Bp Foys Releases Covington Catholic Investigation

This can be found here. Key points:

• There is no evidence the students chanted "build the wall" or any variation.
• A voice was heard shouting "It's not rape if you enjoy it", but video evidence indicates another person said, "He does not go to CovCath" immediately afterward.
• Nick Sandmann's January 20 statement accurately reflects his interaction with the Black Hebrew Israelites and Nathan Phillips. (Sandmann's attorneys correctly did not make him available to the investigation and referred investigators to his January 20 statement.)
• Few if any students left Covington wearing MAGA hats. They purchased them in Washington during or after the March for Life. In prior years, they purchased equivalent Obama hats. There is no policy in the school against wearing political apparel.
• Video evidence supports all statements from students and chaperones. Statements from Nathan Phillips are inconsistent, and he did not respond to requests for an interview.

The video from the Lin Wood law firm posted more than a week ago is actually more detailed than this investigation, which seems almost timid. However, there is no difference in the conclusions of both investigations, and the diocesan investigation will unquestionably support the legal cases of the boys and their families.

The Washington Post report of the investigation turns it into a he said-she said issue, with numerous quotes from Native American activists. It does quote Lin Wood, Sandmann's attorney:

“The MAGA cap that Nick was wearing provides no legal excuse or justification for the politically motivated accusers, rather it only confirms their bias and malice. Anyone who falsely attacked, disparaged, or threatened a minor because of the cap he was wearing should hang his or her head in shame and be held fully accountable in a court of law.”

Further,

The report, he added, “firmly establish[es] the truth that Nick was innocent of any wrongdoing. Nick was the victim of adults who used him to further their own agendas.”

UPDATE: Wood, Sandmann's attorney, has indicated that he will sue Native American hoaxer Phillips as part of his strategy, primarily to get Phillips's sworn deposition. The Foys investigation was unable to interview Phillips.

I think even Bp Barron's reaction, where he called the situation " at best, ambiguous", does not reflect the findings of the Foys investigation.

As I predicted, though, the scope of the Foys investigation was limited to the events in Washington. A much more worthwhile investigation would include how the media contacted Bp Foys, Abp Kurtz, and Abp Lori, the nature of those contacts, what was represented to the bishops, and how the bishops responded in the context of any existing diocesan policies regarding media contacts. A much more worthwhile conclusion would contain recommendations on how bishops can avoid being stampeded by media in the wake of future episodes.

But clearly, influential US bishops are allied with liberal media and the dominant secular narrative, and in the current environment, no such investigation will be permitted. We're lucky to have had the one we got.