Sedona Prince not picked in WNBA draft with sexual assault claims hanging over her

New York Post - Apr 15th, 2025

Sedona Prince, a skilled 6-foot-7 center, did not hear her name called during Monday's WNBA draft, despite projections placing her as a potential late first-round pick. The decision comes in the wake of multiple women accusing Prince of sexual assault or abuse in recent months, making her one of the most challenging prospects to evaluate. Over 200,000 fans signed a petition demanding her removal from TCU's women's basketball team, although Prince has denied all allegations and has not been charged with any crime. According to her lawyer, A. Boone Almanza, Prince's reputation has been unfairly damaged by social media accusations driven by individuals seeking personal gain.

Despite not being drafted, there remains a possibility for Prince to sign a training-camp contract or pursue a professional basketball career overseas. Her college career was frequently interrupted by injuries, yet she managed to deliver impressive performances. Last season at TCU, her third school in seven years, she averaged 17.2 points, 9.4 rebounds, three blocks, and 2.4 assists, contributing to the Horned Frogs' first Elite Eight appearance. The situation raises questions about the impact of social media on athletes' careers and the challenges of balancing personal conduct with professional aspirations.

Sexual Assault Allegations Wnba Draft Sedona Prince Tcu Women's Basketball Social Media Impact

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a timely and relevant overview of Sedona Prince's situation in the context of the WNBA draft and the allegations against her. It accurately reports key facts, such as her undrafted status and the public backlash she faces. However, the article could benefit from greater balance and source diversity to enhance its credibility and depth. While it is clear and readable, the lack of transparency about the sources and context of the information limits its overall impact. The story effectively raises public interest issues, but its potential influence is constrained by its limited perspective. Overall, the article serves as a solid introduction to the topic but would benefit from more comprehensive reporting to fully engage and inform readers.

Accuracy

The story accurately reports that Sedona Prince was not selected in the WNBA draft and that she was projected to go as high as the late first round. It also correctly states that Prince has faced allegations of sexual assault or abuse and that she has denied these allegations without being charged with any crime. However, the article could have been more precise by specifying the number of accusers and providing more context about the Change.org petition. The article mentions a statement from Prince's lawyer, which aligns with the reality that she has not been legally charged. Overall, while the article covers the main facts, it lacks depth in verifying some specific claims, such as the exact number of accusers and the details of the petition.

Balance

The article provides a balanced view by including both the allegations against Sedona Prince and her denial through a statement from her lawyer. However, it leans slightly towards Prince's perspective by emphasizing her denial and the absence of legal charges. The story could improve balance by incorporating more perspectives from the accusers or other stakeholders, such as the WNBA or the TCU basketball team. By focusing primarily on Prince's side, the article may inadvertently downplay the seriousness of the allegations and the public backlash reflected in the petition.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, making it easy for readers to follow the main points. It succinctly summarizes Prince's draft status, the allegations against her, and her response. The language is straightforward, and the tone remains neutral, contributing to the article's readability. However, the article could benefit from additional context or background information about the allegations and the public reaction to enhance comprehension.

Source quality

The article references a statement from Prince's lawyer, which adds some credibility. However, it lacks diverse sources, such as comments from the WNBA, TCU officials, or representatives of the petition. The reliance on a single perspective, primarily Prince's defense, limits the depth of the reporting. Including more authoritative sources could enhance the article's reliability and provide a more comprehensive view of the situation.

Transparency

The article provides limited transparency regarding the basis of its claims. While it mentions allegations and a petition, it does not explain the methodology for verifying these claims or the context of the petition. The article also does not disclose any potential conflicts of interest or biases that might affect its impartiality. Greater transparency about the sources and context of the information would improve the reader's understanding and trust in the article.