By Ellen J. Staurowsky, Ed.D., Senior Contributor & Professor, Sport Management, Drexel University, ejs95@drexel.edu
On January 12, 2020 former defensive tackle Isaiah Humphries sued the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State), head football coach James Franklin, and former teammate Damion Barber to recover damages suffered as a result of alleged mistreatment suffered at the hands of his teammates. Humphries maintains that after he and his father reported the abuse to Coach Franklin, the coaching staff failed to ensure his safety and retaliated against him for bringing the matter to their attention.
Background
In December of 2017, Humphries, a three star recruit out of Sachse High School (TX), signed with the Penn State football team. A legacy whose father Leonard had played for Penn State, Humphries graduated a semester early, embarking on his playing career in Happy Valley in January of 2018. For the next nine months, he says that four teammates — Damion Barber (defensive tackle), Micah Parsons (linebacker), Yetur Gross-Matos (defensive end), and Jesse Luketa (linebacker) — “…collectively orchestrated, participated in, directed, or facilitated a campaign to harass and haze” new team members, including him (Humphries v. Penn State et al., 2020).
In the course of his time at Penn State, Humphries alleges that he was regularly subjected to sexually demeaning verbal threats, some of which made reference to the predatory behavior of former Penn State defensive coach, Jerry Sandusky, who is serving a 30 to 60 year prison sentence after being convicted on 45 counts of child sexual abuse in 2012 (Associated Press, 2019). Humphries claimed to be the target of feigned wrestling matches that turned into simulated submissive sex acts. In the football facility known as the Lasch Building and elsewhere, his teammates are alleged to have restrained Humphries and others, violating them with their genitalia. Resistance to their behavior, according to Humphries, was met with further intimidating, threatening, and bullying behavior (Humphries v. Penn State, 2020).
Humphries alleges that members of the coaching staff observed on multiple occasions the hazing and harassment he and his other teammates were subjected to that occurred in the football locker room. He further reports that both he and his father made members of the coaching staff and Coach Franklin aware of the problem to no avail. He alleges no substantive steps were taken by any member of the coaching staff to discourage or prevent it and no effort was made by any member of the coaching staff to report that conduct to appropriate individuals or offices at the University (Humphries v. Penn State, 2020).
While Humphries was hoping for the safe environment promised him by Coach Franklin at the time of his recruitment, what he received instead was greater scrutiny of his own performance after complaining of the hazing and harassment he saw. He alleges that he was “scorned and punished” by the coaching staff and put through drills designed to ensure that he would fail. He further asserts that the retaliation extended beyond the football staff and included “irrational and inappropriate censure” from an academic advisor and denial of medical accommodations needed for him to deal with his anxiety and narcolepsy (Humphries v. Penn State, 2020).
Humphries believes that his decision to pursue a transfer rather than medically retire from the team led to further retaliation. He alleges that his teammates shunned him and actively encouraged him to leave the team and the University, conspiring to push him out with threatening conduct designed to increase his anxiety and fear. One of the players, according to Humphries, was intent on “continuously and repeatedly” threatening physical harm if Humphries did not get out. In exploring options to play elsewhere, Humphries claims that the Penn State coaches shared negative evaluations of him with other coaches.
Multiple Counts of Negligence, Assault and Battery, and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
In his lawsuit, Humphries alleges failures by the University and James Franklin as well as criminal conduct on the part of Damion Barber. In summary, these counts include the following:
Count I — Negligence Per Se — Violation of Antihazing Statutes: Humphries argues that the University by and through its employees had a heightened duty of care under Pennsylvania Antihazing Law, 24 P.S. §§ 5351 et seq. and the Timothy J. Piazza Antihazing Law, 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 2801 et seq. to provide a healthy and safe environment for athletes on its athletic teams. The coaches breached their duty of care by failing to provide a sufficient level of supervision; ignoring the hazing and harassment done by team members; allowing this conduct to go on in violation of Penn State’s antihazing policy as well as state antihazing laws; and failing to report it. Not only was their failure to prevent such conduct negligent, the fact that the coaches did not intercede amounted to promoting or facilitating the hazing and harassing behavior. Compounding matters, the coaching staff retaliated against Humphries and failed to enforce several University administrative policies that address sexual and/or gender-based harassment and misconduct; discrimination and related inappropriate conduct; disclosure of wrongful conduct and protection from retaliation.
Count II — Negligence Per Se — Violation of Antihazing Statutes: Under Pennsylvania’s antihazing statutes, Coach Franklin had a special relationship with Humphries that carried with it a heightened duty of care. His alleged multiple failures to stop the hazing and harassment, provide sufficient supervision, to hold the athletes and coaches involved responsible, and to provide a safe environment resulted in a breach of that duty.
Count III — Negligence Per Se — Violation of Antihazing Statutes: Humphries argues that Barber breached his duty of care by subjecting Humphries to repeated harassment and hazing that violated Pennsylvania antihazing statutes and University policies while further retaliating against him after he raised complaints with coaches.
Count IV — Assault and Battery: According to Humphries, the unwanted harmful physical contact imposed on him by Barber coupled with physical menace led him to believe that he would suffer further physical harm.
Count V — Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: Humphries places the burden on Penn State, Coach Franklin, and Barber for their failure to act in accordance with a common law duty “not to act in a manner which they should have realized would involve an unreasonable risk of causing the plaintiff to suffer emotional distress, illness, and/or bodily harm” (Humphries v. Penn State et al., 2020, p. 41).
Count VI — Emotional Infliction of Emotional Distress: The harassment, hazing, and retaliation suffered by Humphries was of such an extreme and outrageous nature that Barber knew or reasonably should have known would result in emotional distress.
