A former University of Arizona track coach accused of stalking and assaulting a student athlete is now facing additional charges of violating an order of protection.
A Pima County grand jury indictment charges Craig Carter, 48, with four felony counts of aggravated harassment.
The indictment adds to criminal charges against Carter, who in May was jailed after being arrested on suspicion of choking an athlete when she’d no longer have sex with him, and for threatening her with a box cutter and dragging her out of a classroom.
The indictment says Carter made Facebook and Skype contact with a woman affiliated with the UA track team who had a court order of protection against him. The indictment says Carter also tried to contact the woman’s family.
The woman, also an athlete, is not the same woman he is accused of stalking, choking and assaulting. Rather, she is one of two other women affiliated with the team who took out an order of protection against him after his arrest in May.
Carter, who has pleaded not guilty to domestic violence-aggravated assault, stalking and interfering with an educational institution, resigned as UA throws coach May 20. He was released shortly after his arrest in May on a $40,000 bond.
Carter, who is a father and grandfather, sat on a bench weeping during a status conference on his case Monday morning after meeting with his lawyer. Pima County Superior Court Judge Teresa Godoy set his next court date as Feb. 8.
He’s facing mandatory prison time of at least five years if he’s convicted.
The athlete he’s accused of assaulting graduated last year and is now living out of state. She has since filed a civil action against Carter and the UA, saying that Carter subjected her to repeated sexual assaults.
Along with Carter, the lawsuit names as defendants the UA, the Arizona Board of Regents, head UA track and field coach Fred Harvey, and UA athletic director Greg Byrne.
The lawsuit says the athlete had “no ability” to consent to having sex with Carter.
The National Collegiate Athletic Association’s model policy on preventing inappropriate relationships between student athletes and athletic department personnel says, in part, “Whether the student is 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 or older, she or he is significantly less powerful than a head coach, assistant coach, athletics trainer ...
“It is this power differential that makes such relationships inherently unequal, and when the relationships are unequal, the concept of ‘mutual consent’ becomes problematic.”
