I'm genuinely interested in some additional perspective from those who think that TCU screwed up here, and I'm wondering if I'm missing any material facts. As I understand it:
Fields assaulted player B in the locker room and sent him to the hospital.
TCU kicked Fields off of the team for his actions.
An unidentified person connected to Fields contacted the Star Telegram, stating that Fields was bullied and somehow else mistreated, which potentially pointed some blame at player B. The paper ran with the story, likely approaching the school for information (TCU declined comment).
Player B separately identified himself as Ezukanma, and then received some harassment and threats.
The paper tried to reduce its blame by saying they hadn't identified player B (Personally I think this is silly because it wouldn't be difficult for people to figure out who was at practice on the day of the assault and then missing the next day).
Are any of those statements incorrect? Is there more background I'm missing?
To me, the paper made a grievous mistake by publishing ANY of the information provided by the source. SJ wrote it and at least one editor approved it. It seems crazy to publish the assailant's side at all and even worse from a second hand source. Another source, within a couple days, refuted what the first source said.
I understand someone thinking that TCU went too strong on revoking credentials but when a reporter publishes the offender's version of an assault that seems very irresponsible and potentially dangerous.
Again - would love to hear if I am missing something.