Count VII — Civil Conspiracy: The four named players in this suit — Barber, Gross-Matos, Luketa, and Parsons — acted with common purpose in hazing, harassing, battering, and retaliating against Humphries (Humphries v. Penn State, 2020).
As both a direct and proximate result of these acts, Humphries claims to have suffered harm to his physical and mental health (sleeplessness, trauma, humiliation, physical pain, anxiety); emotional issues (feelings of despair, depression, anxiety); effects from the injury he was denied treatment for; the imposition and necessity of uprooting and moving to another school and starting fresh on a new team; and financial costs associated with these issues. Thus, he seeks both compensatory and exemplary damages (Humphries v. Penn State, 2020).
Reaction to the Lawsuit
While Coach Franklin has remained silent about the lawsuit, the Penn State Office of Sexual Misconduct Prevention and Response and the Office of Student Conduct issued a statement indicating that an investigation had been conducted independent of the athletic department involving extensive interviews and none of the claims were substantiated. The statement additionally explained that following an investigation by Penn State Police into related allegations, the results of that investigation were shared with the Centre County district attorney. After a review by that office, a decision was made not to pursue the matter further although Humphries claims that there was an effort made by the football program to “…conceal incidents of misconduct during an investigation” (Aiken, 2020a; Aiken, 2020b).
After the lawsuit was reported, some current and former Penn State players expressed their views on Twitter. Garrett Taylor, a senior, explained that “I don’t speak out often, but not going to sit here quietly while @PennStateFball is falsely being dragged through the mud by someone who quit on the program..” A former Penn State player who was with the Buffalo Bills characterized Humphries was a trouble maker who could not be trusted (Metts, 2020).
Lingering Questions
Is this a case that reveals the troubling inner workings of a major college football program that deputizes players in the inner circle to use threats and intimidation to test newcomers and drive off players determined to be weak? Did coaches witness such treatment and fail to stop it or report it? Is there a culture of hazing and harassment that has gone on unchecked within the Penn State football program?
The Centre County district attorney indicated that there was not enough evidence to support charging Barber because it did not reach the high threshold to reach a determination beyond a reasonable doubt (Aiken, 2020b). Does the suspension of Barber for the first game of the 2019 season for “violation of team rules” shed any light on this case or was that a completely separate matter?
And was this case, when considered alongside of a lawsuit filed by former Penn State team physician, Scott Lynch present a window into an atmosphere that prioritized winning over player welfare (Miller, 2019)? Dr. Lynch accused Coach Franklin of having him removed from his role working with the football team because he resisted being pressured by Franklin to return players to the field before they were fully ready. Penn State and its officials, among them athletic director Sandy Barbour and Coach Franklin, have adamantly denied the allegations in Lynch’s lawsuit, dismissing the doctor’s concerns as statements made by a disgruntled employee.
If Penn State’s response in the Lynch case is any indication of where the University’s defense may be headed in this case, another strong denial may be in the offing here.
References
Aiken, M. (2020, January 14). Former Penn State football player Isaiah Humphries alleges he faced hazing, harassment. The Daily Collegian. Retrieved from https://www.collegian.psu.edu/football/article_875009b6-3704-11ea-a21c-a776dfa711f4.html
Aiken, M. (2020, January 16). Centre County DA releases statement regarding Penn State football lawsuit. The Daily Collegian. Retrieved from https://www.collegian.psu.edu/news/crime_courts/article_84db4cc6-38ae-11ea-966a-fb1c838d663e.html
Associated Press. (2019, November 22). Jerry Sandusky sentenced to another 30-to-60 year prison sentence. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2019/11/22/jerry-sandusky-sentenced-to-another-30-to-60-year-prison-term/
Isaiah Humphries v. the Pennsylvania State University, James Franklin, and Damion Barber. (2020).Case no.: 4: 20-CV-64. Retrieved from https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/readingeagle.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/9/f9/9f9188e0-371a-11ea-b3c8-f781012c01be/5e1e3d1e8d827.pdf.pdf
Scott A. Lynch v. The Pennsylvania State University, Sandy Barbour, James Franklin, Penn State Health, The Milton S. Hershey Center, and Kevin Black. (2019).Case no.: 2019-cv-6337-cv. Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/document/423243811/Dr-Scott-Lynch-lawsuit
Metts, S. (2020, January 15). Penn State students react to football hazing lawsuit. WJAC.TV.com. Retrieved from https://wjactv.com/news/local/penn-state-students-react-to-football-hazing-lawsuit
Penn State Staff. (2018, August). Isaiah Thompson: Player bio. Retrieved from https://gopsusports.com/sports/2018/8/8/sports-m-footbl-isaiah-humphries-nsd-18-html.aspx
Pickel, G. (2019, September 3). Penn State’s Damion Barber missed Week 1 due to suspension, will return vs. Buffalo. Patriot-News. Retrieved from https://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/2019/09/penn-states-damion-barber-missed-week-1-due-to-suspension-will-return-vs-buffalo.html
RLR Staff. (2019, September 3). Penn State DT Damian Barber missed the Idaho game due to suspension. Roarlionsroar.com. Retrieved from https://www.roarlionsroar.com/penn-state-football/2019/09/5853/ damion-barber-suspended-idaho-nittany-lions
Nardone, J. Former Penn State doctor claims James Franklin pressured him to clear injured players. Forbes.com. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/josephnardone/2019/08/26/former-penn-state-doctor-claims-james-franklin-pressured-him-to-clear-injured-players/#392e23164a66
