From the article:
Yes, the father is the person who called UT police initially. He was referred to the Dean of Students.
The missing piece here is that the office of the Dean of Students would then have been responsible for investigating the allegation, not the university police. Their investigator would have spoken to the alleged victim, witnesses, and the accused, before presenting the evidence.
There is too much missing information to draw conclusions here, but if I had to guess, I’d say that the 24-yr-old has an accuser who actually went to the police, which takes a lot, which makes things look worse for him. As we have seen many times, the decision of the police not to charge and the prosecution not to proceed doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. (Although we have to remember that the Duke lacrosse accuser also went to the police. There are always exceptions.)
The undergraduate seems to have been in a more questionable situation. She was obviously drunk enough to not remember much, but that doesn’t mean he could or should have known it. Her friend said that she seemed to be functional and able to consent. It’s one of those gray areas. Again, not enough details.
My thoughts on these cases are colored, I admit, from recently reading Missoula.