By Kelsi Dickens, MS & Michael S. Carroll, PhD
Terrance Phillips, a student-athlete and star basketball player at the University of Missouri, allegedly engaged in harassment and stalking behaviors toward two plaintiffs, Jane Doe 1 (Doe 1) and Jane Doe 2 (Doe 2), according to two separate complaints. According to the complaint, this misconduct eventually led to the sexual assault of Doe 2 in 2017. The harassment, stalking, and sexual assault were reported to the University’s Title IX Office, which first ignored the allegations and then later mishandled the investigation. Because of this mishandling by the University, Phillips was found to have no responsibility for the majority of his behavior. It is alleged that Phillips’ teammates and coaches were aware of his behavior and danger to female students, including the university officials. Still, they did nothing to prevent his conduct, arguably constituting a violation of Title IX. There were at least five other complaints regarding Phillips, and the University did little to nothing in regards to the allegations.
An investigation into the University revealed that, between the years of 2015-18, there were more than 3,000 allegations of misconduct reported to the University Title IX Office, with many of the cases uncompleted. According to a report by The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, only 46 out of 750 cases were investigated during the 2017-18 academic year. Furthermore, a hearing panel or administrator evaluated only 15 of the 46 cases, and no one was permanently expelled as a result of these investigations. The alleged harassment and assaults perpetuated by Phillips and others could arguably have been prevented had the University taken the appropriate actions and followed Title IX guidelines.
Doe 1 Complaint
Phillips was a top basketball recruit who showed much promise as a leader and a player. However, he quickly began to show violent and aggressive behavior. Rumors circulated around campus that Phillips was harassing and stalking multiple women. Phillips allegedly assaulted a classmate in 2016, but she worried about retaliation. The classmate eventually filed a Title IX complaint and provided ample evidence of the abuse, including her bruises, aggressive text messages, and apology emails from Phillips. She then told the Title IX Office that she was so fearful of retaliation that she decided not to go forward with the case. The Office could have done its own investigation, but chose not to do so. The Title IX Office further decided not to pursue the claim, despite the fact that it had received numerous allegations and evidence against Phillips.
In 2017, Phillips met a fellow student at her job in a local bar in Columbia, Missouri. Phillips and the fellow student (Doe 1) exchanged numbers. Three days later, Phillips sent long messages to Doe 1 proclaiming his feelings for her and sent her a picture of his genitalia. Doe 1 explained that she was offended and tried to end all communication with him. Phillips began showing up outside of her classes, her home, and place of employment, eventually landing a job at the same bar.
Doe 1 was desperate for the persistent contact to stop and asked Phillips’ teammates if they could tell him to leave her alone. Their response was that, “Phillips is just like that with girls.” She reported Phillips’ behavior to the Title IX Office, but did not provide his name for fear of retaliation, but explained that he was a basketball player. The Office told Doe 1 that they may have to proceed with an investigation, and they assumed it was Phillips. The Title IX Office did nothing, and Phillips continued to prey on other women. Doe 1 received no support from the Office, and it put no protective measures between herself and Phillips. Doe 1 unfortunately dropped out of school just before she could graduate because she feared for her safety.
Doe 2 Complaint
Doe 2 was asked by Phillips to “follow” him on social media. She had no reason to suspect inappropriate behavior. After chatting for a little bit with Phillips, he began aggressively pursuing her as well. Doe 2 and a friend went to Phillips’ place of employment, Willie’s Bar. He made drinks for them and laced the drinks with a drug. Doe 2’s memory after taking a sip of the drink was waking up to being videotaped and raped by Phillips. She did not consent and was, in fact, unable to agree to sexual intercourse. As Phillips was raping her, he sent Doe 2’s roommate Snapchat messages asking her to join them for a “threesome.”
Three days later, Doe 2 went home and told her parents that she had been raped. Three days after being back home, Doe 2 and her father made a complaint with the Columbia Police Department and filed a written report with the Title IX Office at the University. The Title IX Office assured Doe 2 and her father that the Office would thoroughly investigate and that a “No Contact” directive would be sent to Phillips. Doe 2 said she was not mentally ready to proceed with the investigation, and the Office assured her there was no time limit. Less than a month later, the Title IX Office told Doe 2 they were going to continue with the investigation. The Office still had not sent the “No Contact” directive to Phillips. They also contacted Doe 1 and informed her that they would be continuing her investigation as well. Doe 1 and Doe 2 were then told there were at least six other complaints against Phillips.
University’s Failure of Proper Communication
Plaintiffs were told that the University would perform a thorough investigation into all of the allegations and evidence. The University also made it clear that all of the complaints would be presented to the Title IX panel in one hearing. That did not happen. The Office provided little communication to Plaintiffs between the five to six months from when they were told they would pursue the complaints and the date of the hearing. The Office did not speak to most, or any of the witnesses, did not attempt to retrieve surveillance, never re-interviewed Plaintiffs, and left the investigation far from complete. The University took many months to do what little investigation it did, despite the fact that University policy specifies no more than 30 business days to complete a formal examination.
