Florida Gators receiver Antonio Callaway was found “not responsible” in a Title IX sexual assault investigation, Gator Country confirmed with Callaway’s attorney Huntley Johnson. Matt Baker of the Tampa Bay Times was first to report.
Callaway was suspended indefinitely in January when the university began an investigation into a potential violation of the student code of conduct. Callaway was held out of spring practice and was not around the team until the University of Florida modified his suspension, allowing him to return to school and resume football activities.
Prior to the hearing last on August 5, the complainant’s attorney John Clune, objected to the decision from the University to appoint attorney Jake Schickel as hearing officer. Schickel attended Florida and is a booster for both the football and basketball teams. Clune argued that Schickel recuse himself from the hearing due to the possibility of a conflict of interest. When Schickel declined to do so Clune, his client and a reported five witnesses boycotted the proceedings.
In the hearing officer’s decision obtained by Gator Country, Schickel wrote:
“Immediately prior to the hearing I was provided a letter, which was made part of the record from Mr. Clune, asking me to recuse myself. I denied the request. While he did not impugn my integrity he was concerned with bias. I recounted my experience training, education and life involvements and indicated that I did not believe that I would be biased in any way in favor of or against any of the parties. I have prosecuted rape cases, I have sat in judgment of lawyers. My family has dealt with rape issue s. Note that this was a Student Conduct Hearing which is often held by a member of the university community. The issue is an alleged conduct
violation by Mr. Callaway.”
The hearing went on without Clune or he complainant. Both Callaway and the complainant agreed that they had sexual intercourse on the night in question, leaving Schickel to determine, based on evidence presented, if the complainant was “unable to consent due to age, disability or alcohol/chemical or other impairment.”
The complainant alleged that she was unable to give consent due to intoxication. Schickel writes, “The totality of the evidence suggest the contrary and she was not intoxicated to the extent she could not consent. The affidavits all indicated that (complainant’s name redacted) did not appear intoxicated. Further her own text messages indicated that she was pretending to be intoxicated.”
Both parties admitted to and agreed that Antonio Callaway was high on marijuana in the night in question.
Based on the evidence presented to him including affidavits, the Title IX Investigative Report, interviews, text messages conversations and other documents submitted by both parties, Schickel ruled in favor of Callaway.
Unlike in criminal court, the burden of proof in a student conduct hearing is the preponderance of the evidence, or that the alleged infraction was “more likely than not” to have happened. Schickel’s ruling is that from the totality of the evidence that burden of proof was not met and he find Callaway “not responsible.”