Monthly Archives: July 2018

BAD RULING in Illinois. Judge Blesses Campus Kangaroo Courts

, , /

BAD RULING in Illinois. Judge Blesses Campus Kangaroo Courts

If you’ve ever signed up for a service on the internet or downloaded an app, you’ve probably seen a check box asking you to confirm that you’ve read the terms of service.  Colleges have a similar version of terms of service: student conduct codes and other policies that govern the responsibilities and obligations of colleges and their students…A federal judge in Illinois dismissed a student’s due-process lawsuit against the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, saying he admitted he never read the student code on its website before enrolling. As with many contracts that consumers don’t read carefully, this “NO CONTACT” provision was not obvious enough for Doe to immediately notice it. If Doe had read and understood school policies on its website before enrolling – again, unlikely without a lawyer – he would have learned that the university has a different sexual-misconduct standard than the state of Illinois and it doesn’t do live hearings in Title IX cases…The judge expressed exasperation with the University of Illinois as well, writing in a lengthy footnote that this was a “close decision” and reminded the University of Illinois that it’s likely in violation of 7th Circuit precedent by denying accusing and accused students a “meaningful opportunity to be heard“.

thecollegefix.com By Piper  & Thanks to KC for tweet

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
Autistic Male has Consenting Fist Bump -Then She Accused Him,Twice. TitleIX Allowed Accuser To Be Vile.

, , /

Autistic Male has Consenting Fist Bump -Then She Accused Him,Twice. TitleIX Allowed Accuser To Be Vile.

A “fist bump” and a selfie may have ended Marcus Knight’s educational career at Saddleback College, right as it started. Marcus has autism, cerebral palsy and a shunt to relieve fluid pressure on his brain, and he was not allowed to defend himself against allegations in two Title IX investigations this past fall, said Aurora Knight, his mother. Her son cannot negotiate social situations as easily as others and he receives academic accommodations for his disabilities, BUT INCREDIBLY he was not offered accommodations when he was Title IX accused. Marcus’ mother became aggravated by the description of a consensual fist bump as “inappropriate.” She asked the coordinator “Did he touch her? Did he hug her? Did he follow her? Did he try to get her phone number? Did he expose himself?” When the coordinator allegedly said no to each, Aurora said she responded: “Then stop calling it inappropriate. He’s just trying to make a friend.” Aurora explained to Marcus that the female student did not want to be his friend, and he agreed not to interact with her anymore.  A month later, the female student reported the incident as sexual harassment. The accuser changed her story to say Marcus hugged her, sat very close to her, grabbed her, and tried to get her hands onto his upper thighs. Aurora said that did not seem physically possible, that the female student had been sitting behind the counter. During the Title IX process, Aurora and her son were never allowed to formally defend him. When the Knights were called into a meeting with the Title IX coordinator and the police, they weren’t allowed to present evidence. Aurora received a letter in March informing her that Marcus was found responsible and suspended, and she appealed days later. None of their evidence had been taken into consideration. Saddleback college canceled the appeal hearing the day before it was to take place, and removed the suspension, leaving the sexual-misconduct findings in his record and requiring his assistant to accompany him on campus. The college said it would give her an explanatory letter to alleviate the effect on his record, but Aurora said she has yet to receive it.  “Marcus is now confused and scared, knowing that people do not understand him at all.”

thecollegefix.com By Megan Keller

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
GREAT NEWS. Jurors Acquit Two Former UT Football Players. ‘Regret is not Rape’

, , , /

GREAT NEWS. Jurors Acquit Two Former UT Football Players. ‘Regret is not Rape’

 “Ladies and gentlemen, regret isn’t rape.” – A jury of seven women and five men deliberated for less than an hour and a half last Friday before finding A.J. Johnson and Michael Williams not guilty on all counts of rape. (Johnson and Williams were indicted on February 2015 after a female said both men raped her during a party at Johnson’s apartment in the early morning hours of Nov. 16, 2014. Johnson and Williams were suspended from the UT football team less than 48 hours after the party and never played for Tennessee again.) “We prayed, trusted in God,” Johnson said afterward. “I just knew God was going to take care of it.” Johnson, 26, embraced friends and relatives as soon as the jury departed. The 25-year-old Williams gave a big hug to his lawyer, David Eldridge. “I am so grateful to the jury for their work and their service to our community, and I’m grateful for their seeing the truth, (that) Michael Williams is not guilty and has never been guilty of this crime,” Eldridge said. “He’s looking forward to moving on with his life.”

