ARTICLE REGARDING THE INCIDENT
Peyton Manning is one of the best players in the NFL. This years Co-MVP, Mannings passing yardage and touchdowns passes have increased each of the six years he has played professional football.
Yet, his most impressive quality is his intelligence at the quarterback position. In an age when plays are called in from the sideline, Manning calls his own plays on the field. A typical Manning scenario will have him come to the line of scrimmage, observe the defensive formation, change the play, point out blocking schemes to his offensive linemen, physically position the running backs and ends where he wants them, take the snap and complete the pass. This is all done in about 10 seconds.
Manning is simply the smartest player in the NFL.
So, how could he be the accused, based on some of the dumbest moves imaginable, in a defamation case against a woman the world knows he intensely dislikes? Go figure!
In 1996, Manning was in the University of Tennessee locker room having his feet examined by Dr. Jamie Ann Naughright. Cross-country runner and friend Malcolm Saxon was also in the locker room. With Manning standing and Naughright on her knees examining his feet, Manning dropped his pants and mooned Saxon.
All of this would have been OK except that Naughright contends that Manning did not simply moon Saxon but placed his naked butt and rectum on her head and face. Saxon supported Naughrights version of the story. In a letter he wrote to Manning that became later part of the court record in Naughrights defamation suit, Saxon stated: Bro, you have tons of class but you have shown no mercy or grace to this lady who was on her knees seeing if you had a stress fracture.
You might as well maintain some dignity and admit to what happened.
Your celebrity doesnt mean you can treat folks that way.
The next year, Naughright reportedly agreed to a $300,000 settlement with the University of Tennessee over 33 alleged instances of sexual harassment surrounding her job in the athletic department. Her complaint included the Manning incident. However, Manning was not personally accused of sexual harassment and university officials characterized the incident as horseplay.
That characterization was a bad mistake because Manning never learned the difference between locker-room humor and the creation of a sexually hostile workplace environment. This lack of legal understanding would come back to haunt him when he recounted the Naughright incident in a book he co-authored in 2000 with his father Archie titled Manning: A Father, His Sons, and a Football Legacy.
In the book, Manning called his action crude, maybe, but harmless and contended that the female trainer should have shrugged it off. He also said that Naughright had a vulgar mouth.
Naughright was teaching at Florida Southern Baptist College, a United Methodist Baptist College in Lakeland, Fla., when the book was published. Until then, she had earned substantial pay raises and promotions as a faculty member. However, the resulting notoriety from the book caused her to be demoted and finally resign from the college. Thus, she sued Manning in early 2003 for defamation of character. Libel occurs when a malicious statement, which can be proved false, causes irreparable damage to a persons reputation.
The Saxon letter disproves Mannings story that he did not sit naked on Naughrights head in the locker room. The vulgar mouth assertion came from a bus trip to the University of Virginia in 1996. Yet, Naughright had four male witnesses from that trip ready to testify in her defamation suit that she did not use bad language on the bus to and from Charlottesville.
Still, in November 2003, Mannings attorney asked that the defamation case be dismissed because the passages in the book were substantially true. The trial judge disagreed and ruled that the case would go to trial. In late December, Manning resolved the lawsuit in a confidential, out of court settlement.
Gender discrimination of women often occurs in previously all-male domains such as locker rooms and on golf courses. These are areas where men historically can say and act in ways we wont when women are around. Consequently, the goal of acts like Mannings is not to coerce women into unwanted sexual activity but rather to create an uncomfortable and hostile environment for the perceived female intruder. Men who create these unfriendly environments hope that women will then seek job opportunities in less oppressive conditions and thus, the status quo will be maintained.
While we all need our social space, creating a hostile environment based on gender is clearly illegal. Furthermore, to tarnish intentionally a persons professional reputation through knowingly false and malicious statements constitutes libel (if written) and slander (if spoken). Both are not protected under the First Amendment. Mannings statements in the book are vindictive and his decision to recount the locker room incident was just plain dumb.
Neither Manning nor his father get it. In a November interview, Archie Manning said that his son regrets dropping his pants in front of Naughright and that he has already been punished. Yet, Peyton Manning has never publicly acknowledged sitting naked on the trainers head or writing false statements about her that resulted in a job loss. Moreover, the taxpayers of Tennessee paid the sexual harassment damages to Naughright, not the Manning family. His only punishment has come from the defamation settlement (whatever that is).
Lets hope that the Neanderthal gene stopped with Peyton. His younger brother Eli is the star quarterback for the University of Mississippi and a likely first-round NFL draft pick this spring. If there is no genetic predisposition (to deny women meaningful job opportunities) that causes Eli to violate the law, Im sure he will be smarter both on and off the field than his older sibling.