ANd why isn’t she in PRISON??
If the university has any sense, it will join her as a party defendant. The plaintiff’s attorneys may know that and want the moving party to be the university. I don’t do third party practice so could be totally wrong on this but might be true.
Last January Kirsten Gillibrand brought her to the State of the Union speech....
Apparently Paul Nungesser nor members of FR understand the present threshold for allowing a charge of rape to be made. If you are a man and you have ever considered having sex with a woman then you are a rapist plain and simple.
The guy is always going to be on the losing side without overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Ms. SULKowicz is well named.
I’m not sure about bias, but I’m pretty sure he has a solid case for slander. Her very public accusation has most demonstrably damaged his standing among his peers and in his community. That constitutes an actionable injury.
The mattress carrying around thing leads me to believe she’s an attention seeker. Victim status is always a good way to gain attention at a lib university. To her, carrying a mattress around campus may just be a great way to meet people.
I’ve said it before - With politics as their goal and hype as their weapon, the Left are oddly re-creating a 21st century Puritan sexual standard, albeit without any context to its natural home in Christian morality.
Maybe he’s going for the big pockets first and saving a suit for her next.
Excellent. People are finally starting to bite the dogs.
Not all that familiar with this case, but what this often means is not a ruling by the university that he didn't do it, but rather that there is insufficient evidence to proceed with further action.
IOW, it's left forever in the limbo-land of he-said/she-said rather than being conclusively proven either way.
As opposed to cases, for example, where the accused was in Peru at the time, where innocence is conclusively proven.
What very few seem willing to address is the simple fact that in those common cases where both parties agree sexual activity took place, and the only issue is whether it was consensual, there is quite simply no way to prove guilt (or innocence) beyond a reasonable doubt.
In this unfortunate situation, the legal system has cheated, and people are convicted or acquitted based essentially on which person was more convincing on the stand. IOW, who told the better story.
The problem with this, of course, is that some people are excellent liars and others are unable to tell the truth convincingly when under extreme stress.
If we actually followed our own principles of justice, it would be essentially impossible to get a conviction in a date-rape case. AFAIK, in no other type of case are convictions routinely handed down based solely on the testimony of one interested party that is directly contradicted by another interested party.
Which really ought to give males, in or out of college, good reason to reconsider the wisdom of picking up random females in bars and taking them home. But it won't.
“She is actively earning COURSE CREDIT from Columbia for ... this senior thesis, “Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight).”
Sweet. Karmic revenge will strike when this stupid (and ignorant) child is saddled with a $200,000.00 student loan for the rest of her life for being “educated” at Columbia. Perhaps she can sue Columbia for failing to tell her that a degree in mattress-carrying would qualify for jobs like Starbucks “barista”.