Reaction to Not Guilty        Court -5 day time line

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
YALE Administrator Encouraged Accuser To Come Forward, Then Judged Accused In Kangaroo Court

, , , /

YALE Administrator Encouraged Accuser To Come Forward, Then Judged Accused In Kangaroo Court

A Yale basketball captain who was expelled several years ago for allegedly sexually assaulting a woman he had an ongoing sexual relationship with has produced an updated opposition filing that includes a bombshell conflict of interest. Jack Montague and his attorneys recently discovered that David Post, who chaired the hearing panel against the basketball player, had been directly involved in getting his accuser to file a claim against him. Yale procedures ban anyone from the hearing panel “who has participated in the resolution of an informal complaint arising out of the same events,” or “if their relationship to the complainant or the respondent or other circumstances lead them to believe that they cannot judge the matter fairly,” according to the filing. But Post was called in to assist Yale’s Deputy Title IX Coordinator Angela Gleason in convincing Montague’s accuser to file a formal complaint against him, after she had opted for an informal resolution that wouldn’t punish the former basketball captain.

dailywire.com By Ashe Schow

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
ATIXA Quotes a Proven Discredited Rape Study in Their Recent Position Statement to Colleges

, , , /

ATIXA Quotes a Proven Discredited Rape Study in Their Recent Position Statement to Colleges

In 2011 a Title IX business was born by Brett Sokolow. Brett called it, The Association of Title IX Administrators, or ATIXA for short. For a hefty sum, colleges write checks to ATIXA to attend their weekend seminars, learn how to address accusations of campus sex assault, and receive support as needed. Previously, ATIXA’s training material provided procedures to ensure a finding of guilt for accused students. Recently ATIXA released a position statement to guide schools… For SOS, ATIXA’S position statement is almost comical, because it’s based in part on David Lisak’s thoroughly-debunked rape study. And I am surprised that ATIXA would discredit their own position statement by quoting Lisak’s proven debunked study. “By including Lisak’s study, ATIXA supports the kind of pseudo-science that has propagated the “rape culture” hysteria. Lisak’s entire thesis was based on the claims of ’76 non-traditional students who were not living on a college campus.’ Lisak’s survey data doesn’t even mention campus sexual assault, and the respondents weren’t screened to determine whether they were students or not. His survey included the responses of 1,882 subjects from the pooled data — all men— whose ages ranged from 18 to 71.“ Assuming they reflected the demographics of the university, most would have been part-time students, many of whom would also be holding down jobs away from campus.’ David Lisak’s ‘study is scientifically unsound, and has nothing to do with college campuses, despite it being used specifically for that purpose.”

dailywire.com By Ashe Schow

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
WINS in Ohio! Judge Orders DoED to Meet w Male & Grants Motion to Reconsider

, , , , /

WINS in Ohio! Judge Orders DoED to Meet w Male & Grants Motion to Reconsider

Last month attorney Eric Rosenberg and his client, received welcomed news from Judge Susan J. Dlott, regarding two court filings. In one filing, ‘Plaintiff Tyler Gischel alleges gender discrimination against the University of Cincinnati  and UC officials after he was expelled from UC as a sanction for being found responsible for the sexual assault of a female student. And in the second filing, Plaintiff  argues that the Sixth Circuit’s recent decision in Doe v. Miami University,—released after the Court issued the Amended Dismissal Order—warrants reconsideration of the Court’s decision to dismiss his Title IX selective enforcement, equal protection, and substantive due process claims… Gischel’s legal case against U of Cincinnati is steadily working through the courts and slowly advancing the cause for falsely accused students.

Gischel asserts that UC was biased against him in the disciplinary proceedings due to pressure from the Office of Civil Rights to provide preferential treatment in favor of female students who accuse male students of sexual misconduct. The judge ordered DoED and Gischel  to meet. Read the order granting motion to compel denying motion to quash

With regards to plaintiff’s motion to reconsider Judge Dlott ruled:  ‘For the foregoing reasons, the Motion to Reconsider the Amended Dismissal Order is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. It is granted insofar as the Court will not dismiss the Title IX selective enforcement claim against UC nor the equal protection claims against Defendants Jyl Shaffer, David Cummins, and William Richey in their official and personal capacities. It is denied in all other respects. Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Reconsider

