:38:52 17 A. Excuse me? 10:38:54 18 Q. Are you sure there weren't any, or are you just 10:38:56 19 10:38:56 20 10:39:00 21 10:39:02 22 10:39:05 23 10:39:07 24 A. I -- That's correct. 10:39:10 25 Q. And at that time, during that period of time, you A. Why, when you were the Associate Dean of Academic I was basically -- the Dean did not live on -- in Waco; and so I basically took care of most things. Q. Are you sure there weren't any in regard to academic issues? guessing? A. There may have been. I'm -- I assume there were. I don't recall specifics. Q. Okay. So you became the Dean of the seminary in 2007; is that right? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 28 of 220 27 10:39:14 1 remained in that position until what time? 10:39:16 2 10:39:22 3 10:39:24 4 10:39:27 5 were the Dean of the seminary up until -- and let's hold 10:39:31 6 off on you being the President. 10:39:34 7 guess, in August of 2008? 10:39:36 8 A. 10:39:42 9 correct. 10:39:42 10 10:39:51 11 any appeals reaching your desk for student conduct 10:39:53 12 violations? 10:39:54 13 A. As Dean? 10:39:55 14 Q. Yes. 10:39:55 15 A. No. 10:39:56 16 Q. So from '01 until the time you became President 10:40:03 17 in 2008, what was the process for a student to go 10:40:13 18 through if they were -- if they came forward with an 10:40:20 19 allegation of sexual misconduct? 10:40:23 20 that student was to go through? 10:40:25 21 A. 10:40:28 22 to -- 10:40:28 23 Q. 10:40:30 24 10:40:32 25 A. I believe about six months or so later I became the Interim President. Q. Q. So let's talk about this period of time when you And that happened, I I -- My dates are confusing, but I think that's Okay. During that period of time, did you recall What was the process The process would be likely that they would go Well, hold on. I don't want you to say "likely". I want to know if you know or not. A. Well, the process would be for them to go report Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 29 of 220 28 10:40:34 1 it to the Student Life, Dean of Student Life at the 10:40:37 2 seminary. 10:40:40 3 Affairs at the university. 10:40:41 4 10:40:46 5 you think it was, or that's what you know it was? 10:40:48 6 Because you started -- 10:40:49 7 A. I -- 10:40:50 8 Q. Hold on a second. 10:40:52 9 10:40:54 10 10:40:56 11 10:40:59 12 saying it was "likely" this; and so I don't want you to 10:41:02 13 guess. 10:41:02 14 A. Right. 10:41:03 15 Q. If you really don't know, I'd prefer you say "I 10:41:05 16 don't know", but if you have a -- you know -- if you 10:41:08 17 have a pretty good idea, then go ahead and tell us. 10:41:11 18 10:41:13 19 because we -- I didn't have that experience for us to go 10:41:16 20 through; so I don't recall. 10:41:17 21 10:41:20 22 process would be, as the Dean of the university -- of 10:41:23 23 the department, of what the process would be? 10:41:27 24 though you never went through it, were you -- 10:41:29 25 Q. That would then be reported to Judicial Okay. And let me make sure that -- Is that what Let me finish, if I could. I understand you know what I'm asking, but again, we're trying not to talk over one another. But, so the process -- you started your answer by A. Q. A. I really don't know, but it would be partly Okay. Did anybody make you aware of what the Even I knew that we would -- if we had a serious case, Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 30 of 220 29 10:41:32 1 that we would take it through Judicial Affairs. 10:41:35 2 10:41:42 3 10:41:43 4 A. I do not know the length of that department. 10:41:47 5 Q. Do you -- did you receive any specific training 10:41:51 6 10:41:54 7 A. I did not. 10:41:55 8 Q. Okay. 10:41:58 9 10:42:01 10 A. Sorry. 10:42:01 11 Q. It is a normal behavior. 10:42:03 12 A. Okay. 10:42:04 13 Q. You probably assume what I'm going to ask, but 10:42:07 14 10:42:08 15 A. Okay. 10:42:09 16 Q. So what you just told the jury is what you assume 10:42:12 17 the process would have been. 10:42:15 18 characterization? 10:42:15 19 A. At the seminary. 10:42:16 20 Q. All right. 10:42:21 21 you didn't -- you didn't actually know. 10:42:23 22 assumed that's what you would have done if someone had 10:42:25 23 come forward with an allegation of sexual assault? 10:42:29 24 A. That is what I assume to be the case. 10:42:31 25 Q. Okay. Q. And how long had there been a Department of Judicial Affairs at the university? about what the process would be, or is that just your -- other. So again, let's try to not talk over each And again, I'm not trying to fault you. You know -- let me get it out. Is that a correct But you can't -- sitting here today, You just Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 31 of 220 30 10:42:31 1 A. And I know that I would have been asking 10:42:33 2 10:42:35 3 Q. Okay. 10:42:38 4 A. That's correct. 10:42:39 5 Q. All right. So ... Okay. 10:42:54 6 All right. So you became the President, and I 10:42:58 7 don't want to play, you know, "guess the date" with you. 10:43:01 8 I was -- I think it was in August of '08, but that could 10:43:04 9 be wrong. 10:43:07 10 point. 10:43:11 11 told us that you thought it was about six months after 10:43:13 12 you were Dean of the seminary, but that apparently 10:43:17 13 happened around March of '07, but some -- 10:43:19 14 A. Okay. 10:43:20 15 Q. Let's just say sometime in '08 you became the 10:43:22 16 10:43:25 17 A. The Interim President. 10:43:26 18 Q. Okay. 10:43:30 19 10:43:30 20 A. For about 20 months. 10:43:31 21 Q. Right. 10:43:36 22 10:43:38 23 A. 10:43:49 24 to -- 10:43:49 25 Q. questions to find out the process. If it had ever come to your desk? Let's just assume it was in '08 at some You did say it was -- And you had originally Yeah. President or the Acting President, correct? And you remained the Interim President for how long? So what were the circumstances that you became the President? I was called out of the blue, and then I flew Who called you? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 32 of 220 31 10:43:50 1 A. One of the -- one of the regents. 10:43:52 2 Q. Who? 10:43:52 3 A. Gary Elliston. 10:43:55 4 Q. And was he President of the board or anything, or 10:44:00 5 10:44:01 6 A. Yeah, he was just a regent. 10:44:02 7 Q. Was he on -- on any -- We'll go ahead. 10:44:10 8 10:44:12 9 10:44:15 10 10:44:15 11 A. Aware of ... 10:44:17 12 Q. You were "where"? 10:44:21 13 A. Oh, I was at -- Yes. 10:44:23 14 Q. Okay. 10:44:23 15 A. I was Dean of the seminary. 10:44:25 16 Q. All right. 10:44:28 17 10:44:29 18 10:44:33 19 10:44:34 20 Q. And walk me through that discussion. 10:44:36 21 A. I was rather shocked, did not particularly want 10:44:42 22 10:44:50 23 Q. So you originally turned it down? 10:44:52 24 A. I originally decided that I did not want to do 10:44:55 25 that. was he just a regent? Let's finish this, and I'll go back and ask you. So you get a call from Mr. Elliston, and you were where? You were at Baylor? So Elliston calls you out of the blue, and what does he say? A. "Would you consider becoming the Interim President?" to be, and was encouraged to reconsider and to accept. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 33 of 220 32 10:44:55 1 Q. Why not? 10:44:56 2 A. I enjoyed being the Dean of the seminary. 10:45:00 3 Q. Did you feel qualified to be President? 10:45:04 4 A. I -- I personally have -- Being President is a 10:45:13 5 very difficult job, and I didn't consider myself 10:45:17 6 qualified. 10:45:28 7 Q. Okay. 10:45:30 8 A. This is David Iler. 10:45:32 9 Q. And what's his role with the university? 10:45:34 10 A. He is part of the General Counsel at Baylor 10:45:37 11 10:45:37 12 Q. Okay. 10:45:41 13 A. I -- Four months? 10:45:50 14 know. 10:45:50 15 Q. Months or years is really what I was trying -- 10:45:53 16 A. Months. 10:45:53 17 Q. This year? 10:45:54 18 A. Yes. 10:45:55 19 Q. And we're in 2017, right? 10:46:00 20 A. Yeah. Yes. 10:46:02 21 Q. Okay. So did Elliston explain to you why there 10:46:10 22 was a need for an Interim President, or had Lilley 10:46:12 23 already left? 10:46:13 24 A. They -- President Lilley had already left. 10:46:16 25 Q. And walk us through the circumstances of his I was amazed that many others did. And who is this gentleman here? University. How long has he been in that position? I can only guess. I don't I'm -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 34 of 220 33 10:46:21 1 departure as you -- 10:46:23 2 10:46:25 3 10:46:25 4 Q. Did you ever become familiar with them? 10:46:27 5 A. No, I did not. 10:46:28 6 Q. So sitting here today, you do not know why 10:46:30 7 10:46:32 8 10:46:36 9 10:46:37 10 Q. And you don't know why? 10:46:39 11 A. I was not privy to why they did that. 10:46:42 12 Q. Were there any problems with his performance of 10:46:49 13 10:46:51 14 10:46:54 15 regents' decision; so I was not aware of what their 10:46:57 16 issues were. 10:46:58 17 10:47:04 18 10:47:05 19 A. Correct. 10:47:06 20 Q. And you were not curious to know what the 10:47:08 21 deficiencies had been, why you were being brought in, 10:47:12 22 what deficiencies you might be called upon to correct? 10:47:16 23 Were you not curious about that? 10:47:17 24 10:47:23 25 A. I was not familiar with those circumstances at all. President Lilley left the university? A. I only know that the regents dismissed him from the position. his job duties that you're aware of? A. Q. I was -- that would -- I was not part of the Well, so -- but you're taking over this job as President, correct? A. I did not delve into the issues specifically that led to his dismissal. I was aware of things that I Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 35 of 220 34 10:47:27 1 needed to do as the Interim President. 10:47:30 2 Q. Well, what were you generally aware of? 10:47:32 3 A. I was generally aware that there was serious 10:47:36 4 dissatisfaction on the part of the faculty toward 10:47:41 5 President Lilley. 10:47:46 6 people were rejected for tenure. 10:47:51 7 dismay among the faculty, but I was not privy to any of 10:47:55 8 the regents' discussions. 10:47:56 9 10:48:00 10 me -- tell the jury, what does that mean at Baylor 10:48:03 11 University, being President? 10:48:06 12 10:48:10 13 10:48:10 14 10:48:16 15 of time between 2008 and 2010. 10:48:19 16 university day to day? 10:48:20 17 A. 10:48:23 18 to day. 10:48:23 19 Q. 10:48:26 20 not talking about departments. 10:48:28 21 administrating the university. 10:48:30 22 A. 10:48:34 23 persons. 10:48:39 24 Q. Who is that at this time? 10:48:40 25 A. At the time it was Reagan Ramsower. Q. A. There was an incidence where several This caused some When you become President of the university, tell The President of the university is the Chief Executive Officer. Q. And who is at this time -- and this is the period Who's running the There are many people running the university day Okay. Well, let's go through who they are. I'm talking about There are -- you know -- there are countless There's the CFO, Chief Financial Officer. I'm Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 36 of 220 35 10:48:43 1 There is the -- 10:48:43 2 Q. Did he have any other roles at that time? 10:48:46 3 A. I don't recall other roles. 10:48:48 4 Q. Okay. 10:48:49 5 A. There are -- there is the Chief Academic Officer, 10:48:53 6 the Provost, there is General Counsel, there is the Vice 10:48:59 7 President for Student Life, there is the Vice President 10:49:05 8 for Marketing and Communications, there is the persons 10:49:10 9 in charge of the facilities, and there are persons in 10:49:22 10 charge of alumni relations. 10:49:27 11 of persons. 10:49:28 12 10:49:35 13 your job functions on a day-to-day basis as the 10:49:38 14 President of the university. 10:49:39 15 10:49:43 16 10:49:46 17 10:49:49 18 don't know who better to ask than you. 10:49:51 19 us through the general functions of the President of the 10:49:53 20 university? 10:49:54 21 10:49:58 22 desk related to all of the operations of the university; 10:50:03 23 so it varies from day to day. 10:50:06 24 10:50:13 25 Q. A. Okay. It's just a very long range So give us -- give the jury an idea of That's very difficult to do. The job functions vary from day to day, and they're very wide. Q. A. Q. Well, I don't know -- I don't know them; so I So can you walk Well, so many things come across the President's Well, during your time as the President of the university ... and let's go back, and let's talk about Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 37 of 220 36 10:50:16 1 the student code of conduct issues. Do you recall any 10:50:19 2 allegations of sexual assault during the time period 10:50:22 3 when you were the President the first time? 10:50:25 4 A. I do not. 10:50:26 5 Q. And what was the process for someone to go 10:50:33 6 10:50:35 7 A. The process, it would have been -- 10:50:38 8 Q. Again, let me go back, and I just want to caution 10:50:41 9 10:50:45 10 know -- 10:50:45 11 A. Right. 10:50:45 12 Q. -- and what you think it was. 10:50:48 13 A. Okay. 10:50:48 14 Q. So do you know? 10:50:49 15 A. I do not know specifically, going back to that 10:50:54 16 time, but I do think that it would have gone through 10:50:58 17 Judicial Affairs. 10:50:58 18 10:51:02 19 10:51:03 20 A. Right. 10:51:04 21 Q. -- and I'm trying to ascertain whether that's a 10:51:07 22 10:51:09 23 Is there -- Did you know generally what people 10:51:10 24 were to do, or did you -- or just sitting here today, 10:51:13 25 you assume this is what they would have done? through at that time during those two years? you. Q. I want to just draw a distinction between what you Okay. Okay? And again, you used the term "specifically" -- term you use generally. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 38 of 220 37 10:51:15 1 A. We had a policy -- we've always had a policy of 10:51:19 2 sexual misconduct; and so it would have gone through the 10:51:22 3 processes in Student Life and then also through Judicial 10:51:26 4 Affairs. 10:51:26 5 Q. 10:51:29 6 know? 10:51:29 7 A. 10:51:34 8 10:51:36 9 10:51:40 10 ago you said you weren't. 10:51:44 11 was. 10:51:44 12 10:51:48 13 because of the lack of -- there were no sexual assault 10:51:52 14 issues that came up during this time. 10:51:55 15 10:52:00 16 through 2010, you-all were filing annual reports with 10:52:04 17 the Department of Education notifying the U.S. 10:52:07 18 Government that there were no sexual assaults on Baylor 10:52:10 19 campus during your tenure as President; is that correct? 10:52:13 20 A. That's correct. 10:52:13 21 Q. Who prepared those reports? 10:52:15 22 A. I do not know exactly. 10:52:18 23 Q. Were they -- Were they reports that you approved? 10:52:22 24 A. I would have known about them. 10:52:25 25 Is that what you assume, or is that what you That's what I know because of the processes that came through Student Life. Q. A. Q. So during this two-year period of time, a minute Right. You guessed this is what it I'm -- you know -- my memory is fuzzy In fact, during your period of time from 2008 signed off on them. I don't know if I Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 39 of 220 38 10:52:26 1 Q. Do you recall ever seeing one? 10:52:28 2 A. I do not recall. 10:52:29 3 Q. You just assumed you saw them and signed off on 10:52:32 4 them? 10:52:33 5 A. I did -- I do not know, no. 10:52:35 6 Q. Okay. 10:52:38 7 10:52:39 8 A. Right. 10:52:41 9 Q. -- between what you say, "Well, I assume this is 10:52:43 10 what happened" as opposed to "Yes, this is what 10:52:46 11 happened". 10:52:47 12 A. Right. 10:52:49 13 Q. And going back, just to make sure there's no 10:53:06 14 misunderstandings, you're not aware of any specific 10:53:09 15 process a student would go through if they were -- made 10:53:11 16 an allegation of improper sexual behavior. 10:53:16 17 generally this is what it would have been, but sitting 10:53:20 18 here today, you still don't know -- 10:53:20 19 A. That's true. 10:53:22 20 Q. -- during this time period? 10:53:22 21 A. That's true. 10:53:23 22 Q. Okay. 10:53:29 23 determining -- determining the accuracy of these reports 10:53:34 24 that were given to the U.S. Government asserting that 10:53:37 25 there were no sexual assaults at Baylor during this And again, I'm not trying to get on you. I'm trying to make a distinction -I understand. Okay? Right. You assume Do you know who was responsible for Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 40 of 220 39 10:53:41 1 period, this period of time? 10:53:42 2 A. I do not. 10:53:42 3 Q. Who's responsible for it right now? 10:53:48 4 A. Shelley Dietz. 10:53:50 5 Q. Now, after -- So walk us through. 10:54:11 6 go back to the question. 10:54:16 7 calling you. 10:54:21 8 Board of Regents ... and it's called "regents"; is that 10:54:24 9 correct? 10:54:24 10 A. Correct. 10:54:25 11 Q. They're not trustees. 10:54:26 12 A. They're regents. 10:54:28 13 Q. Okay. 10:54:31 14 time when you were President. 10:54:34 15 how the board -- governance structure during your time 10:54:39 16 as President? 10:54:40 17 A. I do not remember any changes. 10:54:42 18 Q. Okay. 10:54:44 19 time that you left as President, there had not been any 10:54:47 20 changes in governance during your tenure at Baylor 10:54:50 21 University? 10:54:50 22 A. No. 10:54:51 23 Q. Okay. 10:54:55 24 10:54:56 25 Okay. We talked about Mr. Ellison So explain to the jury the -- how the They're -- And let's talk about during this period of Were there any changes in And as far as you were aware, up until the I guess let me make sure we're not doing a double negative. A. You -- Let me Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 41 of 220 40 10:54:56 1 Q. You were not aware -- 10:54:58 2 A. I was not aware. 10:54:59 3 Q. Okay. 10:55:01 4 time? 10:55:02 5 A. 10:55:05 6 10:55:07 7 10:55:14 8 percentage or a number of regents were selected by the 10:55:18 9 Southern Baptist Convention or something like that. 10:55:20 10 10:55:20 11 10:55:23 12 25 percent are selected by the Baptist General 10:55:27 13 Convention of Texas. 10:55:27 14 Q. Okay. 10:55:30 15 A. That's not the Southern Baptist Convention. 10:55:33 16 Q. Okay. 10:55:33 17 A. The Southern -- 10:55:35 18 Q. I'm a Methodist; so -- 10:55:36 19 A. The Southern Baptist Convention is a national 10:55:39 20 convention. 10:55:41 21 Texas. 10:55:41 22 10:55:48 23 10:55:49 24 A. 10:55:50 25 Baptist. So how many regents were there at this Oh, I can't remember exactly. in the thirties. Q. Okay. It may have been I just don't remember. And there's some discussion about that a Is that correct? A. Q. That's not correct. They're selected -- Baptist General Convention? What's the difference? The Baptist General Convention is only And Baylor disassociated from the Southern Baptist Convention at some point; is that correct? No, they did not disassociate from the Southern They did separate from the Baptist General Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 42 of 220 41 10:55:53 1 Convention of Texas, but then still allowed 25 percent 10:55:56 2 of their regents to be nominated by the Baptist General 10:56:00 3 Convention of Texas. 10:56:00 4 10:56:03 5 "nominated". 10:56:07 6 to nominate 25 percent? 10:56:09 7 10:56:14 8 consultation with representatives of the Baptist General 10:56:18 9 Convention of Texas and then decide on whom they would 10:56:20 10 10:56:22 11 10:56:30 12 made up or selected by the Baptist General Convention is 10:56:33 13 actually just nominating. 10:56:37 14 that correct? 10:56:38 15 10:56:43 16 consultation, and then they're elected by the Baptist 10:56:49 17 General Convention of Texas. 10:56:49 18 10:56:51 19 10:56:56 20 A. I don't know that that ever had happened -- 10:56:59 21 Q. That's not what I asked you. 10:57:00 22 A. -- but I assume that is correct. 10:57:02 23 Q. Well, do you know that to be correct, or are you 10:57:05 24 10:57:06 25 Q. A. Okay. So let's talk about that term, How are they selected? They're entitled They nominate, and the regents then sit down in like to add as regents. Q. A. Q. So the 25 percent of the board that is supposedly The board selects them; is It's done through consultation with -- mutual Well, does the board have the right to say "We don't like this nominee, and we veto them" or some -- assuming? A. That is correct. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 43 of 220 42 10:57:07 1 Q. 10:57:10 2 Convention gets to select or put 25 percent of the board 10:57:14 3 members on, that's sort of misleading, isn't it? 10:57:16 4 10:57:19 5 10:57:23 6 10:57:26 7 regents approve that nominee, they will not go on the 10:57:29 8 board, correct? 10:57:30 9 A. That is -- that is correct. 10:57:30 10 Q. And let me ask you, my understanding is there's a 10:57:34 11 10:57:36 12 A. A faculty representative of what? 10:57:38 13 Q. On the Board of Regents. 10:57:40 14 A. There is a -- currently a faculty regent. 10:57:43 15 Q. And how long has that been the case? 10:57:45 16 A. I think that has been maybe four, three to four 10:57:53 17 10:57:53 18 10:57:55 19 the President of the university the first time, there 10:57:58 20 was not a faculty representative on the Board of 10:58:01 21 Regents? 10:58:01 22 A. There was not. 10:58:02 23 Q. Was there a student representative on the Board 10:58:06 24 10:58:07 25 A. Okay. So when we say that the Baptist General I don't believe it's misleading, because there is a mutual cooperation between both, both entities. Q. But at the end of the day, unless the existing faculty representative; is that true? years. Q. Okay. So during the period of time when you were of Regents, non-voting? A. There was not. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 44 of 220 43 10:58:08 1 Q. So we know that the existing board has to approve 10:58:18 2 any nominee from the General Baptist Convention, and 10:58:21 3 that makes up 25 percent of the board. 10:58:26 4 75 percent of the board -- how was that selected during 10:58:29 5 the time that you were President from 2008 to 2010? 10:58:31 6 A. I was not involved in that process. 10:58:34 7 Q. Well, who selected them is my question? 10:58:36 8 A. The regents select them, but I was not involved 10:58:40 9 10:58:43 10 10:58:45 11 that the existing Board of Regents is the ones 10:58:48 12 ultimately and solely responsible for the final decision 10:58:51 13 of who they -- who the oncoming regents will be? 10:58:54 14 A. That is correct. 10:58:54 15 Q. Okay. 10:59:09 16 was there anyone that the regents answered to or were 10:59:16 17 accountable to, other than themselves? 10:59:18 18 A. Ultimately to God. 10:59:20 19 Q. Okay. 10:59:29 20 10:59:33 21 10:59:38 22 that the Texas government might have some influence, but 10:59:45 23 -- over some, if there is misuse of their fiduciary 10:59:57 24 authority, but I don't know. 10:59:57 25 How is the other in the direct process of electing regents. Q. So while you were President, it's accurate to say the word? A. Q. Is there -- During this period of time, How about someone who is in the ... what's I can't remember the word ... earthly world? I assume that -- and I do not know, but I think Well, that's actually something that Baylor has Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 45 of 220 44 11:00:00 1 and always has resisted and was resisting up until last 11:00:05 2 week; is that correct? 11:00:06 3 A. I don't know what you're talking about; so -- 11:00:08 4 Q. Well, you appeared before the Texas Senate 11:00:10 5 telling the Texas legislators to stay out of your 11:00:14 6 business; isn't that right? 11:00:14 7 11:00:17 8 11:00:17 9 11:00:20 10 11:00:23 11 A. I don't know what six laws. 11:00:26 12 Q. So as Acting President, the President for the 11:00:29 13 last year, you do not know what legislation has been 11:00:32 14 passed in the Texas legislature affecting Baylor 11:00:35 15 University? 11:00:35 16 11:00:37 17 11:00:38 18 Q. Do you know them generally? 11:00:39 19 A. Yeah, I would need to know what specifically 11:00:42 20 11:00:43 21 11:00:45 22 the university. 11:00:48 23 legislature, you understand that they recessed Monday, 11:00:51 24 two days ago? 11:00:52 25 A. I did not tell them to stay out of my -- our business. Q. You requested that they not pass a series of six laws that are currently going to the Governor's desk? A. I do not know what six laws specifically you're talking about. you're talking about. Q. A. Well, I'm asking you. Yes. You're the President of And sitting here today, the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 46 of 220 45 11:00:52 1 Q. 11:00:56 2 legislation that they just passed that may impact Baylor 11:01:00 3 University? 11:01:00 4 11:01:07 5 that directly affect Baylor University. 11:01:10 6 the universities, but I don't know. 11:01:12 7 Q. Who's Baylor's lobbyist? 11:01:16 8 A. Our lobbyist that works for Baylor is Rochonda 11:01:23 9 11:01:23 10 Q. When was she hired? 11:01:26 11 A. She was hired when I was President, and I do not 11:01:28 12 11:01:29 13 Q. The President this current term? 11:01:34 14 A. President when I was President the first time -- 11:01:36 15 11:01:38 16 11:01:41 17 the governance of the university when you were President 11:01:49 18 the first time. 11:01:52 19 11:02:01 20 me, and maybe it's not. 11:02:05 21 do 30 people make these types of decisions when they 11:02:11 22 meet four times a year? 11:02:13 23 11:02:15 24 11:02:16 25 A. And are you aware, even generally, of the I am not aware of any specific laws that passed Perhaps all of Farmer-Neal. remember the exact date. Interim President the first time. Q. Okay. So let's walk back. We're talking about 30-some-odd regents sounds a little unwieldy to MS. BROWN: How does that 30 regents -- how Objection to form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. Well, let me ask. How many times do the regents Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 47 of 220 46 11:02:18 1 meet per year? 11:02:19 2 A. Four times. 11:02:20 3 Q. Okay. 11:02:23 4 is. 11:02:28 5 but a smaller working group, a controlled group? 11:02:32 6 don't know what you want to call it, but is there a 11:02:34 7 smaller group of regents that make decisions or make 11:02:37 8 recommendations to the full board? 11:02:39 9 A. At what time or at what period? 11:02:41 10 Q. During the period of time when you were President 11:02:43 11 11:02:44 12 A. There was not. 11:02:45 13 Q. So how did recommendations come to the board? 11:02:50 14 A. Recommendations came from individual regents. 11:02:54 15 Q. And they would debate them and decide them all 11:02:58 16 11:03:01 17 A. That's correct. 11:03:02 18 Q. Was there any process for regents to propose 11:03:08 19 issues and then the administration or staff work on 11:03:13 20 those, develop those? 11:03:16 21 11:03:20 22 11:03:23 23 Q. Can you recall that ever happening? 11:03:24 24 A. I do not recall. 11:03:26 25 Q. So when you left as President in 2010, what was And explain to me how -- what the process Is there a -- I don't know the correct terminology, I the first time. during a two-day meeting four times a year? A. There -- If issues were raised by the regents, then the administration staff would work on those. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 48 of 220 47 11:03:39 1 your next position? 11:03:40 2 11:03:43 3 full-time. 11:03:46 4 went back full-time as Dean. 11:03:48 5 11:03:57 6 11:03:59 7 A. I was -- had no involvement whatsoever. 11:04:02 8 Q. Did you meet with him before he was hired and 11:04:05 9 11:04:08 10 nature? 11:04:08 11 A. I met with him before he was hired. 11:04:12 12 Q. And tell us about that. 11:04:15 13 time? 11:04:16 14 A. I think we met one time. 11:04:18 15 Q. Was it anything more than a casual 11:04:20 16 11:04:24 17 A. It was casual meet-and-greet. 11:04:25 18 Q. So it was not a substantive discussion of Baylor 11:04:28 19 11:04:30 20 A. It was not. 11:04:30 21 Q. Okay. 11:04:36 22 ever discussed by you and President Starr before he 11:04:39 23 joined the university? 11:04:40 24 A. No. 11:04:41 25 Q. Were they ever discussed after he joined the A. Q. Starr? I went back to being Dean of the seminary I was always Dean during that time. Then I Were you involved in the hiring of Professor I can't remember what he goes by. explain to him the job duties or anything of that You met with him one Was it a -- meet-and-greet, or was it a substantive meeting? governance policy? Were issues of -- code of conduct issues Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 49 of 220 48 11:04:43 1 university? 11:04:44 2 A. With me, no. 11:04:45 3 Q. You said "with me". 11:04:50 4 A. I don't know. 11:04:50 5 Q. Okay. 11:04:53 6 11:04:58 7 11:05:00 8 A. I was named Interim Provost. 11:05:02 9 Q. Okay. 11:05:05 10 you're President and Provost ... both times you were 11:05:09 11 Interim President, Interim Provost ... were there any 11:05:12 12 limitations on your duties in those offices because we 11:05:16 13 put the term "interim" on it? 11:05:18 14 A. There were no limitations. 11:05:19 15 Q. Okay. 11:05:23 16 you would be replaced by someone eventually, you were 11:05:27 17 the President of the university? 11:05:28 18 A. I was. 11:05:29 19 Q. And sitting here today, you are the President of 11:05:31 20 11:05:31 21 A. I am. 11:05:32 22 Q. Okay. 11:05:36 23 A. The Provost is the Chief Academic Officer. 11:05:40 24 has to do with hiring of faculty, directing academic 11:05:46 25 programs, budgeting of individual schools; and also, Was it with someone else? That's what I wanted to know. So at some point, I think in 2014, were you named the Provost? So when you use the term "interim" when So you -- so while it was understood that the university? So what are the jobs of the Provost? It Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 50 of 220 49 11:05:58 1 academic dishonesty issues came as part of some appeal 11:06:04 2 process. 11:06:08 3 but they also heard academic dishonesty issues. 11:06:13 4 all of the academic planning and vision for the schools. 11:06:20 5 11:06:29 6 11:06:32 7 A. 11:06:36 8 issues. 11:06:36 9 Q. 11:06:38 10 talking now, you know, from your period of time from 11:06:41 11 2001 now through the end of you being Provost in what 11:06:46 12 year? 11:06:47 13 A. I assume it's 2015. 11:06:51 14 Q. It's my understanding that it was summer of 2015. 11:06:58 15 A. Yes. 11:06:59 16 Q. Does that sound correct to you? 11:06:59 17 A. That's correct. 11:06:59 18 Q. So you were Provost for about a year? 11:07:01 19 A. I was. 11:07:01 20 Q. Do you recall there ever being any issues or 11:07:03 21 discussions about sexual misconduct, Title IX, 11:07:08 22 discrimination type issues being brought to your 11:07:11 23 attention? 11:07:12 24 11:07:16 25 Q. It was just on the -- not the final appeal, Also, Were you involved in student conduct issues, other than academic misconduct? A. I was only involved in academic dishonesty Were you involved -- And here again, we're Title IX issues were brought because we were hiring a Title IX Coordinator. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 51 of 220 50 11:07:18 1 Q. And when was that coordinator hired? 11:07:20 2 A. I can't remember exact dates. 11:07:23 3 Q. Well, approximately? 11:07:24 4 A. It was during my time as Interim Provost; so it 11:07:29 5 11:07:32 6 Q. Who was that person? 11:07:33 7 A. That person was Patty Crawford. 11:07:35 8 Q. And were you involved in the decision that you 11:07:38 9 11:07:41 10 11:07:47 11 directly, but after the "Dear Colleague Letter" it 11:07:54 12 became very clear that we needed to have a full-time 11:07:58 13 Title IX Coordinator. 11:08:00 14 11:08:03 15 11:08:04 16 A. It came out in 2011. 11:08:05 17 Q. So this is three-four years later you said it 11:08:08 18 became, I guess -- let me -- I mean you said it became 11:08:14 19 very clear that you needed one -- 11:08:16 20 A. A full-time -- 11:08:17 21 Q. -- after -- Let me finish my question. 11:08:20 22 You said that after the "Dear Colleague Letter" 11:08:22 23 came out, it became very clear that you needed a Title 11:08:26 24 IX Coordinator? 11:08:26 25 would have been 2014 to '15. I don't know exactly. needed -- that Baylor needed a Title IX Coordinator? A. Q. I was not involved in the decision specific -- And when did the "Dear Colleague Letter" come out? A. We always had a Title IX Coordinator, but it Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 52 of 220 51 11:08:29 1 became clear that this needed to be somebody who was 11:08:33 2 dedicated solely to the Title IX office. 11:08:36 3 11:08:40 4 11:08:42 5 11:08:46 6 of the Executive Council. 11:08:55 7 who was the Chief of Staff to the President, who was on 11:08:58 8 the Executive Council; and then I believe Juan 11:09:02 9 Alejandro, who was also on the Executive Council, who 11:09:06 10 11:09:10 11 Q. What's the Chief Auditor do? 11:09:13 12 A. Audits the university's financial condition and 11:09:17 13 11:09:18 14 Q. CPA/bookkeeper? 11:09:21 15 A. A CPA, yes. 11:09:23 16 Q. What's that have to do with Title IX compliance? 11:09:27 17 A. Well, I'm not -- It's an additional job. 11:09:33 18 Q. Right. 11:09:36 19 11:09:38 20 11:09:42 21 so I don't know what -- what happened -- what exactly, 11:09:45 22 how that functioned. 11:09:46 23 11:09:51 24 trying to correct the wrongs and structural issues at 11:09:56 25 Baylor University because of what has come to light in Q. So who was the Title IX Coordinator? Who had that title before Patty Crawford? A. John Whelan had had it, Director of HR, a member Then I believe Karla Leper, had been Chief Auditor, internal audit. all of the financial reports. But what does it -- how does it -- I assume this is a CPA or something? A. Q. I was not on the Executive Council at that time; Now, you have been in charge for the last year of Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 53 of 220 52 11:09:58 1 regard to discrimination against young women involving 11:10:01 2 sexual assault reporting, whatever that -- you've said 11:10:06 3 that, right? 11:10:06 4 MS. BROWN: 11:10:07 5 MR. DUNNAM: 11:10:09 6 MS. BROWN: 11:10:10 7 11:10:10 8 Q. Did you understand my question? 11:10:11 9 A. No, I did not. 11:10:11 10 MR. DUNNAM: 11:09:47 11 THE REPORTER: 11:09:49 12 for the last year of trying to correct the 11:09:54 13 wrongs and structural issues at Baylor 11:09:56 14 University because of what has come to light 11:09:58 15 in regard to discrimination against young 11:10:00 16 women involving sexual assault reporting 11:10:00 17 ..." 11:10:00 18 11:10:00 19 11:10:00 20 11:10:34 21 11:10:40 22 -- what I was charged with doing was implementing the 11:10:43 23 recommendations that came from the law firm, Pepper 11:10:46 24 Hamilton. 11:10:46 25 Objection, form. What's the form? Vague. BY MR. DUNNAM: Please read it again. "Now, you have been in charge BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. Do you understand -- do you understand the question? A. Q. I don't agree with the question. What I was done Well, we'll get into detail about that, but why Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 54 of 220 53 11:10:49 1 were recommendations made? 11:10:51 2 A. 11:10:55 3 made. 11:10:58 4 Q. 11:11:02 5 11:11:03 6 11:11:06 7 implementing and assuring that recommendations are 11:11:10 8 implemented and followed; is that right? 11:11:12 9 A. That's correct. 11:11:13 10 Q. But sitting here today, you do not know why those 11:11:17 11 11:11:20 12 11:11:23 13 Findings of Fact, but my focus was entirely on the 11:11:28 14 implementation of the recommendations. 11:11:30 15 11:11:32 16 you aware of the reasons and the rationale that it was 11:11:36 17 necessary to implement these 105 recommendations? 11:11:39 18 11:11:42 19 11:11:45 20 11:11:47 21 So you are not aware of the actual reasons for 11:11:51 22 the implementation of any of the 105 recommendations, 11:11:55 23 other than they've been recommended that you-all do? 11:11:59 24 11:12:03 25 I only came in after the recommendations were I do not know the reason why they were made. Well, let me be real -- let me make sure that we've got no misunderstanding. For the last year you've been in charge of recommendations were made necessary? A. Q. A. The recommendations were made necessary from the That's not what I asked. A. Are The reasons and rationale came, I -- from the Findings of Fact. Q. My question is: Okay. That's all I know. Let me ask you again. They were recommended out of the Findings of Fact which were published. That's what I'm aware of, of the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 55 of 220 54 11:12:06 1 Findings of Fact. 11:12:06 2 11:12:09 3 contained in that written report about the underlying 11:12:11 4 need for the 105 recommendations? 11:12:13 5 11:12:16 6 11:12:17 7 11:12:19 8 the public knows about the rationale and the need for 11:12:22 9 these 105 recommendations? 11:12:24 10 A. 11:12:27 11 Fact. 11:12:27 12 Q. And that's all? 11:12:28 13 A. That's correct. 11:12:28 14 Q. What did you review in order to prepare for your 11:12:31 15 11:12:32 16 11:12:38 17 made in the newspaper, at the Senate Hearing -- and at 11:12:44 18 the Senate Hearing. 11:12:44 19 11:12:44 20 11:12:47 21 A. Statements, yes. 11:12:47 22 Q. Can you walk me through what those are? 11:12:49 23 A. I can't remember all of those statements. 11:12:51 24 Q. Well, how many -- about how many? 11:12:53 25 Q. A. Are you aware of anything other than what is I'm only aware of what was written in the final Findings of Fact. Q. So you're not aware of anything other than what I'm aware of what was written in the Findings of deposition today? A. Q. I reviewed some statements that I had and -- had So you reviewed statements you've made. Can you tell us -- I mean are we talking about one or two or a dozen or more? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 56 of 220 55 11:12:55 1 A. I can't -- The Senate Hearing was a long -- but I 11:13:04 2 11:13:05 3 Q. You can't even give me a range? 11:13:07 4 A. No. 11:13:07 5 Q. Two to 20? 11:13:09 6 A. I don't know how many statements. 11:13:13 7 they were not -- weren't isolated. 11:13:16 8 statements. 11:13:20 9 newspaper articles, etcetera. 11:13:21 10 Q. How did you review your Senate testimony? 11:13:26 11 A. I just read it. 11:13:28 12 Q. So it was transcribed? 11:13:29 13 A. Yes. 11:13:30 14 Q. And as we sit here today, do you stand by your 11:13:34 15 11:13:35 16 11:13:40 17 11:13:42 18 11:13:46 19 11:13:47 20 A. No. 11:13:48 21 Q. Nothing stands out? 11:13:49 22 A. No. 11:13:49 23 Q. So let's go back. 11:14:00 24 a casual greeting with President Starr, and then he was 11:14:08 25 hired, correct? can't -- I can't identify the number. It was just -- It was a number of It was just comments that were collected in testimony? A. It depends on -- There were some things in the testimony that I would rephrase. Q. Okay. Well, we'll go over it. Do you remember anything at the moment, though? We were talking about you had Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 57 of 220 56 11:14:08 1 A. That's correct. That's correct. It was after he 11:14:11 2 11:14:11 3 11:14:18 4 was your go-to person? 11:14:22 5 MS. BROWN: 11:14:23 6 11:14:24 7 11:14:27 8 11:14:29 9 11:14:33 10 11:14:35 11 11:14:38 12 your office was right next-door to Reagan Ramsower's and 11:14:42 13 how you said, at least in the media that, you know, you 11:14:49 14 were constantly in contact with him. 11:14:52 15 people or -- 11:14:52 16 11:14:54 17 members of the Executive Council. 11:14:58 18 regularly. 11:14:58 19 Q. That's not what I asked you. 11:14:58 20 A. And we met once a week. 11:15:00 21 Q. That's not what I asked you. 11:15:01 22 again, if I'm -- you know -- if you don't understand the 11:15:05 23 question, just let me know. 11:15:06 24 11:15:08 25 was hired. Q. Now, while you were President the first time, who Objection to form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. Do you know what that means, right-hand person, number two? A. Who was your -- There was no number two. My go-to persons was the entire Executive Council. Q. A. So, you know, there's been some discussion that Is he one of those I was constantly in contact with all of the They met with me I asked you -- And I just asked you if he was one of those people? A. He was one of those persons, yes. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 58 of 220 57 11:15:10 1 Q. Was his importance any more or less than the 11:15:14 2 others? 11:15:15 3 A. It was not more or less. 11:15:16 4 Q. And would this basically be your Executive 11:15:20 5 11:15:21 6 11:15:39 7 11:15:47 8 where that is? 11:16:23 9 (Searching through documents.) 