JUDGE SMACKS DOWN Syracuse For Ignoring Myriad Problems With Rape Accuser’s Claims
“Jane Roe” initially said the vaginal sex was consensual. Later, she said it wasn’t. Syracuse University rejected her two other nonconsensual claims about other forms of sex, but upheld the one that she switched during the investigation. This is only one of many reasons that a federal judge refused to dismiss a lawsuit against the private university by an accused student. In his memorandum and order U.S. District Judge David Hurd approved Title IX and breach-of-contract claims to move forward against Syracuse. In a finding that echoes a ruling against Yale University regarding its proceeding against former basketball star Jack Montague, Judge Hurd said Syracuse may have failed to follow its own evidence standard in the proceeding. He also frowned on the propriety of Syracuse assigning someone whose “prior professional experience [was] advocating for victims of sexual assault” to serve as an investigator. This is one of the ways John has “pleaded facts sufficient to make it plausible that gender was a motivating factor behind the erroneous outcome” of the proceeding, Hurd said. Title IX investigator Bernerd Jacobson refused to “investigate contradictory statements” by other students about Jane’s behavior after the incident, John argued. The Syracuse conduct board joined in the business of hiding evidence, and failing to record Jane’s interview as required by Syracuse policy. The investigative report by Jacobson made the “incredible” claim that Jane’s story was “wholly plausible, no contradictions or omissions are noted,” despite the contrary witness statements, Judge Hurd wrote with emphasis.
In the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees Hurd’s district court, the plaintiff need only plead “specific facts that support a minimal plausible inference of [gender] discrimination,” stemming from a 2016 ruling against Columbia University. Hurd cited an even more recent district court ruling, also against Syracuse, that showed how this standard can be satisfied: A plaintiff points to flaws in the investigation, “assumptions made by investigators” and refusal to consider evidence of innocence, combined with “public pressure on the University to more aggressively prosecute sexual abuse allegations.” John meets the “erroneous outcome” standard he’s pleading, the judge said, citing Jane’s shifting story, her roommates’ contrary statements and failure of anyone to corroborate the “inappropriate touching” claim. The conduct board “could not find credible” the only claim by Jane that it upheld out of the three she made, and thus it ignored Syracuse’s mandatory preponderance-of-evidence standard.
“The egregious male-gender bias on display at Syracuse – as well as the total disregard for the due process rights of male students – exemplifies everything that is wrong with Title IX investigations on college campuses,” said John’s lawyer Andrew Miltenberg. “My client had no shot at defending himself from the onslaught of male gender bias at Syracuse throughout this mockery of a Title IX investigation.”
www.thecollegefix– Greg Piper