Eight months after Doe 1 was stalked and harassed by Phillips, she was told her hearing would be in two days. She received no 14-day notice, which is required. Five months after Doe 2 was raped, the University communicated to her the hearing would be in two days, also not receiving a 14-day notice. Diamond Scott, who was in charge of the investigation at the University, gave incorrect information to Doe 2. This resulted in Doe 2 being left alone in a room with Scott and Phillips, where Phillips would be given support and rights, but not Doe 2. Doe 1 was told her presence at her hearing was not necessary because they already had her statement. This violates the dictates of Title IX; Plaintiffs should know the contents of the investigative report. The hearing panel did not hear the numerous complaints against Phillips, and they were not given full information regarding Phillips’ many violations.
Deliberate Misinformation
Nearly seven months after the sexual assault, Doe 2 was contacted by the University, which informed her that the panel found Phillips not responsible for sexually assaulting her. They also informed her that the committee only knew of her evidence and not about the evidence of other complaints. The next day, Doe 1 was also contacted and was told that Phillips was only found responsible for sending a picture of his genitalia, and not for stalking her. The Plaintiffs were not given reasons for the findings and no written documentation was provided. Doe 2 requested to investigate the file, the hearing transcripts, and the recording. After weeks of resistance from the University, Doe 2 ascertained that there was hardly any evidence provided at the hearing. One of the panel members asked the University why they did not interview Doe 2’s key witness, her roommate. The school said, “We were keeping it on a need to know basis, and didn’t extend that any further than it needed to be.” Scott also informed Doe 2 that she could not appeal the decision.
On Nov. 15, 2018, Phillips used social media to shame all the victims who came forward against him, publicly. One post said, “[Doe 2] you can go fuck yourself.” The University continued to do nothing. When the University finally acted, it conducted an “investigation” that was against their policies and federal law, further traumatizing the victims.
The University never told Doe 1 and Doe 2 the University would be the Complainant, making Plaintiffs’ rights under Title IX become jeopardized. Under the University’s Policy, the Complainant is given certain rights, such as:
To request a no-contact directive between Parties;
To have an Advisor of the Complainant’s choice accompany the Complainant to all interviews, meetings, and proceedings;
To have an opportunity to present a list of potential witnesses and provide evidence to the Investigator;
To be informed of the finding, rationale, sanctions, and remedial actions in writing;
To have an opportunity to appeal the findings and sanctions;
To have the right to object to hearing panelists;
Additional rights relating to the hearing, including the right to receive a notice of hearing for at least 14 business days, to have the names of witnesses that may participate in the hearing and copies of all documents related to evidence and the report at least five days before the hearing, to be present at the hearing, to request alternative attendance or questioning at the hearing, to have an Advisor at the hearing, to testify at the hearing, to present witnesses and documents, and to question witnesses.
The University was inconsistent with applying its Policy to Plaintiffs, unaware of how to treat them as non-Complainant and giving them misinformation.
Deliberate Indifference to Sexual Harassment
The University had actual knowledge of the harassment and abuse that was sustained by Plaintiffs from Phillips. The Title IX violations were reported to the University’s Title IX Office. Despite knowing about the violence and harassment perpetuated by Phillips, the University showed deliberate indifference in responding to his conduct. The University failed to pursue any action against Phillips in a reasonable time, making the Plaintiffs vulnerable to Phillips’ harassment and sexual assault. The sexual abuse and harassment were so severe, pervasive, and offensive that Doe 1 and Doe 2 were deprived of their access to educational opportunities. Instead, they were in an abusive educational environment, resulting in both of them leaving the University. The University received federal financial assistance, which means they are required to follow the mandates of Title IX. The University’s misconduct denied Doe 1 and Doe 2 equal access to the Title IX protections. Therefore, the University engaged in behavior that served to discourage students who had been sexually assaulted from seeking adequate protection and renumeration.
Plaintiffs are asking for punitive damages and demanding the University change its Title IX policies.
Conclusion
The University dismissed Phillips from the basketball team in February 2018 before it closed the first investigation in July 2018. He is currently not an active student at the college. A University spokesperson said the University is currently reviewing the lawsuit.
References
Jane Doe 1 & Jane Doe 2 v. University of Missouri, 2:19-cv-04229-WJE (W.D. Mo. 2019). Retrieved from: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Deliberate-Indifference.pdf
Kelsi Dickens is a first year Sport Management doctoral student at Troy University and an Instructor of Sport Management at Southeastern University, specializing in research related to Title IX and gender equity in the sport industry.
Michael S. Carroll is an Associate Professor of Sport Management at Troy University specializing in research related to sport law and risk management in sport and recreation. He has published over 30 articles and delivered over 50 presentations at professional conferences. He lives in Orlando.