11:16:23 10 11:16:23 11 11:16:24 12 11:16:24 13 11:16:42 14 what's been marked as Exhibit Number 1 and Exhibit 11:16:44 15 Number 2, and there are some handwritten notes on it. 11:16:49 16 We took this off of some Baylor website. 11:16:53 17 handwritten notes are inaccurate, let me know, but 11:16:56 18 someone on staff was trying to figure out the time 11:16:59 19 periods for those of the various Executive Council. 11:17:01 20 11:17:04 21 don't you tell us when you think -- and do you recall 11:17:06 22 those were the members of the Executive Council? 11:17:08 23 11:17:14 24 11:17:19 25 Council you're talking about? A. The Executive Council. MR. DUNNAM: Andrea, do you know which -- I've got it right here. Let me find it. There we go. (Exhibits 1 and 2 marked.) THE REPORTER: 1 and 2. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. So, President Garland, I'm going to hand you And so if the And so let's look at Number 1 right now, and why A. I was not involved in the Executive Council. this time Todd Still was the Provost. Q. Okay. At I was not. And so let's look at -- So you don't know, Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 59 of 220 58 11:17:22 1 Exhibit Number 1, if any of those individuals were on 11:17:26 2 the Executive Council during the time up until May of 11:17:29 3 2016? 11:17:30 4 A. 11:17:34 5 11:17:36 6 11:17:38 7 11:17:41 8 11:17:44 9 11:17:47 10 A. At which time? 11:17:49 11 Q. Exhibit 1, the second time. 11:17:50 12 A. Yes. 11:17:51 13 Q. Who? 11:17:52 14 A. Reagan Ramsower, Tommye Lou Davis, Juan 11:17:58 15 Alejandro, Pattie Orr, Karen Kemp, Brian Nicholson, 11:18:04 16 Kevin Jackson, and Dave Rosselli. 11:18:07 17 11:18:11 18 ones were not on the Executive Council when you became 11:18:13 19 the second -- Interim President for the second time? 11:18:17 20 11:18:23 21 11:18:23 22 11:18:28 23 -- let's ask you whether or not that accurately reflects 11:18:32 24 the Executive Council while you have been President this 11:18:35 25 current time? I do not know, but if this comes from the Baylor University website, I assume it's correct. Q. And I'm not going to represent that to you. We'll figure out what's accurate later on. Do you recall any of those individuals being on there when you assumed the role as President? Q. A. So let's -- it might be easier to tell us which Todd Still, Ian McCraw, Charles Beckenhauer, those three. Q. Okay. So let's look at Exhibit Number 2 and ask Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 60 of 220 59 11:18:37 1 A. That is correct. There has been an addition. 11:18:45 2 Q. And who is the addition? 11:18:47 3 A. That is Doug Welch, who is Chief Compliance 11:18:51 4 Officer. 11:18:51 5 Q. 11:18:55 6 11:18:58 7 A. No. 11:19:03 8 Q. So Ken Starr is hired, and you go back -- Well, 11:19:21 9 11:19:22 10 11:19:27 11 11:19:28 12 A. Yes. 11:19:29 13 Q. And then after Ken Starr was hired, you just went 11:19:34 14 11:19:36 15 A. That's correct. 11:19:37 16 Q. And he was hired in approximately when? 11:19:45 17 A. 2010. 11:19:46 18 11:19:53 19 11:19:57 20 MS. BROWN: 11:19:58 21 MR. DUNNAM: 11:20:00 22 11:20:02 23 THE WITNESS: 11:20:02 24 MR. DUNNAM: 11:20:04 25 THE WITNESS: And has there been anyone that has been taken off? let me rephrase that. While you're the President the first time, you remained the Dean? back to being only the Dean of Truett? MR. DUNNAM: an hour. Okay. 2010? We've been going about Do you want to take a quick break? Yeah. And let me just say on the record any time you want to take a break ... Yes, sir. ... just let me know. Yes. Okay? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 61 of 220 60 11:20:05 1 MR. DUNNAM: I don't want to wear you out. 11:20:07 2 It's not a marathon. 11:20:10 3 hour just -- if it's a good time to do that. 11:20:12 4 enough? 11:20:12 5 THE WITNESS: 11:20:13 6 MS. BROWN: 11:20:16 7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: 11:20:17 8 11:20:19 9 11:33:46 10 11:33:56 11 May 31st, 2017. 11:34:01 12 two of the video deposition of David E. Garland. 11:34:04 13 BY MR. DUNNAM: 11:34:15 14 11:34:17 15 11:34:19 16 A. When I was Interim President this year. 11:34:22 17 Q. 2017 or '16? 11:34:36 18 A. 2016. 11:34:38 19 Q. Approximately what time, what season? 11:34:42 20 A. Oh, I -- I'm sorry, I can't remember what 11:34:49 21 11:34:50 22 Q. 11:34:53 23 spring? 11:34:54 24 A. I don't understand. 11:34:57 25 Q. Well, the board issued its findings last spring; And I'll try to take a break every Fair Sure. Gives the reporter a break. Going off the record. The time is 11:20 a.m. (Recess taken from 11:20 to 11:33 a.m.) Back on the record. Q. Today is Wednesday, The time is 11:33 a.m. This is disc President Garland, when was the first time that you ever had any Title IX training? exactly, but -- no. Before or after the board made its findings last What -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 62 of 220 61 11:35:01 1 is that correct? 11:35:01 2 A. That's correct, yeah. 11:35:02 3 Q. And people refer to this "Pepper Hamilton 11:35:05 4 Report". 11:35:08 5 -- the document we'll go over, but that's actually the 11:35:11 6 board's findings, is it not? 11:35:12 7 11:35:14 8 11:35:14 9 11:35:17 10 11:35:18 11 11:35:22 12 11:35:22 13 Q. What's that? 11:35:23 14 A. It was after, yes. 11:35:24 15 Q. Okay. 11:35:29 16 let's not -- I mean I don't -- I think you know what I 11:35:32 17 mean by "Title IX training", but let me make sure I 11:35:37 18 don't misstate. 11:35:38 19 11:35:40 20 that time that was similar in nature in regard to sexual 11:35:46 21 assault, sexual assault reporting, discrimination, 11:35:49 22 discrimination training, discrimination reporting, 11:35:51 23 anything that -- any training that you had had before 11:35:55 24 you became President this time that you would consider 11:35:59 25 equivalent or to include similar issues? A. That's a misnomer, isn't it? That's correct. That's actually It's the Findings of Fact of the board. Q. So was that before or after the board findings that you had Title IX training? A. It was when I became Interim President; so it was after. And prior to that time, had you had any -- Was there any training that you received before Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 63 of 220 62 11:36:03 1 A. No. 11:36:03 2 Q. Okay. 11:36:12 3 what is your awareness or knowledge about the decision 11:36:15 4 to have some investigation by Baylor law professor 11:36:23 5 Jeremy Counseller into issues of sexual misconduct or 11:36:31 6 that area? 11:36:32 7 A. I had no knowledge of that. 11:36:34 8 Q. Were you aware that he had been? 11:36:36 9 A. I was not aware. 11:36:37 10 Q. So when did you become aware that Jeremy 11:36:42 11 Counseller -- or even sitting here today, do you know 11:36:45 12 that Jeremy Counseller did some kind of investigation or 11:36:49 13 report? 11:36:49 14 A. 11:36:52 15 was out of town; so I was totally unaware of anything 11:36:57 16 about this. 11:36:57 17 Q. And that wasn't what I asked you. 11:36:59 18 A. I -- 11:36:59 19 Q. Sitting here today, are you aware that Jeremy 11:37:02 20 Counseller did some kind of investigation or report 11:37:05 21 until I just asked you that question? 11:37:06 22 A. No, I did not know that. 11:37:07 23 Q. Okay. 11:37:11 24 A. He is the faculty athletic representative. 11:37:18 25 What was your involvement in the -- or I did not. I was away on sabbatical leave. I Would it surprise you to know that he did? does surprise me. It Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 64 of 220 63 11:37:19 1 Q. Okay. Do you know why Baylor deemed it necessary 11:37:23 2 to get some type of outside investigation that 11:37:29 3 ultimately was the hiring of Pepper Hamilton? 11:37:33 4 A. I do not. 11:37:34 5 Q. So sitting here today, do you know why the 11:37:39 6 decision was made to hire an outside investigative law 11:37:44 7 firm? 11:37:45 8 A. 11:37:52 9 11:37:55 10 players. 11:37:55 11 Q. 11:38:05 12 11:38:11 13 11:38:17 14 11:38:18 15 11:38:20 16 President for a year now, and I'm asking for your 11:38:22 17 understanding today. 11:38:25 18 ago why that was done, that's what you believe why it 11:38:29 19 was done; is that correct? 11:38:30 20 A. That's correct. 11:38:31 21 Q. Okay. 11:38:45 22 11:38:46 23 11:38:51 24 11:38:51 25 I understand it now to be because there were newspaper accounts of sexual assaults by football And that's the reason that there was the decision to bring on and have an outside investigative effort? A. I was not here or present or involved in that decision; so I don't know. Q. Well, I'm asking -- I mean you've been the And your statement just a minute Sitting here today, do you know what they were tasked to do, Pepper Hamilton? A. I was not involved in the hiring or charged to Pepper Hamilton. Q. I understand that, but your -- today do you know Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 65 of 220 64 11:38:57 1 what they were hired or charged to do? 11:38:59 2 11:39:03 3 or charged to do by the Board of Regents. 11:39:06 4 involved. 11:39:06 5 11:39:09 6 11:39:10 7 11:39:15 8 produced were they'd provide legal counsel from what we 11:39:19 9 can do to have best practices in these areas. 11:39:22 10 11:39:25 11 you've never asked someone "Hey, why did we decide to 11:39:28 12 hire these guys?" 11:39:29 13 A. No, I've never asked. 11:39:31 14 Q. Were you not curious? 11:39:33 15 A. I was not curious. 11:39:34 16 Q. Did you not believe that it would assist you in 11:39:37 17 implementing the recommendations to understand how those 11:39:40 18 recommendations came to be? 11:39:42 19 11:39:46 20 11:39:47 21 11:39:50 22 it is important to understand why the need for the 11:39:52 23 recommendations came to be? 11:39:53 24 11:39:57 25 A. Q. No, I do not know specifics what they were hired I was not Do you know generally what they were retained and hired to do? A. Q. A. My assumption from the recommendations that they So you never -- you've never -- up until today I did not. I -- all I needed to do was implement the recommendations. Q. A. And sitting here today, you still don't believe What was important was to implement the recommendations. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 66 of 220 65 11:39:57 1 Q. Okay. That's not what I asked you. 11:39:59 2 A. Yeah. 11:40:00 3 Q. Sitting here today, you still do not believe it 11:40:04 4 is necessary for your job functions in implementing the 11:40:09 5 recommendations that you understand why the 11:40:10 6 recommendations were necessary? 11:40:11 7 A. No, I do not. 11:40:12 8 Q. So how do you know that the recommendations will 11:40:17 9 11:40:18 10 11:40:19 11 11:40:24 12 related to best practices at the university, and to me 11:40:28 13 that's the most important thing. 11:40:30 14 Q. And how do you know that? 11:40:32 15 A. How do I know what? 11:40:34 16 Q. You say you know that these will address the 11:40:37 17 issues. 11:40:38 18 issues if you don't know what the issues were? 11:40:40 19 A. The issues raised in the recommendations. 11:40:44 20 Q. And it was not and it's still not important to 11:40:48 21 11:40:53 22 A. It was not important to me, no. 11:40:57 23 Q. And it's still not? 11:40:59 24 A. I was not hired to reinvestigate the Findings of 11:41:03 25 Fact. address the problems, if you don't know what the problems were? A. I know that the recommendations address issues How do you know that they will address the you to understand how any recommendation came to be? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 67 of 220 66 11:41:03 1 Q. And sitting here today, it's still not important, 11:41:11 2 11:41:12 3 A. It, in my mind, is not important. 11:41:15 4 Q. Okay. 11:41:25 5 regarding issues related to concerns of sexual -- Well, 11:41:40 6 let me restate that. 11:41:41 7 11:41:44 8 11:41:46 9 A. A meeting regarding Title IX was my first day. 11:41:51 10 Q. And Kenneth Starr had left? 11:41:55 11 A. Yes. 11:41:55 12 Q. Do you know why he left? 11:41:58 13 A. He was fired by the board -- or removed from 11:42:04 14 11:42:05 15 Q. Why? 11:42:06 16 A. I was not privy to that decision. 11:42:07 17 Q. Today do you know why he was removed? 11:42:09 18 A. I was not privy to any decision. 11:42:11 19 Q. That's not what I asked you. 11:42:13 20 11:42:15 21 A. 11:42:18 22 removed. 11:42:19 23 Q. Do you know generally why he was removed? 11:42:21 24 A. I do not know generally. 11:42:25 25 in your mind? When is the first time you had a meeting When is the first time that you ever recall a meeting regarding Title IX? office by the Board of Regents. Today do you know why he was removed? I do not. I do not know why precisely he was It's for the Board of Regents to decide to hire and fire the President; so Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 68 of 220 67 11:42:28 1 that's what they did. 11:42:29 2 11:42:32 3 "Hey, listen, I want to understand why he was let go so 11:42:36 4 I won't make the same mistakes"? 11:42:37 5 A. I did not. 11:42:38 6 Q. You never asked for any reason of any member of 11:42:39 7 the Board of Regents, "Hey, why did you-all decide to 11:42:43 8 let Kenneth Starr go?" 11:42:49 9 A. I did not. 11:42:51 10 Q. Do you believe that the decision to -- Well, 11:42:58 11 let's characterize -- I want to characterize correctly 11:43:01 12 what happened to him, because it's been stated that he 11:43:05 13 was fired, it was said that he was removed, it was said 11:43:09 14 that he was allowed to resign; and so what happened to 11:43:12 15 Kenneth Starr? 11:43:14 16 11:43:21 17 I believe from newspaper reports that he was just asked 11:43:31 18 to step down as President, maybe stay on as Chancellor, 11:43:35 19 but I was not -- I was not even here at the time. 11:43:39 20 not know. 11:43:39 21 11:43:47 22 11:43:50 23 A. That's correct. 11:43:51 24 Q. You had no interest in finding out? 11:44:01 25 A. I did not. Q. A. Q. So you never went to any of the regents and said I honestly do not know precisely what happened. I do So all you know about how and why Kenneth Starr was let go is what you've read in the newspaper? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 69 of 220 68 11:44:02 1 Q. 11:44:06 2 may not have done wrong so that you wouldn't repeat his 11:44:10 3 decisions? 11:44:12 4 11:44:17 5 recommendations that came out of the Pepper Hamilton 11:44:21 6 findings. 11:44:21 7 11:44:23 8 11:44:25 9 A. I had no interest. 11:44:26 10 Q. And you still don't? 11:44:27 11 A. I still do not. 11:44:29 12 Q. Do you know what they paid him? 11:44:35 13 A. I have no idea. 11:44:36 14 Q. Do you know if they paid him? 11:44:38 15 A. I assume they paid him. 11:44:40 16 Q. Do you believe that he engaged in any misconduct? 11:44:45 17 A. I do not know that he engaged in any misconduct. 11:44:49 18 Q. You just have no clue why they let him go, other 11:44:53 19 11:44:55 20 MS. BROWN: 11:44:57 21 MR. DUNNAM: 11:44:57 22 11:44:58 23 11:44:59 24 11:45:00 25 A. Q. You had no interest in determining what he may or You had no interest? I -- My charge was to work on implementing the And I'm sorry, that's not what I asked you. I asked you: You had no interest? than what you've read in the newspaper? Objection to form. What did you say? What is that? MS. BROWN: Asked and answered. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. Okay. Go ahead. Let's repeat the question. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 70 of 220 69 11:45:04 1 You just have no clue why they let him go, other 11:45:07 2 11:45:09 3 11:45:14 4 11:45:16 5 11:45:20 6 issues that they had been trying to get rid of him for 11:45:23 7 the last two years. 11:45:25 8 A. I do -- That's what he says. 11:45:28 9 Q. Do you believe him to be a truthful person, based 11:45:30 10 11:45:33 11 A. My experience is that he would be truthful. 11:45:36 12 Q. At the time that you became President, was Art 11:45:43 13 11:45:46 14 A. No, he was not. 11:45:47 15 Q. And do you know why -- Well, what happened to 11:45:52 16 11:45:53 17 11:45:58 18 11:45:58 19 Q. Today do you know what happened to him? 11:46:00 20 A. He was removed as football coach. 11:46:03 21 Q. Do you know whether he received compensation upon 11:46:07 22 11:46:09 23 A. I do know that there was mediation. 11:46:13 24 Q. Okay. 11:46:15 25 than what you've read in the newspaper? A. From what I've read in the newspaper and is on account in his book, that's all I know. Q. You know where he says it had to do with other Is that your understanding? That's all I know. on your experiences with him over the years? Briles still the coach of the football team, Head Coach? him? A. I was not involved in any of those personnel decisions. his exit? Do you know whether or not he received compensation upon his leaving? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 71 of 220 70 11:46:18 1 A. From mediation, there was compensation. 11:46:21 2 Q. Of what? 11:46:23 3 A. I can't reveal that. 11:46:25 4 Q. Well, I'm asking you to reveal it. 11:46:27 5 A. I don't know the exact number, but it was -- 11:46:30 6 Q. Well, give us a range. 11:46:31 7 A. I can't. 11:46:39 8 Q. Well, give us a general number, a range. 11:46:42 9 11:46:44 10 is one of the issues pending before the Court on pending 11:46:46 11 motions and that we'll have a resolution of the 11:46:51 12 objections that have been raised to the disclosure of 11:46:53 13 that information. 11:46:54 14 11:46:56 15 question if you want today, and I'm not going to -- I'm 11:46:58 16 asking the question. 11:47:01 17 BY MR. DUNNAM: 11:47:01 18 11:47:06 19 And I'm not asking for an exact figure, but 11:47:09 20 approximately how much money? 11:47:10 21 A. I don't recall the exact amount. 11:47:11 22 Q. I didn't ask you that. 11:47:13 23 A. I don't recall. 11:47:14 24 Q. I asked you an approximate amount. 11:47:15 25 A. I don't recall an approximate amount. How much? I can't recall the exact number. MS. BROWN: MR. DUNNAM: Q. I'm not -- And I'm going to object. This I mean you can object to the And so what did they pay Art Briles upon leaving? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 72 of 220 71 11:47:17 1 Q. Over $10 million? 11:47:19 2 A. I do not recall. 11:47:20 3 Q. Over $15 million? 11:47:22 4 A. I don't recall. 11:47:23 5 Q. Did you -- did you attend the mediation? 11:47:28 6 A. No, I did not. 11:47:29 7 Q. Well, how did you -- who told you the amount? 11:47:31 8 A. The General Counsel told me -- not an amount. 11:47:33 9 11:47:35 10 11:47:38 11 11:47:40 12 11:47:43 13 know it, I couldn't -- I don't think I'm allowed to 11:47:46 14 reveal it. 11:47:47 15 11:47:51 16 11:47:52 17 A. No, I do not. 11:47:53 18 Q. And you don't know whether it was over or under 11:47:56 19 11:47:56 20 A. I do not. 11:47:57 21 Q. Do you believe that Art Briles engaged in 11:48:04 22 11:48:05 23 11:48:10 24 11:48:10 25 They told me that they were mediating. Q. Well, a minute ago you said you couldn't reveal the amount, which would indicate you knew the amount. A. Q. I just -- I don't know the amount, but if I did So under oath today, you have no idea of the approximate amount of money? $5 million? misconduct? A. I am not -- did not investigate Art Briles; so I do not know. Q. Well, you've been the President for a year since Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 73 of 220 72 11:48:13 1 he left. 11:48:16 2 misconduct? 11:48:17 3 11:48:22 4 11:48:23 5 11:48:28 6 litigation Baylor and Baylor regents have stated in 11:48:32 7 court filings specific -- specific allegations of what 11:48:38 8 would appear to be very significant misconduct by Art 11:48:42 9 Briles, correct? 11:48:43 10 A. That's correct. 11:48:43 11 Q. And Baylor and those regents have done that and 11:48:47 12 made those allegations while you've been President of 11:48:49 13 the university, correct? 11:48:50 14 A. That's correct. 11:48:51 15 Q. Do you know whether or not those allegations made 11:48:54 16 by the regents and Baylor University while you've been 11:48:58 17 President are accurate? 11:48:58 18 A. I believe they're accurate. 11:49:00 19 Q. Okay. 11:49:03 20 11:49:07 21 11:49:10 22 11:49:11 23 11:49:16 24 11:49:18 25 A. Do you believe today that he engaged in any I -- I do not believe that I know the facts related to what happened. Q. You understand that in media reports and in And so my question is those allegations, do you believe that it constitutes misconduct? A. I believe that that constitutes grounds for dismissal. Q. Well, you believe that. That means -- did he violate his contract, you believe? A. I do not know the details of his contract. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 74 of 220 73 11:49:21 1 Q. Well, do you believe it was -- warranted for- 11:49:24 2 11:49:26 3 A. I don't know how to judge for-cause termination. 11:49:30 4 Q. But you believe it was misconduct? 11:49:33 5 A. I believe there are accusations of misconduct. 11:49:37 6 Q. Well, the accusations are coming from Baylor 11:49:40 7 University, they're coming while you're President of the 11:49:41 8 university, and you just said that you think those are 11:49:44 9 accurate. 11:49:46 10 11:49:50 11 11:49:53 12 Q. What does "pernicious" mean? 11:50:17 13 A. "Pernicious" means something that is abhorrent. 11:50:24 14 Q. Does it mean -- I didn't know; so I looked it up. 11:50:31 15 You said that the actions of Art Briles were not 11:50:34 16 pernicious, and the dictionary says it means harmful. 11:50:38 17 Did you mean something else? 11:50:39 18 A. I define it as abhorrent. 11:50:41 19 Q. Okay. 11:50:54 20 11:51:48 21 11:52:03 22 11:52:03 23 11:52:13 24 want to ask you if you've ever seen that document? 11:52:16 25 I'll represent to you that that is a document that was cause termination? A. If it comes from the regents, they were directly familiar with the reports. I believe they're accurate. So ... Give me just a second. Well, let's talk about what Baylor has said. And I'm looking at a document ... (Exhibit 3 marked.) ... that's been marked Exhibit Number 3, and I And Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 75 of 220 74 11:52:18 1 filed by members of the Baylor Board of Regents in a 11:52:21 2 lawsuit where Baylor is a party with a gentleman whose 11:52:26 3 last name I have a hard time pronouncing. 11:52:29 4 Shillingwell; is that right? 11:52:29 5 11:52:29 6 11:52:32 7 Q. Shillinglaw. 11:52:36 8 A. I've seen this document. 11:52:38 9 Q. Okay. 11:52:40 10 document. 11:52:51 11 indicates and it states ... I'm looking at paragraph 1 11:52:53 12 ... that player misconduct by the football team was 11:53:00 13 systematically brushed off and kept away from Judicial 11:53:03 14 Affairs. 11:53:05 15 A. That is a violation of policy. 11:53:09 16 Q. Do you think that systematically brushing off and 11:53:15 17 keeping away player misconduct was harmful to the 11:53:19 18 university? 11:53:20 19 11:53:24 20 11:53:24 21 11:53:30 22 "the football program was a black hole into which 11:53:33 23 reports of the misconduct such as drug use, physical 11:53:36 24 assault, domestic violence, brandishing of guns, 11:53:39 25 indecent exposure and academic fraud disappear". MR. DUNN: I think it's Shillinglaw. BY MR. DUNNAM: A. Have you seen that before? So I want to turn you to page 13 of that This indicates -- indication is that -- Do you think that's proper conduct? It was harmful to the -- to the victims and to the university. Q. There is -- The next statement talks about that Do you Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 76 of 220 75 11:53:42 1 read that? Did I read that right? 11:53:43 2 A. Yes. 11:53:43 3 Q. And you believe that occurred? 11:53:44 4 A. I am not familiar with any of the details related 11:53:47 5 11:53:48 6 Q. Where do these details come from? 11:53:51 7 A. I do not know exactly where those details came 11:53:56 8 from. 11:53:57 9 Q. Well, do you have any idea where they came from? 11:54:00 10 A. My -- You're asking for spec -- 11:54:03 11 Q. Well, what's your understanding? 11:54:04 12 A. My understanding would be that it may have come 11:54:07 13 11:54:10 14 11:54:19 15 series of text messages from Coach Briles, and in one he 11:54:27 16 talks about illegal consumption of alcohol from a, I 11:54:33 17 guess, underage football player, and Coach Briles texts 11:54:37 18 this: 11:54:40 19 they won't recognize name -- did he get ticket from 11:54:43 20 Baylor police or Waco? ... Just trying to keep him away 11:54:46 21 from our judicial affairs folks ..." 11:54:48 22 11:54:50 23 A. Yes. 11:54:50 24 Q. Where did that information come from? 11:54:52 25 A. I have no idea what -- to those accusations. I'm not familiar with them. from the oral report from Pepper Hamilton. Q. Okay. The -- At the bottom of page 13 we start a "Hopefully he's under" the "radar enough that Do you read that? Did I read that right? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 77 of 220 76 11:54:54 1 Q. Do you have any -- You have no idea where it came 11:54:57 2 from? 11:54:57 3 A. None. 11:54:58 4 Q. Well, how do individual regents gain access to 11:55:02 5 11:55:03 6 A. I do not know. 11:55:04 7 Q. Do you believe it's proper that regents use 11:55:06 8 information obtained from Pepper Hamilton's 11:55:09 9 investigation to personally defend themselves in 11:55:12 10 11:55:13 11 A. I don't know where they got that information. 11:55:15 12 Q. Do you believe that would be proper, if that's 11:55:18 13 11:55:19 14 11:55:19 15 11:55:21 16 11:55:21 17 11:55:23 18 11:55:23 19 A. I don't -- 11:55:26 20 Q. -- revealing details of information? 11:55:28 21 A. I don't know that it would be improper. 11:55:33 22 Q. Okay. 11:55:37 23 11:55:44 24 11:55:49 25 that information? lawsuits? where they got it? A. I -MS. BROWN: Objection to form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. Do you believe that it would be proper if that was -- if they got that from Baylor University -- And what do you think about Coach Briles' attitude about this particular misconduct? A. Well, it suggests that our Judicial Affairs folks were vigilant in carrying out their duties, and they Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 78 of 220 77 11:55:52 1 were trying to avoid an incident going to Judicial 11:55:58 2 Affairs. 11:55:58 3 Q. 11:56:03 4 11:56:03 5 A. They were -- 11:56:04 6 Q. -- people were vigilant? 11:56:05 7 A. They were carrying out -- it's the expectation 11:56:09 8 that they would carry out their responsibilities and 11:56:13 9 assuming that the player would be appropriately 11:56:19 10 11:56:20 11 11:56:23 12 11:56:26 13 A. Underage drinking, yes. 11:56:28 14 Q. So -- 11:56:31 15 A. It's a violation of the law. 11:56:32 16 Q. Okay. 11:56:35 17 of conduct. 11:56:40 18 violation of the code of conduct? 11:56:41 19 A. It is a violation. 11:56:42 20 Q. Adult or otherwise? 11:56:43 21 A. A violation for students. 11:56:44 22 Q. Regardless of age? 11:56:46 23 A. Regardless. 11:56:48 24 Q. On or off campus, does that matter? 11:56:52 25 A. It does not matter -- I'm sorry. You said it indicates they were -- that your Judicial Affairs -- punished. Q. Okay. And that would be a violation of the code of conduct, drinking? But let's talk about pursuant to the code Is drinking by anyone, any student, a Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 79 of 220 78 11:57:00 1 Q. To the university? 11:57:01 2 A. -- to the university. 11:57:02 3 Q. So if we have a 22-year-old law student who is 11:57:07 4 consuming alcohol off campus at a local restaurant, 11:57:13 5 that's a violation of the Baylor code of conduct? 11:57:16 6 11:57:20 7 specific code of conduct, but it -- I do not think it's 11:57:26 8 something that's going to be brought before Judicial 11:57:29 9 Affairs. 11:57:29 10 11:57:32 11 you know whether or not it's a violation of the code of 11:57:35 12 conduct, as you sit here today? 11:57:36 13 A. I do not. 11:57:37 14 Q. Okay. 11:57:41 15 page -- top of page 14. 11:57:49 16 discussion that -- and go ahead and read it without me 11:57:54 17 reading to you, and then we'll go over it. 11:57:56 18 11:58:20 19 MR. DUNN: 11:58:20 20 MS. BROWN: 11:58:25 21 11:58:25 22 Q. You've read it? 11:58:26 23 A. Yes. 11:58:26 24 Q. So looking at that, it appears that a young woman 11:58:29 25 A. Q. A. You know, I'm not directly familiar with that Well, if it is -- if it is reported, is it -- do I do not know. Let's look at the next page. This is on So this is 2013, and there's a (Reading silently.) (Handing document to Ms. Brown.) Thank you. BY MR. DUNNAM: had been subject to a football player brandishing a gun Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 80 of 220 79 11:58:33 1 at her, and coaches were made aware of the situation, 11:58:38 2 and it was not reported to Judicial Affairs. 11:58:41 3 think that was proper on the part of Coach Briles? 11:58:43 4 11:58:46 5 11:58:46 6 11:58:49 7 11:58:52 8 11:58:58 9 11:59:02 10 11:59:05 11 11:59:07 12 11:59:09 13 A. Failure to report is potentially harmful. 11:59:12 14 Q. The next one is about a football player that 11:59:15 15 "exposed himself and asked for favors". 11:59:33 16 reported by Mr. Shillinglaw to Coach Briles, and the 11:59:36 17 fact that it was at a salon and a spa while he was 11:59:40 18 getting a massage was "not quite as bad". 11:59:44 19 with that statement? 11:59:45 20 11:59:48 21 11:59:50 22 11:59:52 23 exposes himself to a woman at a -- just because it's at 11:59:56 24 a salon or a spa while getting a massage, that that's 12:00:00 25 not as bad as indecent exposure elsewhere? A. Do you That is -- Those issues should be reported to Judicial Affairs. Q. And you believe that the failure to report that is harmful to students? A. I do not know the full circumstances, but if some -- if a student is traumatized, I think that should have been handled through disciplinary procedures. Q. My question was do you think the failure to report that is harmful to students? A. And this was Do you agree I don't know the full details of this incident; so it's hard to evaluate. Q. Well, do you agree that the fact that a gentleman Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 81 of 220 80 12:00:04 1 A. Well, I don't know the full details of what 12:00:06 2 12:00:08 3 Q. It was not investigated? 12:00:10 4 A. That -- as far as I know. 12:00:12 5 Q. Well, how did it get -- how did it get in here, 12:00:13 6 12:00:15 7 A. I do not know where this came from. 12:00:16 8 Q. Okay. 12:00:20 9 12:00:23 10 12:00:25 11 A. Correct. 12:00:26 12 Q. And you believe it to be true. 12:00:30 13 12:00:32 14 A. I don't know where they got this from. 12:00:34 15 Q. Okay. 12:00:35 16 12:00:37 17 12:00:38 18 A. No. 12:00:38 19 Q. You know these gentlemen? 12:00:40 20 A. Yes. 12:00:40 21 Q. Okay. 12:00:44 22 says, that some player exposed himself, and the fact 12:00:49 23 that it happened at a salon or a spa while he was 12:00:53 24 getting a massage somehow to Coach Briles made that more 12:00:57 25 acceptable behavior. happened, and it was not investigated. if it wasn't investigated? So let's take it as face value, because it was filed by the regents; you agree with that, right, this document? You don't believe they'd file something false, do you? But that's not what I asked you. What I asked you is: You don't believe they would file something false with a Court, do you? So let's take it at face value, what it Do you agree with that, that it's Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 82 of 220 81 12:01:02 1 more acceptable behavior? 12:01:04 2 A. I don't believe it's acceptable behavior. 12:01:05 3 Q. The fact that the young woman is evidently 12:01:07 4 alleged to be a stripper, would that make it more 12:01:10 5 acceptable behavior? 12:01:11 6 A. I do not believe it's acceptable behavior. 12:01:14 7 Q. Do you think that the failure to report that was 12:01:16 8 12:01:17 9 12:01:22 10 don't know if students are involved specifically, if 12:01:26 11 this is a student who was ex -- someone that exposed -- 12:01:31 12 if this was a student who was a victim or not. 12:01:34 13 Q. Does it make a difference? 12:01:36 14 A. It does make a difference when it relates to 12:01:39 15 12:01:43 16 12:01:46 17 I'm asking about base morality. 12:01:50 18 football player exposed himself to a young woman, 12:01:55 19 whether she was a student or not, does that make it less 12:01:58 20 your concern? 12:01:58 21 12:02:01 22 12:02:03 23 12:02:05 24 student football player on campus who is exposing 12:02:08 25 himself to young women, whether they be strippers or harmful to students? A. I do not know the context of the details, and I Title IX because it's concerned directly about students. Q. A. I'm not asking about Title IX in this question. The fact that a No, it doesn't make it less my concern. It's unacceptable behavior. Q. Okay. And do you think that if you have a Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 83 of 220 82 12:02:11 1 not, is acceptable behavior? 12:02:13 2 12:02:16 3 12:02:17 4 Q. Okay. 12:02:19 5 A. I do not know. 12:02:20 6 Q. Was -- And do you care? 12:02:22 7 A. I do care. 12:02:23 8 Q. Then why don't you know? 12:02:24 9 A. I do not know anything of the details from 12:02:28 10 12:02:29 11 12:02:37 12 12:02:41 13 12:02:46 14 A. Ian McCaw was Director of Athletics. 12:02:49 15 Q. And we have an "assault and threatening to kill a 12:02:56 16 non-football -- non-athlete ... operations staff 12:03:00 17 official --" No. 12:03:03 18 arrested for assault and threatening to kill a non- 12:03:05 19 athlete." 12:03:06 20 12:03:08 21 A. I do -- It doesn't make it clear. 12:03:14 22 Q. And you don't know? 12:03:15 23 A. No. 12:03:16 24 Q. He talked to the player. 12:03:19 25 A. This ... this is unacceptable behavior, and it needed to be investigated. And was it investigated? September 2013. Q. Okay. Let's go on to the next. The next one we have an issue of Coach Briles texting Ian McCaw. He was in what position? I'm sorry. Sorry. "... a player was Was that a student non-athlete? there. He said police were "They were going to keep it quiet. That would Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 84 of 220 83 12:03:24 1 be great if they kept it quiet." 12:03:27 2 12:03:30 3 12:03:32 4 12:03:39 5 12:03:42 6 12:03:45 7 the effort to keep it quiet involving the Waco Police 12:03:48 8 Department was harmful to students at Baylor University? 12:03:52 9 12:04:05 10 12:04:07 11 think that was harmful to students, the failure to 12:04:10 12 report this and the efforts to keep it quiet? 12:04:13 13 harmful to students? 12:04:15 14 MS. BROWN: 12:04:17 15 THE WITNESS: 12:04:20 16 this situation; so I can't evaluate that. 12:04:22 17 BY MR. DUNNAM: 12:04:23 18 12:04:26 19 statement, you don't know whether or not that was 12:04:28 20 harmful to students? 12:04:29 21 12:04:32 22 guilty of assault or threatening should be investigated, 12:04:36 23 and if he's found guilty, then, that there should be 12:04:40 24 appropriate discipline. 12:04:40 25 Do you believe that is appropriate behavior for Mr. McCaw and Coach Briles? A. I believe any instance of accounts of arrest or threats, assaults should have been investigated. Q. Do you think the failure to investigate that and MS. BROWN: MR. DUNNAM: Q. A. Q. Objection to form. I asked a question. Do you Was that Same objection. I do not know the details of So on its face, if you accept the truth of the I believe any player on a football team who is That's not my question. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 85 of 220 84 12:04:43 1 My question is the failure to do that, what 12:04:45 2 you've just said, do you believe that's harmful to 12:04:47 3 students? 12:04:48 4 A. The failure to investigate is -- is harmful. 12:04:52 5 Q. So the next one talks about that we had a player 12:05:04 6 who was suspended for repeated drug violations, and the 12:05:08 7 bottom line was that he was meeting with the Vice 12:05:11 8 President for Student Life, and if he did not reinstate 12:05:13 9 him, the President would, correct? 12:05:15 10 A. That's correct, what it says. 12:05:17 11 Q. And so it would appear that this was just -- or I 12:05:23 12 guess that President Starr was the President at the 12:05:25 13 time? 12:05:25 14 A. Yes. 12:05:25 15 Q. And do you believe that it would be appropriate 12:05:28 16 for the President of the university to reinstate an 12:05:32 17 individual over the objection of the Vice President for 12:05:34 18 Student Life if the allegations were true of repeated 12:05:38 19 drug violations? 12:05:39 20 12:05:42 21 12:05:43 22 12:05:45 23 effort to demonstrate misconduct on the part of Art 12:05:50 24 Briles? 12:05:50 25 A. A. It depends on the circumstances and the details of the case. Q. You realize that these things were filed in an Do you know that? Yes. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 86 of 220 85 12:05:51 1 Q. And you've told us you think they're true? 12:05:55 2 A. I think so. 12:05:56 3 Q. Do you think that that is indicative of 12:05:57 4 12:06:00 5 A. Uhm ... 12:06:04 6 Q. If you don't know, it's okay. 12:06:05 7 A. I don't know, no. 12:06:06 8 Q. We have another player that's caught selling 12:06:12 9 12:06:15 10 care of itself - if not we can discuss the best way to 12:06:21 11 move on it", and it was never reported, and the coach 12:06:25 12 arranged for the player to transfer to another school. 12:06:33 13 12:06:36 14 12:06:39 15 12:06:41 16 12:06:49 17 12:06:58 18 believe that that conduct is misconduct by Coach Briles, 12:07:04 19 or do you know? 12:07:04 20 A. What is the mis -- what is the misconduct? 12:07:07 21 Q. Well, go ahead. 12:07:11 22 12:07:11 23 A. Okay. 12:07:14 24 Q. Well, you can read it. 12:07:16 25 misconduct for Coach Briles? drugs, and Coach Briles says: "I'm hoping it will take Do you think that's misconduct? A. I do not know what he means, "the best way to move on it". Q. Okay. Let's talk about the next one. A player was arrested for marijuana. Do you He was arrested for possession of marijuana. A student's arrested? assume anything. I don't want you to I'd like you to read it. This is the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 87 of 220 86 12:07:18 1 bottom paragraph on page 14. 12:07:20 2 12:07:32 3 details involved here. 12:07:41 4 clear from what he says is what, because all he's asking 12:07:43 5 is "What do you think we should do?" 12:07:46 6 that means. 12:07:46 7 Q. So you don't see any misconduct in that? 12:07:49 8 A. I don't know what he -- if it's misconduct to say 12:07:54 9 12:07:57 10 12:08:08 11 The first full paragraph talks about some -- it's 12:08:13 12 discussing some players and their conduct with a woman, 12:08:18 13 and Coach Briles said: 12:08:22 14 A. What page? Excuse me. 12:08:24 15 Q. I'm sorry. Page 21. 12:08:26 16 A. I'm sorry. (Turning page.) 12:08:31 17 Q. Looking at the first full paragraph, this is a 12:08:36 18 discussion of some young ... I assume football players, 12:08:40 19 but we'll just call them "bad dudes" that were involved 12:08:43 20 with a young woman, and we can look at -- and I'll tell 12:08:46 21 you what, let's -- I guess I skipped too far ahead. 12:08:50 22 Let's look at page 20. 12:08:53 23 earliest report of gang rape. 12:08:59 24 context on page 20. 12:09:04 25 involving five football players on some young woman. A. (Reading silently.) I'm not sure of what the I'm not -- I can't -- I'm not I don't know what "Let me know what you think we should do." Q. Okay. Page 21. If you'd turn to page 21 for me. "Those are some bad dudes --" Yes. It's talking about the Well, you can see that in So there was evidently a gang rape Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 88 of 220 87 12:09:08 1 And Coach Briles, when he looked at the names of the 12:09:16 2 individuals involved, and that's on the first full 12:09:18 3 paragraph on page 21, he says: 12:09:21 4 dudes. 12:09:29 5 12:09:33 6 12:09:35 7 A. No. 12:09:35 8 Q. -- for misconduct of a young man that resulted in 12:09:42 9 12:09:45 10 A. (No audible response.) 12:09:59 11 Q. If you'd like to take a break, you can. 12:10:05 12 A. My answer is no. 12:10:10 13 Q. These allegations appear to be troubling to you? 12:10:29 14 A. Yes. 12:10:31 15 Q. And I don't want -- I don't know how else to say 12:10:35 16 this, other than to say if they're troubling to you, why 12:10:38 17 are you not aware of the circumstances of the sexual 12:10:43 18 assaults of my 10 clients? 12:10:49 19 12:10:53 20 the details. 12:10:58 21 these things do not happen again at Baylor University. 12:11:00 22 Q. What things? 