opinion
Does verdict signal athletic impunity?
Ron Billingslea has been found innocent. We
can express outrage, satisfaction or indifference
to the verdict, but the fact remains that the former
assistant basketball coach has had his Constitu
tionally guaranteed day in court — and won.
But we’re uneasy with the verdict — and
worried about what it indicates about University
athletics and the University.
Deputy district attorney Darryl Larson — pros
ecuting a case he thought open-and-shut —
failed to convince the seven-man, five-women jury
that Billingslea knew he was taking state money
when he accepted $1,680 from the Bronson Travel
Agency.
Billingslea’s defense countered that the
former coach believed the money he deposited in
his private bank account was a “fringe benefit” of
the job.
Must we now also conclude that athletic
freebies extend to courts of law?
Even during the trial, Larson warned the jury
that an innocent vedict would be “a signal to the
prosecutor’s office that no sports figure should be
indicted, because he won’t be found guilty.”
Larson’s appeal now takes on prophetic sig
nificance. Future trials — particularly that of
Billinglsea’s fellow assistant coach Mark Barwig
later this month — will be seen in the light of the
Billingslea verdict.
The cynic — and we are not above cynicism —
might conclude that University athletic figures
have been given some sort of “athletic impunity.”
That conclusion is not unjustified. At least one
juror said the presence of “big-time jocks” and
the possibility of testimony by ex-head coach Dick
Harter and player Felton Sealey influenced the
trail’s outcome.
“If it would have been an ordinary Joe Blow,”
the juror said, “he would have been convicted.”
We hope that isn’t the case.
But Larson’s and our concerns are warrant
ed. Freebies are apparently part of the turf for
“big-time jocks." And Billingslea himself admitted
that they included free clothes and beer from local
businesses.
Apparently the “fringes” and special con
siderations flow so readily that it's easy to forget
about weighing right and wrong.
As deep as our concern about University
athletics is, we also worry about what this mess
says about the Univeristy.
When a man in a position of leadership and
responsibilty can claim ignorance of the basic
differences between right and wrong, what are we
to conclude about the people who hire admitted
ignoramuses?
Claiming such ignorance is too much like the
speeder who pleads innocent because he doesn’t
know the speed limit. But if he doesn’t know that
doing 60 mph in a school zone is illegal, we need
to get him off the road.
Unquestioning ignorance is a defense no one
can accept. The justice system is based on the
simple assumption that ignorance can’t preclude
guilt.
One juror who voted guilty in the 10-2 verdict
said she couldn’t believe the former coach didn’t
know the $1,680 he got from Bronson Travel —
money from unused airline tickets — was indeed
University money. She characterized the story as
“illogical.”
We’d say that’s a tame assessment.
But she’s right. And that bit of illogic can only
further alienate the University community that has
witnessed the ethical double standard between
the University’s athletic and academic divisions.
Billinglea’s trial reinforces our belief in the
fundamental soundness of the judicial system and
the absolute necessity of due process.
But the verdict can only reinforce our belief
that moral standards are suspended somewhere
between Johnson Hall and MacArthur Court.
va rs
Guy’s self interest
I am not usually of the habit of writing
to the editor every week, but I feel a
strong need to do so in this case. Last
week, I wrote concerning the on-campus
and Salem rallies for higher education.
At Friday's rally, one of the ASUO pres
idential candidates, Donovan Guy, was
handing out letters accusing the rally as
being nothing more than a political ploy
for another candidate, Rich Wilkins.
To Mr. Guy's letter, I have two replies:
1) The U of O day at the capitol was
planned several months ago. For the
entire period of the planning stage, Rich
Wilkins (ASUO vice president for state
and university affairs) and the Student
University Relations Council have been
in charge. Dave Eaton did not simply
"allow Rich Wilkins (sic) name to replace
his own," at the last minute as Guy’s
letter implies.
2) Mr. Guy’s fourth paragraph speaks
of the "poor organization and planning
by the ASUO” which resulted in only one
person showing up for a discussion of
higher education at the University Inn. If
he would have checked his facts, he
might have discovered that the program
he was referring to was sponsored by the
Housing Office and was organized by
me, not Eaton, Wilkins, or anyone else.
It greatly disturbs me that a candidate
for student body president would make
such allegations without first checking
his facts. I also am disappointed that
Donovan Guy can’t see past his own
self-interest and realize that the rallies
were in the best interest for all.
Greg Harris
RA, Alder House
Not monolithic
(In regards to An Opium Den of One.
April Fools Day understood etc.)
Boy, you have chutzpah! You really
gave me a blast. I’m a Christian who is
just trying to be real cool and friendly,
and I find out that I’m the greatest thing
since Adolf Hitler and Nestles Well,
here’s one thing you’s got to remember:
Be specific about the type of Christian
you are evaluating, i.e Christianity is not
one great Kiwanis club. (My apologies to
the Kiwanis for any miscasting.) If I
joined the Kiwanis (I suppose) I would
acknowledge that I have a thoroughly
common set of beliefs which all my
' IF YOU'D BEEN HE® YESTERDAY YOU CiDUAD HA® HAD THIS FIFTEEN CENT STAMP FGP0&ITE0T
CENTS INSTEAP OF THE TWENTY CENTS ITU COST YOU TStAY,'
Kiwanis pals would also have and this set
of beliefs would make us all Kiwanis.
This is not so for Christianity. There
seems to be only one common belief
Christians hold, and even that is subject
to many shades of grey.
I'm still afraid my point is not getting
across. Try this; replace "Christian” with
"Philosopher” (or even "American”).
Different philosophers hold different
beliefs. Some differences are not ob
vious and some are so great one
wonders if there is any correlation other
than the fact both people call themselves
"philosopher.”
To be concise, the title "Christian"
does not beget unanimity. Someday,
everyone will understand this, and
maybe then I'll be able to tell a person
that I am a Christian without having him
duck.
Mark Waldo
Carson Hall
Apathetic ASUO
Are the students of the University of
Oregon as apathetic as I am led to
believe? In the April 6 Emerald article
entitled "ASUO Anti-apathy Rallies
Planned for Capital, EMU,” we are told
that ASUO Pres. Eaton and Vice Pre
sident Wilkens spoke about higher
education funding at the University Inn
on April 2, and only one student showed
up. The article claims that this incident
illustrates the apathy prevalent on cam
pus, and condemns the general student
for being “unconcerned.”
I believe that the students of our
University are concerned with our pre
sent financial woes A day does not pass
when I don't hear complaints about
graduate students teaching upper-divi
sion courses, or one’s inability to find a
seat in an overcrowded class. Students
are concerned — they simply haven’t had
a way of burning their energy for this
financial cause.
Were you aware of the April 2 funding
meeting at the University Inn? How many
higher education budgetary meetings
have you been aware of this year? We
must not condemn the students of the
University for not attending these finan
cial meetings for they, as I, were probably
unaware of them.
Who can we blame for this apathetic
turnout at our financial hearings? The
Eaton/Wilkens administration has been
too “unconcerned'' to sufficiently inform
the student populous of these meetings,
and therefore must be declared as the
true apathetic party.
It is interesting to note that Mr. Wilkens
is attempting to overcome this apathy
problem by scheduling an anti-apathy
rally at the EMU and the state capital a
few days before the ASUO primary elec
tion, in which he is a presidential can
didate. Further note that the originally
planned date for the rally was moved up a
few days, presumably to accommodate
the primary election schedule Are these
rallies intended to overcome student
apathy or to overcome Mr. Wilkens’ pres
idential I candidate opponents?
The ASUO administration — not the
student populous — is more apathetic
than I am led to believe.
David Connelly
Junior, accounting