For those of us who go to the University of Kentucky, I'd say we can all mostly come to an agreement that lately, UK has done a poor job at handling sexual assault. For those of you reading this who don't go to UK or who aren't aware of the recent sexual assault cases, let me catch you up on what's been going on.
One of the big headlines in the news in Kentucky is a sexual assault allegation case between former UK professor James Harwood and UK men and women who worked in Harwood's department. According to UK documents obtained by UK's student newspaper the Kentucky Kernel, there were two complainants and five victims who reported either sexual harassment or sexual assault involving Harwood. Both complainants reported that they were sexually assaulted during conferences related to their work or studies at UK. These incidents spanned between 2012 and 2015, and victims came forward once they heard there were others who had been allegedly sexually assaulted by Harwood.
As if this case wasn't bad enough on its own, the university tried to conceal the sexual assault case documents from the Kernel. The Kernel was informed about this case from a spokesperson representing the victims and the Kernel then requested records on the case. While UK handed over some of the records, most were kept private until an anonymous source related to the case handed them over to the Kernel. The Kernel even went to the Attorney General in order to get the records through UK. The Attorney General ruled that the documents were, in fact, public records and there was no reason that UK could withhold the documents. The only stipulation was that UK could withhold the names of the victims.
After this ruling from the Attorney General came about, UK's president Eli Capilouto sent out a campus-wide email saying that UK would appeal the attorney general's decision by filing a lawsuit against the Kentucky Kernel. The victims in the case told the Kernel that they were not notified that the email was going to be sent out. A representative of the victims said that though the university keeps saying that this decision is in the interest of the victims, the victims themselves disagree.
According to the Kernel, the spokesperson also went on to say, "It feels like UK is trying to protect what went on here and to protect James. Why not have complete transparency in this? UK should be interested in protecting not just the students at UK. (UK) should also be in the interest of protecting students at other universities where James may end up and repeat this behavior.”
When I take a step back to look at this whole case, there are so many problems I see with it. First of all, the fact that a university is suing its own student newspaper speaks volumes. As Capilouto heads this lawsuit against the Kernel, one of the main things that makes me mad is that he's using my tuition money and public tax dollars to sue a newspaper that I've written articles for, a newspaper that represents the voices of the students on campus. Who is he to decide that my tuition is going toward a case where he wants to conceal sexual assault on UK's campus from the public eye? I don't want to go to a university that decides that my tuition money (26,156 dollars, to be exact) is put to better use through the suing of the student newspaper rather than through the direct bettering of my educational experience.
Something else that upsets me about this case is the fact that Capilouto was trying to hide the truth from the public as he concealed a portion of the open-document records from the Kernel. As a journalist, I know that it is our job to uncover the truth and provide a voice for the voiceless. It's our job to expose illegal activity by uncovering facts and presenting them to the public to keep citizens informed and safe. How am I supposed to learn how to be a true journalist at a university that teaches us these things in class, but doesn't uphold these values through its own course of action? A sexual assault case like this might temporarily make a university look bad, but trying to hide that it ever happened is what makes a university look even worse. Instead of presenting how wrong it is that Harwood committed sexual assault on campus and trying to reform the university from there, Capilouto decided the best course of action would be to hide it all together. This case speaks volumes to Capilouto's integrity as we now see he values preserving the university's public image more than he values keeping students and faculty safe on campus. I can't say I'm proud to be at a school that responds this way to sexual assault.
And in the end, Harwood resigned and was able to receive pay and benefits from the university until his last day on August 31. In a society where rapist Brock Turner was only given a six-month prison sentence for sexually assaulting an unconscious, intoxicated woman, and then went on to only serve three months of it, I'm not even surprised. My only hope going forward is that the Kernel wins the case and some serious reform happens at this university regarding the way that sexual assault is handled. I chose to come to this university based off of the outstanding academic program that we have here, and because I believed that I was coming to a place that would protect me from the unjust. This case just goes to show that my own morals don't match with this university, and I'm sure many can back me with similar opinions. Hopefully, we can only get more educated on sexual assault from here so that our future as a university is well-informed, and students can feel as if they're safe on campus.