12:11:01 23 A. These allegations as I've just -- just read here. 12:11:04 24 Q. But do you -- you don't even know -- you have no 12:11:08 25 "Those are some bad Why was she around those guys?" Do you believe that it is -- that the -- that any young woman is to blame -- their sexual assault? A. Do you not want to be aware? I am not aware of the names. I'm not aware of What I was tasked to do was to make sure clue of what things happened to my 10 clients? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 89 of 220 88 12:11:11 1 A. I do not. 12:11:12 2 Q. And if you -- Why would you not want to know what 12:11:16 3 had happened to these young women to assure it never 12:11:19 4 happened again? 12:11:20 5 12:11:23 6 Well, objection to form. 12:11:24 7 BY MR. DUNNAM: 12:11:25 8 Q. I want to know why you don't want to know. 12:11:27 9 A. I -- I know what has to be done in the 12:11:31 10 12:11:34 11 Q. 12:11:36 12 correct? 12:11:37 13 A. 12:11:40 14 the board of recommendations, Findings of Fact that led 12:11:44 15 to the recommendations. 12:11:45 16 12:11:48 17 told two of my clients that they needed to avoid 12:11:53 18 reporting these issues, otherwise their parents might 12:11:57 19 find out they were sexually assaulted? 12:12:00 20 that? 12:12:00 21 A. I do not know that. 12:12:01 22 Q. Do you believe that's appropriate? 12:12:03 23 A. That is completely inappropriate, according to 12:12:05 24 12:12:07 25 MS. BROWN: recommendations. Q. I'm objecting to form. It's -- That's what I have to do. But you don't know why it has to be done, I know from the Findings of Fact that come from Do you know that two -- that Baylor University Do you know our current policies and procedures. Q. And what policy or procedure do you have right Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 90 of 220 89 12:12:09 1 now that would address that issue? 12:12:11 2 12:12:15 3 kinds of things that we've done. 12:12:17 4 encouraged students to -- through all of our 12:12:22 5 orientations and teaching, that they must -- that they 12:12:27 6 need to report, they should report, they're free to 12:12:30 7 report, and they're able to report without any kind of 12:12:33 8 consequences to them, and so that they can -- so it's 12:12:37 9 encouraged. 12:12:40 10 12:12:43 11 reports a sexual assault, responsible parties at the 12:12:47 12 university ... which are all of the faculty and staff 12:12:49 13 ... must report those incidents through the -- through 12:12:54 14 Title IX; so that could never happen again at Baylor 12:12:59 15 University. 12:12:59 16 12:13:05 17 12:13:06 18 12:13:09 19 12:13:10 20 12:13:14 21 that was told instead of going to the local hospital for 12:13:17 22 a rape kit, that she should go to a clinic down the 12:13:21 23 street and say that she had sex with a boy she didn't 12:13:25 24 know well so that she could get an STD test? 12:13:28 25 A. Those issues, we make it -- well, there are all One, we have We also have a policy that if any student ever Q. What? You're talking about page 21 or what I told you about my clients? A. No. I'm talking about your clients being discouraged from reporting. Q. A. Are you aware that my client -- I have a client I do not know that. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 91 of 220 90 12:13:29 1 Q. Do you think that's appropriate? 12:13:31 2 A. According to our current policy, that is not 12:13:33 3 12:13:34 4 12:13:38 5 Hamilton? 12:13:41 6 that? 12:13:41 7 A. 12:13:46 8 12:13:46 9 Q. Was that proper -- proper procedure? 12:13:48 10 A. That, I do not know the details how she presented 12:13:51 11 herself. 12:13:53 12 Q. 12:13:57 13 university in the clinic saying "I was sexually 12:13:59 14 assaulted. 12:14:00 15 A. I don't know any of the details of that. 12:14:02 16 Q. Do you think that that conduct by the employee of 12:14:07 17 12:14:08 18 12:14:13 19 12:14:13 20 12:14:16 21 for the purposes of my question, that a freshman young 12:14:18 22 woman goes into the health clinic, she reports that she 12:14:21 23 was sexually assaulted, they discouraged her from 12:14:25 24 reporting and implied to her that her parents would find 12:14:27 25 out and she hadn't told the parents yet, and they told appropriate. Q. Well, what about the policy before Pepper Was that -- Or was there no policy to address There were policies addressing sexual misconduct at Baylor University. I don't know any of the -- She presented herself as a freshman at the I don't know what to do." Baylor University was proper? A. Not knowing the details, I can't evaluate what happened. Q. I'm asking you to assume those are the details Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 92 of 220 91 12:14:30 1 her to go down the street to a clinic and lie to them so 12:14:34 2 that she could get an STD test and a pregnancy test. 12:14:38 3 A. Is this hypothetical? 12:14:39 4 Q. No. 12:14:42 5 12:14:42 6 A. I don't know. 12:14:43 7 Q. I'm telling you what happened. 12:14:45 8 12:14:46 9 12:14:49 10 12:14:51 11 12:14:53 12 investigating. 12:14:55 13 investigating 125 individuals that had reported sexual 12:14:59 14 assault that were not related to football. 12:15:02 15 happened to that investigation? 12:15:03 16 12:15:07 17 12:15:09 18 12:15:12 19 12:15:15 20 A. I do -- I do not know what's happened. 12:15:18 21 Q. But I thought you just reported that all of the 12:15:20 22 12:15:25 23 A. 12:15:28 24 enacted. 12:15:29 25 Q. This is what happened to my client which you don't know about. I don't know the details. Is that appropriate? A. I do not -- I need to investigate what the details were to be able to evaluate this. Q. A. Well, I thought that you-all had -- were Last fall you reported you were What's I do not know what -- That has not come to my office, and that -- so I don't know what those -Q. So what is happening with this investigation of the people that reported, the 125 young women? recommendations have been enacted. The recommendations have structurally been What does that mean, "structurally"? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 93 of 220 92 12:15:31 1 A. 12:15:34 2 process related to issues, reporting line and things 12:15:38 3 like that. 12:15:38 4 Q. Which ones are those? 12:15:40 5 A. I can't remember exactly, but reporting lines, 12:15:43 6 making sure that everybody coordinates in reporting so 12:15:46 7 it goes up through -- so we have a centralized way of 12:15:49 8 knowing what everything is that's happening. 12:15:50 9 12:15:53 10 12:15:54 11 A. All of them have been enacted -- 12:15:54 12 Q. So -- 12:15:56 13 A. -- and it's been audited. 12:15:57 14 Q. It's been audited? 12:15:58 15 A. Yes. 12:15:59 16 Q. What does that mean? 12:16:00 17 A. That means that people came in and went through 12:16:04 18 all of the 105 recommendations through our internal 12:16:07 19 audit, and they evaluated whether we did fulfill what 12:16:12 20 was intended in the recommendations. 12:16:16 21 Q. And who did that? 12:16:18 22 A. That was done by our internal auditor, and it was 12:16:21 23 done by Pepper Hamilton, now Cousins [phonetic] ... what 12:16:25 24 -- I don't know the new name, Cousins. 12:16:29 25 Q. Well, there are some that are still ongoing in So all of them have been enacted, or some of them have been enacted? Q. So looking at the allegations that we have in Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 94 of 220 93 12:16:55 1 Exhibit Number ... and I apologize, I think it's Exhibit 12:16:58 2 Number 3, but if you'd look at the front page. 12:17:00 3 A. It's 3. 12:17:01 4 Q. So looking at the allegations that have been made 12:17:03 5 by the regents against Coach Briles, do you still 12:17:09 6 believe that his conduct was not pernicious? 12:17:11 7 12:17:17 8 do not believe the word "pernicious" is -- if you define 12:17:21 9 it as harmful, then that's quite different, but that's 12:17:24 10 12:17:29 11 Q. Well, do you believe it was harmful? 12:17:31 12 A. I believe that what he did in keeping things from 12:17:35 13 being reported so that investigations could happen and 12:17:39 14 the disciplinary process could be carried out is 12:17:42 15 harmful. 12:17:43 16 Q. Do you still believe he's a good man? 12:17:47 17 A. I can make no judgment about one's goodness or 12:17:51 18 badness. 12:17:51 19 Q. 12:17:53 20 that you believe he's a good man. 12:17:55 21 find the quote. 12:17:56 22 12:18:00 23 make a judgment. 12:18:04 24 the media. 12:18:04 25 A. "Pernicious" means deliberately abhorrent, and I not what I meant by "pernicious". A. Q. Well, you've told the -- you've told the media If you want, I'll I -- That was in a media, and I'm not going to I'm not going to say he's a bad man to Even though he would do things that were harmful Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 95 of 220 94 12:18:07 1 to young women who were students of Baylor University? 12:18:10 2 A. That does not make one a bad, evil person. 12:18:13 3 Q. Okay. 12:18:32 4 12:18:33 5 12:18:38 6 naming the School of Social Work after her. 12:18:44 7 away, and I felt a debt, an obligation to -- when they 12:18:50 8 called upon me to do it again as part of fulfilling my 12:18:55 9 -- a sense of duty. 12:18:58 10 12:19:03 11 were hired to implement these recommendations. 12:19:06 12 charged with anything else? 12:19:07 13 12:19:11 14 12:19:13 15 12:19:17 16 12:19:17 17 A. What duties do you mean? 12:19:20 18 Q. The ones that you talked about your first go- 12:19:21 19 around. 12:19:22 20 A. Yes. 12:19:22 21 Q. The issues at Baylor regarding sexual violence in 12:19:33 22 and around the campus, you have characterized that as 12:19:37 23 "societal"? 12:19:38 24 A. As what? 12:19:40 25 Q. Societal. So why did you accept the job as Interim President this last time? A. Q. A. The Board of Regents had honored my wife by She passed And what were your -- You've talked about you Were you Well, that was just part of the general responsibility of being President. Q. And you've continued to fulfill all of the other duties of President? Yes. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 96 of 220 95 12:19:42 1 A. 12:19:45 2 these things occurred across many campuses -- have 12:19:48 3 occurred across many campuses. 12:19:50 4 12:19:52 5 12:19:56 6 A. Yes. 12:19:57 7 Q. Okay. 12:20:00 8 A. I mean that we have a society in which 12:20:05 9 12:20:10 10 12:20:17 11 12:20:57 12 Pepper Hamilton did that was involved in some form or 12:21:01 13 fashion at Penn State? 12:21:02 14 A. No. 12:21:03 15 Q. Were you -- Have you seen the reports that Pepper 12:21:09 16 12:21:11 17 A. No. 12:21:12 18 Q. You've made the statement that what Baylor did in 12:21:19 19 this investigation was unprecedented. 12:21:24 20 to be true? 12:21:25 21 A. I do not know that to be true. 12:21:28 22 Q. So why did you say that? 12:21:30 23 A. I -- I was not fully aware of what happened 12:21:35 24 elsewhere. 12:21:40 25 the exhaustive recommendations, 105, were very Q. I believe from news reports that I've read that But you specifically said the problems are "societal". And if you want, I'll -Yes, I would say that. And what do you mean by that? pornography is ubiquitous, and it creates a negative attitude in treatment of other persons sexually. Q. Why were -- why was -- Have you seen the reports Hamilton may have been involved in at Occidental? Do you know that I did believe that what Baylor had done in Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 97 of 220 96 12:21:49 1 significant and also publishing (inaudible). 12:21:49 2 THE REPORTER: 12:21:49 3 THE WITNESS: 12:21:56 4 12:22:02 5 12:22:03 6 12:22:03 7 12:22:07 8 that report we do not know the individual names of 12:22:09 9 administrators/coaches who were responsible for the 12:22:12 10 12:22:17 11 A. I can't answer that question. 12:22:19 12 Q. So do you know who the coaches and the 12:22:27 13 administrators are who were responsible for the 12:22:29 14 failures? 12:22:30 15 12:22:33 16 12:22:34 17 Q. Who? 12:22:35 18 A. Well, there would have been Coach Briles, Coach 12:22:40 19 Shillinglaw was named, and ... and ultimately the 12:22:43 20 Athletic Director. 12:22:45 21 12:22:48 22 of Regents that the issues with sexual misconduct/ 12:22:52 23 sexual violence at Baylor University, the football team 12:22:56 24 is only involved in approximately 10 percent of those 12:23:01 25 incidents that have been reported? "And also ..." ... very significant and also publishing these as a measure of transparency. THE REPORTER: Thank you. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. So if there's transparency, how come when we read misconduct or the failures that Pepper Hamilton noted? A. These were the persons who were ultimately dismissed from their positions. Q. Do you agree with the statements from the Board Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 98 of 220 97 12:23:03 1 A. I don't know that for a fact. 12:23:05 2 Q. Have you been told that by anyone? 12:23:07 3 A. I have been told that, yes. 12:23:09 4 Q. By? 12:23:09 5 A. By regents. 12:23:11 6 Q. Okay. 12:23:15 7 fire an assistant coach and we fire the Athletic 12:23:19 8 Director and that's all we fire, how are we addressing 12:23:23 9 the mishandling and the failures of the university in 12:23:26 10 regard to the other 90 percent of sexual assault victims 12:23:31 11 at Baylor University? 12:23:32 12 12:23:35 13 12:23:38 14 12:23:42 15 the individuals other than -- and from the football 12:23:45 16 program who made the decisions to retaliate against 12:23:48 17 victims to discourage reporting. 12:23:52 18 A. 12:23:54 19 details. 12:23:54 20 Q. 12:24:00 21 University been demoted or discharged as a result of the 12:24:04 22 decisions that were made to victimize and discourage 12:24:10 23 reporting of sexual assault of non-football related 12:24:13 24 assaults? 12:24:14 25 A. So when we fire the football coach and we We addressed it through the 105 recommendations and revising policies and procedures. Q. A. But there's been no personal accountability for Is that true? I do not know that to be true. I don't know the Has any non-football related employee of Baylor I don't know that anyone has been demoted that Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 99 of 220 98 12:24:20 1 has -- I don't know of any specific case where persons 12:24:23 2 have done that and they have not been demoted. 12:24:25 3 Q. Well, name the ones that were demoted. 12:24:27 4 A. There were no -- none that I know of that were 12:24:30 5 demoted. 12:24:33 6 President. 12:24:33 7 12:24:46 8 12:25:02 9 12:25:02 10 12:25:05 11 into a long series of questions, this might be a good 12:25:07 12 time for lunch. 12:25:09 13 MR. DUNNAM: 12:25:10 14 MS. BROWN: 12:25:11 15 12:25:11 16 MR. DUNNAM: 12:25:12 17 MS. BROWN: 12:25:12 18 MR. DUNNAM: 12:25:13 19 have a flow. 12:25:17 20 that out by now, right? 12:25:21 21 12:25:24 22 any time you want. 12:25:27 23 hour and 35 minutes, and it's 12:30. 12:25:32 24 rumbling. 12:25:33 25 Q. Personnel decisions were made before I became Well, are you aware that -- Well, let's look at your report. (Exhibit 4 marked.) MS. BROWN: Jim, if this is going to lead That's fine with me. But it's up to you. I'm not trying to break -No. -- your flow. I mean It's 12:30. I just sort of bounce around. No, that's fine with me. I don't You figured That's why I said I think we've gone about another MS. BROWN: Chad's stomach is It's up to you, but I think this Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 100 of 220 99 12:25:35 1 would be a good time. 12:25:36 2 MR. DUNNAM: 12:25:38 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: 12:25:39 4 12:25:45 5 13:32:06 6 13:33:40 7 May 20th -- May 31st, 2017. 13:33:45 8 is disc three of the video deposition of David E. 13:33:48 9 Garland. 13:33:48 10 13:33:58 11 13:34:03 12 make sure. 13:34:05 13 briefing, I guess, after becoming President for your 13:34:08 14 current term, you were not aware of any sexual 13:34:13 15 misconduct, sexual assaults or anything of that nature 13:34:15 16 occurring at Baylor University; is that right? 13:34:19 17 A. I was not. 13:34:19 18 Q. Okay. 13:34:23 19 that while you were Interim President for the first 13:34:28 20 time, that one of our clients who's referred to as "Jane 13:34:34 21 Doe Number 7" was sexually assaulted -- 13:34:36 22 A. I was not. 13:34:37 23 Q. -- while you were President? 13:34:38 24 A. I was not. 13:34:39 25 Q. Are you aware that while you were the Provost, No. That's fine with me. Going off the record. The time is 12:25 p.m. (Luncheon recess taken from 12:25 to 1:32 p.m.) Back on the record. Today is Wednesday, The time is 1:32 p.m. This BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. So, President Garland, I'm just going back to My understanding is until you got your And are you aware, as we sit here today, Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 101 of 220 100 13:34:43 1 during that period of time, that I believe Jane Does 13:34:49 2 Numbers 8 and 9 were sexually assaulted as students of 13:34:54 3 Baylor? 13:34:54 4 A. I was not. 13:34:55 5 Q. You're still not aware of that? 13:34:57 6 A. No. 13:34:57 7 Q. And you know this lawsuit's been pending for 13:35:02 8 13:35:05 9 A. I am not aware of how long. 13:35:07 10 Q. And are you aware that during your current term 13:35:12 11 as President, that one of our clients, Jane Doe Number 13:35:17 12 10, a young woman attending Baylor University, was 13:35:20 13 sexually assaulted? 13:35:22 14 A. 13:35:26 15 appeal. 13:35:27 16 Q. 13:35:31 17 talked about when you were Interim President before and 13:35:35 18 Provost before, you weren't aware of it until I just 13:35:40 19 told you; is that right? 13:35:42 20 A. That's correct. 13:35:42 21 Q. Does that bother you? 13:35:45 22 A. What bother -- 13:35:46 23 Q. Your lack of awareness that young women were 13:35:49 24 sexually assaulted under your watch while you were 13:35:54 25 Provost. 10 months, something like that? Are you aware of that? I know that that particular client made an Okay. But the other, I guess, three we just Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 102 of 220 101 13:35:54 1 A. I'm very concerned for young women, but I was not 13:35:56 2 13:35:57 3 13:36:05 4 these young women are, what happened to them, or what 13:36:11 5 the university can do for them to help remediate or 13:36:21 6 somehow assist them with the problems they've had as a 13:36:24 7 result of how Baylor treated them after the assault? 13:36:27 8 13:36:33 9 13:36:36 10 be remediation, but I don't -- it's not my 13:36:40 11 responsibility as President to do that. 13:36:42 12 Q. Whose responsibility is it? 13:36:43 13 A. Well, it would be legal counsel and -- you know 13:36:48 14 -- I don't know the cases; so I don't know what's 13:36:50 15 happened. 13:36:50 16 13:36:53 17 for example, if we have a young woman who's a junior and 13:37:00 18 she's sexually assaulted and reports it to Baylor, she's 13:37:06 19 made to sign a document acknowledging that she was 13:37:08 20 consuming alcohol, and she's placed on probation; she 13:37:14 21 starts to enroll for the next semester, and she has not 13:37:18 22 completed her community service for being on probation 13:37:25 23 for having a drink ... I may be wrong, but I think it's 13:37:28 24 shortly before she turned 21, off campus; her admission 13:37:32 25 was barred because she hadn't completed enough community made aware of it. Q. A. And you haven't felt the need to go find out who I believe that investigations would be done and what happened with the investigations, and there would Q. But legal counsel, are they responsible for -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 103 of 220 102 13:37:35 1 service hours, her dad has to intervene, and finally she 13:37:40 2 gets enrolled? 13:37:44 3 treated her? 13:37:44 4 13:37:45 5 13:37:47 6 13:37:47 7 13:37:50 8 13:37:50 9 A. I don't know any of the details. 13:37:51 10 Q. I'm telling you the details. 13:37:55 11 true, is that how the university should have treated 13:37:57 12 her? 13:37:57 13 A. I don't know the details. 13:37:57 14 Q. I'm telling you the details. 13:37:57 15 A. I do not know. 13:37:59 16 13:38:00 17 13:38:02 18 13:38:05 19 is accurate. 13:38:08 20 University should be treated? 13:38:09 21 13:38:13 22 sexual abuse/sexual assault would not be punished for 13:38:19 23 consuming alcohol. 13:38:19 24 13:38:22 25 A. Is that how the university should have I don't know -MS. BROWN: Objection to form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. Is that how the university should have treated her? Assuming those are I haven't had any access to the investigation of this case. Q. That's not what I'm asking. I'm having you assume that what I'm telling you A. Q. Is that the way that a student at Baylor Under the current policy, a student who reports a But this young woman was, and I'm not asking about today. I'm asking that this is how -- if this is Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 104 of 220 103 13:38:24 1 how this young woman was treated, was that proper? 13:38:27 2 13:38:29 3 13:38:31 4 13:38:34 5 asking you to assume that. 13:38:37 6 proper? 13:38:37 7 A. 13:38:40 8 13:38:42 9 13:38:46 10 should avoid learning the details of the conduct of the 13:38:50 11 university and the specifics? 13:38:53 12 A. No. 13:38:54 13 Q. So again, I'm going to ask you a very direct 13:38:57 14 question. 13:39:01 15 you need to explain it, that's acceptable, but assume 13:39:05 16 that what I'm telling you is accurate, that this is how 13:39:08 17 this young woman was treated. 13:39:12 18 A. If that were the case -- 13:39:15 19 Q. Would that be proper? 13:39:16 20 A. -- and it could be proven in the details in the 13:39:20 21 investigation, that is not the way we treat students 13:39:23 22 now. 13:39:25 23 have been treated. 13:39:26 24 13:39:31 25 A. I do not know how this young woman was treated. I do not know any of the details. Q. I'm telling you how she was treated, and I'm I do not know the details related to this incident. Q. Q. If that is true, is that I can't make a judgment. Why -- Did someone tell you that you -- that you Okay? Has anyone told you that? I think it's a yes-or-no answer. If Was that proper? It should not have been the way she was -- should So let's go forward with this young woman who, I believe, had roughly a 3.9 in a very rigorous degree Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 105 of 220 104 13:39:38 1 program at the time she was sexually assaulted. After 13:39:41 2 she had been placed on probation, after her enrollment 13:39:44 3 had been barred and she finally got in, she threw down 13:39:48 4 three F's in her studies. 13:39:54 5 probation, scholarship type issues. 13:39:57 6 surprising to you? 13:39:58 7 MS. BROWN: 13:39:59 8 THE WITNESS: 13:40:01 9 13:40:03 10 13:40:03 11 13:40:07 12 you to assume that it did ... would it be proper for the 13:40:11 13 university to offer her assistance, whether it be 13:40:14 14 counseling, whether it be tutoring, or whatever, to help 13:40:18 15 a young woman who's gone from a 3.9 to making three F's 13:40:22 16 in courses? 13:40:24 17 assist her? 13:40:25 18 A. Yes, I think it's proper to assist her. 13:40:27 19 Q. And do you think it would be improper for the 13:40:29 20 13:40:32 21 A. Once again, I don't know -- 13:40:33 22 Q. You don't know? 13:40:34 23 A. -- whether the case -- whether the university did 13:40:37 24 13:40:38 25 She had issues with academic Would that be Objection to form. I -- Since I don't know the case, I just can't answer that question. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. If that happened to a young woman ... and I want Would it be proper for the university to university to refuse to assist her? refuse to assist her. Q. Well, I'm telling you they did. Do you think Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 106 of 220 105 13:40:41 1 that would be improper? 13:40:43 2 13:40:46 3 13:40:48 4 13:40:52 5 made acceptable grades and Baylor charged her a second 13:40:56 6 time for those classes, would that be proper? 13:40:59 7 A. I -- if -- I simply don't know the case. 13:41:03 8 Q. Are you willing to answer the question "yes" or 13:41:04 9 "no"? 13:41:07 10 university to charge her twice if she had failed classes 13:41:11 11 as a result of the trauma of sexual assault? 13:41:14 12 13:41:16 13 investigated and has been adjudicated, then I think it 13:41:21 14 would be improper to charge her again. 13:41:23 15 Q. But only if it's been adjudicated? 13:41:26 16 A. After it's been adjudicated. 13:41:27 17 Q. If she applied for grade forgiveness because she 13:41:31 18 retook the classes and she made acceptable grades, do 13:41:34 19 you think it would be proper to -- would you have to 13:41:37 20 adjudicate it before you'd be willing to consider grade 13:41:40 21 forgiveness? 13:41:41 22 13:41:45 23 13:41:46 24 13:41:51 25 A. I don't -- I don't know that that actually happened; so I -- I don't know anything about the case. Q. A. A. Do you think that if she retook the classes and I'm just asking would it be proper for the As a result of the trauma that's been I would be willing to consider grade forgiveness, given the situation, but I don't know this case. Q. And you -- Well, let me ask this: We may be -- The jury is obviously hearing you today, and it's -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 107 of 220 106 13:41:56 1 you're still the President of the university, and they 13:41:59 2 may hear from you live at trial. 13:42:04 3 13:42:06 4 that we've asked you these questions about what you 13:42:09 5 think of these young woman ... of going back and 13:42:11 6 learning about them? 13:42:13 7 13:42:16 8 13:42:17 9 13:42:19 10 lawyers? 13:42:21 11 figure out what happened to these 10 young women? 13:42:23 12 13:42:26 13 but I'm not going to investigate something that I -- 13:42:29 14 that's not -- out of my purview. 13:42:32 15 13:42:34 16 happened under your role as -- actually, four happened 13:42:38 17 under your role as either President or Provost. 13:42:42 18 still -- you feel like you have no personal stake in 13:42:45 19 that? 13:42:46 20 A. 13:42:49 21 cases. 13:42:52 22 they were investigated or not. 13:42:54 23 13:43:01 24 another, because if -- if you're going to go out now and 13:43:05 25 investigate these issues to where you can answer my Do you have any intention of going back ... now A. I would have to wait to see what my lawyers told me I needed to do. Q. A. Q. Q. What if they -- what if you don't talk to your Do you have any personal desire to go back and It's -- I am very concerned for the young women, Well, "out of your purview"; three of these And you I have -- I do not know anything about these I don't know whether they were reported, whether And again, to make sure that we understand one Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 108 of 220 107 13:43:10 1 questions, that's what I want to know, because I want to 13:43:13 2 know if you're going to show up whenever we're in trial 13:43:15 3 and say "Oh, I've looked at these all now, and I know 13:43:18 4 everything about them." 13:43:20 5 going and doing that? 13:43:21 6 A. Not right now. 13:43:22 7 Q. Would you mind, if you decide to do that, you let 13:43:24 8 your counsel know so she can let me know and we maybe 13:43:27 9 can ask you some more questions? 13:43:29 10 A. I would have to ask the counsel. 13:43:31 11 Q. Okay. 13:43:37 12 13:43:40 13 A. "Deliberate" is intentional indifference -- 13:43:40 14 Q. Okay. 13:43:42 15 A. -- and not caring. 13:43:43 16 Q. And -- Okay. 13:43:54 17 13:43:55 18 A. That's correct. 13:43:56 19 Q. And you testified under oath, correct? 13:44:00 20 A. Correct. 13:44:00 21 Q. And you signed, actually, a document. 13:44:03 22 didn't -- they don't make you raise your right hand in 13:44:06 23 the legislature. 13:44:09 24 before you testify saying that you're going to testify, 13:44:12 25 you want to testify, and you affirm in writing, signing Do you have any intention of Would that be fair? Do you know what the words "deliberate indifference" mean? What do those mean to you? Now, you testified before the Texas Senate; is that correct? They They have you sign an affirmation Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 109 of 220 108 13:44:16 1 your name, that you will tell the truth? 13:44:17 2 A. Yes. 13:44:18 3 Q. Okay. 13:44:21 4 So I'm going to hand you a document, and let's ... 5 (Exhibit 5 marked.) 6 7 Oh, wait. Let's mark this one. Let me make sure. 8 THE REPORTER: 9 MR. DUNNAM: 10 I can get another -So -- THE REPORTER: Do you want to make this 13:44:52 11 Number 6? 13:44:52 12 13:44:54 13 an -- Actually, these are stapled in two separate -- two 13:44:58 14 separate sections -- 13:44:58 15 MS. BROWN: 13:45:00 16 MR. DUNNAM: 13:45:02 17 we misstated where to start the transcribe -- 13:45:07 18 transcription; so they're actually -- they go together; 13:45:10 19 so I'd like to offer those for the deposition as one 13:45:12 20 exhibit, and we can staple them. 13:45:16 21 chronological order. 13:45:19 22 acceptable, or do we need to mark them twice -- mark two 13:45:21 23 of them? 13:45:21 24 13:45:23 25 MR. DUNNAM: MS. BROWN: exhibit. Yes. And, Counsel, do you have Thank you. -- because we had one typed and I mean they're in They're time-stamped. No. And is that You can mark it as one Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 110 of 220 109 13:45:23 1 (Exhibit 6 marked. Exhibit 5 withdrawn.) 13:45:23 2 13:45:23 3 13:45:25 4 hand you what's been marked as Exhibit 6. 13:45:31 5 before you showed up you had read a transcript of your 13:45:33 6 testimony. 13:45:34 7 A. Yes. 13:45:35 8 Q. Okay. 13:45:41 9 13:45:45 10 reporter here did. 13:45:48 11 wrong with it, then I'm sure it will be pointed out by 13:45:51 12 some lawyers or something at some point, but I'd like to 13:45:53 13 go through this, and I'll -- we'll represent to you that 13:45:56 14 we -- my office didn't participate other than requesting 13:46:00 15 that this be done. 13:46:02 16 A. Yes. 13:46:02 17 Q. Okay. 13:47:08 18 13:47:20 19 this is questioning from Senator West. 13:47:26 20 indicated to the Texas Senate that you had not attended 13:47:29 21 the first meeting where Pepper Hamilton briefed the 13:47:33 22 regents; is that right? 13:47:34 23 A. That's correct. 13:47:35 24 Q. But they had been hired by the board, correct? 13:47:40 25 A. That's correct. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. Okay. So we're going to -- Dr., we're going to Okay? And you said Right? So actually, I got the last of this early this morning; and so -- I didn't do it. Our court So we'll -- if there's something Okay? So let's -- Hold on a second. Let's start on page 8. Fair enough? I think Now, you Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 111 of 220 110 13:47:41 1 Q. And they had done, as you told Senator West, an 13:47:48 2 13:47:49 3 13:47:52 4 13:47:54 5 13:48:25 6 13:48:28 7 there's been an exhaustive investigation of these issues 13:48:32 8 at your university?" 13:48:34 9 so", correct? 13:48:37 10 A. Yes. 13:48:38 11 Q. And in fact, you told Senator West that, to the 13:48:42 12 best of your recollection, there had been no stone left 13:48:44 13 unturned? 13:48:45 14 A. I did not say that. 13:48:46 15 Q. Okay. 13:48:49 16 13:48:53 17 13:48:54 18 13:48:57 19 A. That's correct. 13:48:57 20 Q. Okay. 13:48:58 21 A. That's different than "no stone unturned". 13:49:03 22 13:49:03 23 13:49:05 24 13:49:06 25 exhaustive investigation, correct? A. I don't know if I used the word "exhaustive", but they did an investigation. Q. Well, let's find it. Let's look on page 11. "Do you feel, sir --" this is on line 3 "-- that And you said: Well, hang on. "Yes, I believe Let's see what you said: "No stone has been left unturned?", he asked. You said: "... may be some stones, but we've tried to find as many stones as we could unturn." Well, how is that different than -I -- "There may be some stones." Q. Well, I said "that you knew of" is what I think I asked you -A. That's correct. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 112 of 220 111 13:49:07 1 Q. -- but fair enough. 13:49:10 2 13:49:12 3 the findings, you are aware, or do you just know from 13:49:15 4 reading the newspaper, that Pepper Hamilton was given 13:49:19 5 broad latitude and reviewed e-mails and text messages 13:49:23 6 and personnel files and any document they wanted? 13:49:28 7 A. I believe that's correct. 13:49:29 8 Q. How do you -- Why do you believe that? 13:49:31 9 A. Because I have simply heard that. 13:49:35 10 from where exactly, but I understood that that's what 13:49:38 11 they did. 13:49:38 12 Q. And look at page 9. 13:49:47 13 A. Pardon? 13:49:48 14 Q. Looking at page 9, Senator West asked you: 13:49:54 15 what about the notes?" 13:49:57 16 they have any notes that they used to make the 13:49:59 17 presentation?" 13:50:02 18 13:50:04 19 13:50:06 20 A. Yes. 13:50:06 21 Q. And you said: 13:50:09 22 13:50:11 23 A. Yeah. 13:50:12 24 Q. When did you hear the oral reports? 13:50:14 25 A. On the -- on June 1. Okay. So let's go back to -- in coming up with I don't know And this is on line 22: "So "Did Do you agree with me he's talking about Pepper Hamilton? He's asking about -- "Having heard the oral reports, I think they worked from notes, yes, sir." Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 113 of 220 112 13:50:16 1 Q. And who -- So what was this briefing on June 1? 13:50:22 2 A. What, now? 13:50:24 3 Q. When was the June -- I mean what was the June 1 13:50:26 4 13:50:27 5 A. It was an oral report of what -- of the findings. 13:50:31 6 Q. And so were you in with the regents when they did 13:50:34 7 13:50:34 8 A. No, I was not. 13:50:35 9 Q. Okay. 13:50:37 10 A. This was a subsequent meeting with members of the 13:50:39 11 13:50:40 12 Q. And who was present? 13:50:41 13 A. I can't remember exactly who was President -- 13:50:45 14 present. 13:50:48 15 Council. 13:50:48 16 Q. Was Pepper Hamilton there? 13:50:49 17 A. They were the ones presenting. 13:50:51 18 Q. And how long was that presentation? 13:50:54 19 A. I had to leave in the middle because I had to go 13:50:57 20 13:51:00 21 Q. So how long were you there? 13:51:02 22 A. I was about two-and-a-half hours. 13:51:04 23 Q. And do you know now how long that meeting was? 13:51:09 24 A. I do not remember -- I do not know. 13:51:11 25 Q. You said halfway through; so I'm just curious. briefing that you were at? the oral report? So was this a subsequent meeting? Executive Council. There were mostly members of the Executive to a Big 12 meeting that day. I left. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 114 of 220 113 13:51:14 1 A. I don't know. 13:51:16 2 Q. And so let's go through. 13:51:21 3 13:51:23 4 13:51:26 5 13:51:31 6 questions that ask you to repeat what the attorneys 13:51:35 7 said. 13:51:35 8 BY MR. DUNNAM: 13:51:37 9 13:51:43 10 it your intention to follow your lawyer's advice here 13:51:47 11 today and not answer my question? 13:51:49 12 A. Yes, it is. 13:51:50 13 Q. And if I ask you any question about what was said 13:51:57 14 at the meeting of the Executive Committee that you 13:51:59 15 attended where Pepper Hamilton gave an oral 13:52:02 16 presentation, is it your intention not to answer those 13:52:04 17 questions? 13:52:04 18 13:52:06 19 13:52:07 20 Q. 13:52:09 21 correct? 13:52:09 22 A. I believe I should not answer. 13:52:11 23 Q. Okay. 13:52:20 24 correct? 13:52:21 25 A. MS. BROWN: I don't know how long it went. What did they tell you? Objection, calls for privileged information, attorney-client privilege, work product. I would instruct the witness not to answer Q. A. So, President Garland, is it your intention -- is I believe that's covered by attorney-client privilege; so I should not answer. Okay. And you refuse to answer that; is that But Pepper Hamilton did have notes, That I do not know. I just inferred that. Most Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 115 of 220 114 13:52:24 1 of the report was oral, and they were not reading. 13:52:30 2 13:52:34 3 think they worked from notes, yes, sir." 13:52:39 4 Senator West says: 13:52:42 5 had notes that they used in order to make the oral 13:52:47 6 report?" 13:52:48 7 A. 13:52:51 8 for a fact. 13:52:54 9 heard. 13:52:56 10 13:52:59 11 and you never -- you can't tell us whether or not they 13:53:01 12 were working from notes or not? 13:53:02 13 A. I cannot. 13:53:03 14 Q. Was there a PowerPoint presentation? 13:53:05 15 A. None that I remember. 13:53:06 16 Q. So they just talked to you, and you do not know 13:53:10 17 -- despite what you told Senator West, you don't know 13:53:13 18 whether -- 13:53:13 19 A. I really do not know. 13:53:14 20 Q. -- there were notes or not? 13:53:17 21 13:53:19 22 was said was oral. 13:53:21 23 provided to you? 13:53:22 24 A. Nothing. 13:53:22 25 Q. Anything else, other than what was oral? Q. Q. Well, I mean, let's carry over. "Okay. And you said: You say: "I And then So they had notes -- they "Yes, sir." I simply inferred that, but I do not know that I didn't see their notes. I didn't see, I It was an oral report. So you're sitting there for two-and-a-half hours, Now, you indicated that most of the -- of what Was there anything in writing Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 116 of 220 115 13:53:27 1 A. I don't know what that might -- 13:53:29 2 Q. I don't know. 13:53:31 3 13:53:32 4 A. No. 13:53:32 5 Q. Okay. 13:53:34 6 A. It was all oral. 13:53:34 7 Q. All right. 13:53:39 8 said: 13:53:43 9 13:53:44 10 A. 13:53:48 11 that? 13:53:48 12 Q. 13:53:53 13 talking about the notes. 13:53:55 14 that there's an investigation by the State right now?" 13:53:57 15 A. Right. 13:53:58 16 Q. And you said: 13:54:00 17 13:54:02 18 be made available as part of the investigation that's 13:54:05 19 being done by law enforcement?" 13:54:07 20 13:54:08 21 A. I did not know. 13:54:09 22 Q. -- "but we've given them" everything, but then 13:54:11 23 you said -- you volunteered: 13:54:14 24 over to the NCAA"; so were the notes turned over to the 13:54:18 25 NCAA? You were one that said most of it was in oral -- oral. It was -- it was oral. Now, Senator West goes on, and you "... we turned it over to the NCAA, as well." Is that the notes? I'm not sure what the question was. So we're carrying down. "Okay. Where is "Were those --" He's "Were those -- Now, you know "Yes." Now, will that information in those notes And you said you didn't know -- But "we've also turned it Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 117 of 220 116 13:54:19 1 A. 13:54:22 2 was that when the NCAA asked for information, we gave 13:54:27 3 them the information they asked for. 13:54:32 4 precisely that information was. 13:54:35 5 -- so ... 13:54:36 6 13:54:44 7 13:54:44 8 13:54:45 9 13:54:45 10 13:54:46 11 13:54:50 12 it's in front of you right here. 13:54:54 13 Exhibit Number 4 is. 13:54:55 14 13:54:59 15 13:55:01 16 13:55:06 17 Regents that prior to the implementation of the 13:55:09 18 recommendations that you were in charge of implementing, 13:55:17 19 that Baylor University was wholly failing to comply with 13:55:23 20 Title IX as indicated in this report? 13:55:25 21 13:55:28 22 the whole report, because there are words that are used 13:55:32 23 in this that said "inconsistently", which implies that 13:55:37 24 there were times when it was done; so I -- I think that 13:55:41 25 that statement should be read in the context of Q. I don't know what notes existed. Okay. What I meant I do not know what I don't know what the So we'll come back to Exhibit Number ... I think it was 5? THE REPORTER: 6. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. ... 6 in just a minute. Let's look at Exhibit Number 4. A. It's right -- So tell us what This is the Board of University -- Baylor University Board of Regents Findings of Fact. Q. A. Do you agree with the findings of the Board of I believe that comment should be read in light of Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 118 of 220 117 13:55:44 1 everything in the report. 13:55:45 2 Q. 13:55:47 3 enough? 13:55:47 4 A. Yes. 13:55:48 5 Q. Page one: 13:55:55 6 forth in greater detail, reflect a fundamental failure 13:55:59 7 by Baylor to implement Title IX of the Violence Against 13:56:04 8 Women Reauthorization Act of 2013." 13:56:05 9 13:56:06 10 13:56:09 11 I would use the statement "fundamental". 13:56:12 12 there were cases where indeed we did implement Title IX, 13:56:17 13 but I -- simply because they use the word 13:56:20 14 "inconsistent". 