Posted on 02/06/2020 8:43:43 AM PST by karpov
The University of Connecticut expelled a male student for an allegedly nonconsensual sexual encounter with a female student. But now a judge has issued a temporary restraining order to halt the student's removal, on the grounds that the university's investigation was wildly unfair.
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has obtained a transcript of the court proceeding, which took place on January 23. As it shows, U.S. District Judge Michael Shea was especially perturbed that UConn did not interview key witnesses who would have undermined the accuser's credibility.
"I am troubled by aspects of this procedure," said Shea, "and in particular I think the thing that troubles me the most is the fact that the hearing body refuses to hear from four of the plaintiff's witnesses."
None of the witnesses saw the encounter itself, which took place in April 2019 in a dorm room and involved only the male and female students. But prior to the disputed encounter, the two students—identified in the lawsuit as John Doe and Jane Roe—rode in a car together with several other people. Jane sat on John's lap, and he claims that she spent the ride grinding on him.
That Jane had initiated activity at this stage of the night does not mean she consented later, of course. But importantly, she denied to investigators that the amorous encounter in the car had occurred at all. The other people in the car contradicted that—they heard, and could feel, her rubbing against John—and were willing to speak to this at the university's hearing, but UConn denied them, claiming they did not have relevant testimony.
The judge rightly disagreed. Since there were no witnesses to the encounter itself, adjudicators must considerable the relative credibility of the two students.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
University kangaroo courts have been an issue for quite a long time. A comeuppance is long overdue.
This kind of stuff has gone on too far. Everything you said is correct.
Grinding in a car ride in front of other people does not mean that any subsequent “No” doesn’t mean no, but it is definitely ridiculous for an impartial investigation to deny that these contexts are relevant to the case.
What did Jussie know and when did he know it?
Innocent until proven guilty unless you’re male.
My sister, who thought that first feminist march against Trump was the ultimate in women’s power (or some crap like that), had her beloved pastor get booted by unsubstantiated mee-too garbage. She said ‘NO WAY that could be true’.
Unfortunately I do still want to get along with my sister, so I didn’t have the heart to point out just how hypocritical she’s being in having said that.
The hookup culture makes it difficult to distinguish between some actual rapes and cases in which a female has regrets about a sexual encounter.
A lot of people have huge sympathy for the men accused in these cases. I do not.
I am not a perfect person by any stretch, but I have applied the principle of sexual fidelity exclusively to the person married to.
If men treated sex as reserved for the person they marry and waited until marriage, they would not experience these specific kinds of accusations.
“as some leftists are willing to do”
Oh, plenty of people on the right are willing to railroad people based on just an accusation too.
Plenty of men have been accused of rape by their wives too, buddy.
I don’t understand why a university is even involved in a law enforcement matter. They should stay out of it.
The university should have no right to “try” the student in the first place UNTIL that student has been tried by our court system and found guilty. These extra-judicial kangaroo courts need to be stopped.
Define plenty.
I’ve known many rape victims. I’ve been involved with uncovering false allegations of rape. But I’ve never personally known anyone accused of raping his wife or any women making this claim.
All sorts of false allegations tend to fly during divorces, but such allegations are usually taken with a grain of salt by the courts.
A commitment to monogamous marriage is the best way to avoid false allegations of rape. Any suggestion otherwise is nonsense.
Who’s asking for your ‘sympathy?’
“Define plenty.”
One in ten married women allege they have been raped by their husbands. I’d say that’s plenty.
“A commitment to monogamous marriage is the best way to avoid false allegations of rape.”
No, avoiding women altogether is the best way to avoid false allegations. Being married doesn’t do anything to protect you if a women decides you are a good target for an allegation.
Don’t pretend to be a tough guy after whining about how poor old men are being mistreated because they can’t control their sexual urges and get themselves into trouble.
Most women, if treated well, would never think of making a false allegation of sexual advances or assault.
Men who pursue illicit sex with “strange women” get what they deserve.
Stop whining about it.
“One in ten married women allege they have been raped by their husbands.”
It’s odd that these statistics are floating around. And actually, the statistics do not say “alleged”. They say it actually occurs this often. But I call it odd because I would have expected at least once in my life to have heard such claims.
A woman told me a couple of weeks ago about an abusive ex-boyfriend “slut shaming” and sexually harassing her.
I just had another woman this week share with me about her and her husbands affairs. She shared that she had an abortion this week. She was looking for prayer.
I had another woman describe how she was raped as a teenager by a boyfriend. She had no reason to lie about it. She never shared this with her own husband who is now deceased.
A lot of people have opened up to me about their trials, and I’ve never heard anyone say their husband raped them or that their wife falsely accused them of rape.
So, I question these statistics.
“avoiding women altogether is the best way to avoid false allegations.”
Nonsense. And completely cynical.
Men need women. Women need men. Porn and prostitution are not viable substitutes for a wholesome relationship. And few people are capable of lifelong abstinence.
The hookup culture destroys lives—men and women. Rape and false allegations of rape are more prevalent today because of it. And it leads to lack of intimacy.
“So, I question these statistics.”
That’s fine, but on the one hand we have multiple studies, and on the other hand we have your anecdotal experiences. Not really comparable.
“Nonsense. And completely cynical.”
Cynical, sure, but completely sensible. I can’t be credibly accused of animal abuse if I’m not around any animals, and neither can I be credibly accused of rape if I’m never alone with a woman.
“Men need women. Women need men.”
Sure, but tell that to women. They intentionally destroyed the dynamic that has worked since the beginning of time and made it dangerous for men to associate with them. Men didn’t do that.
“That’s fine, but on the one hand we have multiple studies, and on the other hand we have your anecdotal experiences. Not really comparable.”
True, but your comment leaves out the fact that politically charged topics such as this tend to “find” statistics supporting the position of certain advocacy groups.
You can also find statistics that prove that abortion being illegal in certain South American countries causes MORE abortions and therefore pro-life voters should support legalized abortion.
Traditionally, being married is a string defense against allegations of rape. This changed in the early 90s, right along with the growing hookup culture. My point is underscored.
“I can’t be credibly accused of animal abuse if I’m not around any animals, and neither can I be credibly accused of rape if I’m never alone with a woman.”
You can’t be accused of shoplifting if you never shop. Do you really want to accept living life that way?
I think it is a good idea to set boundaries that avoid all appearances of impropriety when possible. Many pastors have guidelines they follow in which they are never alone with a woman for counseling and prayer. These days it might make sense to broaden this to men as well.
Relationships are based on trust. There are trustworthy people and untrustworthy. I suggest men who fear this threat to get to know potential partners / wives in a safer way. Online chatting is not a bad option. Phone dating is not bad. Meeting in public places until there is trust built up might be a way.
“[Women] intentionally destroyed the dynamic that has worked since the beginning of time and made it dangerous for men to associate with them. Men didn’t do that.”
Men pursuing sex with no commitment contributed to this.
It is unfortunate that many women seem to be attracted to the bad boys. The good guys sometimes pay the price for the bad ones.
Personally, I could not live my life without just accepting the risks and pursuing love even IF I got betrayed. Still worth the risk to me.
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.