Lawsuit by ex-University of Michigan student accused of sexual assault is revived
Reuters reports the University of Michigan must face a former male student’s claims that it wrongly refused, at a disciplinary proceeding, to allow him to cross-examine the female student who accused him of sexual misconduct, and other adverse witnesses.
In a decision on Friday, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court judge’s dismissal of claims by the male student, known as John Doe, that the school violated his due process rights and Title IX, a U.S. law barring gender discrimination by schools that receive federal funds.
Doe, who left school 13-1/2 credits short of his business degree rather than face expulsion, was accused of having non-consensual sex with a woman at a “Risky Business” themed fraternity party when he was a junior and she a freshman.
The woman, known as Jane Roe, said she was too drunk to consent, while Doe said she participated willingly.
Circuit Judge Amul Thapar rejected university claims that cross-examination was not necessary because Doe could review the woman’s statement, had ample opportunity to challenge witnesses’ testimony and confessed in a police interview, a claim the judge said was unproven.
“Due process requires cross-examination in circumstances like these because it is the greatest legal engine ever invented for uncovering the truth,” Thapar wrote, noting that the school allows cross-examination in all misconduct cases not involving sexual assault.
In reviving the Title IX claim, Thapar, an appointee of President Donald Trump, said without ruling on the merits that Doe raised a “plausible” claim that the university showed “anti-male” bias in discrediting testimony from his fraternity brothers.
He said this came against the backdrop of a federal probe into the school’s handling of sexual misconduct claims.
So the anti-male academics and their kangaroo court got schooled on due process, and equal rights under the law. I highlighted in bold the judge’s pedigree as a Trump appointee for a reason- the more of his judges are on the job, the less the Dems can legislate from the bench.
Category: Legal
I hope he prevails sues the pants off her.
The hell with that – I hope he nails UM for a few million.
That happens a couple of times, the university’s big donors will very likely reign in some of the rampant idiocy in the UM’s administration.
I hear that, big Donors are who often truly call the shots at Universities, let a number of them shut their wallets and the schools will cave in no time.
Just ask the University of Missouri.
Remember, no so long ago, when the shenanigans by the football team at the playing of Star Spangled Banner at U of Missouri caused the more generous alumni donors to express their displeasure by not donating to the alumni funds, and/or telling their kids to go elsewhere?
That was two years ago, when this nonsense started.
I think people have had just about enough of this fantasy nonsense, so I’m glad this young man is doing this. Equal rights means for everyone, not just certain people. If you don’t like being excluded, then do NOT BE an excluder**.
** “Excluder” is not a common use of ‘exclude’.
Last I heard, the U of Missouri was STILL suffering, having to lay off Faculty and Staff, closing Dormitories,…
Agree 100% It’s time equality was more than lip service…
I see what you did there…
So did I. But since he’d (literally) already achieved that by alternative means, I thought that point was moot. (smile)
Sauce, goose, gander.
Suck it, Libtards.
Reuters is usually fairly reliable as a wire service, but this story seems to have a couple of information holes.
A big one is the graf on “the backdrop of a federal probe into the school’s handling of sexual misconduct claims.” What’s up with that? Fleshing out some specifics of the federal probe might have helped with additional context.
Another thing missing are the incident dates involved. When did the fraternity party happen, and when was the male student forced out of school? I’m pointing this out because in late 2014, Rolling Stone published a story called “A Rape on Campus” about a sexual assault at a fraternity party which proved to be completely fabricated.
It raises the question: Was the female U Mich student caught up in a #MeToo type opportunity to play a victim card?
PG, go to the link I provided; I rarely post entire articles, in the interest of brevity and space on the site. I cherry pick the sections I feel get to the meat of the issue, and leave to the commenters like yourself to use the link for the entire article.
In the future I’ll add the link at the bottom of my post, and use words like “to see the article in its entirety, click here” or words to that effect.
Thanks for the input.
