Loser.
Posted on 10/01/2019 10:23:24 AM PDT by Red Badger
A federal district judge has allowed a male student’s defamation lawsuit against a female student who accused him of rape to survive a motion to dismiss.
The male student, whom The Daily Wire will call John Doe, was accused of raping a female student, who shall henceforth be named Jane Roe. The two students attended Syracuse University.
In 2017, the two attended a party at John’s fraternity, which was co-hosted by Jane’s sorority. Surveillance footage from the night showed the two students entering John’s room around 12:30 in the morning. The two awoke in the same bed the next morning, fully clothed, with no memory of what happened the night before.
The following day, Jane went to Crouse Hospital in Syracuse, New York for a sexual assault examination. Because she didn’t remember the night before, she assumed she was drugged. She received a sexual assault examination, which found caffeine and marijuana in her bloodstream. A bloodstain was found on the crotch area of her white leotard, but there was no blood on her underwear. There were also two “tears” to Jane’s labia, but “no internal cuts or abrasions to vaginal walls and she had smooth hymen edges,” according to Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf’s summary of the case contained in her ruling. The ruling was first reported by Reason’s Eugene Volokh.
A DNA analysis of Jane’s vagina found no male DNA.
Despite these findings, indicating no sex occurred, Jane reported John to the Syracuse Police Department. Police investigated the claim and closed the case without charging John, since there was no physical evidence that any sexual contact occurred and Jane said in interviews she couldn’t remember what happened that night. Syracuse police forwarded the results of their investigation to the Onondaga County District Attorney’s Office, which conducted its own investigation and came to the same conclusion as the police. The report from the DA concluded, “There is no credible proof of any sexual conduct in this case, consensual or non-consensual.”
In June 2017, however, Jane took her claims to Syracuse University’s Title IX department. Jane initially told school investigators that she had no memory of the night in question but weeks later said she experienced “sudden flashes of memories following a visit to a therapist.”
After these allegedly recovered memories, Jane claimed John raped and sodomized her without her consent. Despite no physical evidence of her claims, Syracuse expelled John based on Jane’s say-so alone.
Jane went to John’s fraternity the next day and bragged that “her rapist was expelled,” according to court documents.
John moved to New Jersey and enrolled at the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT). He also obtained an internship with Bohler Engineering.
Jane then began publicly claiming that John was a “rapist,” which resulted in him losing his internship. John included six instances of Jane’s “defamation.”
Jane sent a text to John’s friends, calling him a “violent rapist.” Jane sent a text to one of John’s other friends, calling him a “monster.” On Facebook, Jane called John a “rapist” and claimed it was not the first time he “has raped someone and I want to make sure that it is the last.” She posted his picture, marked the location as NJIT, and tagged both NJIT and Bohler in the post. On LinkedIn, Jane called Goldman a “rapist” and tagged NJIT and Bohler once again. Jane also messaged Bohler directly on Facebook. Bohler responded by saying it “elected to immediately terminate the employment relationship” with John based on Jane’s “allegations.” Jane then posted that she was “feeling happy” that John lost his internship, again calling him a “monster” and “a disgusting excuse for a man.” Finally, Jane “reviewed” NJIT, claiming, “A school that accepts recently expelled rapists, despite it being marked on their transcript…………………. “
Judge Mauskopf accepted most of John’s arguments that Jane had defamed him except one – about John’s fear that he may be expelled by NJIT for Jane’s claims. Because nothing has actually happened to him at NJIT, his fears are (so far) not related to any actual actions.
Jane’s attorneys tried to push back on John’s claims, saying that John didn’t suffer any injury due to her conduct, even though John was clearly expelled from Syracuse and fired from his internship as a direct result of her claims.
Your right but that does not excuse her nor does it condemn him as a rapist.
Unless the charges are against a Liberal, women must always be believed.
“On LinkedIn, Jane called Goldman a “rapist” and tagged NJIT and Bohler once again.”
Is this a slip-up in editing? Is his name Doe or Goldman?
“but that does not excuse her nor does it condemn him as a rapist.”
It would have solved his problem before there was a problem.
Ah. John Doe and Jane Roe are aka Alex Goldman and Catherine Reddington from this news story from last year.
https://nypost.com/2018/06/30/false-college-rape-allegation-destroyed-my-life-suit/
John should be comfortable financially from the university and woman when this is over.
The school that dismissed him based upon her say should be sued big time.
Freudian Slip.................
I don’t think monetary damages are good enough, she belongs in PRISON, 10 years ought to give her time to think about telling LIES that ruin Lives.
Chicks lie often.
Scenario - Girl likes guy, so she sleeps with guy.
Guy just wanted the nookie.
Bitter chick lies.
“His actions were a no no.”
Your response is pure garbage.
“Your response is pure garbage.”
He would have solved his problem before there was a problem.
Why is that garbage?
First of all, it’s his room.
Secondly, you’re essentially blaming him for some lying female.
Third, just because you’re religious doesn’t mean everyone else needs to do, or think, as you do.
Maybe she was “raped” by an XX “transgender”.
Loser.
“First of all, it’s his room.
Secondly, you’re essentially blaming him for some lying female.”
No, he is responsible for getting so drunk he had memory loss. He is responsible inviting a drunk womaninto his bedroom and onto his bed.
If he chose to act differently, she could not tell lies about what whent on in his bed when they were so drunk.
____ __
“Third, just because you’re religious doesn’t mean everyone else needs to do, or think, as you do.”
Not a region thing, just good common sense.
“Loser”
What do you think I have lost?
Women do not deserve the pedestal Churchians put them onto.
You have a very bad view of this, because we would have consequences to your change in the law.
What would stop a rapist from just killing the victim? No rapist would let a victim survive. So you are condemning the victim to death, when most rapists don’t kill now, the reason to leave them alive is gone with your change. Very short sighted. Same for pedos and other crimes. Murder gets death, everything else should not so as to save the victims.
“But women never lie about rape...”
My experience has been that 100% of women who have claimed rape to me never were. It was either a sexual fantasy of theirs or an attention seeking ploy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.