I find it interesting that this thread has Antoine Winfield Jr.'s involvement ranging from being at home on the computer with his girlfriend, to being the escort of the freshman and everything in between. Nobody knows for sure except AWJ. The only fact that is known is that, as of now, after his EOAA testimony he is suspended for one year, not expelled.
One point that I haven't seen mentioned in any thread are students' internal conduct records. Each student, whether they are an athlete or not, are expected to follow the Student Conduct Code at the U of M. This is common among all colleges and universities. If a student is found in violation of any portion of the Conduct Code there is an internal record kept. This could include things like a noise violation in the residence halls, fighting, being underage and found on campus with alcohol, as well as more serious violations as academic misconduct(cheating, plagiarism, etc.). If in violation, a student may get a written warning, probation, community service, removal from residence halls, suspension or expulsion. There can be other sanctions, but those are some of the common ones.
My point being that it seems everyone is assuming that the ten students were all issued the sanctions they were given based solely on the events of 9/2. This may be true or some may have gotten in trouble previously which led to a more severe sanction. The general public is not privvy to these. Just because they were not charged on the criminal side, does not mean they were never guilty of previously breaking the Student Conduct Code. For athletes, typically they sign a document that permits the school to contact a designated liaison within the athletic department to alert their coaches when something happens. The coach may decide that he/she may further discipline the student related to the team such as not starting the game, benching, or something else. To be trying to connect the dots and figure out which student was A1, A2, etc. and then tying it to just only was in the report is unfair to everyone involved and a slippery slope.
Regarding Antoine Sr. and his tirade during the boycott TV clip, he does not deserve an apology. I respect that he was upset in the heat of the moment, but he was wrong in what he said. He got up on his soapbox and scolded the University because the President, the AD, or the coach didn't bother to call and tell him about his son's situation. He only heard about it when his son told him about it. He threatened that his son was never coming back to the U until Kaler and Coyle were fired. The fact is, and he would have known this himself since he was a student and an athlete once, is that no one at the University could legally inform him of the situation or the results except his own son. Because of laws of confidentiality, the school can not, without permission from the student, discuss any disciplinary matters with a parent. I feel from Atoine Sr., but in this case he was simply wrong in his statements.