13:56:21 15 13:56:24 16 finding that there was a fundamental failure by Baylor 13:56:29 17 to implement these laws? 13:56:30 18 13:56:33 19 light of the context where they also -- they talk about 13:56:36 20 specific instances. 13:56:37 21 13:56:39 22 question is do you agree with this sentence, or do you 13:56:41 23 disagree with the Board of Regents? 13:56:43 24 13:56:47 25 Okay. Well, let's go through the report. Fair "Pepper's Findings of Fact, as set Do you agree with that statement? A. Q. A. Q. A. I believe that there were failures. I'm not sure I believe Well, so you disagree with the Board of Regents' I believe that that should be interpreted in Well, I'm going to go through those, but my I believe "fundamental failure" does not mean wholesale that basically -- because they referred to Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 119 of 220 118 13:56:52 1 "inconsistent" application for the Title IX. 13:56:54 2 13:56:59 3 failure to implement Title IX and the Violence Against 13:56:59 4 Women Reauthorization Act? 13:57:05 5 13:57:05 6 13:57:06 7 13:57:06 8 13:57:09 9 13:57:09 10 A. I believe that there were failures. 13:57:11 11 Q. And you -- but you do not believe they were 13:57:13 12 13:57:14 13 13:57:15 14 13:57:17 15 Q. What word would you use? 13:57:20 16 A. I'd use "that reflects a failure -- some failures 13:57:24 17 of Baylor to implement the Title IX of -- Title IX of 13:57:28 18 the Education Amendments of 1972 consistently". 13:57:31 19 13:57:38 20 that the efforts to implement were slow, ad hoc, 13:57:42 21 hindered by a lack of institutional support and 13:57:45 22 engagement by senior leadership." 13:57:47 23 that finding? 13:57:47 24 13:57:50 25 Q. A. So you do not believe there was a fundamental I believe that was -MS. BROWN: Objection to form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. I just want to know if you agree or disagree with the statement -- fundamental failures? A. I do not believe -- I believe that there were failures, not -- I would use a different word. Q. A. Okay. So in here we find Baylor -- "Pepper found Do you agree with I do not know because -- from the evidence, but I believe that the next question and the next statement is Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 120 of 220 119 13:57:53 1 that they "were wholly inadequate to consistently 13:57:59 2 provide a prompt and equitable response." 13:58:02 3 13:58:04 4 13:58:05 5 13:58:09 6 13:58:11 7 A. Yes. 13:58:11 8 Q. This is what the Board of Regents, 30-plus 13:58:15 9 13:58:19 10 13:58:21 11 13:58:22 12 13:58:22 13 13:58:24 14 13:58:25 15 unprecedented, what the regents did in this case," 13:58:28 16 publishing these findings? 13:58:29 17 A. I said that. 13:58:30 18 Q. Okay. 13:58:33 19 talk in detail about each one of these however you want, 13:58:36 20 but I intend to go through their findings, because you 13:58:39 21 said we need to go through it in detail because you do 13:58:42 22 not agree with the broad finding at the top. 13:58:46 23 want to go through these -- 13:58:46 24 A. Right. 13:58:47 25 Q. -- and see what you disagree with and what you So there were cases, I think, where this was the case but not always the case. Q. I'm just going -- These are not my -- this is not my words. You understand that? regents found, published and has -- have, I guess you could say bragged about for the last year, right? A. Yes. MS. BROWN: Objection, form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. You say this is -- you said: "This is So I just want to go through, and we can I just Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 121 of 220 120 13:58:49 1 don't. Okay? So let's try this one more time. 13:58:53 2 13:58:57 3 Title IX were slow, ad hoc, and hindered by lack of 13:59:01 4 institutional support and engagement by senior 13:59:06 5 leadership"? 13:59:07 6 13:59:09 7 "student conduct ... were wholly inadequate to 13:59:12 8 consistently provide a prompt and equitable response." 13:59:16 9 Q. So you disagree with that sentence? 13:59:18 10 A. I believe it is corrected by the next sentence. 13:59:20 11 Q. Who's the senior leadership that hindered things 13:59:26 12 13:59:29 13 A. That I do not know. 13:59:31 14 Q. Well, you told the Texas Senate that everyone 13:59:42 15 culpable for these failures were no longer at Baylor. 13:59:48 16 Do you recall that? 13:59:48 17 A. I do recall that. 13:59:50 18 Q. So how do you know that to be true, if you don't 13:59:52 19 know who the senior leadership is that were the ones 13:59:56 20 that did not provide the institutional support or proper 13:59:59 21 engagement? 14:00:02 22 told the Senate? 14:00:04 23 14:00:06 24 that personnel decisions were evaluated, and those 14:00:09 25 persons were removed. Do you agree that "Baylor's efforts to implement A. Do you agree with that? I believe in the next statement where it says by lack of institutional support and engagement? A. How do you know that to be true, what you Well, I may have been misled, but I understood Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 122 of 220 121 14:00:10 1 Q. Who told you that? 14:00:11 2 A. Well, just simply the fact that people were 14:00:15 3 removed. 14:00:17 4 Q. 14:00:24 5 but you may have been misled. 14:00:28 6 saying? 14:00:28 7 A. I may have been mistaken or misled. 14:00:30 8 Q. By who? 14:00:31 9 A. I believe that's correct. 14:00:32 10 Q. Who told you everybody culpable is gone? 14:00:36 11 A. No -- no one told me. 14:00:37 12 Q. You just assumed that? 14:00:39 13 A. I just assumed it. 14:00:40 14 Q. Well, how could you be misled if it's just an 14:00:40 15 assumption? 14:00:44 16 you. 14:00:44 17 14:00:47 18 persons were gone. 14:00:50 19 aware of in any investigation that someone was find -- 14:00:55 20 found to be culpable. 14:00:56 21 14:00:59 22 support", and this is discussing the university, there 14:01:02 23 is a section at the back that I will agree only deals 14:01:05 24 with the football program, correct? 14:01:07 25 A. Q. A. No one told me specifically. Well, so you told the Senate everyone was gone, Is that what you're "Misleading" connotates that somebody told I may have misinterpreted the fact that these There was no -- none that I was In reading this document, "institutional That's correct. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 123 of 220 122 14:01:08 1 Q. 14:01:14 2 talking about the university as a whole as an 14:01:17 3 institution. 14:01:18 4 A. I think this statement is, yes. 14:01:20 5 Q. All right. 14:01:22 6 -- was involved, do you know that to include somebody 14:01:25 7 more than Art Briles and Mr. Shillinglaw and Mr. McCaw? 14:01:30 8 14:01:32 9 14:01:32 10 14:01:44 11 just wanted to talk about; so let's talk about it. 14:01:47 12 talks about that "based on a high-level audit of all 14:01:50 13 reports of sexual harassment and violence for three 14:01:53 14 academic years from 2012-'13 through '14-'15, Pepper 14:01:59 15 found that the University's student conduct processes 14:02:01 16 were wholly inadequate to consistently provide a prompt 14:02:05 17 and equitable response under Title IX." 14:02:08 18 14:02:12 19 14:02:14 20 14:02:19 21 14:02:23 22 14:02:25 23 14:02:27 24 14:02:30 25 A. This statement, particularly in the summary he's Do you agree with that? And so whatever senior leadership we I do -- I do not know exactly what they were talking about. Q. Okay. The next sentence, and this is the one you It And we'll go through each finding as it continues, but do you agree with that sentence? A. I assume it's correct. I was not present from 2-12 -- 2012 to 2015; so I don't know that for a fact. Q. You don't know whether -- And you've made no effort to ascertain whether it's correct or not? A. I'm not -- I've just heard the report, but this is a summary from the report. I do not know. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 124 of 220 123 14:02:33 1 Q. 14:02:34 2 least, of Pepper Hamilton's summary of everything; so 14:02:38 3 you do know more than what's just in this report; is 14:02:41 4 that correct? 14:02:41 5 14:02:44 6 they were primarily -- they were all entirely related to 14:02:48 7 the football program. 14:02:49 8 Q. Okay. 14:02:51 9 A. The purpose was to orient us, I believe, as to 14:02:57 10 why the President had been dismissed, the coach had been 14:03:02 11 dismissed, and also the Athletic Director. 14:03:04 12 14:03:10 13 support complainants through the provision of interim 14:03:14 14 measures." 14:03:15 15 14:03:17 16 "consistently", which means that they failed in some 14:03:20 17 cases to support complainants. 14:03:22 18 14:03:26 19 support a young woman who's been the subject of sexual 14:03:28 20 assault within your university? 14:03:31 21 14:03:34 22 14:03:36 23 14:03:38 24 keep wanting to talk about "consistently". 14:03:42 25 want to talk about -- why do you want to point that out? A. Q. A. Q. A. Well, you sat through two-and-a-half hours, at I do know that the instances that they brought, And what was the purpose of that meeting? And it says that "Baylor failed to consistently Is that true? With the emphasis on consistence -- Do you believe it's proper even once to fail to I believe it's a serious failure not to support victims of sexual assault. Q. And is there any justification for -- because you Why do you Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 125 of 220 124 14:03:43 1 A. 14:03:45 2 complainants. 14:03:48 3 "consistently", then that means there were cases where 14:03:52 4 they did. 14:03:52 5 14:03:54 6 "consistently" means more often than not, less often 14:03:59 7 than not; you don't know because you just don't know 14:04:00 8 anything, right? 14:04:01 9 A. I do not. 14:04:01 10 Q. You just don't know? 14:04:02 11 A. That's correct. 14:04:03 12 Q. Okay. 14:04:07 13 University failed to take action to identify and 14:04:09 14 eliminate a potential hostile environment, prevent its 14:04:13 15 recurrence, or address its effects for individual 14:04:15 16 complainants or the broader campus community." 14:04:18 17 14:04:22 18 14:04:24 19 14:04:28 20 investigation, I -- that's what -- the conclusion they 14:04:33 21 draw -- drew. 14:04:33 22 Q. And -- 14:04:34 23 A. I can't verify it. 14:04:36 24 Q. You can't verify it, but -- so I guess -- and I 14:04:40 25 Q. Because in many ways we were supportive of I -- because if they're saying But you don't know whether they were -- whether All right. "... the University -- Now, that element doesn't say "consistently". says they failed to do it. A. It Do you agree with that? The statement was -- if this came from their apologize if I keep going back to this, but you were the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 126 of 220 125 14:04:43 1 President. 14:04:43 2 A. Not at this time. 14:04:44 3 Q. But this is talking about a period of time in the 14:04:48 4 past. 14:04:50 5 A. It's a period of time. 14:04:51 6 Q. And you had been the President of this university 14:04:54 7 14:04:56 8 A. Correct. 14:04:57 9 Q. You've been the Provost for how long? 14:05:00 10 A. One year. 14:05:01 11 Q. For a year. 14:05:05 12 becoming President as you currently are, you had had a 14:05:09 13 senior leadership role at Baylor University? 14:05:11 14 A. Correct. 14:05:12 15 Q. And you have no independent knowledge one way or 14:05:15 16 14:05:16 17 A. These never came to my attention. 14:05:18 18 Q. The fact that they did not come to your attention 14:05:22 19 as the President and the Provost of the university, does 14:05:25 20 that indicate to you that there was a fundamental 14:05:27 21 failure at that time? 14:05:28 22 14:05:32 23 14:05:32 24 Q. 14:05:36 25 Provost? You agree with that? for 20 months, almost two years, correct? So for three years prior to you the other whether these things are true? A. At -- I was not President of the university at these times. Well, what about the times you were President and Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 127 of 220 126 14:05:36 1 A. 14:05:39 2 during this time, but that is the Chief Academic 14:05:41 3 Officer. 14:05:45 4 Officer. 14:05:45 5 Q. Were you on the Executive Council? 14:05:47 6 A. Yes, I was. 14:05:48 7 Q. Do they come to the Executive Council? 14:05:50 8 A. I do not remember them coming to Executive 14:05:52 9 Council. 14:05:52 10 14:05:54 11 occurred when there were 125 young women who reported 14:05:59 12 sexual assault on the university, are you troubled that 14:06:03 13 that never came to your attention as a member of the 14:06:05 14 Executive Council? 14:06:06 15 A. I do not know why that did not come -- 14:06:07 16 Q. Are you troubled that it did not come to your 14:06:09 17 14:06:09 18 14:06:12 19 14:06:14 20 14:06:16 21 14:06:17 22 time on the Executive Council none -- you were not aware 14:06:21 23 of any of this that was going on that were fundamental 14:06:24 24 failures of the university? 14:06:25 25 Q. I was not President and Provost. I was Provost These issues do not come to the Chief Academic Do you think if during a period of time when this attention? A. I don't know the circumstances or the details of any of these reports, whether they were reported or not. Q. Let me try this again. Are you troubled by the fact that during your A. I do not know that they were -- these things were Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 128 of 220 127 14:06:27 1 going on. Had I -- So I can't answer that "yes" or 14:06:31 2 "no". 14:06:31 3 Q. When were you Provost? 14:06:34 4 A. I was Provost from 2014-2015. 14:06:37 5 Q. So this was going on when you were Provost, 14:06:40 6 14:06:43 7 A. These things never came to my attention. 14:06:45 8 Q. I agree. 14:06:49 9 14:06:54 10 Executive Council of the university that none of these 14:06:57 11 issues were brought to your attention? 14:06:59 12 trouble you or not? 14:07:01 13 14:07:03 14 brought to my attention; so I don't know why -- what I 14:07:06 15 would be troubled about, because I assume they were 14:07:09 16 being dealt with differently, but it just did not come 14:07:11 17 to my attention. 14:07:12 18 14:07:15 19 14:07:16 20 14:07:19 21 14:07:21 22 14:07:25 23 the term "failure" during this time period about 20 14:07:28 24 times. 14:07:30 25 because they're talking specifically about 2014 and '15. So my question, let me ask it again: Does it trouble you in 2014 and '15 when you were on the A. Q. Does that I do not know why they would not have been Will you agree that now we know that they were not being handled properly? A. I do not know that they were mishandled. I don't know what cases you're specifically talking about. Q. I'm talking about in this report where it uses Are you not willing to acknowledge to me that the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 129 of 220 128 14:07:34 1 statements in here that there were fundamental failures 14:07:37 2 while you were Provost of this university are accurate? 14:07:39 3 14:07:43 4 this -- in this Findings of Fact were related to the 14:07:46 5 football program. 14:07:46 6 14:07:51 7 14:07:52 8 A. That's correct. 14:07:53 9 Q. Okay. 14:08:00 10 it important to tell you about the other 90 percent of 14:08:04 11 the young women who were victims of sexual assault and 14:08:08 12 reported it to the university, that no one has ever 14:08:11 13 talked to you about that? 14:08:11 14 14:08:14 15 14:08:18 16 14:08:23 17 Morning News when your regents went up there to meet 14:08:25 18 with the editorial people that football was 10 percent 14:08:29 19 of the problem? 14:08:30 20 14:08:34 21 14:08:35 22 14:08:43 23 14:08:47 24 just ask you because I am just trying to -- because you 14:08:51 25 keep pointing back that this is why you need to have A. Q. I can't evaluate -- The ones that I'm aware of in Because the only briefing that you had the benefit of related to football? A. Does that trouble you, that nobody thought I do not know why that happened. And I do not know if that is the actual case. Q. A. Well, you do know that you-all told the Dallas I -- The regents have more information than I do about that. Q. Well, let's move on for a minute. So I don't think you ever answered; so let me Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 130 of 220 129 14:08:54 1 your -- these recommendations implemented. 14:08:56 2 14:08:59 3 these findings were made; so I'm asking you do you 14:09:02 4 believe the findings are accurate? 14:09:04 5 14:09:10 6 is important is for us to pivot to the future in order 14:09:13 7 to make sure that these kinds of accusations or events 14:09:17 8 or whatever do not happen. 14:09:20 9 14:09:23 10 are we not to hold accountable the individuals that made 14:09:26 11 the decisions that resulted in failure after failure of 14:09:30 12 the university to address the needs of these young 14:09:32 13 women? 14:09:35 14 A. I do not -- 14:09:36 15 Q. -- these failures? 14:09:37 16 A. I do not believe that people were -- that that 14:09:40 17 was ignored, but I just simply don't know the details of 14:09:44 18 those cases. 14:09:44 19 14:09:47 20 after failure, you believe that there's no need to go 14:09:50 21 back and hold anyone other than the people that we've 14:09:53 22 talked about, Starr, Briles, McCaw, Shillinglaw, 14:09:57 23 accountable for the failures in how these young women 14:10:02 24 were treated? 14:10:04 25 You've told me that you don't know any facts why A. Q. Q. A. I assume that the findings are accurate, but what And in pivoting -- so in pivoting to the future, Are we to ignore the people responsible for -- So when we go through and talk about failure I would assume that in the investigation they did Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 131 of 220 130 14:10:07 1 hold the persons they judged to be accountable in the 14:10:10 2 names that came up. 14:10:11 3 14:10:15 4 was let go, other than the four individuals we've talked 14:10:18 5 about? 14:10:18 6 A. No. 14:10:19 7 Q. In fact, who's Bethany McCraw? 14:10:25 8 A. She is in Judicial Affairs. 14:10:28 9 Q. She's still there? 14:10:29 10 A. Yes. 14:10:30 11 Q. And has her role changed? 14:10:32 12 A. Her role has changed. 14:10:36 13 Title IX cases, but this is just because we now have a 14:10:43 14 Title IX Coordinator; and so she does -- her role is 14:10:46 15 basically student violations other than sexual assault. 14:10:49 16 14:10:57 17 14:11:00 18 14:11:04 19 14:11:05 20 Q. Has she received a pay raise? 14:11:14 21 A. I have no idea. 14:11:14 22 Q. So who would know? 14:11:18 23 A. Her supervisor. 14:11:21 24 Q. Who verified the accuracy -- Let me ask do you 14:11:42 25 Q. Q. But as we sit here today, you know of no one that She doesn't handle any Was she -- was her job duties altered because of how she had mishandled anything in the past? A. I did not -- I was -- That happened before I became President; so I don't know. know whether Pepper Hamilton wrote this? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 132 of 220 131 14:11:44 1 A. 14:11:48 2 the "Baylor University Board of Regents Findings of 14:11:50 3 Fact", not Pepper Hamilton's. 14:11:52 4 14:11:55 5 14:11:57 6 14:12:00 7 University Board of Regents"; so it comes from -- from 14:12:02 8 the Board of Regents. 14:12:04 9 Q. My question is do you know who drafted it? 14:12:05 10 A. No, I do not. 14:12:06 11 Q. Did Pepper Hamilton draft it? 14:12:07 12 A. I do not know who drafted this. 14:12:09 13 Q. Who was responsible for verifying that the 14:12:16 14 14:12:20 15 14:12:24 16 14:12:25 17 14:12:30 18 14:12:34 19 -- examples of actions taken by University 14:12:36 20 administrators that directly discouraged complainants 14:12:39 21 from reporting or participating in student conduct 14:12:42 22 processes." 14:12:43 23 14:12:45 24 A. I -- Yes. 14:12:48 25 Q. Who were the university administrators that Q. I do -- They did not write it, because this is Well, I understand that it's on Baylor Board of Regents' letterhead. A. No. My question is did -- It's the title of it. It is "Baylor failures noted were indeed accurate? A. I do not know. This -- All of this occurred/ transpired before I became President. Q. Okay. Let's carry on. Bottom of page 1: "Pepper Hamilton found exact Do you agree with that statement? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 133 of 220 132 14:12:51 1 directly discouraged complainants from reporting or 14:12:54 2 participating in the process? 14:12:56 3 A. I can only guess. 14:12:58 4 Q. You don't know? 14:12:58 5 A. I do not know. 14:12:59 6 Q. Well, go ahead and guess, if you have an idea. 14:13:02 7 A. I believe it was the Chief of the Baylor 14:13:05 8 14:13:06 9 Q. Was he fired? 14:13:08 10 A. He -- This is not during my time, but I 14:13:13 11 understand that he was replaced. 14:13:15 12 circumstances. 14:13:16 13 14:13:23 14 14:13:23 15 A. No, I did not. 14:13:24 16 Q. You didn't watch it? 14:13:26 17 14:13:27 18 A. I was on it. 14:13:29 19 Q. Are you aware that Mr. Ramsower said that when 14:13:35 20 they asked him as head of public safety why he was not 14:13:40 21 the person accountable, he directed the attention and 14:13:44 22 the blame at the Police Chief and said he's no longer at 14:13:47 23 the university? 14:13:48 24 14:13:51 25 University Police. Q. You know Mr. Ramsower. I do not know the Did you watch the "60 Minutes" -- Well, you were on it, weren't you? A. I didn't watch it; so I don't know what Dr. Ramsower said. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 134 of 220 133 14:13:51 1 Q. Who was this Chief of Police? 14:13:54 2 A. The Chief of Police was Chief Doak. 14:13:58 3 Q. And when was he -- when did he leave the 14:14:00 4 14:14:00 5 A. I don't know the dates exactly. 14:14:02 6 Q. Was it when you were President? 14:14:04 7 A. No. 14:14:04 8 Q. It was before you were President? 14:14:05 9 A. I -- Yes. 14:14:07 10 Q. Do you know whether he was let go? 14:14:09 11 A. I do not know any of the details. 14:14:12 12 Q. Anyone other -- Now, this says "University 14:14:19 13 administrators", plural; so are you saying that that is 14:14:22 14 only Chief Doak? 14:14:24 15 14:14:27 16 administrators -- who they are -- who they were. 14:14:30 17 perplexed by it. 14:14:31 18 Q. Why? 14:14:32 19 A. I don't know who it is, "University 14:14:34 20 14:14:35 21 Q. Are you interested in who it is? 14:14:37 22 A. I would be interested if they -- if there was 14:14:41 23 some serious malfeasance regarding their carrying out of 14:14:48 24 their duties. 14:14:48 25 university? A. I have no clue what the university I'm administrators". Q. Well, do you think that if a university Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 135 of 220 134 14:14:50 1 administrator directly discourages a rape victim from 14:14:55 2 reporting her rape, that that is serious? 14:14:57 3 A. I do believe that's serious. 14:14:58 4 Q. And so are you interested in knowing who did 14:15:00 5 that? 14:15:01 6 A. 14:15:08 7 14:15:09 8 Q. Who? 14:15:09 9 A. I believe it was the Chief of Police. 14:15:11 10 Q. Anyone else? 14:15:14 11 A. I do not know of anyone else. 14:15:15 12 Q. Well, this says "University administrators". 14:15:18 13 14:15:21 14 A. He would be a university administrator. 14:15:22 15 Q. Okay. 14:15:24 16 14:15:25 17 A. I do not know who that could possibly be. 14:15:27 18 Q. I'm not asking you whether you -- I'm asking are 14:15:30 19 14:15:31 20 14:15:34 21 read that, would have known and have taken action -- 14:15:37 22 would have investigated and taken action, but I don't 14:15:40 23 know anything about this situation. 14:15:42 24 14:15:44 25 I believe that I think I know who did that from -- that -- yes. the Chief of Police an administrator? Is I'm just curious. And so are you interested in who the other administrators are? you interested in finding out? A. Q. I would have thought that the regents, having As President of Baylor University, are you interested in finding out who the other administrators Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 136 of 220 135 14:15:47 1 were who directly discouraged rape victims from 14:15:50 2 reporting their assaults? 14:15:51 3 A. I only know of one case where that -- 14:15:54 4 Q. Are you interested in determining who the other 14:15:56 5 14:15:56 6 A. I don't know how to determine who those are. 14:15:58 7 Q. How about asking someone a question, "Who is it?" 14:15:58 8 A. I -- 14:16:02 9 Q. Is that -- is that too much for you to do? 14:16:04 10 14:16:04 11 14:16:06 12 Q. Is that too much for you to do? 14:16:07 13 A. You know, my -- I just don't know who it could 14:16:10 14 be, and I don't -- and I've had other responsibilities 14:16:15 15 than looking and reinvestigating the investigation. 14:16:16 16 14:16:20 17 ask that question? 14:16:23 18 not to say "Who's the other --" that's a conscious 14:16:26 19 decision you've made, right? 14:16:28 20 14:16:32 21 14:16:32 22 Q. All right. 14:16:33 23 A. No, I've not. 14:16:34 24 Q. Well, can you think about it right now? 14:16:38 25 people are? MS. BROWN: Objection, form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. A. Are you deliberately making the decision not to Have you made a deliberate decision I've not -- I've not been concerned about this issue. And have you thought about it? think it's a good thing for you to find out? Do you Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 137 of 220 136 14:16:40 1 A. I'm leaving the office of President; so it will 14:16:43 2 14:16:46 3 14:16:51 4 14:16:51 5 A. Correct. 14:16:52 6 Q. And you became President ... when was it again? 14:16:57 7 A. June. 14:16:57 8 Q. June 1. 14:17:04 9 14:17:08 10 14:17:10 11 14:17:14 12 concern that I was -- that I was involved in, and 14:17:18 13 nowhere in the recommendations did it say to come find 14:17:21 14 out who university administrators were or whatever. 14:17:24 15 was dealing with policies and procedures. 14:17:28 16 deal with personnel. 14:17:29 17 14:17:36 18 not to spend all day here. 14:17:40 19 specific questions for a reason, to hurry this along, 14:17:44 20 actually. 14:17:48 21 thing. 14:17:49 22 A. Yes, I've read it. 14:17:50 23 Q. -- and how many times have you read it? 14:17:51 24 A. I can't count the number of times. 14:17:54 25 Q. And you understand you went off on the not be under my responsibility to find out. Q. You got this report. It came out a year ago, right? So it's about June 1; so you've been there a year, and you decided -- you read this report. How many times have you read this? A. Q. I've read the recommendations is the primary It It did not President Garland, I don't -- you know -- I hope Okay? And I'm asking you And I just asked you -- I only asked you one Have you read this -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 138 of 220 137 14:17:56 1 recommendations, and you realize I didn't ask you about 14:17:56 2 those. 14:17:58 3 A. I understand. 14:17:58 4 Q. Okay. 14:18:00 5 limit your answer. 14:18:04 6 If something's "yes" or "no", I would like for you to 14:18:07 7 say "yes" or "no", but if you need to explain, I'd like 14:18:09 8 you to do that. 14:18:11 9 A. Yes. 14:18:11 10 Q. But I would ask that when I ask a question, you 14:18:14 11 wait until I'm done and you listen to the question I 14:18:16 12 actually asked and not what you want to say. 14:18:20 13 you'll answer my question and then you want to say 14:18:22 14 something, great, I'm all for that. 14:18:25 15 limit you. 14:18:26 16 14:18:29 17 14:18:32 18 A. I've read them. 14:18:34 19 Q. When was the first time you read them? 14:18:36 20 A. The -- June 2nd. 14:18:39 21 Q. So these came out when? 14:18:45 22 A. I do not know when they came out. 14:18:48 23 Q. So you decided not to read it until you became 14:18:55 24 14:18:56 25 So let's try something. I don't want to I want you to answer things fully. Fair enough? Okay? If I do not want to Okay? So my question is: Have you read these board findings, and how many times have you read them? I can't count the number. President? A. I was not privy to it until I became President. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 139 of 220 138 14:18:59 1 Q. 14:19:11 2 check, but I think they were released to the world in 14:19:13 3 May. 14:19:16 4 A. I was out of town. 14:19:17 5 Q. You were out of town. 14:19:18 6 A. I was in Colorado. 14:19:20 7 Q. And so despite the fact that these things are all 14:19:22 8 over the internet, all over the TV, you just didn't read 14:19:24 9 them until you came -- 14:19:26 10 A. I did not read them. 14:19:27 11 Q. Okay. 14:19:31 12 question is: 14:19:35 13 these administrators are? 14:19:37 14 A. 14:19:40 15 were. 14:19:41 16 Q. 14:19:44 17 administrators contributed to or accommodated the 14:19:51 18 hostile environment". 14:19:54 19 14:20:00 20 14:20:01 21 Q. And you have chosen not to ask? 14:20:07 22 A. I -- I did not ask. 14:20:08 23 Q. Did it ever cross your mind? 14:20:13 24 asking is this a decision you made, "I just said I'm not 14:20:15 25 going to ask", or was it you weren't -- A. Well, I may be wrong, we'll get somebody to I don't know how you weren't privy until -- Where were you? So you had them since June 2nd, and my You've made a decision not to ask who I did not ask who these university administrators Okay. It also says that the "University Do you agree with that statement? I assume that these particular ones did. I do not know who they are. I mean I'm just Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 140 of 220 139 14:20:18 1 A. It never crossed my mind. 14:20:20 2 Q. Never crossed your mind until today? 14:20:22 3 A. No. 14:20:22 4 Q. In one instance those actions constituted 14:20:28 5 retaliation against a complainant for reporting sexual 14:20:32 6 assault. 14:20:35 7 against this young woman? 14:20:36 8 A. 14:20:41 9 idea. 14:20:41 10 Q. And you elected not to find out? 14:20:44 11 A. I elected not to find out. 14:20:47 12 Q. So I go back to this, because you stated under 14:20:51 13 oath to the Texas Senate that the administrators 14:20:54 14 responsible -- we can go look at your -- you know -- if 14:20:57 15 you have any question about it, we'll look at the 14:20:59 16 transcript, but you asserted to the Texas Senate that 14:21:02 17 all of the administrators responsible for these failures 14:21:05 18 were no longer at the university. 14:21:06 19 14:21:10 20 14:21:11 21 14:21:16 22 Starr, who retaliated against a sexual assault victim 14:21:20 23 for reporting? 14:21:21 24 A. I do not know. 14:21:22 25 Q. Do you believe if it was one of them, it would A. Do you know who made the decision to retaliate I do not know who that was, and I'm -- I have no I believe that was correct, because the ones that I knew about were the folks that were dismissed. Q. So who was it, Art Briles, McCaw, Shillinglaw or Which one? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 141 of 220 140 14:21:24 1 have been proper to pay them a dime when they were let 14:21:29 2 go? 14:21:31 3 14:21:34 4 14:21:36 5 Q. I don't understand what that means. 14:21:38 6 A. Well, if they're under certain contracts and 14:21:40 7 they're let go, I don't know what kinds of things could 14:21:43 8 be required. 14:21:44 9 Q. Well, you think -- Do you have a contract? 14:21:55 10 A. No. 14:22:00 11 Q. So your -- you don't know whether it would have 14:22:08 12 been proper or not to pay someone who was leaving who 14:22:13 13 had retaliated against a young woman for reporting 14:22:17 14 sexual assault? 14:22:20 15 not? 14:22:20 16 A. I don't know the details or this particular case. 14:22:23 17 Q. And you have no intention of learning those 14:22:25 18 14:22:27 19 A. I have not found any need to know those details. 14:22:29 20 Q. Okay. 14:22:42 21 Engagement. 14:22:45 22 conduct an independent and external review; is that 14:22:48 23 correct? 14:22:48 24 A. That's what it says. 14:22:49 25 Q. Of how Baylor handled Title IX? Would it be proper, if it was one of them? A. I'm not able to make that kind of judgment because of contract issues. I don't know. Just for my teaching contract, with tenure. You don't know whether that's proper or details; is that true? All right. Let's go on to the Overview of You do agree that they were hired to Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 142 of 220 141 14:22:52 1 A. That's -- that's what it says. 14:22:55 2 Q. There was no limitation on what they could 14:22:59 3 14:23:01 4 A. Where is that? 14:23:02 5 Q. I'm asking. 14:23:04 6 A. I do not know. 14:23:05 7 Q. Okay. 14:23:08 8 Board of Regents that accepted the recommendation to 14:23:16 9 engage Pepper Hamilton? 14:23:17 10 14:23:20 11 14:23:22 12 14:23:25 13 14:23:27 14 A. I do not know. 14:23:28 15 Q. Do you know whether they looked at student 14:23:35 16 e-mails? 14:23:36 17 A. I -- I do not know what they looked at. 14:23:39 18 Q. You have no idea anything what they looked at? 14:23:41 19 A. No. 14:23:47 20 documents from current and former Baylor employees". 14:23:51 21 don't know -- it doesn't say students, but I don't -- so 14:23:54 22 I don't know. 14:23:54 23 14:24:11 24 starts to talk about the specifics, and let's go through 14:24:17 25 page 5 where it starts the new section; so I just want investigate? A. Or do you know? I -- Who was on the Special Committee of the I was not President at that time, not present at the Regents Meeting; so I have no idea. Q. Do you know what the "access to personnel and data" was, what they accessed? Q. It says here: "e-mails, mobile device data, I Let's move to page 4, because that's where it Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 143 of 220 142 14:24:21 1 to look at this one section entitled "Failure to 14:24:25 2 Prioritize, Recognize, Implement and Resource Title IX". 14:24:28 3 Are you familiar with that section? 14:24:30 4 A. Yes. 14:24:30 5 Q. If you need extra time to familiarize it, just 14:24:35 6 14:24:37 7 A. Okay. 14:25:04 8 Q. Okay? 14:25:04 9 A. Yes. 14:25:05 10 Q. So I'm trying to avoid having to go line by line 14:25:07 11 with you. 14:25:09 12 same to everything, then I have no desire to -- 14:25:12 13 A. Yeah. 14:25:12 14 Q. -- beat a dead horse. 14:25:14 15 14:25:22 16 Prioritize, Recognize, Implement and Resource Title IX", 14:25:22 17 do you agree with the findings of all of the failures 14:25:24 18 that are listed in that section? 14:25:26 19 A. I believe they identified failures. 14:25:30 20 Q. And do you believe the findings are accurate? 14:25:33 21 A. I think their judgment is probably correct. 14:25:39 22 Q. But you have no first- or secondhand information 14:25:42 23 14:25:46 24 A. No, I do not. 14:25:46 25 Q. And you felt and still believe that that is not let me know, because I want to ask you about it. (Briefly scanning document.) I just -- you know -- if your answer is the If we look at this section entitled "Failure to as to why -- as to whether or not they're correct? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 144 of 220 143 14:25:50 1 within your purvey as a University President who is 14:25:55 2 charged with implementing all of the recommendations? 14:25:58 3 14:26:01 4 recommendations so that we have -- we do not fail to 14:26:06 5 prioritize, recognize and implement Title IX. 14:26:07 6 14:26:12 7 14:26:13 8 14:26:15 9 14:26:20 10 provide the adequate resources, and I believe we have 14:26:23 11 done that. 14:26:23 12 14:26:27 13 14:26:28 14 14:26:31 15 14:26:34 16 MR. DUNNAM: 14:26:37 17 think we've hit about another hour. 14:26:40 18 14:26:42 19 14:26:44 20 (Recess taken from 2:26 to 2:43 p.m.) 14:43:13 21 Back on the record. 14:43:20 22 May 31st, 2017. 14:43:25 23 four of the video deposition of David Garland. 14:43:29 24 BY MR. DUNNAM: 14:43:30 25 A. Q. I do believe it's my job to implement the But not for you to understand the details of what these failures actually were? A. I -- My goal is to find out what actually we must do to prioritize, recognize and implement Title IX and Q. But not actually what happened that constitutes the failures noted? A. No, because they -- those would be reflected in the recommendations, "Here's what we have to fix". Can we take a quick break? THE VIDEOGRAPHER: I Going off the record. The time is 2:26 p.m. Q. Today is Wednesday, The time is 2:43 p.m. This is disc So, President Garland, how many briefings are you Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 145 of 220 144 14:43:35 1 aware of that Pepper Hamilton gave? 14:43:41 2 A. I am aware of ... I'm aware of three. 14:43:50 3 Q. And give me approximately -- We know the main -- 14:43:52 4 we know the one you talked about that you went to that 14:43:54 5 you-all talked about football, right? 14:43:56 6 A. Yeah. 14:43:58 7 Q. And then we know about the one with the full 14:44:03 8 14:44:06 9 14:44:09 10 14:44:09 11 14:44:13 12 14:44:14 13 A. I don't know that. 14:44:15 14 Q. You don't know that? 14:44:16 15 14:44:18 16 14:44:24 17 14:44:26 18 Q. When was that? 14:44:27 19 A. I can't recall when that was. 14:44:30 20 Q. Well, was it before or after your briefing? 14:44:32 21 A. It was after mine. 14:44:34 22 Q. And who were the former regents? 14:44:35 23 A. I can't recall exactly who they were. 14:44:39 24 14:44:40 25 I was in one briefing. board that was 10 hours or something like that, right? A. I don't know how long it was, but they had a briefing. Q. Okay. And you know Mr. Murff said it was 10 hours? And then what was the other one, the third one? A. There were some other regents that they wanted former regents to be briefed on. knew that they were being briefed. Q. Can you name any of them? I just Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 146 of 220 145 14:44:42 1 A. I can't. I can't remember. 14:44:46 2 Q. Who was setting up these briefings? 14:44:48 3 A. I do not know. 14:44:49 4 Q. Who was interacting with Pepper Hamilton? 14:44:53 5 A. I assume the primary person would have been 14:45:01 6 General Counsel, but I did not interact with them 14:45:04 7 directly. 14:45:04 8 Q. Well, did you interact with them through someone? 14:45:07 9 A. I did not interact with them through someone. 14:45:11 10 would be -- they were being dealt with through General 14:45:15 11 Counsel. 14:45:15 12 Q. Do you know that to be true, or are you assuming? 14:45:17 13 A. I just assumed that. 14:45:19 14 Q. So the correct statement is you didn't deal with 14:45:21 15 them at all, directly or indirectly, and you don't know 14:45:24 16 who did? 14:45:24 17 A. I did not deal with them directly. 14:45:26 18 Q. Well, what about indirectly? 14:45:28 19 A. I did not -- Well, I got their reports -- 14:45:31 20 Q. Right. 14:45:32 21 A. -- and the recommendations. 14:45:33 22 Q. Right. 14:45:35 23 14:45:36 24 A. It would have been General Counsel. 14:45:38 25 Q. Well, "would have been", I don't know what that And you don't know who with the university had interaction -- It Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 147 of 220 146 14:45:41 1 means. I don't want you to guess. 14:45:42 2 A. I ... I ... 14:45:44 3 Q. I mean "I don't know" is a fine answer. 14:45:47 4 14:45:47 5 A. I don't know. 14:45:48 6 Q. -- whatever is true. 14:45:49 7 A. Yeah. Yeah. 14:45:50 8 Q. Okay. There's been reports and, I think, 14:45:57 9 14:46:01 10 regents that -- either in Waco or they flew up to Pepper 14:46:06 11 Hamilton and they had some kind of a pre-briefing or 14:46:11 12 status update or something like that? 14:46:12 13 A. In February of when? 14:46:13 14 Q. Of last year, 2016. 14:46:16 15 A. I don't know about that. 14:46:18 16 Q. Now, when did you have the meeting with Gina 14:46:28 17 Smith at Pepper Hamilton where you-all had a discussion 14:46:32 18 about the assurances that she gave you and why they had 14:46:39 19 been brought in? 14:46:39 20 A. Pardon? 14:46:43 21 Q. You had a discussion with Gina Smith of Pepper 14:46:46 22 14:46:46 23 14:46:50 24 14:46:54 25 I mean -- discussions about a meeting in February, a group of I don't know the question, what -- Hamilton? A. That was at my first regent meeting the day before she gave some more briefings. Q. And the "some more briefings" were the ones to Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 148 of 220 147 14:46:57 1 you in the Executive Committee? 14:46:59 2 14:47:01 3 talking with us about how to implement -- how we should 14:47:05 4 be implementing the recommendations. 14:47:06 5 Q. 14:47:09 6 meeting? 14:47:09 7 A. I don't know what number that would be. 14:47:11 8 Q. Okay. 14:47:14 9 14:47:16 10 14:47:19 11 14:47:20 12 14:47:22 13 14:47:22 14 A. I can't remember. 14:47:25 15 Q. Do you have any idea? 14:47:26 16 A. I would only be guessing. 