Since publishing Part One, the work on this story has continued. From poring over the police report to glean new details, to contacting local law enforcement in Arizona, to paying attention to all media coverage of the case. Most of that coverage has been about Alex Verdugo, who was traded to the Boston Red Sox. There's been a need for clarification of facts, and pointing out the twisting of those facts (more of that later), as well as questioning the angle many members of the media have chosen, particularly in Boston sports media.
Read Part One below:
There has been definite frustration in this process. Most people I've contacted either couldn't help (due largely to the victim being a minor at the time of the assault, in 2015), or weren't open to helping for personal reasons. That's understandable and should be respected.
What I realized I could do was share that process, allowing readers into the unfolding work. In this part of what will likely become a series, here's a peek into journalistic practices, unanswered questions, discoveries, and, to be very meta, coverage of the coverage. Because national and local baseball writers should be expected to deliver the truth, unvarnished, and without bias.
Contact:
First, I've contacted family members but, so far, they're unresponsive. I've also contacted the victim. She was also unresponsive. Several years have passed. Time has gone on, life moves forward. It's possible they simply don't want to revisit what happened. Or there might be other, more complex reasons that we aren't privy to. After several attempts, I've let that go for now, possibly for good.
Also, a police officer I spoke to, whose name is on the police report, was unable to share specific facts in answer to my questions because, as mentioned, the victim was a minor at the time. Protection of a minor victim, especially when violence has occurred, is too important to sacrifice.
Omitted Facts
After reviewing Part One, and the police report again (and again, and again), there was information I chose not to include. Upon matching up certain sections, it was obvious that there were bits of information too important not to discuss. But that would take committment. I'd have to go deeper, and face possible consequences. That's a chance I'm willing to take. There's more to come but, for now, it's important to explore this part of the victim's statement:
*During her initial contact with law enforcement, the victim said she was specifically offered “hush money” in return for her silence. She said that the offer was made by "the General Manager." At the time of the assaults, the GM was Farhan Zaidi. But, per other source material, the victim might've been referring to Kapler, and just confusing the job titles. In the emails that were made public in several reports, as well as some I privately received, there's no contact between Kapler or Zaidi discussing a financial trade. A phone call between that person and the victim might've taken place. Again, to my knowledge , there's only the victim's word that this offer took place. She also doesn't state what her response was. But when she was asked to press charges, she declined. She later said that doing so "wouldn't help her situation."
Additional Questions:
* The victim stated that the group went back to the hotel to “turn up,” slang for drinking and doing drugs. I'm curious about what drug use might've taken place, and if the Dodgers ignored any information about who did what.
*Laura Slater (not her real name) was the case worker at the time, and stated she wanted to prosecute. Why was she so determined to prosecute the girls and James Baldwin, for the two assaults? What made her believe this was a strong enough case to pursue? What did she see in the photographs that might've made her believe the evidence was enough?
*Why wasn’t Verdugo pursued for more information, beyond a few phone calls discussed in the report? He was the only other player who was present per the vicitm's statement, and according to Nick Francona on the Kirk Minihane Show, it was his understanding that Verdugo filmed the assault, then posted the video of the beating on social media. As stated in Part One, that’s a violation of MLB Social Media Policy. As an investigative witness, he knew specific details that were essential to pursuing the case.
*She said the “organization” stopped responding to attempts at contact. Gabe Kapler, then the Dodgers Director of Player Development, characterized his, and the team's consideration for the victim as serious; why then did they no longer communicate with the victim? If there was great concern for her, where is evidence they took further action to ensure she was properly cared for after being traumatized, and then scared off by Kapler's proposed dinner with her abusers? Her fear of something "bad" happening to her, as communicated by her grandmother in an email to the team, is alarming. This was a young girl in fear for her safety.
Before Spring Training began, the Red Sox introduced Verdugo to the media. Here are highlights of the Press Conference and a fact check with each item.
“If I was around…”
Fact Check: He was around. Period.
“I would’ve put a stop to it…
Fact Check: He’s playing with the truth here. He could have put a stop to the assault of the girl. He was, according to the report, not present in the room when the sexual assault occurred (the victim states he was in the bathroom with the two other girls present). We still don’t know what he was told about any sexual activity after the victim left, or when he was alone with his teammate.
"With that incident there were a lot of reports. Obviously, my name being mentioned in the allegations, it hurts."
