The big problem with "keeping this in house" is that it leads to wild speculation.
Im on the fence about this. As a business they hold liabilities as fiduciaries to protect their organization and employees, but is it better to keep it at the source or to let it spiral to derivative speculation and the court of public opinion in following?
Just like with beach initially, the rumor that spread within the organization was that he engaged in a sexual favors or something around fostered a beneficial homosexual relationship that led to jealousy or resentment from other players in training camp.
And like when public went off the rails with Crawford and his crack house following the team announcing his rehabilitation program, it could be said amongst the considerations like violating HIPPAA and beyond nuanced marketing/PR, they might need to protect both the organization and employees from liability in being known or holding an identity as a sexual assault victim or addict.
Sounds apologist, and my history providing perspective arguing against public/mob opinion doesn’t help, so I should add what happened was a tragedy and everyone involved should be held responsible... by being completely clear with what happened to the public. Haha