14:47:29 17 Q. So once a month? 14:47:32 18 A. Not once a month. 14:47:36 19 Q. Well, how many meetings do you recall? 14:47:39 20 A. Maybe three or four. 14:47:46 21 Q. So we have a regents meeting the next day, and 14:47:50 22 14:47:52 23 A. Correct. 14:47:53 24 Q. And she tells you that "I was talking with Gina 14:48:00 25 A. Not the Findings of Fact, but she was just Okay. So that's what I mean. Is that a fourth Well, I just asked you how many times that Pepper Hamilton had meetings briefing. A. Well, you asked me briefings, but this was just meeting about -Q. Okay. Well, how many times have you met with Pepper Hamilton? Maybe -- I don't know. It was occasional. you meet with Gina Smith of Pepper Hamilton, right? yesterday, and she guaranteed me that because they're so Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 149 of 220 148 14:48:04 1 well known ..." I guess to the Office of Civil Rights 14:48:08 2 "... we are going to be protected just because we hired 14:48:11 3 them." 14:48:12 4 A. What she told me -- 14:48:14 5 Q. I'm asking did she tell you that? 14:48:16 6 14:48:19 7 with Dr. Garland on any potential privilege issues 14:48:23 8 related to this area of questioning. 14:48:28 9 14:48:32 10 14:48:35 11 14:48:37 12 14:48:37 13 MR. DUNNAM: 14:48:39 14 MS. BROWN: 14:48:42 15 conversation might have been and whether other topics 14:48:44 16 were addressed. 14:48:45 17 14:48:47 18 14:48:49 19 14:48:50 20 14:48:50 21 Q. And did she tell you that? 14:48:52 22 A. I don't know if she told me in exactly those 14:48:55 23 14:48:56 24 14:48:59 25 Did she tell you that? MS. BROWN: MR. DUNNAM: I'm going to need to consult That's fine, but this is out of Q & A with the Waco Tribune-Herald. MS. BROWN: Well, you can ask him about whether he made that statement. MR. DUNNAM: Okay. I just -- I'm not sure how expansive the All I've asked him is did he say this, did she tell him that. THE WITNESS: I did say that. BY MR. DUNNAM: words. Q. But she told you -- that was the gist of what she told you? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 150 of 220 149 14:48:59 1 A. That was the gist, and it had to do primarily -- 14:49:04 2 14:49:08 3 Garland, I would instruct you not to reveal 14:49:11 4 attorney-client privileged information you may have 14:49:14 5 received from an attorney from Pepper Hamilton, and it's 14:49:17 6 fine for you to discuss the statement that you made to 14:49:20 7 the newspaper. 14:49:23 8 say. 14:49:23 9 BY MR. DUNNAM: 14:49:27 10 14:49:31 11 14:49:34 12 A. I did make that statement. 14:49:36 13 Q. I just want -- I want to know if she made it to 14:49:39 14 you. 14:49:42 15 accurate. 14:49:43 16 14:49:48 17 14:49:49 18 14:50:03 19 14:50:05 20 14:50:09 21 -- well, Gina and Leslie came back, audited it, we had 14:50:12 22 an internal audit and -- to verify that we did fulfill 14:50:19 23 what was -- what the intentions were in the 14:50:22 24 recommendations. 14:50:23 25 MS. BROWN: Q. Okay. I have to interject. Dr. I don't know what else you were about to And you said this is maybe not verbatim, but it's accurate what she told you; is that correct? A. I want to know if the statement you made was The statement that I made is, I think, what we discussed in general. Q. Okay. How do you know the 105 recommendations have been structurally implemented? A. Q. Because we've had it audited by Pepper Hamilton So all you know is that Pepper Hamilton told you Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 151 of 220 150 14:50:26 1 that you-all have -- you-all have implemented them? 14:50:29 2 14:50:34 3 14:50:37 4 Q. Who did that? 14:50:38 5 A. We had a -- Who did what? 14:50:44 6 Q. Who did your audit, your own audit? 14:50:47 7 A. Well, we had different teams working on different 14:50:50 8 sections of the recommendation. 14:50:55 9 verified what we had done, and then we had our internal 14:50:58 10 auditor with other help do it, and then they went 14:51:03 11 through it with Gina and Leslie to ultimately verify 14:51:08 12 that we, indeed, had completed these. 14:51:11 13 14:51:11 14 14:51:16 15 or not they've actually been implemented, other than 14:51:20 16 what somebody's told you? 14:51:21 17 14:51:24 18 recommendations and the statements of who was 14:51:28 19 responsible and the evidence that it has been completed; 14:51:33 20 so I have it from documents. 14:51:34 21 Q. From documents? 14:51:36 22 A. From a document that documents "here we are in 14:51:39 23 14:51:41 24 14:51:44 25 A. No. We did our own audit of these recommendations and then had them confirmed. Excuse me. So they basically (Exhibit 7 marked.) Q. A. And so do you have personal knowledge of whether I've gone through all of the rec -- all of the the status of all of these 105 recommendations". Q. So if we look at -- Let me hand you what's been marked as Exhibit 7. Are those the recommendations that Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 152 of 220 151 14:51:47 1 you indicate have been enacted? 14:51:50 2 A. Yes. 14:51:50 3 Q. And what documents exist that prove to you that 14:51:55 4 14:51:58 5 A. I'm not sure what -- 14:52:00 6 Q. Well, you just said that from documents you know 14:52:03 7 14:52:04 8 14:52:06 9 Excel spreadsheet, who was -- who was responsible, all 14:52:11 10 of the persons responsible, and then what actions have 14:52:12 11 been taken, and then the verification that these were 14:52:15 12 done. 14:52:16 13 Q. 14:52:19 14 at -- let's just start close to the top. 14:52:24 15 one point -- 1.3. 14:52:30 16 offered -- because these have been enacted. 14:52:33 17 "offered institutional and personal apologies and 14:52:35 18 appropriate remedies". 14:52:37 19 14:52:40 20 have invest -- who have reported and have tried to make 14:52:45 21 the appropriate apologies and remedies, but it comes 14:52:49 22 from those we have records of. 14:52:51 23 Q. So there are records of -- you -- 14:52:54 24 A. Persons who filed, who filed -- that would file 14:53:03 25 they have been enacted? that they've been enacted. A. A. Yeah, we went through all of these, yeah, the Okay. So let's just go through them. Let's look Let's look at This indicates that Baylor has They've What have they done? They have sought out all of the persons who we the sexual assault claim. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 153 of 220 152 14:53:04 1 Q. So -- And the number that the regents gave Dallas 14:53:10 2 Morning News, the numbers fluctuated, but the last 14:53:12 3 number reported was 125. 14:53:15 4 A. I am aware of that number, yes. 14:53:17 5 Q. And do you think that's an accurate number? 14:53:19 6 A. I can't judge whether that's an -- I don't know 14:53:21 7 14:53:23 8 14:53:28 9 14:53:32 10 during the period noted have all been personally 14:53:37 11 contacted and provided with institutional and personal 14:53:41 12 apologies? 14:53:42 13 14:53:45 14 those -- what that number is, but I assume that we have 14:53:52 15 reached out. 14:53:55 16 I think this is one of the things that we have worked 14:53:59 17 hard on and is also difficult. 14:54:01 18 Q. So how many -- Why is it difficult? 14:54:04 19 A. Because finding the persons and making contact 14:54:06 20 with them and finding out from the records who has been 14:54:12 21 -- who we have reports of filing sexual assaults. 14:54:15 22 Q. So how many have you -- 14:54:19 23 A. I don't know the number. 14:54:20 24 Q. So how do you know it's been done? 14:54:23 25 A. Well, because it was verified that we had done Are you aware of that? where they drew their numbers from. Q. Do you know whether or not the 125 young women who were victims of sexual assault and reported that A. I do not know if those 125 -- I don't know if We've made public apologies, as well, but Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 154 of 220 153 14:54:26 1 it. And I didn't personally check or investigate to see 14:54:29 2 if each and every single one had been contacted. 14:54:33 3 14:54:38 4 offered institutional and personal apologies to all of 14:54:42 5 these young women, and that's been accomplished", and 14:54:44 6 you just said "Okay"? 14:54:45 7 A. That's correct. 14:54:46 8 Q. All right. 14:54:48 9 14:54:49 10 A. I do not know. 14:54:49 11 Q. Do you have any idea? 14:54:50 12 A. I know in some cases, but I don't know in all 14:54:55 13 14:54:55 14 14:54:57 15 14:55:02 16 A. Yes, it does. 14:55:02 17 Q. So why have you made no effort to personally 14:55:05 18 14:55:07 19 14:55:11 20 14:55:12 21 14:55:13 22 been out touting this over and over, over the last month 14:55:16 23 or so; is that correct? 14:55:17 24 A. That's correct. 14:55:18 25 Q. But sitting here today, are you willing to swear Q. So someone -- someone has told you, "Hey, we What type of appropriate remedies have they been offered? cases. Q. Does whether or not what you were telling the public being accurate matter to you? verify any of this? A. I can't personally verify all of those that -- we have to delegate the responsibility. Q. You are the spokesman for the university that's Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 155 of 220 154 14:55:23 1 that they've all been -- all of this has been 14:55:26 2 accomplished? 14:55:27 3 14:55:32 4 good faith effort, and it's been audited that we've 14:55:35 5 tried to accomplish all of these 105 recommendations. 14:55:37 6 Q. 14:55:40 7 public. 14:55:42 8 been accomplished; and so you haven't told them "we 14:55:45 9 tried to do this". 14:55:48 10 14:55:49 11 14:55:52 12 faith effort in doing all of these 105 recommendations, 14:55:57 13 and we didn't say that we accomplished all of them. 14:56:02 14 was structurally. 14:56:05 15 Q. What does "structurally" mean? 14:56:07 16 A. "Structurally" means that we made a -- made 14:56:09 17 structural efforts to do all of these things. 14:56:12 18 left to be done and are still in place in process. 14:56:14 19 14:56:17 20 enacted a policy that said "we're going to do this"? 14:56:20 21 that what that means? 14:56:21 22 14:56:23 23 policies, but we also have done everything we could to 14:56:28 24 reach out to victims. 14:56:29 25 A. I'm -- I am willing to say that we have done a Well, trying to. That's not what you told the You've told the public that these things have You said "we've done it". So which is accurate? A. Q. A. Q. What is accurate is that we have made a good It We tried to do it structurally. Some are You mean "structurally" just means you-all No. We did more than that. We did enact So what actions on Baylor's part constitutes Is Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 156 of 220 155 14:56:33 1 appropriate remedies? 14:56:34 2 A. That depends on the circumstances of details. 14:56:37 3 Q. All right. 14:56:39 4 14:56:41 5 14:56:46 6 victim who is a survivor had a significant drop in GPA 14:56:55 7 where the next semester you had a series of F's is that 14:56:58 8 we -- you cannot remove those F's from the transcript, 14:57:02 9 but you can remove them from the grade point average, 14:57:05 10 14:57:07 11 14:57:12 12 14:57:13 13 A. It's a failure that can be rectified. 14:57:16 14 Q. And only Baylor has the power to do that; is that 14:57:19 15 14:57:20 16 14:57:27 17 14:57:31 18 14:57:37 19 14:57:40 20 14:57:45 21 victims, the President meet with survivors and listen to 14:57:49 22 them, hear them out and personally offer apologies. 14:57:53 23 Q. And how many have you done of those? 14:57:55 24 A. I've done three. 14:57:59 25 Q. Out of 125? Well, give me one remedy that you believe is appropriate. A. One remedy is that when a student -- when a and I know that for -- that we've done that. Q. And if that has not been for a young woman, is that a failure on Baylor's part? right? A. I -- Well, I take it that if that's in their transcript, that that would be Baylor's responsibility. Q. Are there any other appropriate remedies that you're aware of that have been considered or offered? A. One of the appropriate remedies is to meet with Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 157 of 220 156 14:58:01 1 A. I don't know what the 125 -- I don't know that 14:58:05 2 14:58:05 3 14:58:08 4 14:58:09 5 14:58:13 6 14:58:16 7 Q. To who? 14:58:19 8 A. I beg your pardon? 14:58:21 9 Q. Who did you -- 14:58:22 10 A. These persons initiated that. 14:58:24 11 Q. No. 14:58:27 12 14:58:27 13 14:58:29 14 counsel, that I would be willing to meet with any -- any 14:58:33 15 survivor. 14:58:34 16 14:58:39 17 talk to you" is different than going out and 14:58:43 18 aggressively trying to find women to -- 14:58:45 19 A. I don't believe -- 14:58:45 20 Q. -- apologize to. 14:58:45 21 A. I do not believe you can treat survivors 14:58:48 22 14:58:48 23 14:58:51 24 14:58:58 25 number is -Q. Have you made any effort to assure that you're meeting with as many as possible? A. I have made it clear that I would meet with any survivor who wanted to meet with the President. clear. A. Q. I'm talking about you said you've made it You made it clear to who? I made it clear to the administration, legal Well, saying "Hey, you can come see me and I'll aggressively. Q. I didn't say you should treat them aggressively. I said you should make an aggressive effort to go out. A. I don't -- We have not done that with this. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 158 of 220 157 14:59:00 1 Q. You just basically, if somebody calls -- 14:59:02 2 A. That's correct. 14:59:02 3 Q. -- and wants to talk to you, you say "Hey, I'll 14:59:04 4 14:59:05 5 A. That's correct. 14:59:06 6 Q. And you've done that with three young women? 14:59:08 7 A. That's correct. 14:59:08 8 Q. How many women have been offered appropriate 14:59:11 9 14:59:11 10 A. I do not know. 14:59:12 11 Q. We go down, and it talks about to "develop 14:59:26 12 protocols to address the restorative and ongoing needs 14:59:28 13 of victims of reported sexual assault between 2011 and 14:59:31 14 2015". 14:59:32 15 14:59:34 16 14:59:36 17 MS. BROWN: 14:59:38 18 MR. DUNNAM: 14:59:40 19 I don't have a number on it. 14:59:42 20 on that one. 14:59:44 21 14:59:55 22 14:59:55 23 MR. DUNNAM: 14:59:56 24 It's on page 2. 15:00:01 25 be willing to talk to them"? remedies? What protocols have been established to accomplish this? MS. MEHTA: What number are you on? Which one is that, Ms. Mehta? It doesn't have a number Here, let me look at that. Let's see. II.1. I think it's on the -- there. It's Number Roman Numeral Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 159 of 220 158 15:00:10 1 BY MR. DUNNAM: 15:00:10 2 15:00:15 3 Numeral II.1, what protocols have been established to 15:00:19 4 accomplish this? 15:00:19 5 A. 15:00:20 6 that. 15:00:20 7 Q. Do you know the general protocols? 15:00:21 8 A. I do not know the general. 15:00:23 9 Q. Do you know anything about them -- 15:00:24 10 A. Hmm-mm. 15:00:24 11 Q. -- other than it's on this piece of paper? 15:00:26 12 A. It's on this piece of paper, and I know some 15:00:29 13 15:00:31 14 15:00:33 15 15:00:34 16 A. No. 15:00:34 17 Q. -- or what the protocols are? 15:00:38 18 15:00:56 19 Numeral II.2: 15:00:58 20 cases identified in this review to determine if there 15:01:01 21 are appropriate remedies consistent with the goals of 15:01:04 22 Title IX." 15:01:05 23 15:01:06 24 A. I don't know precisely what has been done. 15:01:09 25 Q. What's generally been done? Q. So my question is, and we'll look at Roman I do not know the precise protocols regarding other persons are responsible for carrying it out. Q. But you don't know what it's going to take to carry it out -- Okay. If we look at -- it says contact -- Roman "Contact known victims in the specific What have you-all done on that? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 160 of 220 159 15:01:11 1 A. I know that victims have been -- in cases have 15:01:15 2 been contacted, but I don't know how many, and I don't 15:01:19 3 know precisely what the remedies were. 15:01:21 4 Q. Can you give me an example of one? 15:01:24 5 A. Of ... 15:01:24 6 Q. Of one of them. 15:01:27 7 A. I -- The one was basically to address the issues 15:01:35 8 that she -- that she wanted to be heard by the 15:01:40 9 President, the Vice President for Student Affairs -- 15:01:45 10 Q. Was that you -- 15:01:46 11 A. -- and General Counsel. 15:01:46 12 Q. -- as President? 15:01:48 13 A. Well, I happened to be the current President. 15:01:52 14 Q. Well, but was that individual victim -- did she 15:01:58 15 15:02:01 16 A. Excuse me. 15:02:03 17 Q. You said someone was contacted and met the 15:02:06 18 15:02:08 19 15:02:10 20 15:02:10 21 15:02:14 22 15:02:14 23 A. Yeah. 15:02:15 24 Q. So do you know of any other victim that was 15:02:18 25 What was done? meet with you, or was that when Mr. Starr was President? President. A. What? Was that you or Starr? Yeah, it was -- it was me. She wanted to meet with the President. Q. Okay. Well, I wasn't sure whether this was previous. contacted? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 161 of 220 160 15:02:19 1 A. I do not. 15:02:19 2 Q. And do you know what the appropriate remedies 15:02:25 3 15:02:26 4 A. I do not know specific cases. 15:02:30 5 Q. The next one, II.3: 15:02:46 6 cases from 2011 to '15 to consider pattern, trends, 15:02:50 7 climate", has that been done? 15:02:52 8 A. Yes, it has. 15:02:53 9 Q. And how many past cases have you determined 15:02:56 10 15:02:56 11 A. I do not know the number. 15:02:57 12 Q. Who conducted the review? 15:03:00 13 A. I do not remember exactly who was in charge of 15:03:02 14 15:03:04 15 Q. What team was it? 15:03:06 16 A. It was the Restorative Remedies Team, but I don't 15:03:10 17 know the names of the specific -- I can't remember the 15:03:14 18 names of the specific persons involved in addressing 15:03:18 19 these issues. 15:03:18 20 15:03:19 21 15:03:22 22 A. I do not know specifically. 15:03:24 23 Q. Do you know generally? 15:03:25 24 A. No. 15:03:26 25 Q. You just don't know at all? were to be? "Conduct review of past exist? this team -- particular team. Q. Do you under -- Do you know what the pattern, trends and climate were that were determined? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 162 of 220 161 15:03:28 1 A. No. 15:03:28 2 Q. So why do you say "specifically"? 15:03:28 3 A. Well, I don't know. 15:03:31 4 Q. Why don't you say "I don't know"? 15:03:32 5 A. I just don't know. 15:03:33 6 Q. Okay. 15:03:36 7 15:03:36 8 A. Right. 15:03:37 9 Q. -- but you keep saying "specifically", and that 15:03:38 10 requires me to say "Well, do you know generally?" 15:03:41 11 trying to make sure there's not something; so -- 15:03:43 12 A. No. 15:03:44 13 Q. Okay. 15:03:55 14 Let's go to II.5: 15:04:01 15 but later withdrew from Baylor, to understand if the 15:04:01 16 withdrawal was connected to Title IX concerns." 15:04:03 17 15:04:07 18 15:04:09 19 A. I do not know that, no. 15:04:10 20 Q. Are you aware that our Jane Doe -- Jane Doe 15:04:15 21 15:04:17 22 A. I did not know. 15:04:17 23 Q. -- who was raped and dropped out during the same 15:04:19 24 15:04:21 25 I mean that's -- I'm not trying to badger you -- All right. I'm The next one -- Well, hold on. "Identify victims who made reports, Were -- Do you know of any -- any identified victims that that would apply to? Number 1 is actually one of those young women -- time period? A. Are you aware of that? I'm not aware of Jane Doe 1 at all. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 163 of 220 162 15:04:23 1 Q. Okay. But you're not aware of any -- whether or 15:04:25 2 15:04:28 3 A. 15:04:31 4 know -- 15:04:31 5 Q. Do you know what the efforts are? 15:04:32 6 A. Well, that they attempted to identify victims 15:04:35 7 from the reports and to investigate and find out -- find 15:04:39 8 the victim or survivor. 15:04:41 9 Q. Who did it? 15:04:42 10 A. I do not remember the name exactly. 15:04:44 11 Q. So how do you know it was accomplished? 15:04:46 12 A. Simply because it was notified that it was done 15:04:49 13 15:04:51 14 15:04:54 15 going through all of these 105 recommendations, that 15:05:00 16 what you know is that someone has told you that all of 15:05:02 17 this has been done? 15:05:02 18 A. That's correct. 15:05:03 19 Q. And you have no independent personal knowledge of 15:05:06 20 what, in fact, was actually done and actually whether it 15:05:09 21 was done. 15:05:12 22 you? 15:05:12 23 15:05:15 24 15:05:19 25 not this has actually been done or not? I know that efforts have been made, but I don't and audited. Q. A. So is it -- so is it -- is it true, without me Everything you know is what somebody's told Except in the ones where I am particularly responsible, listed as the responsible party. Q. And what is that? What are those? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 164 of 220 163 15:05:20 1 A. 15:05:28 2 now I've got to go through each one of these, but 15:05:31 3 they're -- I'm -- we divided up all of the assignments 15:05:35 4 with various persons responsible, and where the 15:05:38 5 President is involved that's where I'm responsible. 15:05:41 6 15:05:43 7 don't want to talk about things that you really just 15:05:45 8 don't even know about. 15:05:47 9 A. Right. 15:05:47 10 Q. But I'd like to know which ones that you would 15:05:49 11 15:05:50 12 15:05:57 13 Number V, where we have had our Title IX policy 15:06:04 14 completely reviewed, procedures completely reviewed and 15:06:07 15 revised, practices consistently completely revised. 15:06:13 16 15:06:18 17 so that no sexual -- no person -- no student who reports 15:06:22 18 a sexual assault will ever be punished for the 15:06:25 19 circumstances in which that might -- that assault may 15:06:29 20 have occurred. 15:06:30 21 15:06:34 22 15:06:38 23 don't want to cut you off. 15:06:41 24 that's fine, but if we went through Roman Numeral V, 15:06:45 25 "Title IX Policy", those are things that you were Q. Well, they're in governance; and so they're -- I just need to know that because, you know, I know something about. A. Well, dealing with the policies, Title IX Policy, We specifically in V.2 made an amnesty provision We have revised the Title IX appeal process. Q. So I'm not -- just so you don't have to -- I If you need to elaborate, Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 165 of 220 164 15:06:47 1 personally involved in knowing that it was accomplished? 15:06:50 2 15:06:56 3 hours with every team leader reporting on what -- on the 15:06:58 4 progress of what they've been doing; and so I have heard 15:07:01 5 orally what we've been doing. 15:07:02 6 15:07:05 7 V, is there any other section of these recommendations 15:07:07 8 that you have -- you personally know yes, these things 15:07:10 9 were done, or you had sufficient oversight that you're 15:07:13 10 15:07:15 11 15:07:28 12 "Athletics Department"; and so that -- and when we come 15:07:35 13 back to relationship with the board, governance -- 15:07:40 14 Q. Okay. 15:07:42 15 A. -- yeah. 15:07:42 16 Q. So if we carve out X, V and III -- 15:07:49 17 A. I was not directly involved. 15:07:50 18 Q. And you really don't know what's been done to 15:07:54 19 15:07:57 20 15:08:00 21 the audit by Pepper Hamilton and by our internal 15:08:02 22 auditor. 15:08:03 23 Q. 15:08:10 24 than III, V and X, your answers would be similar to what 15:08:13 25 we just talked about in Number II? A. Q. Yes. And we met every week for two to three All right. So under -- other than Section Number not just taking someone's word for it? A. I -- In Section X I was involved also with assure that that's actually been accomplished? A. I do know what's been done to assure it is from But if I asked you about the things that -- other Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 166 of 220 165 15:08:15 1 A. Correct. 15:08:16 2 Q. That it would be similar; so there's no need for 15:08:19 3 15:08:19 4 A. That's correct. 15:08:20 5 Q. Okay. 15:08:35 6 were there for about two-and-a-half hours, subject 15:08:38 7 matter was football, and you said you had to leave early 15:08:40 8 to go to some Big 12 meeting; is that right? 15:08:45 9 A. That's correct. 15:08:46 10 Q. And what was the subject matter of the Big 12 15:08:49 11 meeting? 15:08:49 12 A. 15:09:02 13 15:09:04 14 15:09:08 15 mean I remember that, and it was in the newspaper and 15:09:10 16 all of that, but -- so you're in a meeting, they're 15:09:14 17 discussing -- you hadn't -- at this point -- Let me step 15:09:19 18 back. 15:09:20 19 At this point, you had participated in no 15:09:25 20 detailed briefing from Pepper Hamilton, correct? 15:09:28 21 A. Just a two-and-a-half-hour briefing. 15:09:32 22 Q. Well, I mean up until that meeting started, this 15:09:35 23 is your first meeting to hear the details of what 15:09:39 24 underlines the Findings of Fact; is that correct? 15:09:42 25 me to repeat all of that? So this meeting that you went to where you I can't recall. No, I take it back. It was basically expansion. Q. A. Okay. Any other subject matter other than -- I That's correct. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 167 of 220 166 15:09:43 1 Q. And up to that point, no one had told you about 15:09:48 2 it, you hadn't asked anybody about it, and this is your 15:09:51 3 first opportunity to hear the details of why did these 15:09:58 4 failures all occur, and in detail what were the 15:10:01 5 failures, correct? 15:10:02 6 A. That's correct. 15:10:03 7 Q. And so you sit down, they start talking about 15:10:06 8 football, and as I understand it, it's pretty bad acts 15:10:12 9 on the football administration and how things were 15:10:15 10 15:10:18 11 A. The cases, individual cases were -- 15:10:21 12 Q. Football? 15:10:22 13 A. -- were specific cases that involved football 15:10:26 14 players. 15:10:26 15 Q. 15:10:30 16 first time with you in detail were the ones where -- 15:10:33 17 were the types of activities from which these 15:10:36 18 recommendations were derived; is that right? 15:10:39 19 A. I -- I assume that's correct. 15:10:40 20 Q. All right. 15:10:44 21 15:10:46 22 A. That is correct. 15:10:46 23 Q. In order to go talk with people about Big 12 15:10:50 24 15:10:51 25 handled, correct? That was the subject matter? And the activities that were discussed for the And you left the meeting at some point before it ended, correct? expansion? A. That's correct. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 168 of 220 167 15:10:52 1 Q. 15:10:55 2 had happened, the failures in the university to protect 15:10:57 3 sexual assault victims? 15:11:00 4 15:11:03 5 Executive Council, we're all involved in this; and so we 15:11:08 6 -- so I had -- what I had from this was the 15:11:11 7 recommendations, which were the primary responsibility 15:11:15 8 that I had for the university. 15:11:16 9 15:11:20 10 participation in the Big 12 expansion discussion was 15:11:24 11 more important than you finishing the Pepper Hamilton 15:11:28 12 briefing on what had happened to young men -- women at 15:11:34 13 Baylor? 15:11:37 14 A. I don't know. 15:11:37 15 Q. -- to you to go to the Big 12 meeting? 15:11:41 16 A. I don't know that anyone decided what was more 15:11:43 17 15:11:43 18 Q. Well, who decided -- 15:11:44 19 A. -- that I be able to -- This was my second day on 15:11:48 20 the job, and I was told that I was to go to the Big 12 15:11:48 21 conference; so I don't know. 15:11:51 22 Q. Who told you that? 15:11:52 23 A. My secretary told me that that was scheduled; so 15:11:54 24 15:11:55 25 A. Q. Was that more important than understanding what Was that more important to you? It was a very important part of my job. The Whose decision was it that your attendance and Who decided it was more important -- important -- I went to the Big 12. It is -- You cannot send to the Big 12 a -- the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 169 of 220 168 15:12:00 1 Presidents need to be present. 15:12:02 2 Q. And where was this meeting? 15:12:03 3 A. It was in Dallas. 15:12:04 4 Q. And when did it start? 15:12:07 5 A. I -- It started in -- I can't remember exactly. 15:12:14 6 15:12:16 7 15:12:24 8 should be at this meeting instead of remain at this 15:12:27 9 meeting? 15:12:28 10 15:12:33 11 don't know. 15:12:37 12 people to inform me what was going on with the Findings 15:12:42 13 of Fact and that I could ask questions if I needed to, 15:12:47 14 but primarily the responsibility was what do we do with 15:12:50 15 the recommendations. 15:12:51 16 Q. Do you know who told your secretary? 15:13:03 17 A. No, I do not. 15:13:04 18 Q. Okay. 15:13:24 19 15:13:25 20 15:13:28 21 15:13:29 22 15:13:32 23 15:13:34 24 A. Yes. 15:13:34 25 Q. So why -- what was -- What did you think when you Probably in the afternoon, 4:00 or 5:00. Q. A. Did you -- So who told your secretary that you Well, the -- I was just given my schedule. I But the -- I did have opportunity for other Does the President handle administrative personnel issues? A. It depends on what administrative personnel you're talking about. Q. Letting go people that are part of the senior administration and Executive Council. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 170 of 220 169 15:13:43 1 heard Patty Crawford was resigning? 15:13:46 2 A. I can't remember what I thought at the time. 15:13:50 3 Q. You have no recollection of what went through 15:13:53 4 15:13:54 5 A. No. 15:13:54 6 Q. -- when you heard that your Title IX Coordinator 15:13:56 7 15:13:58 8 A. A bit surprised, I'm sure, but I don't. 15:14:01 9 Q. Did you have any indication? 15:14:03 10 15:14:04 11 A. No, it wasn't a total surprise there. 15:14:06 12 Q. Why not? 15:14:07 13 A. Because we were having some difficulties with her 15:14:10 14 15:14:12 15 Q. What were the difficulties? 15:14:17 16 A. She was an excellent empathic counselor, but 15:14:20 17 there were management issues in handling the Title IX 15:14:23 18 office. 15:14:23 19 Q. Explain to me what they were. 15:14:31 20 A. There was turnover, and there were scheduling 15:14:31 21 15:14:31 22 Q. Why was there turnover? 15:14:33 23 A. I do not know specifically. 15:14:34 24 Q. Was the turnover her fault, or was it other 15:14:37 25 issues? your mind -- was resigning? Was it a total surprise, or did you -- management. difficulties. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 171 of 220 170 15:14:37 1 A. I don't know specifically the issues. 15:14:41 2 Q. Was the university dissatisfied with her at the 15:14:45 3 15:14:46 4 A. 15:14:52 5 manager. 15:14:53 6 Q. 15:14:56 7 15:14:57 8 15:15:03 9 15:15:06 10 15:15:08 11 15:15:11 12 15:15:12 13 15:15:16 14 15:15:18 15 Q. What was the dissatisfaction? 15:15:20 16 A. The dissatisfaction was the management of the 15:15:23 17 15:15:24 18 Q. That there was some turnover? 15:15:25 19 A. There was turnover. 15:15:27 20 Q. What else? 15:15:28 21 A. I'm not -- I can't recall exactly all of the 15:15:31 22 15:15:31 23 15:15:36 24 15:15:39 25 time she left? There was attempts to help her become a better Was the university dissatisfied with her when she left the university? A. The university was doing everything that they could to make her successful in her job. Q. Let me try this again. Was the university dissatisfied with her at the time she left? A. Seeking to improve performance suggests some element of dissatisfaction. Title IX office. other issues. Q. Who was involved with you in trying to address these issues with Patty Crawford? A. Who was involved with me? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 172 of 220 171 15:15:40 1 Q. Yes. 15:15:41 2 A. Her direct supervisor and -- 15:15:43 3 Q. Who was that? 15:15:44 4 A. It would have been at that time -- it was later 15:15:48 5 moved from -- to -- from Juan Alejandro to Reagan 15:15:54 6 Ramsower. 15:15:54 7 Q. At that time who was it? 15:15:56 8 A. At that time it was Reagan Ramsower. 15:15:58 9 Q. And how long had he been over her? 15:16:00 10 A. I can't remember exactly. 15:16:05 11 15:16:05 12 15:16:09 13 15:16:09 14 A. No, I did not. 15:16:10 15 Q. Did you ever instruct anyone to counsel with her 15:16:15 16 15:16:17 17 A. I did not. 15:16:18 18 Q. Do you know of anyone that ever counseled with 15:16:21 19 15:16:23 20 A. I did. 15:16:23 21 Q. Who? 15:16:24 22 A. The Vice President for Human Resources, and as 15:16:29 23 15:16:29 24 Q. Who is that? 15:16:30 25 A. That is Cheryl Gochis and ... and her supervisor. It was -- I don't know exactly how long that was. Q. Had you ever counseled with Patty Crawford prior to her leaving? about deficiencies in her office? her about deficiencies in her office? well as -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 173 of 220 172 15:16:36 1 Q. Reagan Ramsower? 15:16:40 2 A. Yes. 15:16:40 3 Q. Okay. 15:16:47 4 -- that was given to Ms. Crawford about deficiencies 15:16:51 5 within her office or concerns. 15:16:52 6 15:16:57 7 15:16:57 8 Q. Well, what were you told? 15:16:59 9 A. What? 15:16:59 10 Q. What did Ramsower tell you or the HR lady tell 15:17:04 11 15:17:07 12 15:17:09 13 15:17:11 14 Q. Anything else? 15:17:11 15 A. That's it. 15:17:12 16 Q. Did you ever participate in these meetings? 15:17:16 17 A. No. 15:17:16 18 Q. Did you ever overhear these meetings? 15:17:19 19 A. No. 15:17:19 20 Q. There is a statement by Ms. Crawford that Mr. 15:17:24 21 Ramsower was not supportive, that he would not provide 15:17:28 22 her the recommendations or the support she needed. 15:17:33 23 that accurate? 15:17:34 24 A. That she said that? 15:17:36 25 Q. No. A. So tell us about the counseling that was I was not directly involved in the counseling to her. you about "Hey, this -- we talked to Patty today and --" A. I was just told that they talked to Patty today to try and help her improve. Is what she said accurate? Is Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 174 of 220 173 15:17:38 1 A. I disagree. 15:17:39 2 Q. And how do you know that? 15:17:40 3 A. Because we invested heavily in the Title IX 15:17:43 4 office, and we were willing to do -- we had prioritized 15:17:46 5 it and were willing to do whatever we could to make it a 15:17:50 6 successful office. 15:17:51 7 15:17:56 8 15:17:58 9 A. I have no idea. 15:17:59 10 Q. Would that be a concern to you if he did? 15:18:02 11 A. I would find it extremely surprising, since he 15:18:07 12 15:18:10 13 Q. Would it be of concern to you if he did that? 15:18:13 14 A. I don't know that he did that. 15:18:14 15 Q. I asked you would it be of a concern to you if he 15:18:17 16 15:18:18 17 15:18:21 18 15:18:21 19 15:18:26 20 15:18:30 21 15:18:33 22 15:18:33 23 15:18:36 24 anyone -- you don't know who the individuals were who 15:18:40 25 were involved in victim blaming? Q. Did Mr. Ramsower ever say that victims have mental issues? has a sibling who has mental issues. did do that? A. If I knew that for a fact, that he did that, that would be a concern. Q. And you are aware that Pepper Hamilton found victim blaming as an issue ongoing at Baylor University? A. I believe that victim blaming did occur in some cases. Q. And as we sit here today, you don't know of Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 175 of 220 174 15:18:42 1 A. I do not. 15:18:44 2 Q. Okay. 15:18:53 3 15:18:54 4 15:19:05 5 15:19:07 6 15:19:11 7 reasons for leaving both in writing and in the press, 15:19:18 8 correct? 15:19:18 9 A. That's correct. 15:19:19 10 Q. And what did you do to determine whether or not 15:19:25 11 15:19:27 12 A. I met with the supervisor, her supervisor. 15:19:31 13 Q. Ramsower? 15:19:32 14 A. I met with Dr. Ramsower. 15:19:36 15 15:19:38 16 Q. Who? 15:19:38 17 A. Cheryl Gochis, who is Vice President of HR, and 15:19:46 18 others who dealt -- I can't remember who else, but to 15:19:51 19 deal with what was the -- was there any foundation for 15:19:54 20 these concerns. 15:19:54 21 15:19:59 22 15:20:02 23 15:20:08 24 15:20:09 25 So Ms. Crawford leaves. She had been there for how long? A. I do not know the exact dates. About 2014 to 20 -- I don't know the exact dates. Q. And she actually expressed her concerns and her allegations were accurate? I met with the persons who had been directly involved in -- Q. Now, her concerns were primarily addressed at support she received from those very individuals, right? A. Her concerns were accusations that she had not received support. Q. From those individuals? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 176 of 220 175 15:20:10 1 A. Particularly from ... from her supervisor. 15:20:17 2 Q. Reagan Ramsower? 15:20:18 3 A. That's correct. 15:20:18 4 Q. Is there some reason you don't want to use his 15:20:21 5 name? 15:20:23 6 A. I prefer to refer to him as "Dr. Ramsower". 15:20:23 7 Q. Okay. 15:20:25 8 A. I've used his name. 15:20:27 9 Q. Okay. 15:20:28 10 "supervisor". 15:20:31 11 say "supervisor" I have to clarify "Is that Ramsower?" 15:20:33 12 Fair enough? 15:20:34 13 A. Dr. Ramsower, yes. 15:20:35 14 Q. Okay. 15:20:37 15 15:20:40 16 15:20:40 17 A. I have no idea. 15:20:41 18 Q. Really no clue? 15:20:42 19 A. No, sir. 15:20:42 20 Q. Was he there when you arrived? 15:20:44 21 A. Yes. 15:20:44 22 Q. And is it accurate that when he -- when you came 15:20:47 23 15:20:54 24 15:21:01 25 She had more than one supervisor; so when you -- Well -- Well, I mean you keep calling him She had more than one; so every time you Dr. Ramsower. So how long has Dr. Ramsower been with the university? on as President, he was -- added to his title was COO? A. If the -- That happened before I started; so I know him primarily as CFO. Titles don't -- that doesn't Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 177 of 220 176 15:21:07 1 really communicate to me very much. 15:21:08 2 Q. What's his title today? 15:21:10 3 A. I think it's CFO. 15:21:15 4 Q. You don't even know what his title is? 15:21:18 5 A. No. 15:21:19 6 Q. Is he -- What's his responsibility for day-to-day 15:21:24 7 15:21:25 8 15:21:33 9 15:21:40 10 Q. Is he still over public safety? 15:21:42 11 A. Public safety is primarily with -- No, I don't 15:21:49 12 15:21:49 13 Q. When was that removed from him? 15:21:51 14 A. I do not know. 15:21:52 15 Q. Is he still over Title IX? 15:21:55 16 A. No. 15:21:57 17 Q. He's not over that coordinator? 15:21:59 18 A. The coordinator meets with him, but the 15:22:02 19 coordinator has direct report to the President. 15:22:06 20 well, excuse me. 15:22:12 21 directly reporting to the Chief Compliance Officer, who 15:22:15 22 meets both with Reagan Ramsower and has direct report to 15:22:21 23 the President and is also a member of the Executive 15:22:23 24 Council. 15:22:23 25 Q. I'm not sure what titles are. No, I don't. running of the school? A. He is over admissions, he is over budget, and he also supervises or is concerned with Human Resources. believe that's correct. Okay. I mean, The coordinator of Title IX is now So in -- my understanding is that Baylor Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 178 of 220 177 15:22:29 1 has interacted with a number of outside entities in 15:22:35 2 regard to the issues of sexual assault at the 15:22:39 3 university. 15:22:40 4 A. I'm not -- what -- 15:22:42 5 Q. Big 12, correct? 15:22:44 6 A. Well, explain. 15:22:45 7 Q. Big 12. 15:22:47 8 15:22:50 9 15:22:56 10 15:22:57 11 A. And what do you mean, "interacting"? 15:22:59 12 Q. Big 12 withholding money from you, or has. 15:23:02 13 A. That's correct. 15:23:02 14 Q. Okay. 15:23:05 15 and trying to assure them that you-all are all straight 15:23:08 16 and narrow now, right? 15:23:10 17 15:23:16 18 conducting their own audit of our Pepper 15:23:18 19 Hamilton Report. 15:23:18 20 15:23:21 21 are having meetings, and there's investigations 15:23:23 22 involving the NCAA; is that correct? 15:23:24 23 A. The NCAA -- NCAA is investigating. 15:23:29 24 Q. Then there's the Southern Association of Colleges 15:23:33 25 Is that correct? I'm asking about outside entities that Baylor has been interacting with for issues arising out of the sexual assaults. A. Q. And so you-all are meeting with the Big 12 The Big 12 will be -- I believe will be All right. And then my understanding is you-all and Schools, correct? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 179 of 220 178 15:23:34 1 A. That's correct. 15:23:36 2 Q. And there's the Texas Rangers? 15:23:39 3 A. That is correct. 15:23:40 4 Q. Is there anybody I've missed? 15:23:42 5 A. I don't believe so. 15:23:43 6 Q. So have you -- Who is the person at Baylor that 15:23:48 7 is the liaison interfacing -- the person going to the 15:23:53 8 meetings involving NCAA? 15:23:55 9 15:24:00 10 Chief Academic Compliance Officer. 