Fact Check: This makes zero sense. The reports were based on facts. His name was mentioned because of those facts. Because he was there. I don't know what he's talking about.
"I don't want Boston fans or people to judge me for something they have read or seen posted."
Fact Check: This is a blatant attempt to blame the media. Not gonna fly.
"I was cleared of any wrongdoing."
Fact Check: Again, he's really playing with the truth in these responses. It's surprising the Red Sox didn't make sure he was more fully prepped. They knew this would probably dominate the presser. To be clear, he was not cleared of any wrongdoing. That's completely inaccurate. Charges were not brought against anyone present and involved in abusing the victim. Therefore, he could not be cleared of anything.
"With that being said, it was a terrible thing that happened but I'm really just..it was in my past. It was something I've grown from, I've learned from it, and I've stayed active in the community..."
Fact Check: This is completely off the rails. WHAT terrible thing? The thing he said he wasn't present for, and the media was posting lies about? What did he grow from? Not helping a girl being assaulted physically and possibly sexually? Staying active in the community has nothing to do with the question he was asked, and makes no difference. But he did his best to deflect.
He goes on a bit more about being a good person in the community, before he's asked about both stating he was cleared, but also saying it was a terrible thing, then is directly asked what he learned.
"I learned that you have to be smarter with the positions you put yourself in. It was tough. There was due diligence on everybody's end."
Fact Check: No idea what he means about the "due diligence," but being smarter about positions one puts themselves in again eludes to him doing something wrong, even as he's saying he did nothing wrong.
He again states he was "cleared" of wrongdoing (why on earth didn't the Red Sox have him read a prepared statement?)
..."It's just hard to talk about. It's hard on me. I don't want this to keep going."
Fact Check: It's crucial for sports teams to be mindful in response to violence against women, and the language chosen to address those incidents and accusations. Verdugo repeatedly centered himself as the victim. That's not what he was there to do. He was there to show a modicum of remorse, and to be direct about what exactly he did wrong, and what exactly he learned. He also should've been directed to issue some sort of apology to the victim, and victims everywhere.
...Here was his opportunity.
Q. Do you have any regrets regarding what happened?
AV: I would say I have regrets of what had transpired that night with certain things.
Fact Check: Again, this makes absolutely no sense. He isn't expressing regret about anything, because he said he wasn't involved in anything. He drops the ball hard here, but he allowed to continue with this baffling attempt.
"If I was around for anything that happened, I would've put a stop to it. I would've helped out. I would've done something."
Fact Check: This is a blatant lie. He was around. He could've put a stop to at least the physical assault. He did nothing. That was his choice. He's simply lying to every person in that room, and to every fan he says he hopes to win over.
There was plenty more hemming and hawing, but he was again asked about his statement that he was "cleared of wrongdoing."
"There was a police investigation. There was a team thing, too. There's mixed views on everything. It is what it is. People will spin it however they want."
Fact Check: There was an investation in which police were unable to gather more facts, and were unable to convince the victim to press charges. But even more important to point out is that Verdugo was told not to cooperate with the investigation at the behest of the Dodgers. Again, he, nor anyone else involved, was "cleared" of anything. It is what it is isn't a an answer to anything. No one is "spinning" anything. The facts were discovered and reported, and the media has asked questions about those facts. But what the media didn't ask about, is why the Dodgers didn't allow Verdugo to cooperate. They were deliberate in their efforts to keep Verdugo from being questioned further.
Period.
The thing that continues to guide me is the pursuit of answers and fairness. The same questions remain, and have not been answered:
Why was NO ONE punished?
Why did Major League Baseball do absolutely nothing? Why did they let the Dodgers handle this "internally?"
Why was the assault of a teenage girl cloaked in darkness, and allowed to remain there? A crime was reported, and the only message the players received was that they could get away with their actions, without consequences. How is that possible? How can MLB expect us to take their policies seriously when they've blatantly ignored this, and other other situations where women were abused?
Until these questions, and many others, are answered, this story isn't over.
Expect to see more updates and discussion here as time goes on. There's no guarantee any of the questions will ever be answered, or that Verdugo will ever truly discuss what happened that night, which includes his failure to assist a girl being assaulted. He was entertained enough by her suffering to film the incident, and post it to a social media site. Giving up asking these questions isn't an option, not here.
Thank you.
JQ