Yes TE was guilty based on the wording of the clause, but by definition, so was the Duke player .

ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below).

Check.

Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area .

He lowered his head to make forcible contact and was leading with his helmet to attack with forcible contact to blow the tackler back. Neither player was defenseless and neither player launched (unlike the Duke defender who smacked a defenseless cunningham). Both players lead with the head. If Duke player keeps his head up no foul. If TE kept his head up would they have called the penalty on Duke runner? Who knows, it is hypothetical. But the rule as written applies equally to offense and defense, but the officials apply it only to defensive players because of how the rule is taught.

Tough deal for TE, but apply the rule equally for the rest of the season and tweak the rule some more in the off season, because the intention is player safety. In highschool I watched our running back lead with his helmet and snap the middle linebackers neck leaving the guy paralyzed. Joe never got over that hit. Fix the rule and apply it as fairly as possible.