 

 

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
APPEALS COURT Rules You Can Only Sue Your Own College for Violating Title IX

, , /

APPEALS COURT Rules You Can Only Sue Your Own College for Violating Title IX

One of the more comical disputes in Title IX litigation happened between Kansas State University and the University of Kansas three years ago, when the latter was being sued by a student it expelled for off-campus behavior alleged by his ex-girlfriend during summer break.  Kansas State went to the trouble of filing a friend-of-the-court brief against KU, telling the judge that universities are under no legal obligation to police the behavior of students when it happens outside of an “education program or activity.” In an opinion published Wednesday, the three-judge panel said the allegations by “Jane Doe” “failed to allege sufficient facts for a plausible Title IX claim against Brown,” and upheld the district court’s ruling in favor of Brown.

thecollegefix.com By Greg Piper

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
CAMPUS SEX Assault: An Epidemic of Absurdity

/

CAMPUS SEX Assault: An Epidemic of Absurdity

In its effort to present a balanced portrayal of the presumed sexual assault epidemic on American college campuses, Sky News traveled to Ohio, home to several large universities and a huge student population, to find out more. There are few things women want to talk about more than themselves and their victimhood. It’s all the rage. And what they said is what makes this article inadvertently interesting,  particularly about how the mix of alcohol and risk-taking makes them vulnerable, and why consent is nowhere near as straightforward as it should be.

Student Shelby Ebert said: “I think the biggest problem we have on campus is drinking too much and having sex, and then you’re like ‘oh, I probably shouldn’t have done that’, you know? And then you’re like ‘do you consent when you’re drunk’? Is that consent?”

This is what passes for sexual assault, rape, in the minds of some. It’s as if they weren’t there, had nothing to do with it. They didn’t choose to drink. They didn’t agree to have sex. It all just happened to them, and the next day they got a Mulligan on personal responsibility, and a second chance to decide whether the consent of the night before was still consent in the light of day. Rape and sexual assaults are serious offenses, crimes, but the epidemic on campus has nothing to do with rape or sexual assault. It has to do with women asserting their agency to go out and have a good time, and then revisit it the next day where they can choose to absolve themselves from all responsibility for their active choices and turn their good time into the victimhood. There is nothing wrong with a woman choosing to have sex. But if you decide the next day (or year) it wasn’t your best choice, that doesn’t make the guy a rapist.

blog.simplejustice.us  By Scott H. Greenfield

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
CA APPEALS ‘Serious, Serious Questions.” UCSB Denies Due Process to Accused Male

, , /

CA APPEALS ‘Serious, Serious Questions.” UCSB Denies Due Process to Accused Male

Last week, a three-judge California appellate panel heard the first of at least five appeals in campus due process cases against the University of California-Santa Barbara. Oral argument came before Justices Arthur Gilbert, Steven Perren, and Kenneth Yegan, each of whom seemed dubious about UCSB’s handling of the case. At one point, Justice Gilbert acknowledged that “we’ve really tipped our hand” in revealing the panel’s “serious, serious questions” about the due process given to the accused student. Justice Perren was the most skeptical of the university’s actions. He noted that, “I read this record, and I was stunned at a university procedure which purports to be fair and equitable puts a kid [the accused was a freshman] who’s attempting to get a college education in the position of, essentially, a lawyer in a major sexual assault case.”  UCSB’s lawyer pushed back on this point, claiming that Perren had minimized the trauma of the victim. This point brought a strong rejoinder from Perren, who noted that “your argument assumes its conclusion”—that the accuser was, in fact, a victim. Much of the hearing focused on what would happen if the court sided with the accused student. Justice Gilbert raised this early on, wondering what would happen if the court just decided UCSB denied due process—and what occurred if the court found there was no substantial evidence of guilt at all. Justice Yegan, meanwhile, focused on the appearance of unfairness—noting that the university was, in effect, investigating and judging itself, instead of choosing to have an outside adjudicator. He also worried about the unfairness of a process in which the accused student’s lawyer could not speak, but the university’s counsel could. The university’s lawyer, Jonathan Miller, defended the procedures by repeatedly claiming that mandates from Title IX and OCR required the university to adjudicate sexual assault claims. But nothing from OCR requires (as happened here) the accused student to have a silent lawyer or not to be able to gather and present expert testimony.

academicwonderland.com  By KC Johnson

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
1 2 3 4