Ed, there was the same-same lack of key facts in the full Reuters piece. It’s why I pointed them out.
Also, I’m more than OK with TAH posting a synopsis with a link. It also helps to avoid potential beefs over copyright.
Thanks, Perry. I am very conscious of copyright laws; the last thing I want to do is bring more litigation to the place.
That being said, some guy named Hardin cautioned me here on using easily traced forum names, as nasty folks are out there on the interwebs, who would love to drag more people into no shit lawsuits.
Not telling you or any one else what to do, just be advised, and asking all the other TAH members to use due diligence when posting.
There are people out there who wish us harm- don’t make it easy for them and protect yourself.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2018/07/06/university-michigan-sex-assault-hearing/764119002/ incident happened late last year.
Re Perry Gaskill’s question – from the Free Press article, this looks like an open-and-shut case of “she pursued him, he lost interest, and she later sued.” Looks like every time this case gets in front of a real judge, the university gets bitchslapped.
This is why, first and foremost, you do NOT drink yourself into blind stupidity and then blame what happened on someone else.
Having seen ‘Risky Business’, the point of that party was to raise enough cash to get Birdbrain’s parents’ furniture and household stuff, especially the Stueben Glassworks egg, out of hock from the pimp. The college that Birdbrain had applied to sent an interviewer for the usual pre-entry interview, and he happened to show up while the event was underway. He not only appreciated the initiative that Birdbrain took to raise the cash, but also made “friends” by spending time interviewing both Birdbrain’s friends and the hookers. So Birdbrain gets into Princeton, instead of having to go to the University of Illinois, and he has a new girlfriend.
So how was that frat party a ‘Risky Business’ type of party? Were they raising money for a good cause? Did they have to replace a cracked Steuben egg?
More like this, I would think.
Well Chief Masterson told me in Main Control before I was shit canned out of M Div and into A Gang where I finally got AJ Squared away to when I go to my first Liberty port to drink soda pop and keep my pecker in my pants. This dude should have listened to the Chief.
From David’s linky thingy, yeah she apparently wanted more of a relationship and he either (a) sobered up himself, (b) recognized the full growed rattle headed, copper cobra moccasions inside her head or (c) realized that any woman who had to get that drunks to sleep with him probably wasn’t a good choice. These kids need to realize that the whole male privilege thing means, she can accuse you of inappropriate behavior no matter how drunk she is or how bad she thought she wanted it.
Yet again, I ask a simple question, with a qualifier. Criminal sexual assault, or claims of it, are a crime, no? If the answer is yes, and it is, in all 50 states and numerous territories, why is a university involved, at all, in the investigation of said sexual assault? That is the job of investigators, usually employed by police agencies, sheriff’s departments and Bureaus of State Police, Departments of State Police, etc. etc. It is not the job of the Dean of Students, or the Dean of the School of Political Science or the Professor of Humanities. They have no investigatory skills or experience, even though they may think they do.
The results of an investigation is taken to a prosecutor/District Attorney, to see if there is enough evidence for a prosecution, and if a warrant for an arrest can be made.
All of that said, I hope this young man can take the U of M, whose colors are Corn and Blue, er, Maize and Blue, for about Seventy leben Millions of dollars.
Yes. Yes. Exactly.
College tribunals are fine for issues of academic integrity, and for minor misconduct that doesn’t merit criminal prosecution. But allegations of serious crime should be investigated by trained police and, if substantiated, prosecuted within the criminal justice system.
Progtardism allows judges of that ilk to ignore the rule of law and many precedents with which they disagree, based upon their political value system and beliefs. For them, the Constitution is just a piece of paper with words that mean what they say they mean, nothing more and nothing less. Any phrases with obvious and inconvenient meanings which hinder their power are to be ignored.
If the Duke University lacrosse team’s parents didn’t have deep pockets and connections, then district attorney NiFong would have sent the lot of them to the slammer, instead of being disbarred and jailed.