15:24:03 11 Athletic Director, and we have an outside attorney 15:24:07 12 working with us. 15:24:08 13 Q. Are you involved in any of those meetings? 15:24:10 14 A. I am not. 15:24:11 15 Q. Have you been to any of those meetings? 15:24:13 16 A. I have not. 15:24:13 17 Q. What about with the NCAA or the Big -- the Big 15:24:18 18 15:24:19 19 15:24:22 20 a very important part of what Baylor is. 15:24:25 21 extremely important part of the university. 15:24:27 22 relationship to the Big 12, as I understand, when we 15:24:32 23 complete the Pepper Hamilton evaluations, that they will 15:24:36 24 then have a -- choose persons to audit it. 15:24:41 25 A. 12? The persons involved with the NCAA would be our It would also be the I'm sorry. A. Q. The Big 12? I go to Big 12 meetings because it's It's an Our When you complete the Pepper Hamilton -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 180 of 220 179 15:24:42 1 A. 15:24:47 2 Hamilton Report, we'll hand it over to the Big 12. 15:24:50 3 I believe that they're going to pick persons to come and 15:24:52 4 audit that. 15:24:53 5 Q. So Pepper Hamilton is still doing something? 15:24:56 6 A. Pepper Hamilton is not. 15:24:59 7 what we did in our accomplishments in the 15:25:03 8 recommendations. 15:25:04 9 Q. So is that not compiled yet? 15:25:08 10 A. Pardon? 15:25:08 11 Q. Is that not compiled yet? 15:25:09 12 A. Yes, it's been compiled, and yet -- we have yet 15:25:11 13 to turn it over to -- I don't know what the 15:25:13 14 circumstances are with the Big 12. 15:25:14 15 15:25:20 16 or interfacing with the Big 12 in regard to these 15:25:23 17 issues? 15:25:23 18 A. 15:25:23 19 Big 12. 15:25:25 20 Q. All right. 15:25:25 21 A. I have not met -- About what? 15:25:27 22 Q. About these issues and the concerns that the Big 15:25:31 23 15:25:33 24 15:25:36 25 Q. When we hand over what we've done with the Pepper Then I mean I'm talking about So who are the people responsible as the liaisons The President is the one who interfaces with the So who have you met with? 12 has about holding money and all of that. A. Well, I've been -- I've met with the other Big 12 Presidents. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 181 of 220 180 15:25:36 1 Q. And so tell us about those meetings. 15:25:38 2 A. What do you need? 15:25:41 3 Q. I just want to know -- 15:25:42 4 A. I reported to the Presidents what we had done, 15:25:46 5 what -- gave them the Findings of Fact and the 15:25:50 6 recommendations, and I've also reported on what we've 15:25:55 7 done, that the President I assume is going to be meeting 15:25:58 8 tomorrow and will be also reporting. 15:26:01 9 15:26:05 10 15:26:06 11 A. Correct. 15:26:06 12 Q. And so who is -- who else, other than you, from 15:26:09 13 Baylor goes to those meetings -- went to those meetings 15:26:12 14 involving the sexual assault concerns? 15:26:15 15 A. The -- in one meeting three regents attended -- 15:26:19 16 Q. Who? 15:26:19 17 A. -- and reported. 15:26:20 18 15:26:31 19 15:26:33 20 Q. 15:26:39 21 person? 15:26:39 22 A. Mark Harper is the Chair. 15:26:39 23 Q. Okay. 15:26:42 24 A. And it was those two and ... and I can't 15:26:45 25 Q. So the incoming President is meeting with the Big 12 tomorrow? The Chair of regents, David Harper, and ... and ... oh, my goodness. Is Harper the Chair, or is the Chair a separate remember. So Mark Harper -- My mind goes blank. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 182 of 220 181 15:26:47 1 Q. Okay. 15:26:50 2 15:26:52 3 15:26:57 4 15:26:57 5 15:27:00 6 15:27:03 7 15:27:03 8 (INFORMATION REQUESTED: 15:27:03 9 ________________________________________________________ 15:27:04 10 ______________________________________________________.) 15:27:04 11 15:27:06 12 15:27:09 13 15:27:14 14 15:27:15 15 Q. Is Rhoades the Athletic Director? 15:27:18 16 A. Mack -- 15:27:20 17 Q. I don't know. 15:27:21 18 A. Yes, that's correct. 15:27:22 19 Q. Who's the football coach? 15:27:25 20 A. Matt Rhule. 15:27:26 21 Q. Matt Rhule. 15:27:28 22 15:27:29 23 A. Yeah. 15:27:29 24 Q. All right. 15:27:30 25 A. The General Counsel, Chris Holmes, went to one deposition. A. Well, we will leave a blank in the If you think of it, can you fill it in? I think it may have just been the two. I can't remember. Q. Okay. Well, we'll leave a blank, and if there's a third, could you put the name in? A. Q. Fair enough? Yes. _______________________________ Anybody else go to any of those meetings with the Big 12 concerning the sexual assault concerns? A. The Athletic Director went to -- Mack Rhoades went to the one meeting. I'm just asking. Okay. That's what got me there, two R's. Anybody else? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 183 of 220 182 15:27:36 1 meeting; and so -- 15:27:38 2 15:27:42 3 15:27:42 4 15:27:45 5 submitted reports. 15:27:50 6 so we did an initial report and submitted it to them, I 15:27:56 7 believe, in August. 15:28:02 8 show -- so that we can demonstrate the effectiveness of 15:28:06 9 the changes that we made. 15:28:06 10 Q. Who drafted the report? 15:28:08 11 A. There were several people that drafted the 15:28:11 12 report, but the primary person responsible was in the 15:28:14 13 Provost's office. 15:28:20 14 Vice Provost for Academic Affairs. 15:28:21 15 Q. And did you review that report? 15:28:23 16 A. I did. 15:28:23 17 Q. Did you approve of what was put in it? 15:28:26 18 A. I did. 15:28:27 19 Q. What about the Texas Rangers? 15:28:29 20 A. I have not had any contact with the Texas 15:28:31 21 Rangers. 15:28:31 22 Q. 15:28:34 23 15:28:35 24 15:28:39 25 Q. Okay. How about the meetings with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools? A. We've had no meetings with them. We have Their concern is about safety. And They required another year to just It would have been Wes Null, who's Do you know who at the university is the liaison or contact with the Rangers? A. I believe Brian Nicholson is the one who's had primary contact with the Texas Rangers. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 184 of 220 183 15:28:41 1 Q. Why was there no -- 15:28:48 2 A. And excuse me. 15:28:52 3 General Counsel, but I've not had any contact with the 15:28:55 4 Texas Rangers. 15:28:56 5 15:29:03 6 15:29:04 7 15:29:08 8 15:29:10 9 15:29:14 10 that it had to do with you wouldn't get a report for 15:29:16 11 months and months and you had to -- 15:29:18 12 15:29:22 13 15:29:28 14 15:29:30 15 15:29:33 16 A. I -- Well, that's what I was told; so -- 15:29:42 17 Q. Who told you that? 15:29:43 18 A. I can't know the exact regents, but the regents, 15:29:50 19 15:29:51 20 15:30:26 21 at a university are not addressed properly, that that 15:30:33 22 will increase the risk to the other students in the 15:30:37 23 future at that university? 15:30:40 24 MS. BROWN: 15:30:43 25 THE WITNESS: Q. I believe they've also dealt with Well, why was no written report received from Pepper Hamilton? A. I do not know. I was not President at the time. I was not privy to what was going on. Q. A. Well, I mean didn't you tell the Texas Senate You know, that's -- that's what I have been told. I do not know for an actual fact why that was the case. Q. So why did you swear to that under oath to the Texas Senate if you didn't know it for a fact? and I don't remember exactly who said that. Q. Do you believe that if problems of sexual assault Objection to form. I believe sexual assault must Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 185 of 220 184 15:30:47 1 always be taken seriously, and every step must be taken 15:30:52 2 to prevent those from happening. 15:30:53 3 BY MR. DUNNAM: 15:30:53 4 15:30:58 5 it is not addressed, if it is not taken seriously, that 15:31:02 6 it will endanger and heighten the risk in the future? 15:31:08 7 MS. BROWN: 15:31:10 8 THE WITNESS: 15:31:13 9 15:31:15 10 15:31:17 11 I ask you that? 15:31:19 12 somebody told you to say, but did I ask you that? 15:31:22 13 15:31:22 14 15:31:23 15 Q. Did I ask you that? 15:31:24 16 A. Ask your question again. 15:31:26 17 Q. Do you believe that the failure of a university 15:31:29 18 or any institution to take seriously reporting of sexual 15:31:34 19 assault and deal with it aggressively, the failure to do 15:31:40 20 that increases the risk of that conduct being repeated 15:31:44 21 in the future? 15:31:45 22 MS. BROWN: 15:31:46 23 THE WITNESS: 15:31:48 24 take these things seriously and would ignore them would 15:31:54 25 be a danger to students. Q. And my question is that -- do you believe that if Objection to form. I believe that Baylor would always take seriously sexual assault. MR. DUNNAM: Did I ask you that? I mean did I know you're trying to say whatever MS. BROWN: Objection, form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Objection to form. Any institution that might not Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 186 of 220 185 15:31:56 1 MR. DUNNAM: And it would increase the risk 15:31:58 2 ongoing, the longer the institution failed to take it 15:32:03 3 seriously and address it? 15:32:03 4 MS. BROWN: 15:32:05 5 MR. DUNNAM: 15:32:07 6 THE WITNESS: 15:32:09 7 15:32:13 8 15:32:15 9 15:32:15 10 15:32:18 11 avoided, or an institution, a corporation, a government 15:32:22 12 entity, any institution ... the longer they don't take 15:32:26 13 it seriously and do the things that need to be done, it 15:32:30 14 continues to increase the risk over time. 15:32:30 15 MS. BROWN: 15:32:33 16 MR. DUNNAM: 15:32:34 17 MS. BROWN: 15:32:35 18 THE WITNESS: 15:32:37 19 abuse in some churches demonstrates that to be the 15:32:41 20 true case. 15:32:42 21 15:32:43 22 15:32:44 23 MS. BROWN: 15:32:45 24 THE WITNESS: 15:32:46 25 MR. DUNNAM: Objection to form. Do you agree with that? I can't imagine any institution not taking this seriously and addressing it. MR. DUNNAM: I didn't ask you that. See, that's the issue, I didn't ask you that. I asked you if the longer a university MR. DUNNAM: Objection -Do you agree with that? Objection to form. The evidence of clergy sexual And that's just common sense, isn't it? Objection, form. What's common sense? That if we don't take Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 187 of 220 186 15:32:48 1 incidences of improper conduct seriously, that that 15:32:53 2 conduct is likely to continue and even grow, correct? 15:32:58 3 MS. BROWN: 15:33:01 4 THE WITNESS: 15:33:03 5 one-to-one correspondence that it will foster further 15:33:06 6 instances, but I do believe any incidence of sexual 15:33:10 7 assault must be taken seriously. 15:33:13 8 15:33:14 9 15:33:17 10 15:33:18 11 15:33:20 12 15:33:22 13 15:33:26 14 specific institution like Baylor -- 15:33:28 15 MR. DUNNAM: 15:33:31 16 institution, any institution that does not -- And I 15:33:34 17 think we've talked about this. 15:33:36 18 because you keep bouncing around. 15:33:38 19 15:33:41 20 example, the church you just mentioned. 15:33:43 21 issues in churches, and the Catholic Church has gotten 15:33:47 22 maybe the most attention. 15:33:50 23 with, it increases the risk of it reoccurring in the 15:33:54 24 future. 15:33:55 25 Objection, form. I don't know that there's a MR. DUNNAM: And if it's not taken seriously, it heightens the risk in the future to it occurring again? MS. BROWN: I have to object again. Objection, form. THE WITNESS: If you're talking about a I'm not. I'm asking about any I just want to make sure But an institution of any nature, for And they've had But if something is not dealt Do you agree with that? MS. BROWN: Objection to form. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 188 of 220 187 15:33:57 1 THE WITNESS: 15:33:58 2 seriously any sexual assault and address the issue. 15:34:02 3 BY MR. DUNNAM: 15:34:03 4 15:34:06 5 15:34:07 6 A. 15:34:09 7 must -- 15:34:09 8 Q. Do you -- 15:34:12 9 A. You must take these things seriously and address 15:34:14 10 15:34:15 11 15:34:19 12 15:34:23 13 15:34:23 14 MS. BROWN: 15:34:25 15 THE WITNESS: 15:34:27 16 15:34:27 17 15:34:29 18 15:34:31 19 15:34:32 20 15:34:34 21 Q. Go ahead. 15:34:34 22 A. Just repeat the question. 15:34:36 23 Q. I think you answered it. 15:34:39 24 15:34:46 25 Q. I believe that we should take Because it will -- if you don't address it, it will continue; is that correct? No. Because it's the right thing to do, that you them as best you can. Q. Other than on, you know, morality of the moment, don't you believe it has an effect in the future? A. I can't judge -Objection to form. -- can't judge what actually can happen -MS. BROWN: Excuse me. You have to let me get my objection in before you respond. Objection to form. BY MR. DUNNAM: Were you involved in the contact with the Wall Street Journal that was -- that occurred immediately Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 189 of 220 188 15:34:50 1 prior to the "60 Minutes" story? 15:34:52 2 A. I was not. 15:34:53 3 Q. Did you give them interviews? 15:34:55 4 A. No. 15:34:56 5 Q. Can you think of any time that you have overruled 15:35:17 6 15:35:23 7 15:35:27 8 15:35:28 9 15:35:30 10 15:35:31 11 15:35:33 12 15:36:32 13 15:36:32 14 15:36:34 15 15:36:38 16 (Recess taken from 3:36 to 3:51 p.m.) 15:51:15 17 (Replacement Exhibit 5 marked.) 15:51:15 18 Back on the record. 15:51:18 19 15:51:19 20 15:51:25 21 questions. 15:51:29 22 around a bit because I'm trying to fill in a few holes. 15:51:31 23 Is that fair enough? 15:51:32 24 A. Yes. 15:51:32 25 Q. So if I jump somewhere and it's too drastic, let a recommendation of Reagan Ramsower? A. I normally don't get recommendations from Reagan Ramsower. Q. I didn't ask you if you normally got recommendations. A. I do not -- cannot think of any. MR. DUNNAM: Let's take a quick break for a second. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Going off the record. The time is 3:36 p.m. The time is 3:51 p.m. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. So, President Garland, I've got just a few more That should make you happy. I may jump Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 190 of 220 189 15:51:37 1 me know. 15:51:37 2 15:51:39 3 15:51:40 4 15:51:50 5 "guest columnist: 15:51:54 6 violence". 15:51:55 7 Q. And who wrote that? 15:51:56 8 A. I -- Someone in the PR office gave the skeleton, 15:52:04 9 15:52:07 10 Q. And who's the PR office? 15:52:09 11 A. I honestly don't know. 15:52:12 12 Q. So who is -- how did this -- Who put this on your 15:52:17 13 desk? 15:52:19 14 A. The Vice President for Communications. 15:52:20 15 Q. Who is that? 15:52:21 16 A. Jason Cook. 15:52:22 17 Q. Was Bunting involved in it? 15:52:26 18 A. Not that I know of. 15:52:28 19 Q. Why was Bunting hired? 15:52:30 20 A. Bunting was hired because the Ketchum public 15:52:38 21 15:52:44 22 Q. So Baylor had a PR firm before Bunting? 15:52:48 23 A. Long before, yes. 15:52:49 24 Q. And it was named Ketchum? 15:52:52 25 A. Yes, Ketchum. I'm going to hand you what's been marked Exhibit Number 5, and I'm going to ask you what that is? A. This is my final comments to the paper as a Baylor committed to preventing sexual and I edited it. I mean in Communications. Who put the outline on your desk? relations firm decided to withdraw. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 191 of 220 190 15:52:55 1 Q. And how long -- do you know generally how long 15:52:58 2 15:52:58 3 A. No. 15:53:00 4 Q. -- for Baylor? 15:53:00 5 A. No, I do not. 15:53:01 6 Q. And who was the person you interacted with at 15:53:04 7 Ketchum? 15:53:06 8 A. I've forgotten that person's name. 15:53:08 9 Q. Can we leave a blank, and if you remember the 15:53:12 10 15:53:14 11 15:53:17 12 directly. 15:53:20 13 President for Communications. 15:27:03 14 (INFORMATION REQUESTED: 15:27:03 15 ________________________________________________________ 15:53:21 16 ______________________________________________________.) 15:53:21 17 Q. And so why did they withdraw? 15:53:25 18 A. I can't speculate on -- as to why. 15:53:28 19 Q. Did anyone tell you why they withdrew? 15:53:30 20 A. No, no one did. 15:53:32 21 Q. They just -- next thing you knew they said "We 15:53:35 22 15:53:37 23 A. That's correct. 15:53:37 24 Q. And who was responsible for finding Bunting? 15:53:42 25 A. The Vice President for Communications and ... and Ketchum had been the PR firm -- name, will you put it in for me? A. Certainly. I did not interact with them They primarily worked through the Vice _______________________________ don't want to work for you anymore"? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 192 of 220 191 15:53:55 1 I can't remember who else that began looking for other 15:53:59 2 persons to work -- who worked in this area. 15:54:03 3 15:54:05 4 15:54:08 5 A. I don't recall the exact time. 15:54:13 6 Q. Months, weeks? 15:54:15 7 A. It would have been weeks, but I don't know. 15:54:17 8 Q. And were any regents involved in the decision of 15:54:22 9 15:54:24 10 A. 15:54:29 11 were. 15:54:30 12 Q. Do you know anyone who interviewed Bunting? 15:54:33 13 A. I do know that the Vice President for 15:54:38 14 Communications was heavily involved in the interviews 15:54:40 15 process. 15:54:41 16 Q. 15:54:44 17 15:54:44 18 A. I -- I don't know whether -- who contacted whom. 15:54:49 19 Q. And I guess the Director of Communications would 15:54:52 20 15:54:53 21 A. The Vice President would know that. 15:54:55 22 Q. Who -- Did you ever meet with Bunting before they 15:54:59 23 15:55:00 24 A. No. 15:55:03 25 Q. Have you met -- have you met with them since they Q. Do you know how long before Bunting was hired that Ketchum gave notice they were leaving? who to replace Ketchum with? I can't say for certain. I do not believe they Did you-all contact them, or did they contact you initially? know that? were retained? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 193 of 220 192 15:55:05 1 were retained? 15:55:06 2 A. Yes. 15:55:07 3 Q. And when was that first meeting? 15:55:09 4 A. The first meeting, I don't know exact dates, but 15:55:14 5 15:55:19 6 Q. And what did they tell you? 15:55:20 7 A. Just -- they gave discussions, they gave 15:55:25 8 information about what "60 Minutes" might be -- what 15:55:29 9 they might be interested in and ... and just basically 15:55:36 10 15:55:38 11 Q. Did they give talking points? 15:55:40 12 A. No, they did not. 15:55:41 13 Q. They gave you nothing in writing? 15:55:44 14 A. Nothing in writing. 15:55:45 15 Q. Have you ever received anything from Bunting in 15:55:47 16 writing? 15:55:48 17 A. 15:55:57 18 15:56:03 19 15:56:08 20 seen that Baylor has issued, the press releases, the 15:56:11 21 statements from you and your office? 15:56:12 22 15:56:16 23 15:56:19 24 15:56:26 25 it would have been in preparation for the "60 Minutes". TV stuff. Nothing in writing except, you know, their -- just when they would put out PR pieces or whatever. Q. A. Was Bunting involved in the PR pieces that we've They were -- Not from my -- not directly from me, but I think they were involved in Baylor statements. Q. When you would meet with editorial boards, for example, the Q & A that you and Mr. Murff had with the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 194 of 220 193 15:56:32 1 Waco Tribune-Herald, did you meet with Bunting in 15:56:34 2 advance -- 15:56:34 3 A. No. 15:56:35 4 Q. -- to discuss that? 15:56:35 5 A. They were not hired at that time. 15:56:37 6 Q. Okay. 15:56:40 7 15:56:43 8 A. I was not involved in that. 15:56:44 9 Q. Okay. 15:56:51 10 15:56:52 11 A. No. 15:56:57 12 Q. Has their relationship been terminated? 15:57:02 13 A. I do not know for sure. 15:57:03 14 Q. How much was Bunting paid? 15:57:05 15 A. I have no idea. 15:57:05 16 Q. Who would know? 15:57:07 17 A. I -- I would guess the Communications Department, 15:57:16 18 15:57:17 19 15:57:21 20 be wrong, but I assume these people aren't cheap; and so 15:57:25 21 this is some financial commitment of the university that 15:57:28 22 is diverting funds from other needs, whatever they might 15:57:30 23 be, and is the Communications Director authorized to 15:57:36 24 expend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars on a PR 15:57:41 25 firm without your permission? What about subsequent meetings? Because there was basically a tour of ed. boards, wasn't there? Is Bunting still involved today in media strategy? It's basically -- our office is doing this. but I can't be -Q. So I'm trying to understand. So, you know, I may Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 195 of 220 194 15:57:42 1 A. 15:57:47 2 customary that we have always used outside firms for 15:57:52 3 help to outsource some things. 15:57:57 4 know what the amount was, but the regents were also 15:58:02 5 involved. 15:58:02 6 15:58:05 7 involved in this stuff. 15:58:06 8 I asked earlier. 15:58:07 9 decision to hire Bunting? 15:58:09 10 A. I do not think -- I do not know, no -- 15:58:09 11 Q. And -- 15:58:11 12 A. -- but I don't think that was the case. 15:58:13 13 Q. You don't think it was? 15:58:14 14 A. I believe that we hired Bunting, as far as the 15:58:19 15 15:58:19 16 15:58:21 17 expenditure was made on Bunting was done without the 15:58:26 18 regents' awareness? 15:58:27 19 15:58:31 20 15:58:34 21 15:58:38 22 15:58:38 23 A. I was -- 15:58:38 24 Q. -- and you don't know what they paid him or -- 15:58:40 25 A. I was not involved. Q. They work through -- with a budget, and it's been In this case, I don't That's what I'm trying to figure out is who was Did the regents -- That's what Did the regents participate in the administration. Q. A. And you believe that the budget or whatever I don't remember that they were -- that we asked, because we have a budget. Q. We can make those decisions. But you weren't involved. They just paid this guy -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 196 of 220 195 15:58:41 1 Q. And you weren't consulted about it? 15:58:43 2 A. Consulted in ... 15:58:44 3 Q. About the decision to hire them. 15:58:47 4 A. Yes, I was consulted, but I was not consulted 15:58:49 5 15:58:50 6 15:58:51 7 15:58:54 8 15:58:54 9 A. We -- we made the decision as a group. 15:58:56 10 Q. Who is the group? 15:58:58 11 A. The Vice President for Communications and myself, 15:59:03 12 15:59:05 13 Q. Was Ramsower involved? 15:59:06 14 A. I can't remember. 15:59:07 15 Q. You stated to the Waco paper that you were 15:59:21 16 interested in changing the culture and root cause of 15:59:26 17 these assaults. 15:59:30 18 cultural and root causes, in your opinion, of these 15:59:33 19 assaults? 15:59:34 20 15:59:39 21 cause; and so I don't -- I'm not an expert on the 15:59:45 22 psychological causes of what causes persons to do this. 15:59:49 23 15:59:53 24 you're referring to when you talk about "root causes"? 15:59:55 25 And I think a term you used was "cultural", "cultural about fees or anything. Q. All right. Did you -- Who made the decision? So did you make the decision "Yes, I want to hire them"? and I can't remember who else was involved. A. Q. Other than pornography, what are the I would argue that pornography is the primary Aside from pornography, is there anything else Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 197 of 220 196 16:00:00 1 issues". 16:00:00 2 A. 16:00:03 3 but I -- I'm not an expert in this area. 16:00:09 4 research that identifies pornography as a contributing 16:00:12 5 factor. 16:00:13 6 Q. 16:00:15 7 to the Waco paper, "cultural and root causes", not 16:00:19 8 whether you've done studies, but when you said that, 16:00:24 9 pornography was what was in your mind, and that's it? 16:00:26 10 A. That is primarily what was in my mind. 16:00:32 11 Q. Anything else? 16:00:32 12 A. No. 16:00:36 13 Q. Okay. 16:00:39 14 16:00:42 15 16:00:51 16 16:00:57 17 16:01:01 18 16:01:01 19 A. There is -- 16:01:02 20 Q. I want to know what that means to you. 16:01:03 21 A. There is a perception amongst some that 16:01:08 22 masculinity is tied to violence, machismo, being able to 16:01:16 23 assert yourself in power over another person. 16:01:22 24 16:01:27 25 Yeah, I believe that these are cultural issues, And all I'm trying to ask is when you said that That's primarily pornography. And you talked about implementing a "masculinity program". A. I do know What does that mean? There -- This was a program which would teach men how to behave like men properly with females. Q. So can you elaborate? I mean I know what that means to me. Q. And so what was the -- was a masculinity program adopted and implemented? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 198 of 220 197 16:01:29 1 A. No, it was not. 16:01:30 2 Q. Was any program implemented to deal with issues 16:01:46 3 16:01:48 4 16:01:52 5 to deal with pornography addiction so students who are 16:02:00 6 -- have that addiction can meet with groups to help them 16:02:05 7 overcome it. 16:02:05 8 Q. When were those programs initiated? 16:02:08 9 A. These were -- I believe they -- in fact, I think, 16:02:14 10 and I don't know for sure, but I think they've been 16:02:16 11 going on for some time. 16:02:17 12 16:02:21 13 response to these issues of masculinity programs that 16:02:25 14 you talked about? 16:02:26 15 16:02:30 16 Student Life is always concerned about the well-being of 16:02:34 17 our students, and they were also addressing these 16:02:38 18 issues. 16:02:38 19 Q. 16:02:51 20 Dr. Ramsower, who are the board members who are most 16:02:56 21 involved in attempting to address these issues since you 16:03:02 22 became President and before, if you know? 16:03:05 23 16:03:09 24 the Chair of the Audit Committee has been heavily 16:03:13 25 involved. of pornography? A. Q. A. A. There have been programs that have been initiated So these weren't -- those were not implemented in No. These are -- these are something part of -- Are there -- are there -- Aside from yourself and I do not know who it would have been before, but His name is Dan Hord, and he has been heavily Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 199 of 220 198 16:03:19 1 involved not only with Title IX issues, also with the 16:03:22 2 Coordinator of Title IX, but as part of the Audit 16:03:27 3 Committee this has been a primary concern. 16:03:28 4 Q. Any other regents? 16:03:31 5 A. That have been -- that -- 16:03:33 6 Q. Most involved in trying to address the problems 16:03:37 7 16:03:38 8 16:03:45 9 16:03:49 10 16:03:53 11 TV or whatever, I see a number of regents that appear 16:03:58 12 more often than others, and that's what I'm trying to 16:04:03 13 get at. 16:04:06 14 would be maybe inaccurate, and if so, say so, but I 16:04:11 15 think it would be unusual to expect that you had 35 16:04:14 16 people that were really hands-on; and so I want to know 16:04:16 17 who the regents are who have been the most hands-on 16:04:19 18 throughout this turmoil. 16:04:21 19 A. Well, I would -- Hands-on regarding what? 16:04:24 20 Q. Dealing with the problems that arose with sexual 16:04:29 21 assault at Baylor University and the efforts to deal 16:04:31 22 with it. 16:04:31 23 A. 16:04:34 24 responsibilities to the administration to address, and 16:04:39 25 that is our responsibility to do that. at Baylor. A. Because Title IX came primarily under the Audit Committee, it was Dan Hord primarily. Q. Well, I mean when I read the newspaper or watch I know that there are a lot of regents, and I The regents basically delegated those They monitor Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 200 of 220 199 16:04:43 1 this, and we report to the regents what we've done. 16:04:46 2 16:04:49 3 format, or are you meeting with a smaller group of 16:04:52 4 regents or talking with them on the phone? 16:04:55 5 16:05:00 6 Chair would be involved in phone call conversations, but 16:05:04 7 primarily it was reporting to the regents as a whole. 16:05:07 8 Q. And who's on the Audit Committee? 16:05:10 9 A. I can't go through the list. 16:05:18 10 16:05:19 11 Q. Other than -- 16:05:20 12 A. I know who the Chair is. 16:05:22 13 Q. That's Hord? 16:05:23 14 A. Dan Hord, yes. 16:05:25 15 Q. Other than Hord, how many people are on it? 16:05:27 16 A. There are about -- you know -- I'd have to have 16:05:32 17 16:05:36 18 Q. Is it published? 16:05:38 19 A. Yes. 16:05:45 20 the -- all of the committees and the members of the 16:05:48 21 committee, and there has been for the next meeting a 16:05:52 22 transition where they have changed the number of 16:05:56 23 committees and who's on them -- 16:05:56 24 Q. So -- 16:05:58 25 A. -- so that will have changed. Q. A. But are you just reporting to all 30 in a written The Audit Committee would -- I think that the miss a name. I don't -- I would I don't know. my list out in front of me to be able to be specific. Is it a published list? The board publishes on its website all of Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 201 of 220 200 16:06:01 1 Q. So if we wanted to know the regents that have 16:06:05 2 been most involved, we would look first to the members 16:06:08 3 of the Audit Committee; is that fair? 16:06:08 4 A. That would be correct. 16:06:09 5 Q. And then which other committees would we look to? 16:06:12 6 A. I would think committees related to student body; 16:06:20 7 16:06:21 8 Q. 16:06:24 9 just -- 16:06:24 10 16:06:27 11 meetings. 16:06:33 12 has been primarily -- 16:06:34 13 Q. Are agendas in writing? 16:06:37 14 A. The agendas are in writing, and they're published 16:06:40 15 16:06:40 16 16:06:43 17 know that there is transition within the board that's on 16:06:47 18 -- been ongoing since, and I'd like to go back to the 16:06:50 19 2004 period because we have clients whose issues go back 16:06:55 20 that far; but the names that I've seen, names of people 16:07:00 21 involved in these throughout the years, Mr. Murff, has 16:07:04 22 he been heavily involved in the issues? 16:07:06 23 16:07:10 24 16:07:11 25 so ... A. Do you know? You said you "would think". I'm I don't remember the exact agenda in those I do know that -- that the Audit Committee on the website. Q. A. Now, I want to -- I want to go back because I Mr. Murff is Chairman of the Board and, therefore, has been heavily involved in everything. Q. Okay. The former Chair before him was who? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 202 of 220 201 16:07:15 1 A. Richard Willis. 16:07:19 2 Q. So would the same apply for him in terms of his 16:07:23 3 16:07:24 4 16:07:28 5 16:07:28 6 Q. And who was before him? 16:07:29 7 A. Buddy Jones, I believe. 16:07:36 8 Q. Okay. 16:07:39 9 16:07:39 10 A. Dary Stone. 16:07:42 11 Q. And those are names I've heard. 16:07:45 12 Jones, Stone, Murff, Willis. 16:07:50 13 have been more involved than others? 16:07:52 14 A. Not that I -- not that I know of. 16:07:56 15 Q. When we turn on "60 Minutes", you know, we see 16:07:59 16 Neal Jeffrey, we see ... I think Ms. Stevens; is that 16:08:03 17 correct? 16:08:03 18 A. That's correct. 16:08:04 19 Q. We see Mr. Gray; is that correct? 16:08:08 20 A. That's correct. 16:08:08 21 Q. So that's what I'm trying to get at. 16:08:12 22 people that are going out there and meeting with the 16:08:14 23 editorial boards and figuring out -- I assume if they're 16:08:18 24 meeting and talking on "60 Minutes" or meeting with 16:08:20 25 editorial boards, that they know what they're talking involvement in Title IX issues, if any? A. That I don't know. I was not in the administration at that time. And do you recall who was before Mr. Jones? I've heard Are there any others that Who are the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 203 of 220 202 16:08:23 1 about. They've informed themselves; is that correct? 16:08:25 2 A. As regents, yes. 16:08:26 3 Q. And so who are these point people on the regents, 16:08:30 4 16:08:32 5 16:08:37 6 at "60 Minutes". 16:08:41 7 people, but -- 16:08:42 8 Q. Who picked them? 16:08:43 9 A. I do not know. 16:08:44 10 Q. And did some of them interview with the Wall 16:08:49 11 16:08:49 12 16:08:55 13 16:08:56 14 16:08:59 15 about? 16:09:02 16 mentioned gang rapes for the first time and those types 16:09:05 17 of things. 16:09:08 18 particularly known as where you go for your sports news. 16:09:11 19 A. I honestly don't know why. 16:09:13 20 Q. Okay. 16:09:20 21 16:09:24 22 A. He's a regent. 16:09:26 23 Q. Okay. 16:09:30 24 A. He's not a regent. 16:09:32 25 Q. They were, right? other than those I've just named? A. I do not know why they were even picked to speak They're not necessarily the point Street Journal? A. I believe Cary Gray interviewed with the Wall Street Journal, but I don't know. Q. What was the Wall Street Journal approached I think that was at the point where Baylor Why the Wall Street Journal? So who else? Stevens, Mr. Jeffrey. They're not So we've got Mr. Gray, Ms. Was he a regent? Murff, Willis, Jones, Stone? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 204 of 220 203 16:09:33 1 A. Right. 16:09:34 2 Q. Okay. 16:09:35 3 A. Who -- 16:09:37 4 Q. -- have met with -- Who decided who was going to 16:09:39 5 16:09:40 6 A. I do not know. 16:09:40 7 Q. Who decided who was going to talk to Wall Street 16:09:43 8 Journal? 16:09:43 9 A. I do not know. 16:09:44 10 Q. Who decided who was going to meet with the Dallas 16:09:47 11 16:09:47 12 A. I do not know. 16:09:48 13 Q. How did you come to meet with the Waco Trib? 16:09:52 14 16:09:53 15 16:09:59 16 it was arranged by the Vice President for 16:10:04 17 Communications. 16:10:04 18 16:10:08 19 the Big 12, and you are meeting with -- it's my 16:10:11 20 understanding that these meetings that were -- And I 16:10:13 21 want to talk about the Big 12 in connection with their 16:10:16 22 concerns about what was happening on Baylor campus and 16:10:19 23 sexual assault. 16:10:21 24 A. Yes. 16:10:21 25 Q. All right. Who else -- be on "60 Minutes"? Morning News? Who asked you to do that? A. Q. The first time after the regent meeting, I think Who -- Now, when we look at these meetings with Okay? Fair enough? In those meetings, were those the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 205 of 220 204 16:10:25 1 university Presidents of Big 12? 16:10:27 2 A. Yes. 16:10:27 3 Q. And you were there to represent Baylor 16:10:29 4 16:10:29 5 A. Absolutely, yes. 16:10:31 6 Q. And were the Presidents of these universities 16:10:37 7 very active and involved in the discussions about this, 16:10:40 8 or did they -- were they passive and just listened to 16:10:42 9 what you had to say? 16:10:43 10 A. How do you define "passive" and "active"? 16:10:47 11 Q. Well, you can use words that you -- that you can 16:10:49 12 define for me. 16:10:51 13 involvement of those Presidents in these meetings. 16:10:53 14 A. They were passive and listened. 16:10:57 15 Q. Okay. 16:11:01 16 other ones about the conduct, or did they just listen to 16:11:04 17 what you had to say? 16:11:05 18 16:11:10 19 16:11:13 20 Q. And so who among those Presidents -- 16:11:15 21 A. I can't recall. 16:11:17 22 Q. Who among the Presidents, if any, was the one 16:11:20 23 16:11:22 24 16:11:26 25 University? A. I'm trying to characterize the Did any of them appear more concerned than They were concerned about the conduct and were very hopeful that we were rectifying the situation. asking the most questions and the most concerned? A. I -- you know -- there was just a general discussion. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 206 of 220 205 16:11:26 1 Q. So let me -- I don't want to mischaracterize 16:11:29 2 this, but are you suggesting that -- Well, how many 16:11:32 3 meetings were there or have there been about this 16:11:36 4 subject matter? 16:11:36 5 A. About what? 16:11:37 6 Q. About this subject matter. 16:11:39 7 A. There were two -- 16:11:42 8 Q. Do you recall -- 16:11:42 9 A. -- that specifically -- 16:11:43 10 Q. -- approximately when? 16:11:44 11 A. No, I don't. 16:11:51 12 16:11:56 13 16:11:58 14 16:11:58 15 16:12:04 16 16:12:06 17 16:12:09 18 said "We want to know what's happening", and it's fair 16:12:12 19 to say that you showed up, you told them what had 16:12:15 20 happened, and they were fairly passive about it? 16:12:18 21 16:12:20 22 16:12:20 23 Q. Okay. 16:12:21 24 A. -- because my primary responsibility was not to 16:12:26 25 It's a seasonal thing. I can't recall exactly to give precise dates. Q. Okay. And the Presidents were at all of them; is that correct? A. Not all of the Presidents were. Some -- Once the President of Kansas was sick; so -Q. A. Okay. So am I characterizing correctly that they We -- I told them what we were doing to fix the problem -- reinvestigate the Findings of Fact but to implement the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 207 of 220 206 16:12:31 1 recommendations. 16:12:31 2 16:12:32 3 16:12:34 4 A. No. 16:12:34 5 Q. Okay. 16:12:42 6 A. I do not know. 16:12:42 7 Q. Do you have a timeline on that? 16:12:44 8 A. No. 16:12:46 9 Q. So is there any -- is there -- Have you ever seen 16:12:48 10 any kind of master timeline that Baylor has done to 16:12:54 11 catalog and chronologically set out a timeline of the 16:13:00 12 events of relevance in terms of Baylor's Title IX 16:13:03 13 compliance or dealing with sexual assault issues? 16:13:08 14 A. I've not seen that. 16:13:09 15 Q. Has it always been Baylor's policy when a victim 16:13:26 16 wanted the assistance of counsel in regard to any aspect 16:13:31 17 of the investigation, that they could not have counsel 16:13:37 18 of their choice -- 16:13:37 19 A. I don't know -- 16:13:38 20 Q. -- involved? 16:13:38 21 A. I don't know that that's part of the policy. 16:13:43 22 Q. So can they, or can they not have counsel? 16:13:46 23 A. I believe Title IX is evolving in its 16:13:53 24 implementation. 16:13:58 25 come without counsel, but I believe that may be all Q. Did they -- Did they ask questions or ask for information about what had happened? Who is the Big 12 using to do the audit? There's no timeline. It's up to them. Normally victims or survivors would Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 208 of 220 207 16:14:01 1 changing, and I'm not sure about that -- 16:14:01 2 Q. Was there ever a -- 16:14:02 3 A. -- because it is evolving. 16:14:03 4 Q. Was there -- Well, okay. 16:14:05 5 before it evolved where they were prevented from having 16:14:08 6 counsel participate with them? 16:14:10 7 16:14:13 8 16:14:15 9 16:14:26 10 letter outlining her issues addressed to Dr. Ramsower; 16:14:32 11 is that right? 16:14:32 12 A. That's correct. 16:14:33 13 Q. Why wasn't it addressed to you? 16:14:40 14 MS. BROWN: 16:14:41 15 THE WITNESS: 16:14:46 16 16:14:46 17 16:14:57 18 16:14:58 19 A. Yes. 16:14:59 20 Q. ... what you did to ascertain who was right and 16:15:03 21 wrong is you talked to the two individuals who she had 16:15:06 22 the most criticism about; is that correct? 16:15:09 23 A. I ... I did, yes. 16:15:11 24 Q. And that's all you did, correct? 16:15:12 25 A. No. A. Was there ever a point I can't answer that definitively. It's normal that counsel were not present. Q. Why did -- When Ms. Crawford wrote -- she wrote a Objection, form. I can't speculate as to why. BY MR. DUNNAM: Q. Okay. And in investigating her complaints in that letter ... which you read, correct? I also talked with other people who had been Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 209 of 220 208 16:15:18 1 in meetings with her. 16:15:24 2 because she met in every single meeting when we were 16:15:27 3 around the table discussing the implementations of the 16:15:31 4 recommendations, and never once did she raise objections 16:15:35 5 where she could have raised those objections. 16:15:37 6 16:15:40 7 16:15:43 8 A. The persons who were on her committee and -- 16:15:46 9 Q. Who? 16:15:46 10 A. I forget exact -- who exactly it was. 16:15:51 11 Q. Do you recall any person in particular that you 16:15:53 12 met and spoke with, other than Ramsower and the HR 16:15:59 13 Director? 16:15:59 14 16:16:05 15 16:16:05 16 16:16:08 17 16:16:10 18 A. Andrea Dixon. 16:16:12 19 Q. Okay. 16:16:15 20 A. She said that Ms. Crawford tended to be overly 16:16:24 21 16:16:26 22 Q. In what context? 16:16:29 23 A. In the meetings where we were discussing how we 16:16:31 24 16:16:34 25 Q. In many ways I was very surprised And who are these people you talked to, in addition to the HR person and Dr. Ramsower? A. The name escapes me; so I'm sorry. I'll have to fill in the blank. Q. there. Well, let's leave -- we'll leave another blank If you think about it, that's fine. Ms. Dixon. And what did she tell you? emotional in meetings. implement and address the recommendations. Q. Well, what would cause her to get emotional? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 210 of 220 209 16:16:37 1 A. I do not know. 16:16:38 2 Q. Well, I mean do you think that, in and of itself, 16:16:40 3 16:16:40 4 16:16:44 5 16:16:45 6 Q. Well, do you think this is an emotional subject? 16:16:50 7 A. It's a highly emotional subject. 16:16:52 8 Q. So why would that be inappropriate? 16:16:54 9 16:16:55 10 16:16:58 11 context of discussing these issues, but the context of 16:17:02 12 discussing how do we implement the Title IX, the 16:17:08 13 recommendations. 16:17:09 14 16:17:12 15 16:17:13 16 16:17:19 17 repeatedly that she needed to be involved in every 16:17:24 18 single thing involved in the recommendations. 16:17:25 19 hired to be the Coordinator of the Title IX office, and 16:17:29 20 that was her primary responsibility. 16:17:33 21 16:17:37 22 can't -- that we had to divide things up into a large 16:17:41 23 group. 16:17:45 24 just felt like it was -- it was not her job to be the 16:17:50 25 primary person to be in charge of implementation of is a problem? A. Apparently, it arose as a problem from the perspective of others. And you don't know the context? A. Q. I do not know the context, but it was not in the And so why did you side with Dr. Ramsower over Ms. Crawford? A. Because I felt like her objections were primarily She was The 105 recommendations are so broad that we 80 people were involved in this, and -- and I Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 211 of 220 210 16:17:53 1 everything. 16:17:54 2 16:17:58 3 was to implement and herd all of the various groups to 16:18:05 4 make sure we would reach completion on the -- and that 16:18:07 5 was her primary job. 16:18:08 6 16:18:12 7 she got emotional at some meetings about the need to 16:18:15 8 implement these policies, the information that you've 16:18:17 9 just described to us is information you received from 16:18:22 10 16:18:25 11 A. What information? 16:18:26 12 Q. The information you just said, why you sided with 16:18:29 13 16:18:29 14 16:18:32 15 constantly that she needed to be involved in this and 16:18:35 16 constantly -- and I decided this is simply not correct. 16:18:38 17 She just needs to be doing her job, which is 16:18:41 18 coordinating the Title IX office, that this is 16:18:45 19 absolutely a top priority to be able to meet the needs 16:18:48 20 of the students, and not being involved in every single 16:18:53 21 committee that was trying to implement the 16:18:55 22 recommendations. 16:18:56 23 16:18:59 24 point she was contacted and asked for names of 16:19:02 25 assailants that Title IX was investigating; is that In fact, we hired somebody who their primary job Q. And other than the information you received about Dr. Ramsower and the HR Director? him. A. Q. No. I read what she said in her letter, and it's Now, you're aware that she indicated that at one Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 212 of 220 211 16:19:08 1 correct? 16:19:09 2 A. I don't -- 16:19:10 3 Q. She has stated that at one time that she was 16:19:18 4 asked to identify the names of assailants, an assailant 16:19:23 5 or assailants, that had complaints against them within 16:19:26 6 Title IX, by administration. 16:19:30 7 A. I do not know that. 16:19:31 8 Q. Well -- 16:19:31 9 A. And I don't know who asked. 16:19:33 10 Q. Dr. Ramsower? 16:19:35 11 A. I don't know that. 16:19:35 12 Q. And that she gave him the name, and he took 16:19:39 13 action. 16:19:42 14 A. No. 16:19:43 15 Q. So when -- We have the board's acknowledgment of 16:19:52 16 16:19:55 17 16:19:59 18 16:20:01 19 16:20:08 20 16:20:10 21 MS. BROWN: 16:20:13 22 THE WITNESS: 16:20:16 23 identify indifference. 16:20:20 24 issued the Findings of Fact reflects our considerable 16:20:23 25 concern about these issues and the implementation of the You're not aware of that? No. failure after failure. A. Are you aware of that? You've acknowledged that, right? I acknowledge that they -- in their report we admit that we had failures. Q. So when can you say that Baylor's indifference and failures stopped? Objection to form. The Findings of Fact do not I think the very fact that we Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 213 of 220 212 16:20:27 1 105 recommendations. 16:20:29 2 BY MR. DUNNAM: 16:20:29 3 16:20:33 4 didn't do this, and we discouraged this and whatever, 16:20:36 5 that ... well, that's just good people make mistakes? 16:20:39 6 Is that what you're saying? 16:20:40 7 A. No, I do not say that. 16:20:41 8 Q. Well, what is it, then? 16:20:42 9 A. I said that there's no evidence, I think, of 16:20:46 10 total indifference to these kinds of issues. 16:20:49 11 inconsistency in applying the Title IX rules that we had 16:20:54 12 in place at the time. 16:20:55 13 16:21:00 14 16:21:02 15 16:21:08 16 16:21:12 17 Q. So when did those failures stop? 16:21:14 18 A. I can't identify when failures stopped. 16:21:17 19 16:21:19 20 Q. Which was when? 16:21:20 21 A. Immediately after the Findings of Fact and 16:21:24 22 16:21:27 23 Q. A year ago? 16:21:28 24 A. That's when we direct -- took direct action in 16:21:34 25 Q. Q. So you say the fact that we failed this, we There was So when did the failures identified in the Board of Regents' findings stop? A. Their findings go ... I think you pointed out as 2012 to 2015. That was their investigation. I know when we started to address them. recommendations were published. the specific references coming out of the Findings of Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 214 of 220 213 16:21:43 1 Fact. 16:21:45 2 because I was not in office. 16:21:48 3 16:21:59 4 we're going to reserve our questions that we may have in 16:22:02 5 addition -- that we do have in addition after the Court 16:22:04 6 rules on the issues it has before it. 16:22:12 7 Garland decides it's important for him to learn about 16:22:16 8 the -- 16:22:16 9 16:22:19 10 "President", and then you're just going to call 16:22:21 11 me "Professor". 16:22:22 12 16:22:24 13 16:22:25 14 But anyway, we're going to complete our 16:22:26 15 questions for today and reserve our other questions 16:22:30 16 until after the Court rules on these issues and, also, 16:22:34 17 if President Garland ever decides it's important to make 16:22:38 18 the effort to learn the facts about what happened to our 16:22:41 19 clients and/or these other people. 16:22:45 20 MS. BROWN: 16:22:48 21 16:22:50 22 16:22:55 23 16:22:57 24 MS. BROWN: 16:22:59 25 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Q. A. I can't answer the question before that time So that completes our questions for today, and And if President You've got 30 more minutes to call me MR. DUNNAM: Well, I'm just trying to do what I said I'd do. Objection to the sidebar. And we'd like to take a break when you're done. MR. DUNNAM: Okay. Well, I just told you we're reserving our other questions. All right. We'd like to. Going off the record. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 215 of 220 214 16:23:00 1 16:41:30 2 (Recess taken from 4:22 until 4:41 p.m.) 16:41:30 3 THE REPORTER: 16:41:37 4 16:41:38 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The time is 4:22. We are off the video and just on the record. MS. BROWN: We'll reserve our questions. Thank you. * * * * * * * * 11:41 9?657?91?5 OF ESTES PAGE Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 216 of 220 215 1 NAME OF WITHESS: DAVID E. GARLAND D312 TAKEN: 31, 2017 2 CHANGES nun 3 PAGE LINE CHARGE REASON 4 32, line 10 of_E1_1_e General Counsel" eh_ould be ?part of the Office of the General Counsel." Reason: improve clarity 5 a?W?Hm?? 6 34L line 5 should be "incident." Reason: 7 misspelling. . 8 9 144, lines 16-17. regents? should be "regents emeriti." Lines 23-24 also refEr to regents emeriti. Reagen: To correctly 10 imam 11 180, line 22 "Mark Harper" should be "Ron Murff." Reason: incorrect name, 12 13 181. lines 8-10 "The only two who attended with me were Ron Murff and David Harper. Reason: recalled the namesasxmmal? 11:41 9195719115 Ham ESTES PARK awn Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 217 of 220 216 1 I, DAVID E. GARLAND, have read the foregoing 2 deposition and hereby affix my signature that same is 3 true and correct, except as noted above. Comrade 8 THE STATE OF Jae-mars) 9 COUNTY OF 10 Before me, ilYkEL? on this day 11 personally appeared DAVID E. GARLAND, known to me (or 12 pro?ved to me under oath or thr0ughT?gQ5hrNEr?mLL?mm 13 (description of identity card or other document) to be 14 the person whose name is Subscribed to the foregoing 15 instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the 16 same for the purposes and consideration therein 1? expressed. 18 Given under my hand and seal of office this 19 day of dung 2017. 2G 2 1 JENNIFER M. SUTER 22 NSJATE OF COLORADO TARYIDQD1640327UQ ?ora 23 My commission expires: 24 25 (DEPOSITION ADJOURNED AT APPROXIMATELY 4:41 P.M.) Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 218 of 220 217 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION 2 3 4 5 6 7 JANE DOE 1, JANE DOE 2, JANE * DOE 3, JANE DOE 4, JANE DOE * 5, and JANE DOE 6, * Plaintiffs, * * VS. * Cause No. 6:16-cv-173-RP * JURY TRIAL DEMANDED BAYLOR UNIVERSITY, * Defendant. * 8 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION DEPOSITION OF: DAVID E. GARLAND DATE TAKEN: MAY 31, 2017 9 10 I, Lorna G. Hildebrandt, Certified Shorthand Reporter 11 in and for the State of Texas, hereby certify to the 12 following: 13 That the witness, DAVID E. GARLAND, was duly sworn by 14 the officer and that the transcript of the oral 15 videotaped deposition is a true record of the testimony 16 given by the witness; 17 That the deposition transcript was submitted on the 18 5th day of June, 2017 to the witness through his 19 attorney of record, JIM DUNNAM, Esquire, for 20 examination, signature and return to me within 30 days 21 after submission; 22 23 24 25 That the amount of time used by each party at the deposition is as follows: JIM DUNNAM - 04 HOURS: 16 MINUTES ANDREA MEHTA - (NO TIME USED) CHAD W. DUNN - (NO TIME USED) LISA A. BROWN - (NO TIME USED) Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 219 of 220 218 1 DAVID R. ILER - (NO TIME USED); 2 That pursuant to information given to the deposition 3 officer at the time said testimony was taken, the 4 following includes counsel for all parties of record: 5 7 JIM DUNNAM, Attorney for Plaintiffs ANDREA MEHTA, Attorney for Plaintiffs CHAD W. DUNN, Attorney for Plaintiffs LISA A. BROWN, Attorney for Defendant DAVID R. ILER, Attorney for Defendant. 8 I further certify that I am neither counsel for, 6 9 related to, nor employed by any of the parties or 10 attorneys in the action in which this proceeding was 11 taken, and further that I am not financially or 12 otherwise interested in the outcome of the action. 13 14 15 Further certification requirements will be certified to after they have occurred. Certified to by me this 5th day of June, 2017. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 /s/ Lorna G. Hildebrandt______ LORNA G. HILDEBRANDT Texas CSR Number: 429 Expiration Date: 12-31-18 Firm Registration Number: 50 P.O. Box 7424 Waco, Texas 76714-7424 Telephone No.: 254/840-3661 Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 220 of 220 219 1 FURTHER CERTIFICATION 2 The original deposition was/was not returned to the 3 4 5 6 7 deposition officer on ___________________________, 2017; If returned, the attached Changes and Signature page contains any changes and the reasons therefor; If returned, the original deposition was delivered to JIM DUNNAM, Custodial Attorney; 8 That $____________ is the deposition officer's 9 charges to the Plaintiffs for preparing the original 10 11 deposition transcript and any copies of exhibits; That the deposition was delivered in accordance with 12 the Rules, and that a copy of this certificate was 13 served on all parties shown herein. 14 15 Certified to by me this ____ day of _____________, 2017. 16 _____________________________ LORNA G. HILDEBRANDT Texas CSR Number: 429 Expiration Date: 12-31-18 Firm Registration Number: 50 P.O. Box 7424 Waco, Texas 76714-7424 Telephone No.: 254/840-3661 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 * * * * * * * Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 1 of 58 EXHIBIT Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 2 of 58 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ******************************************************** 9 DAVID GARLAND TESTIMONY 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BEFORE TEXAS SENATE COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION MARCH 29, 2017 ******************************************************** Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 3 of 58 2 1 2 3 4 (Audio recording from 1:53:45) SENATOR WEST: Okay. Thank you very much. Pres. Garland. PRES. GARLAND: My name is David Garland. 5 I'm the Interim President of Baylor University, and I 6 want to thank you, Mr. Chairman and members, for 7 allowing me to testify on this bill. 8 9 We've already mentioned the significant number of -- and I don't want to talk about how 10 wonderful the TEG has been in its past 40 years, but 11 11 percent of the two -- 2,700 -- 778 students statewide 12 receiving the TEG attend Baylor University, and of these 13 2,943 students, 1,597 are minority students, and 962 are 14 are first gen students. 15 It's been very successful. I'm very proud 16 of our three student government association leaders. 17 Two of them receive TEG funds. 18 regents, one of them is a TEG recipient. 19 $10.4 million we received this past year goes 20 100 percent to the student, not to the university. 21 passed on to the student. 22 Of our two student And this It's And what Baylor would respectfully like -- 23 would want to request is that this TEG bill be decoupled 24 from the greater calls for transparency among the 25 state's private institutions. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 4 of 58 3 1 We are not against transparency. You know, 2 our Board of Regents in February implemented the 3 recommendations, 27 pages of recommendations of a 4 special independent governance review task force. 5 was led by Greg Brenneman, who is CEO of Home Depot. 6 Paul Foster, who I understand is a regent of another 7 state institution, was on it. 8 were formulated after reviewing the best practices from 9 groups such as the Association of Governing Boards of And these recommendations 10 Universities and Colleges and the American Bar 11 Association. 12 It And part of what is in the bill we already 13 have passed and implement. 14 publicly post our meeting dates, agendas and minutes. 15 We also publish our governance documents on the web. 16 That's baylor.edu/board of regents. 17 certificate of formulation bylaws, guidelines for board 18 operations, commitments and responsibilities, and then 19 we also publish the list of committee members and the 20 respective committee charges. 21 For example, we already now We have our We also, Mr. Baggett, now have open media 22 ability -- availability after the board meetings, which 23 reporters are briefed and they can ask any questions 24 regarding the university developments. 25 The governance task force considered Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 5 of 58 4 1 carefully, as I understand it, but ultimately 2 recommended against the board of regents conducting open 3 meetings for three reasons that we've already mentioned: 4 One is the concern about unnecessarily disclosing 5 competitive information; the other is that few other 6 leading private universities across the nation have 7 public open meetings, and those that they consulted that 8 did recommended against it; and these open meetings are 9 not consistent with the American Bar Association's 10 guidance for nonprofit corporations. 11 So thank you. 12 SENATOR WEST: 13 14 Senator? QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR SELIGER: 15 Q. Dr. Garland, thank you for being here today. 16 A. Yes, sir. 17 Q. You had said that one of your student regents is 18 a TEG recipient? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. How many TEG recipients filed complaints with the 21 university or law enforcement for sexual assault? 22 A. I personally -- I don't know that number. 23 Q. But you know your student regent did? 24 A. My student regent did? 25 Q. Yeah. You said your student regent got TEG -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 6 of 58 5 1 A. No -- Yeah, she got TEG. I do know that. I 2 don't know the exact number of persons filing for sexual 3 assaults or their names. 4 5 Q. It's kept confidential. You said that the minutes of the trustee meetings are published? 6 A. Yes, we are now publishing those. 7 Q. All of the minutes? 8 A. All of the minutes, as I understand it, yes, sir. 9 Q. I find that interesting, because Ms. Escamillia 10 said that publishing those minutes thought she would be 11 revelatory of some sort of proprietary information. 12 A. It may be simply we discuss tuition. What the 13 cost for tuition is we wouldn't publish exactly what 14 we're going to do, "Our tuition next year is going to be 15 this certain amount", but we discuss tuition. 16 17 Q. In the much talked about Pepper Hamilton Report, was there anything in that report that was proprietary? 18 A. No, not that I know of. 19 Q. Then why was it not released to the public? 20 A. The Pepper Hamilton Report is -- was not a 21 report. 22 to the regents. 23 understand they gave it orally to -- and then what I 24 think the regents decided to do was publish the findings 25 of fact, a summary without details and names, you know. It was findings of fact that they gave orally I was not President at that time. So I Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 7 of 58 6 1 I would assume if your daughter was one of those 2 victims, you would not necessarily appreciate her name 3 being published so it would be open and -- 4 5 Q. Aren't those things commonly redacted, though, in the case of sexual assault of a minor? 6 A. Pardon? 7 Q. Aren't those things generally redacted, though, 8 9 in the case of sexual assault of a minor? A. That's absolutely true, but the details that 10 would also have been published could easily identify a 11 victim, from what I understand. 12 details, you might be able to -- in a small community be 13 able to identify exactly who those persons were. 14 Q. In looking at the And so -- and so if this was delivered orally, 15 the entire report then would be subject to 16 attorney-client privilege and with no requirement to 17 make it public at all; is that correct? 18 A. I believe that would be correct. 19 Q. Can you understand if to some observers it might 20 look like it was done that way specifically so there 21 would be no document that could be made public or 22 subpoenaed or anything like that? 23 A. In talking with the regents, and we don't call -- 24 we call them "regents", not "trustees", but I do trust 25 them, and I do -- maybe some others don't, but I do Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 8 of 58 7 1 trust them because I know them personally. 2 their motivation was to act as quickly as possible and 3 to publish the event that -- I mean from what I 4 understand, it would be six months or more to do that, 5 and what they wanted to do is take action as quickly as 6 possible. 7 I do think And I do not know too many other universities in 8 the nation that ever took the action that we did in 9 firing -- firing basically a very successful football 10 coach. 11 other universities that ever published any document like 12 the findings of fact. 13 12 directors, the presidents of other institutions, I 14 think they were quite shocked that we were quite as 15 transparent as we were in identifying the 105 16 recommendations, for example. 17 And also, I think that I don't know too many When I released this to the Big I think the only other school that's ever done 18 something like that is Occidental in California. 19 were trying to be transparent, and we're not trying to 20 cover up what happened at Baylor. 21 Q. I'm sorry, I don't buy that for a minute. So we I 22 don't buy that for a minute. 23 but I think that's exactly what was going on, and that's 24 exactly why this bill has been filed. 25 Maybe you aren't today, Do your trustees sign some sort of nondisclosure Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 9 of 58 8 1 2 or secrecy agreement? A. I don't know that they do sign. I think they 3 may, but it is also the fact that they have a fiduciary 4 responsibility to the university. 5 Q. So you're not aware of whether -- Have you been 6 in your current position while there has been a regent 7 meeting? 8 A. Yes, absolutely. 9 Q. Okay. 10 11 So you're familiar with the conduct, and you don't know -A. And we have -- in executive session we have 12 discussion, "This is going to be -- this needs to be 13 kept in confidence." 14 15 16 Q. Okay. But you don't require some sort of pledge or agreement to sign a nondisclosure agreement? A. I don't know if it's signed or something, but I 17 do believe that there is the expectation that there 18 would be nondisclosure. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. Well, I understand that among trustees, as Ms. Escamillia says -A. And I don't know whether we force -- ask them to sign something specifically. Q. And as a manner of board of trustees policies, what are the sanctions there if anything is disclosed? A. I don't -- you know -- I don't know. Presumably, Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 10 of 58 9 1 they can -- in the recommendations that -- it talks 2 about how to dismiss trust -- regents who may violate 3 their fiduciary responsibility; so I think the sanction 4 would be that you would be removed from the -- from the 5 board. 6 SENATOR SELIGER: 7 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 8 9 Okay. Thank you. QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR WEST: 10 Q. Mr. President ... 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. ... I've got several questions of you. 13 Now, and I don't know whether there's a 14 distinction, but I need to know was the Pepper Hamilton 15 firm hired as investigators? 16 A. Yes, as I understand it. And you understand I 17 was not the President at the time. 18 in that, but I believe they were investigating. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. I was not involved So they weren't hired as lawyers, they were hired as investigators? A. Well, as -- as lawyers who would investigate what had happened. Q. Okay. But their primary purpose was to investigate? A. As lawyers, to let us know what had happened at Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 11 of 58 10 1 Baylor University. 2 Q. You understand the difference -- 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. -- of that? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Okay. So their primary purpose was to 7 investigate and to come up with findings of facts for 8 the board, correct? 9 A. Yes, they were hired by the board. 10 Q. All right. Now, in coming up with their findings 11 of facts, were they given broad latitude to review the 12 e-mails, mobile devices, Judicial Affairs, Title 9 13 files, personnel files and other documents? 14 A. Yes, sir. 15 Q. Of current and former Baylor employees? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Okay. 18 And you're telling us again that there was nothing -- no type of report reduced to writing -- 19 A. Yes, sir. 20 Q. -- that was presented to the Board of Regents? 21 A. Right. 22 Q. And so what about the notes? 23 24 25 Yes, sir. Did they have any notes that they used to make the presentation? A. Having heard the oral reports, I think they worked from notes, yes, sir. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 12 of 58 11 1 2 Q. Okay. So they had notes that they used in order to make the oral report? 3 A. Yes, sir. 4 Q. Were those -- Now, you know that there's an 5 investigation by the State right now, right? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Okay. Now, will that information in those notes 8 be made available as part of the investigation that's 9 being done by law enforcement? 10 11 A. I honestly don't know, but we've given them all of the information that they've asked for. 12 Q. Okay. Sir, let me -- 13 A. And we've also turned it over to the NCAA, as 14 well. 15 Q. There was -- The administrators, are you aware of 16 the names of the administrators that were involved in 17 some of the issues that bring you before this particular 18 panel today? 19 20 21 A. I am aware of those in Judicial Affairs that were named in the reports, yes, sir. Q. Okay. And does the report name all of the 22 administrators, current and former, that were involved 23 in this ... what we perceive as a cover-up? 24 25 A. I -- It names -- it deals with specific instances, as I remember, and primarily it is from Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 13 of 58 12 1 Judicial Affairs and Title 9 office and also -- 2 primarily also from the coaches in the football. 3 4 Q. Do you feel, sir, that there's been an exhaustive investigation of these issues at your university? 5 A. Yes, I do believe so. 6 Q. No stone has been left unturned? 7 A. There may be some stones, but we've tried to find 8 9 as many stones as we could to unturn. Q. And would it be a fair statement to say that you 10 or someone on your staff knows all of the individuals, 11 the administrators -- current and former administrators 12 that have been involved in what some would say would be 13 a culture of perpetuating sexual violence on your 14 campus? 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 I would say that I would know those who were named specifically from the investigation. Q. Okay. I don't have any further questions right now. A. And I would say those persons are no longer at Baylor University. Q. Okay. So which is -- which investigator, 22 Judicial Affairs investigator, improperly determined 23 that there was no jurisdiction? 24 25 A. I think what part of the problem was in Judicial Affairs, and like Title 9, they did not operate Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 14 of 58 13 1 according to a preponderance of evidence, and therefore, 2 we have changed all of our policies related to Title 9. 3 And I mean it's rather extensive in changing the 4 Title 9, all of our policies. 5 6 7 Q. What investigator made that determination, though, about the preponderance of evidence issue? A. Well, I think the cases that I knew about where 8 the victims felt like they were mistreated were when 9 they -- when they were asked about "How did you get in 10 that situation?" or "Were you inebriated?" or something 11 like that. 12 Those are questions we do not ask anymore. Any victim who comes will have absolute -- will 13 receive absolutely no punishment, regardless of the 14 situation, because we want to address the justice for 15 this victim. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. Yeah, but which investigators normally made those determinations? A. Do you know the names of them? I know the names that victims have told me and also that were in the report. Q. And are all of the names of the individuals that the victims told you, are they in the report? A. Yes. Yes, sir. SENATOR WEST: Okay. I'll hold off for a minute because there may be other questions. I guess not. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 15 of 58 14 1 SENATOR BIRDWELL: Mr. Chairman, if there's 2 no other members of the committee, I want to make sure 3 that I defer to the members of the committee first. 4 SENATOR WEST: Okay. 5 you'd like to ask a question. 6 SENATOR BIRDWELL: 7 QUESTIONS OF RAY MARTINEZ BY SENATOR BIRDWELL: 10 Q. 11 correct? 12 A. 13 14 15 16 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I want to begin, if I may, with Mr. Martinez. 8 9 Well, go ahead if You mentioned 39 private universities; is that We have 38 members of our association, Senator Birdwell. Q. And there are how many total private in the state, those who aren't members of the association? A. Sure. I don't know the exact number, but there 17 may be a few that are regionally accredited, site CSC 18 accredited that are perhaps more church-related higher 19 education institutions, more of a church-based 20 curriculum that are not members of our association; but 21 we're proud to say we have pretty much most of, if not 22 all of, the nonprofit private regionally accredited 23 institutions of higher education as members of our 24 association. 25 Of our 38 members, one is a private medical Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 16 of 58 15 1 school. 2 voting member. 3 private nonprofit institutions or one -- we have one 4 member that is a two-year private college, Jacksonville 5 College in Jacksonville, Texas. 6 7 8 9 Q. That's Baylor College of Medicine. And the other 37 are either four-year Yes, sir. So of those 39 universities, how many of them are faith-based? A. Sure. Of our 37 academic institutions, 36 are faith-based institutions or church-affiliated 10 institutions. 11 Rice University. 12 They are a Q. Okay. The only one that is not, Senator, is Let me -- let me ask a very frank 13 question, because I think it's the one element that has 14 not been discussed here. 15 How would being subject to open meetings change 16 the dynamics of private faith-based schools, given the 17 hostility to faith-based organizations today in our 18 nation's culture? 19 A. Well -- 20 Q. Because I think there's a fundamental First 21 22 Amendment issue here, too. A. Yes, sir. I guess I'll answer that in the 23 general sense, and then you can follow up if I don't get 24 to what you're trying to achieve. 25 I would say the discussion we had earlier, Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 17 of 58 16 1 insightful conversation, and one that I look forward to 2 continuing to have, particularly with Senator Seliger, 3 is what I was stressing about the balance and about how 4 there are certain things about private universities that 5 make us have to focus even perhaps more so than our 6 peers and our public or junior -- or sorry -- or 7 community college peers on remaining as competitive as 8 possible, because we don't have the funding stream. 9 And again, the public funding stream for the 10 public's community colleges certainly has dwindled, but 11 we don't have any kind of a funding stream other than 12 TEG and a few other programs that we're eligible for 13 that are State funded programs, but not anything like 14 TEG. 15 public dollars, but generally we are dependent upon 16 tuition and fees. 17 support or other perhaps federal sources of funding. 18 And so that's tricky in and of itself, if you TEG is the biggest. Or we have access to some We're dependent upon philanthropic 19 were to impose the Chapter 551 Government Code, but 20 another element of complexity is the fact that most, if 21 not all -- 37 of our members are church-affiliated 22 institutions; so there may be things specific that are 23 discussed in a governing board setting that are, as you 24 point out, first amendment issues or dealing with a 25 particular religious affiliation or church affiliation Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 18 of 58 17 1 for that institution that makes it even more complex to 2 impose -- now impose Chapter 551 of the Public 3 Information Act upon our institutions; so I hope that 4 gets to some of the answer you're -- 5 Q. It does, because -- Let me ask some more 6 fundamental TEG questions, if I may, because there's 7 been the -- the TEG is essentially a voucher program. 8 Is that a -- that may be too fundamental a description, 9 but I think fundamentally it is a voucher program at the 10 higher education level for Texas students to attend 11 private universities to help alleviate the student body 12 crowding in our publics. 13 came about? 14 15 A. So I'm going to answer that question as carefully as I can, Senator, without -- 16 17 Is that fundamentally why TEG SENATOR SELIGER: I notice he's looking at me -- 18 MR. MARTINEZ: I did. 19 SENATOR SELIGER: -- as a supporter of TEG 20 who's had to hold my nose just because of what you just 21 said. So I know (inaudible - overlapping voices). 22 SENATOR BIRDWELL: 23 SENATOR WEST: 24 25 I admit I did. Now, now, now, now, now. As a supporter of TEG myself. MR. MARTINEZ: And that's why I'm put in a Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 19 of 58 18 1 very tricky spot here. 2 SENATOR WEST: Yes, you are. 3 MR. MARTINEZ: And so here's my answer. The 4 answer is I'm not going to answer the question, 5 obviously, but I would say, Senator Birdwell, that a 6 traditional voucher program is usually provided when the 7 government doesn't have a say in that particular segment 8 of society or doesn't have the wherewithal. 9 For example, a voucher -- food stamps. You 10 give the person a voucher to go purchase food. 11 government is not a food distributor; so that's a 12 traditional voucher program. 13 the food business. 14 them a -- send him into the private sector, and let them 15 go get that. 16 The The government is not in Give the person a voucher, and give Or housing, Section 8. We're not in the 17 business of building housing necessarily by the 18 government; so you give somebody a voucher to go take 19 that voucher, shop it in the private sector. 20 That's not how TEG works. So again, I'm not 21 saying for or against vouchers. I'm just saying a 22 voucher doesn't work. 23 get a phone call back in, gosh, 1983 ... did we have 24 phones? 25 High School I didn't get a phone call from the I was a TEG recipient. I didn't But back in 1983 when I graduated from Alice Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 20 of 58 19 1 coordinating board saying "Ray, you get $3,000.00 in 2 TEG. 3 you want to go to." 4 not how it's ever worked. 5 BY SENATOR BIRDWELL: Go shop that around to whatever private university That's not how it works. 6 Q. The student makes the application for -- 7 A. We fill out a FAFSA. That's You know, I was recruited 8 by Southwestern out of high school and first of my 9 family to go to college; so I needed a lot of help with 10 financial aid, but the institution is the one that helps 11 you to figure out what your needs are financially. 12 then to determine the eligibility I had to meet 13 financial needs requirements and other eligibility 14 requirements, but I didn't get to take that voucher with 15 me to Austin College or to Shriner and then choose 16 Southwestern. 17 18 19 20 And That's not how it works. But again, I'm not opining one way or the other. I'm just telling you how it works. Q. Let me apologize for putting you in such a -- (inaudible - overlapping voices). 21 Let me apologize for putting you in an untenable 22 position first, but the nature of the question was 23 really getting to the dollars are with the student? 24 A. That's correct. 25 Q. It's not an appropriation for the university? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 21 of 58 20 1 A. That's correct, yes. 2 Q. And respecting the chairman's concern, there are 3 a number of universities that are abutting the 4 $5 million threshold here. 5 that are above the 5 million, if to maintain their 6 freedom of maneuver or, as you had mentioned earlier in 7 testimony, to avoid the camel's nose of government in 8 the tent of a private entity, would drop down below 5 9 million, what is the fundamental impact to the student 10 11 Would the two universities population of those universities? A. Well, I mean I think that the institutions would 12 have to make that decision themselves. 13 characteristic of a TEG recipient is somebody who 14 demonstrates financial need first and foremost, but I 15 can also tell you across our sector six out of every 10 16 TEG recipients are also PELL Grant recipients. 17 makes them among the most financially needy in higher 18 education. 19 Obviously, the That So six out of every 10 of TEG recipients. It's also true that we do very well, in terms of 20 our -- in terms of our minority diversity, a large 21 number of Hispanic, African-American, Asian-American 22 students that are TEG recipients; so obviously if any 23 institution chooses to not take TEG funds that they're 24 eligible for, it would -- it could potentially have an 25 impact on being able to recruit first gen college Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 22 of 58 21 1 students, minority college students, or other students 2 from other underserved populations, other underserved 3 categories, you know, low income students, students from 4 rural areas, etcetera. 5 characteristics of a typical TEG student. 6 7 8 9 All of those fit the QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR BIRDWELL: Q. Dr. Garland, let me ask you a couple of questions, if I may. 10 A. Sure. 11 Q. I think Mr. Martinez has already answered the 12 impact to diversity, disadvantaged students and the 13 like. 14 If -- and this is a regent/Baylor decision, but 15 if the decision was to drop below the 5 million in TEG 16 dollars and the impact that I think -- I think you had 17 raised an opinion about the impact to the student body, 18 does that just simply make your student body smaller, or 19 would Baylor replace -- 20 A. No. We've had students -- we've had over 40,000 21 applications this year for 3,300 slots. 36 percent of 22 these are minority students, or entering class last year 23 was 36 percent. 24 coming from out of state, and it may mean that we would 25 increase -- if we were to decide to cut down, it may Increasingly, about 34 percent are Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 23 of 58 22 1 mean that we would increase our out-of-state students. 2 Let me -- Do you mind if I just -- I got this 3 e-mail from a student last night. 4 knew -- 5 Q. May I ask Pres. Garland to read it, if I may? 6 SENATOR WEST: 7 PRES. GARLAND: 8 I don't know how she Sure, that's fine. She says she's met me a couple of times. 9 "I'm writing you to voice my concerns about 10 Baylor losing the TEG bill. As a low income student, I 11 rely on financial aid to get me through college. 12 expected family contribution based on FAFSA for the past 13 two years has been zero, making me a full need student. 14 I truly hope that the TEG stays in place because I need 15 it to come to Baylor. 16 transfer. 17 some, that may be nothing, but to me and my family that 18 is months of 40-hours-a-week of work. 19 generation Hispanic girl." 20 She works 20 hours a week-plus at Whataburger. 21 comes from a single-parent home. 22 affects students like me," as she interprets it. 23 hope that Baylor cares about the students who don't wear 24 the North Face brand every day, who don't drive the 25 latest sports car or not Greek -- in Greek life and My If it does not, I would have to I know that the fund is around $5,000.00. To I'm a first She says where she's from. She "This bill directly "I Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 24 of 58 23 1 aren't Baylor Legacies." 2 She perceives this bill is directly 3 affecting her. 4 BY SENATOR BIRDWELL: 5 6 Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Let me ask a couple other. 7 The Pepper Hamilton Report had 105 -- 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. -- recommendations, did it not, Mr. Garland? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. And of those, 80 have already been actioned? 12 A. Over 85. 13 Q. Over 85 now? 14 A. And we'll have them completed. 15 And please, I'm not an expert on the Pepper 16 Hamilton Report. 17 President, my responsibility was primarily to implement 18 the 105 recommendations. 19 that. 20 investigator to confirm that we have done those and then 21 turn them over also to the Big 12 for them to have an 22 external investigator to determine that we've completed 23 them. 24 25 I was -- When I came in as Interim We're almost to the end of We'll be turning those over to an outside So my responsibility is primarily, as I understood it, the 105 recommendations; so I don't know Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 25 of 58 24 1 all of the details related to the Pepper Hamilton 2 Report. 3 Q. But I think fundamentally as a private 4 institution, you are very much tethered to the free 5 market. 6 A. Yes, sir. 7 Q. -- you sell a commodity called education -- 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. -- not unlike Starbucks selling coffee? