Post by Vince524 on Jul 5, 2017 12:10:29 GMT -5
So I've posted on this before, how colleges handle rape cases. Under the Obama administration, new guidance lowered the due process for accused students to the point of being guilty until proven innocent, with no conceivable way to actually prove their innocence.
Making it mandatory for colleges to use preponderance of the evidence standard, 50.01% so that any personal bias would enough for a finding of responsible.
Allowing unfounded cases to be appealed and retried, sometimes under even worse standards
Insisting that no cross examination take place, which is essential, especially in a he said, she said case.
They also put forward that a single complaint could trigger a federal investigation of the college, to see if they weren't doing enough. Petrified that they were going to lose federal money, many colleges seemed eager to expel students no matter what the evidence or lack there of showed.
If you were faced with an arrest for rape and were cleared by the cops and it was believed it was simply someone else, based of forensics, polygraph and video, you were still disciplined and it would remain on your record.
His parents hired an attorney and a private investigator. It was forensically proven through both surveillance and DNA, as well as polygraph, that he was innocent. (It was allegedly another man who was walking directly in front of him). All charges criminally were dropped against John Doe and also erased from his record.
However, at the school level he was immediately suspended and kicked off campus. According to the complaint, no real investigation was done. No one was allowed to testify on his behalf, the school would not take his statement, allow the private investigator or attorney to speak or introduce the evidence. He had been suspended from school pending the outcome at the same time his due process rights were stripped. He had no way to prove his innocence without the facts of the case being presented.
The school found him responsible of sexual misconduct. He appealed and was denied. He was suspended from school for TWO years. His official transcript stated “Suspended for Sexual Misconduct”, he had no option but to wait out the imposed sanctions, as no other school would admit him with the branded record.
Student A was never the complainant in the administrative proceeding with the University. In fact, after the incident in question, Mr. Doe and Student A continued to socialize, and she subsequently invited him to spend another night with her. Weeks later, an unidentified third party unilaterally reported the matter, and the University began to investigate.”
Let that sink in.
Weeks later, someone anonymously filed a sexual assault complaint. Student A never considered what happened to be sexual misconduct. John Doe never considered the events to be sexual misconduct. They both admitted to drinking and they both engaged in sexual intercourse. Someone else decided that all drunken sex is rape, therefore it must be reported. The school decided regardless of what the two college students thought, and regardless of them both engaging in the same activities, John Doe needed to be punished.
John Doe was immediately suspended from campus pending the conclusion of this case. He lost his scholarship, and all pre-paid tuition, and his college transcripts are branded with the black mark of “Suspended for Sexual Misconduct” which will likely disallow him from enrolling in another school.
TWO YEARS of litigation. The University has conducted hearings and John Doe has appealed. It was taken to federal court and the University of Kentucky attempted to schedule another hearing on the matter. John Doe’s attorneys filed legal action to stop them from having additional hearings. Student A filed her own Title IX complaint with the OCR against the University for the way it mishandled this case. This case still has not concluded; neither party has resolve, and no one can move forward completely.
Let alone cases where there was a charge from the victim and the student had to prove their were innocent. It wouldn't matter.
At the University of Colorado, a student known only as John Doe in his lawsuit was accused of sexual assault by another student. That student, referred to as Jane Doe in the lawsuit, would later tell university investigators that she "may have stretched the truth" about the encounter because she was "pissed off" at John for being "just another douchy frat dude." She told police she wanted revenge against John.
But during the campus disciplinary hearing, the fact that Jane admitted her prior statements were lies meant she was subsequently being honest. So, the fact that she admitted to lying about being assaulted somehow became evidence that she really was assaulted.
This John Doe was found responsible for sexual assault and suspended for three terms.
Caleb Warner's accuser went to the police and the college and told the same story. The college expelled him, the police issued a warrant. For her arrest
He would have to sue and then settle. His expulsion was turned into a suspension, they'd seal the file and agree not to open it unless he agreed, which he'd have to if he wanted to go to another college.
He was awarded $15k, which is a fraction of the legal costs.
I've got more cases to illustrate, but I'll post more later.
OCR has fallen into a pattern and practice of overreaching, of setting out to punish and embarrass institutions rather than appreciate their good faith and genuine desire to correct legitimate civil rights problems,” Jackson told the crowd.
Jackson said, according to Inside Higher Ed, that the Obama administration had been playing “gotcha” with schools, treating “every complaint as a fishing expedition through which our field investigators have been told to keep searching until you find a violation rather than go where the evidence takes them.”