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. So fundamentally you are tied to the free market. I mean fundamentally -- 12 So if Baylor regents and leaders don't act quickly 13 within that free market of education as a commodity, 14 whether it's students, staff, faculty, you'll begin to 15 lose those folks in the free market of other 16 universities seeking students and the like. 17 18 19 Has your student population seen an increase, decrease? A. You said 40,000 applications? Our applications this year increased from last 20 year from when we set a record. 21 applications have increased over the last year; so the 22 Baylor -- the demand for a Baylor education is still 23 high across the country. 24 25 SENATOR BIRDWELL: Our completed Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for affording a visiting senator the Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 26 of 58 25 1 opportunity to visit. It's an exceptional discussion. 2 I have serious concerns, as my questions have laid out, 3 with the nature of this bill. 4 Senator Menendez's concern. 5 universities that are only $200,000.00 short of meeting 6 5 million. 7 their safety and the like? If -- And I think I share You know, there are some Are their students no less important and 8 So I appreciate the courtesy that you've 9 given me, and I hope I've acted courteously with the 10 committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 11 SENATOR SELIGER: 12 SENATOR WEST: 13 SENATOR BIRDWELL: 14 Mr. Chairman -- I'm sorry. You're a visiting senator? Well, I'm not assigned to this committee; so I used to -- 15 SENATOR WEST: Oh. 16 SENATOR BIRDWELL: I used to vice-chair, and 17 then I used to be on it; and so I'm pretty familiar with 18 a lot of things here, but I appreciate the courtesy that 19 you, as having the gavel, Senator West, and Senator 20 Seliger have given me. 21 SENATOR WEST: 22 23 24 25 Thank you. Thank you. QUESTIONS OF RAY MARTINEZ BY SENATOR SELIGER: Q. Mr. Martinez, it's an interesting question that Senator Birdwell asked, if a university simply went down Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 27 of 58 26 1 below $5 million. 2 doesn't go to the university. 3 And so if the TEG wasn't available to go to Baylor, 4 there's no reason to think that that student wouldn't 5 qualify for TEG to go to one of your other 37 -- 36 6 institutions in this case? 7 A. It's important to know that the money No, sir. 8 SENATOR SELIGER: 9 SENATOR WEST: 10 11 12 It goes with the student. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR WATSON: Q. I just would like to say something about the TEG 13 discussion. And, Dr. Garland, you probably wouldn't be 14 -- if this bill were to pass in its current form, you 15 probably wouldn't be the person to end up advising the 16 board or making a recommendation with regard to how you 17 might get around this bill? 18 A. I hope not. 19 Q. Yeah, I bet. 20 I hope they hire somebody soon. I bet that's right. So -- And it's not lost on anybody in this room 21 that, you know, I love Baylor University ... a lot, but 22 I've been extraordinarily disappointed and very sad 23 about all that has gone on and, frankly, in the way and 24 the efforts that Baylor has made or not made to restore 25 confidence in Baylor. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 28 of 58 27 1 While you won't be on the decision -- probably in 2 on that decision if this bill was to pass exactly as it 3 is, it would be even more disappointing if what Baylor 4 decided to do was to reduce the amount of Tuition 5 Equalization Grants, that students that you have 6 described need those grants in order to go to that 7 university, just so that the school could avoid what 8 this body would have considered greater transparency. 9 Regardless of how someone feels about Baylor 10 University, whether they love it or they hate it, one of 11 the problems at Baylor University has been a lack of 12 transparency, and if it was to continue that or 13 exacerbate that and, by doing it, do it on the backs of 14 students that otherwise wouldn't be able to go to 15 Baylor, that would be even worse. 16 A. Senator Watson, I fully agree. 17 SENATOR WATSON: 18 SENATOR WEST: 19 22 Are there other questions? Senator Taylor? 20 21 Thank you. QUESTIONS OF RAY MARTINEZ BY SENATOR TAYLOR: Q. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 23 Real quick, in your knowledge, has this ever been 24 an issue before where private universities were asked to 25 be subject to Open Records and the Public Information Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 29 of 58 28 1 2 Act? A. Sir, the only instance, Senator Taylor, would be 3 what we -- what I talked about from the last session, 4 that there was a bill that required -- and of our 38 5 members I think the last count I had was 22 of our 38 6 members have certified peace officers, in other words, a 7 Campus Police Department. 8 have just some sort of a security force that doesn't 9 have commissioned peace officers. The others would probably But SB 308 required 10 that any private university in Texas that has 11 commissioned peace officers employed by their university 12 would be subject for -- or law enforcement authorities 13 would be subject to Chapter 552 of the Government Code, 14 which is the Open Records Act. 15 that I'm aware of that we impose any aspect of our 16 Public Information Act upon private universities. 17 Q. That's the only instance And, you know, this is obviously coming out of a 18 situation that's been going on for now a couple of 19 years, but it has to do with criminal activity, I mean 20 the suspected sexual assault and how they were handling 21 all of that. 22 23 24 25 Aren't you guys already open to scrutiny and investigations for criminal activity? A. Well, certainly there are -- I mean the answer is yes, and there are certainly important federal laws in Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 30 of 58 29 1 place, the Clarity Act, the Violence Against Women Act, 2 Title 9 regulations that have been very strongly 3 enforced by the previous administration. 4 the current administration is going to do with regard to 5 Title 9, but I don't think there's going to be any 6 backing down from the requirements under Title 9 for 7 campus sexual violence or campus sexual assault. 8 9 We'll see what So certainly that's applicable to all institutions of higher education, public and private 10 alike. 11 We take those federal laws very seriously, and we're 12 doing everything we can to make sure that we are fully 13 complying and then some with all aspects of federal and 14 new state laws that might be -- that might be voted upon 15 this session that also deal with campus sexual violence, 16 campus sexual assault. 17 SENATOR TAYLOR: 18 19 20 21 And I can speak for our sector, our 38 members. Thank you. QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR TAYLOR: Q. Dr. Garland, does Baylor have public access to your board meetings? 22 A. Say that again? 23 Q. Does Baylor -- do the Board of Regents board 24 25 meetings, are they open to the public at all? A. No, they're not, sir. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 31 of 58 30 1 2 Q. You said you have the press available immediately afterwards? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. So what have you changed between before all of 5 this started and what's happening now, as far as the 6 board meetings? 7 A. Well, what we have changed is the 27 pages of 8 recommendations. Now we've published all of this on the 9 Board of Regent -- on the website, all of the details 10 that are requested in the Senate Bill. 11 have concern about is the open meetings where anybody 12 could come in and attend the meeting. 13 Q. And what we only Well, you know, one of the things that did come 14 out in the Pepper Hamilton Report of the 105 reg -- it 15 did refer to things happening on the Board of Regents, 16 and we've never heard anything about what that was. 17 These are obviously -- you were worried about students' 18 privacy, but we've never heard what the Board of 19 Regents' actions were that were problems that we're 20 fixing, and we've never heard what's being corrected on 21 that. 22 A. I think -- well, I think, you know, again, I'm 23 not the expert on the Pepper Hamilton. I think what may 24 -- what that was addressing is not coverups but simply 25 persons that -- coaches could go directly to regents and Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 32 of 58 31 1 get special considerations. 2 Q. But we haven't learned who those regents were? 3 A. I personally don't know who those regents are 4 myself. 5 Q. And I think one of the frustrations -- and here's 6 my concern. We have a situation at Baylor that a lot of 7 people are frustrated about, and I think we're going 8 into areas where we've never gone before as far as 9 requiring private universities to be subject to these 10 laws that we're talking about, but there is a 11 frustration within the community, within the Baylor 12 community, about the board. 13 situation at your institution is the same. 14 basically develops the board, and they pick who the 15 board members are. 16 A. Excuse me. And apparently your The board Do you-all have any -Not entirely, because 25 percent of 17 the regents are appointed by the Baptist General 18 Convention of Texas. 19 regents. 20 regents; so it's not entirely simply a -- other people 21 have influence on who takes part in the Board of 22 Regents. 23 Q. How many board members are regents? 24 A. We have 36. 25 Q. 36. The alumni elect their three B Association elects -- or nominates the So nine of those are Baptist General Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 33 of 58 32 1 2 3 Convention? A. I think maybe less than that, and the number keeps changing. 4 Q. And then three are alumni? 5 A. It would break down to three alumni, elected by 6 7 8 the alumni -- or nominated by the alumni. Q. And then one from the Baylor Foundation; is that right? 9 A. B -- B Association, yeah. 10 Q. The B Association? 11 A. Yeah. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. And then we now have added student voting, 14 student regents who are voting regents, and then also 15 faculty regents who are voting members. 16 SENATOR TAYLOR: 17 20 All right. Thank you, Dr. Garland. 18 19 Okay. QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR WEST: Q. Dr. Garland, just looking at some of the findings 21 of facts, Baylor admits that unnamed university 22 personnel discourage rather than encourage participation 23 in the university's Title 9 processes on page 7 of the 24 finding of facts. 25 personnel were that discouraged that? You don't know who those unnamed Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 34 of 58 33 1 A. Discouraged -- Excuse me. 2 Q. Discouraged participation in the university's 3 4 Discouraged ... Title 9 processes. A. I think that was in the coaching staffs. They 5 tried to -- I mean we have e-mails that say that they 6 want to keep this incident out of Judicial Affairs. 7 8 Q. Okay. I think that's -- So the coaching staff talked to the victim, encouraged them not to -- 9 A. It is very interesting that the victims -- 10 Q. Let me finish my question. 11 A. Excuse me. 12 Q. -- encouraged the victims not to participate in 13 14 the process? A. As I understand, many of the victims, instead of 15 going to the Title 9 Office, went to coaches. 16 find that difficult to understand why they did, but they 17 had a close association with the coaches. 18 the coaches to take action. 19 And I They expected And I think if they were discouraged, it would be 20 that we had a system in which football -- particularly 21 the football team wanted to keep their disciplinary 22 procedures in-house and avoid going to Judicial Affairs. 23 24 25 Q. And so when that finding of fact was made, that's what Pepper Hamilton told the board? A. I was not there. I was not there to witness what Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 35 of 58 34 1 they told the board, but I believe that that's what they 2 told them that resulted in the dismissal of the football 3 coach and other staff, other football staff. 4 5 Q. Okay. And the football staff reported up through the -- to the administration -- 6 A. No. 7 Q. All right. 8 A. I'm sorry. 9 Q. So the football staff and coach reported up to 10 They reported up to the head coach. Let me finish. the Athletic Director? 11 A. That's correct. 12 Q. And the Athletic Director -- 13 A. No, not always. 14 From what I understand, they did not always report to the Athletic Director. 15 Q. Did they report to the Judicial Affairs Office? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Just -- You have a situation here where you have 18 Judicial Affairs. 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. It seems -- 21 A. And we also had a Title 9 Office. 22 Q. A Title 9 Office and a Football Department. Did 23 it ever -- And I haven't read the whole report, but it 24 would seem as though that if you had a series of young 25 ladies saying that they were sexually assaulted and then Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 36 of 58 35 1 they presented before the Judicial Affairs Department, 2 who then determined -- says that they didn't have 3 jurisdiction, then that would have alerted the 4 administration. 5 A. Would that not be a fair assumption? I think that's a fair assumption, and that's what 6 I think precipitated the hiring of Pepper Hamilton to 7 investigate. 8 9 Q. Those individuals that continuously said that there was "no fire in the smoke" that was being 10 presented, are those persons identified in your findings 11 of facts? 12 A. Explain -- 13 Q. The Judicial Affairs, Title 9 -- 14 A. One person -- 15 Q. -- outside of the Athletics Department. 16 A. One person in Judicial Affairs appeared. 17 name -- and I was out of -- 18 Q. I'm not blaming this on you. 19 A. Okay. 20 Her No, but I believe -- I'll take full blame. I just -- 21 Q. I understand, I understand. 22 A. But, you know, I was not -- I was not in the city 23 at that time. I was on sabbatical leave, and -- but I 24 understand that in the newspaper the name of the 25 Judicial Affairs officer did appear and -- Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 37 of 58 36 1 2 Q. And that was the only Judicial Affairs officer that was involved in this process? 3 A. That's, as I understand it, correct, yes. 4 Q. And you understand that from ... 5 A. Just from the name -- the only name I've ever 6 heard. 7 Q. And that's also a part of the finding of facts? 8 A. The names are not there in the findings of facts. 9 Q. Why is that? 10 A. Because I think we -- I think -- I can't answer 11 that. 12 trying to keep this confidential for the persons 13 involved. My guess, my inference would be that they were 14 Q. But that's just the point of this. 15 A. But that name did appear in the newspaper. 16 Q. And it's just one person? 17 A. What? 18 Q. It's just one person? 19 A. As I understand, yes. 20 Q. And that's the Judicial Affairs person. 21 about Title 9? 22 newspaper? What Did that person's name appear in the I haven't read all of this. 23 A. No. No, that person's name -- 24 Q. Well, who is that person? 25 A. The person in charge of Title 9 was Juan Gonzales Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 38 of 58 37 1 -- or Juan Alejandro. 2 Q. Is he still an employee? 3 A. Yes, he is, but he was not -- in other words, it 4 wasn't -- they didn't go through the Title 9 Office. 5 This is a problem. 6 procedures that we had in place; and so there was -- 7 there was an evasion -- They didn't go through the proper 8 Q. When you say "they", you're talking about -- 9 A. I'm talking about the football. 10 When a victim goes to a football coach, we now 11 make it very clear through Title 9 training that 12 everyone must report to the Title 9 Office. 13 time, they were not reporting. 14 it -- 15 Q. At that They were trying to do So are you telling -- are you telling this 16 committee that all of the victims went to the football 17 coach? 18 A. I do not know all of the victims did that. I 19 know some went to Judicial Affairs and didn't receive 20 what we would now consider to be proper procedures. 21 Q. The person or persons responsible for advising 22 those victims that went through the Judicial Affairs 23 Office, are they still employed by Baylor University? 24 A. Yes, they are. 25 Q. They are? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 39 of 58 38 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Okay. 3 Do you know the names of those individuals? 4 A. I know the name of that individual, yes. 5 Q. It was one individual that was advising all of 6 them? 7 A. 8 9 Not all, but -- yeah, ultimately making a decision. Q. I really don't know this, and the question I'm 10 asking is this: 11 committee is that based on the investigate -- the Pepper 12 Hamilton investigation that was not reduced to writing, 13 that's memorialized in the findings of facts developed 14 by the Board of Regents, the victims of sexual assault 15 went to the Athletic Department and the Judicial Affairs 16 Department; is that correct? 17 A. What you're telling the members of the I believe that's it. And I don't know all of the 18 details of all of the victims, what happened, but I 19 believe -- 20 Q. Well, I'm not asking that. I'm saying they 21 either went to the football coach, the Athletic 22 Department, or Judicial Affairs? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Okay. 25 Now, when they went to Judicial Affairs, was it just one person or several persons advising them? Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 40 of 58 39 1 2 A. I believe there's primarily one person. That's the only person I know of that advised them. 3 Q. Did you hear what you just said, "I believe"? 4 A. Yes. 5 I don't know for -- I don't know all of those details. 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. Yeah. 8 Q. And that Judicial Affairs person is still there? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Okay. 11 A. Bethany McCraw is the name that appeared in the 12 13 Who is that person? newspaper. Q. Okay. All right. You can understand or 14 appreciate where this committee is as relates to the 15 bill as filed by Chairman Seliger. 16 and appreciate that? You can understand 17 A. Sure. 18 Q. Now, Baylor's a great institution. I concur with 19 Kirk Watson, Baylor's a great institution. 20 when we have victims of sexual assault, they've got to 21 be treated with respect, and in this instance that 22 wasn't done. 23 A. But I mean I would amend that that would be -- and we 24 recognize that, and my job was to make sure that never 25 happens again. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 41 of 58 40 1 SENATOR WEST: 2 SENATOR TAYLOR: 3 Any other questions? One quick question, Mr. Chairman. 4 SENATOR WEST: 5 SENATOR TAYLOR: Just one quick question. Ms. Escamillia or Ray, is 6 there any reason that Incarnate Word is here today, with 7 the exception of the fact that you just happen to be 8 taking more than $5 million of tuition education grants? 9 10 12 14 SENATOR TAYLOR: Thank you. QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR TAYLOR: Q. 15 16 No, there's no other reason. 11 13 MS. ESCAMILLIA: Just one more question. And I think you just said Bethany McCraw is still there, but hasn't she left? 17 A. No. She's still there. 18 Q. I thought she had, but that's all right. 19 And I think kind of following along with Senator 20 West, part of the frustration is when the first numbers 21 came out on the sexual assaults and all of that, there 22 was a large number, and it's moved around a lot since 23 then, but it wasn't only football, right? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. And it seems like the only people we've ever Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 42 of 58 41 1 heard held accountable were people in the football 2 program, and that's kind of the frustration that's out 3 there is we don't really know if we've gotten all of the 4 problem out of there. 5 trying to fix it, and I think Baylor's in much better 6 shape going forward, having gone through this horrendous 7 experience; but at the same time, if we still have 8 people around that were a part of this problem, I think 9 they need to be cleaned out, as well. I mean I -- and currently you're And that's really 10 one of the frustrations we have is that we don't feel 11 like that's happened, and we're not getting that 12 transparency. 13 I think, frankly, taking on this bill and making 14 this new law because of your situation at Baylor is 15 probably bad law, personally, but there is still 16 frustration out there that the whole story has not been 17 told, and that's what the people are wanting to know is 18 getting the whole story out there. 19 I would hope you talk about as you-all finish up 20 your -- you know -- going through the changes, there 21 were some things in there about regents that have not 22 been addressed publicly, and at some point I think that 23 needs to be -- needs to be done. 24 25 And you know, it's unfortunate that you're here today because you weren't here during a lot of this. It Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 43 of 58 42 1 would have been nice if Baylor had sent someone who was 2 actually here at the time and had a part in running some 3 of this and is still there. 4 So I guess that's all I have. 5 SENATOR WEST: And let me say this: Yes, we 6 are reading in the newspaper that a certain format of 7 your institution are being indicted or reindicted, but 8 you can't sit up and tell me as a seasoned attorney that 9 there's not some sort of criminal conspiracy where you 10 have representatives of the Athletic Department that 11 knew about this and members of your Judicial staff that 12 knew about this and had turned another head. 13 That is just like committing sexual assault 14 as the main -- as the main perpetrator. 15 their other head, and to me, there is criminal 16 liability. 17 will indict that is altogether something different, but 18 there is criminal liability. 19 "suspect" shouldn't be the only one held criminally 20 responsible if, indeed, the cases prove beyond a 21 reasonable doubt that this occurred, responsible for 22 this conduct. 23 Now, whether or not the District Attorney And the, quote-unquote, Yes. 24 25 They've turned QUESTIONS OF DONNIS BAGGETT BY MR. TAYLOR: Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 44 of 58 43 1 2 Q. One last question, Mr. Chairman. You know, as far as the reporting of these 3 incidents and coaching staff, which I think is very 4 unusual that victims of sexual assault would go to the 5 coach, but then we've got the Judicial Affairs, but then 6 also the Baylor police. 7 then there have been -- there were numerous instances 8 that the Baylor police didn't act on, and that's never 9 been publicly addressed either. And we've heard reports since 10 You know, we found out later that the Chief had 11 been fired but never heard what the reasons were, what 12 they were (inaudible). 13 protecting students' identities, we're protecting adults 14 who are working in the university, and that's -- and 15 that is the frustration. 16 At some point we're not We're all about protecting students. We need to 17 do that. 18 do that, but at the same time, what happened? 19 are the adults that were in the room and involved in the 20 situation that may or may not still be there, and that's 21 the frustration. 22 And I think Baylor's in a better position to And you And I think we have the law we were just talking 23 about earlier about the Police Department. 24 been Open Records? 25 get a story of what happened with the Baylor Police You're in the press. Has it ever Did you ever Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 45 of 58 44 1 2 Chief? A. Senator, thank you for asking. I have not seen 3 anything about what happened to the Baylor Police Chief, 4 but there was an attempt to get at some of the police 5 reports regarding all of this. 6 filed a request with the Attorney General's Office 7 saying that they shouldn't be made public because it was 8 a violation of FERPA to get the investigative records of 9 some of these cases; so we've been thwart -- we, being 10 And as I recall, Baylor the press, have been thwarted. 11 You know, I just happened to pick up this morning 12 my Baylor Lariat pen, which is about out of ink, but 13 I've been making a few notes here. 14 journalism student at Stephen F. Austin way back when we 15 used rocks and chisels to write with, there was an old 16 saying: 17 out." 18 When I was a "If your momma says she loves you, check it Well, it's kind of hard to check it out when you 19 (A) can't get into the Board of Regents meeting, and (B) 20 you can't get at the records that you need. 21 are experiencing some of that frustration as legislators 22 now. 23 24 25 And you-all As the media attempts to cover this, it has been thwarted again and again by the lack of transparency. Q. Let me say I'm now specifically referring to Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 46 of 58 45 1 something that had to do with the Police Department on 2 campus. 3 A. Yes, sir. 4 Q. And we already have a law on that. 5 A. Yes, sir. 6 Q. And I'm just curious why that law is not working 7 8 in this case. A. I wish I could answer that. 9 10 11 12 QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR WEST: Q. And in terms of FERPA, Dr. Garland, can't a student waive their rights under FERPA? 13 A. Yes, they can. 14 Q. Okay. So if, indeed, the media is trying to get 15 to something and then you say that they can't have it 16 because of FERPA, before a determination is made that 17 it's not available because of the FERPA exemption, is 18 the student that the information is associated with 19 asked and told -- 20 A. We would certainly release it. 21 Q. Well, let me finish. 22 Okay? -- asked and told that -- i.e., that the media is 23 attempting to get this on purpose and whether or not 24 they want to waive their rights? 25 that? Are the students told Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 47 of 58 46 1 A. Are they ... 2 Q. Are the students asked whether or not they want 3 to waive their right under FERPA before you-all claim 4 the exception? 5 A. I don't know if we ask them to do that. 6 Q. So it's something you just deal with informally? 7 A. You know, I'm not sure what the policy would be 8 for that, but if the student wants it released, then we 9 certainly would do it. 10 11 Q. Well, I think you misunderstand my question. As an example -- 12 A. Do we ask the student is that -- 13 Q. Sir, please hold on a second. 14 Senator Taylor asked him about the Chief of 15 Police. 16 is my understanding that the university asserted an 17 exception under FERPA. 18 The media attempted to get the information. Am I right about that? MR. BAGGETT: What the media attempted to 19 get was some of the police reports, not information on 20 the firing of the Police Chief. 21 attempting to get when FERPA was cited were the police 22 reports. 23 It SENATOR WEST: Okay. But what we were You were attempting to 24 get the police reports where FERPA was cited. Is the 25 student asked whether or not they want to waive their Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 48 of 58 47 1 rights under FERPA in those instances? 2 DR. GARLAND: I don't think they are, but 3 that makes -- I don't think they are. 4 SENATOR WEST: 5 Okay. Ray, you were about to say something? 6 MR. MARTINEZ: Yes, sir, if I could. 7 SENATOR WEST: I do want to get your name. 8 MR. MARTINEZ: Ray Martinez, President of 9 Independent Colleges and Universities of Texas. 10 I do want to clarify, Senator Taylor, you 11 asked an important question about SB 308, that that law 12 is working, but -- and it is true that requests come in, 13 not just at Baylor, but many of our institutions since 14 that law was passed and signed into law by Governor 15 Abbott. 16 17 It became effective September 1 of 2015. SENATOR WEST: I thought you were going to ask about this right here. 18 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, it does get to that, SENATOR WEST: Well, let me ask this quick 22 MR. MARTINEZ: Okay, sir. 23 SENATOR WEST: -- just ask this quick MR. MARTINEZ: Sure. 19 Senator. 20 21 24 25 -- question. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 49 of 58 48 1 SENATOR WEST: Is there any federal law that 2 prohibits a student from waiving their right under FERPA 3 from disclosure? 4 MR. MARTINEZ: 5 MS. ESCAMILLIA: 6 SENATOR WEST: 7 MS. ESCAMILLIA: 8 9 Do you want to -May I, Senator? Yes. Cynthia Escamillia, General Counsel at University of the Incarnate Word. Generally under the -- under Senate Bill 10 308, the Public Record Information Act as it relates to 11 law enforcement records and private university police 12 officers, FERPA is generally not any kind of a waiver or 13 any kind of an exception. 14 The law enforcement records are separate and 15 apart from the FERPA protections of students. 16 time that FERPA would come into that is if that law 17 enforcement record was shared with an administrator, but 18 to the extent that it completely resides within the 19 Police Department, FERPA is not applicable. 20 The only So for example, when we receive requests for 21 police reports that involve students, FERPA is totally 22 outside of that process, and we do produce those. 23 SENATOR WATSON: Okay. And as I understand 24 what happened in the request from the Attorney General 25 to shield some of that, what happened was ... and I may Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 50 of 58 49 1 be wrong about this, but I think that's where you read 2 it, is one of the potential flaws in 308 is that it's 3 supposed to be subject to FERPA, but what happens is 4 your Police Department gets a report, which now under 5 308 generally would be something that the public would 6 get to see, but if they then take that police report and 7 hand it to an administrator, they would create a 8 situation where that is now protected, right? 9 part of what some people have been frustrated with at And that 10 Baylor has been that that happened, and that you may 11 have had administrators that were over more than one 12 entity of the university that created some potential -- 13 SENATOR WEST: My question is in that 14 scenario can a student waive -- is there any federal 15 impediment law that would prevent a student from waiving 16 disclosure of FERPA? 17 18 19 MS. ESCAMILLIA: Sir, they have the absolute right to waive. SENATOR WEST: That's exactly right. So in 20 instances where there have been requests for disclosure, 21 can the students at Baylor that are the subjects of 22 these investigations, Counselor, waive their rights 23 under FERPA to disclose that information? 24 25 MS. ESCAMILLIA: can, yes, sir. I would expect that they Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 51 of 58 50 1 SENATOR WEST: Okay. And that the 2 university -- does the university have an obligation, 3 Counselor, to make certain that students know that 4 information is being requested and that they have the 5 right to waive their rights under FERPA for release of 6 that information? 7 MS. ESCAMILLIA: Well, if I may, Senator, 8 I'm very uncomfortable taking a legal position with 9 respect to Baylor. 10 I can tell you at the University of the Incarnate Word -- 11 SENATOR WEST: 12 MS. ESCAMILLIA: Generally, then. Okay. -- our practice does not 13 reach to that level because we do provide police 14 reports; so I can't tell you what their practice would 15 be. 16 From a legal standpoint, yes, students can 17 always be requested to waive their FERPA rights so that 18 information can be provided to a requestor. 19 20 QUESTIONS OF RAY MARTINEZ BY SENATOR WEST: 21 Q. Yes, sir. 22 A. Mr. Chairman, if I could just also give one quick 23 footnote to this very important discussion, there are -- 24 under Chapter 552, which is what we're talking about 25 with SB 308, the Open Records Act, a portion about Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 52 of 58 51 1 public information, there are other exemptions that are 2 allowed to be requested; so some of these documents may 3 not just be a FERPA issue. 4 disagree with my fellow panelists here, but -- and I'm 5 not speaking to the Baylor situation. 6 to speak to any particular incident at Baylor about what 7 they might have not produced. 8 9 And I'm not trying to I'm not qualified SB 308 is working is what I want to make sure that I say, because you can to a police report, but it 10 is also true that there are certain exemptions that any 11 institution, not just Baylor, can say "There's an 12 ongoing investigation; so we cannot produce the top 13 sheet of that police report at this moment. 14 it to you later." 15 We'll give I don't know if that's what has happened in any 16 of the instances with the Baylor requests. 17 to make sure that we understand that, or at least from 18 my perspective, SB 308 is working the way we -- the way 19 it was supposed to be working, but ... but you can't 20 fault any entity that's covered by Chapter 552 from 21 relying upon those exemptions that are -- 22 Q. Well, here's a question I have. I just want Now, whether an 23 institution is a public or private institution, should 24 students be made aware of their rights under FERPA? 25 A. No question, sir. I don't know that we -- there Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 53 of 58 52 1 2 3 4 shouldn't be an argument to that. Q. Should they be made aware by a mutual and detached party, as opposed to just the university? A. Well, I think trust is important here, and I do 5 think that one of the things that we've learned 6 certainly throughout the years is that it's important to 7 provide training, and it's important to provide 8 education to our students, particularly when they become 9 -- when they come on as freshman to our campuses. 10 And so I think there ought to be an obligation. 11 There probably is some component -- I can't speak to 12 that because I'm not on campus, but there's probably 13 some component to say -- to help these students 14 understand what it is -- what resources you have 15 available here at this institution. 16 something we need to look closer at to be sure they 17 understand their FERPA rights, as well. 18 19 20 Perhaps that's QUESTIONS OF DR. DAVID GARLAND BY SENATOR TAYLOR: Q. Quick question. Dr. Garland, is the General 21 Counsel for Baylor that was there during this incident 22 -- during the incidents that caused the investigation, 23 is that General Counsel still hired or employed by 24 Baylor? 25 A. That General Counsel passed away. Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 54 of 58 53 1 SENATOR TAYLOR: So it would have been 2 helpful to have your current General Counsel here to 3 answer some of the questions that were collaterally 4 answered by Incarnate Word's counsel, but I appreciate 5 your testimony. 6 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 7 SENATOR WEST: 8 9 10 Senator Seliger. QUESTIONS OF CYNTHIA SANCHEZ ESCAMILLIA BY SENATOR SELIGER: Q. Ms. Escamillia, would you clear this up? My 11 understanding is if there is a police report, and I'm 12 going to assume ... correct me if I'm wrong ... if this 13 is applicable to both civil authorities and campus 14 police, if there is a police report, that in and of 15 itself, it is not covered by FERPA? 16 17 18 A. When it is not shared with other campus personnel, it is not covered by FERPA. Q. If campus personnel has requested that report and 19 then has been given that report, then it is covered by 20 FERPA? 21 A. As I understand the law, yes, sir. 22 Q. Which would be kind of a convenient way to see to 23 it that such information was not released by just simply 24 asking and being given the police report, correct? 25 A. Sir, I can't comment on whether it would be Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 55 of 58 54 1 convenient or not. 2 justification or an educational justification for that. 3 4 Q. I would hope that there's a business But it could just be used to obscure the report, could it not? 5 A. Sir, I can ... I can completely -- 6 Q. I'm a bigger fan of deviousness than you are. 7 8 9 10 [Laughter.] A. I'm comfortable responding that once it is shared it does become a FERPA protected document. motivations behind that, sir, I cannot speak to that. 11 12 SENATOR SELIGER: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 13 14 And as to SENATOR WEST: Is there anyone else who would like to testify for or against Senate Bill 1092? 15 Yes. 16 Don, we have about two minutes. 17 MR. ADAMS: 18 SENATOR WEST: 19 Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Would you please state your name and who you represent? 20 MR. ADAMS: My name is Don Adams. I'm a 21 former member of the Senate. I passed -- in 1973 I 22 passed the Open Meetings and Open Records Act through 23 the Senate. 24 squirming that you saw up here and all of the reticence 25 you saw up here is old news to me. And let me tell you that all of the They all squirmed, Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 56 of 58 55 1 and they all were reticent. 2 meetings. 3 the heels of the Sharpstown scandal it made it possible 4 to pass that bill or those bills. 5 Nobody wanted to have open Nobody wanted to have open records. But on You know, there's been so much said up here 6 that I can't possibly get my arms around it, but I would 7 like to say that I don't know Dr. Garland. 8 most important part of Dr. Garland's testimony was -- is 9 that he was principally hired to see that the Pepper I think the 10 Hamilton Report was followed, followed by his testimony 11 that he wasn't aware of what was in the Pepper Hamilton 12 Report, and I think that is pretty telling testimony on 13 the part of Dr. Garland. 14 I have written Dr. Garland two letters. I 15 wrote him a letter, and I asked him as a former member 16 of the Senate and as a Baylor graduate ... and I am a 17 Baylor graduate, and I'm proud of it. 18 grandfather was, my father was, my sister was, my 19 great-uncle was, and I was, and we're all proud of our 20 Baylor education. 21 I resent ... resent the smear that the Board of Regents 22 and some of the administration have administered to the 23 good name of Baylor University. 24 25 My great- I am proud of Baylor University, and I got off on a rabbit trail there, but let me just say to you that with all of the squirming and Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 57 of 58 56 1 all of the nay-saying and all of the bad things that 2 were going to happen if we passed the Open Meetings and 3 Open Records Act, it never came to pass. 4 universities in this state conduct their business under 5 that Act, and they have never had -- well, in -- here at 6 Austin we had a regent that kind of got out of hand, but 7 the Act has worked. 8 9 The public I just want to relate one quick story to you. I was sitting in my Senate office, and a 10 constituent of mine called me on the phone. 11 "What are you doing?" 12 13 She said And I said, "Well, I'm sitting in my office." 14 "What are you doing with that bill?" 15 I said, "Well, there are 3,000 bills up 16 here, Sissy." 17 called "Sissy". 18 up here. 19 20 By the way, most women in East Texas are I said, "Sissy, there are 3,000 bills Which bill do you want?" "That one that makes public knowledge -- public entities meet in public." 21 I said, "Well, what's wrong with that?" 22 She said "How do you expect the Jacksonville 23 Independent School District to do business if it has to 24 does it in public?" 25 And I said, "Well, Sissy, I think you're Case 6:16-cv-00173-RP Document 106-2 Filed 06/14/17 Page 58 of 58 57 1 2 fixing to learn." Senator, I have some language that I'll be 3 happy to furnish you that will take out -- take 4 completely out of the purview of the Board of Regents of 5 Baylor University them dropping it out by -- and I'll be 6 happy to furnish it to you. 7 SENATOR WEST: 8 MR. ADAMS: 9 SENATOR WEST: 10 Appreciate it. Thank you for letting me appear. MR. ADAMS: 12 SENATOR WEST: 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Thank you. Thank you, Don. 12:00 o'clock here. 11 13 Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to testify for or against the Senate Bill? Testimony is closed. * * * * * * * * [END OF DESIGNATED AUDIO RECORDING AT 2:59:37.]