CURRENT News

ST. LOUIS NAACP Exposes TitleIX’s Racism: ‘The Denial of Due Process Disproportionately Impacts African American Men’

, /

ST. LOUIS NAACP Exposes TitleIX’s Racism: ‘The Denial of Due Process Disproportionately Impacts African American Men’

Law professors across the racial and political spectrum have no trouble acknowledging it. Now a Missouri chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is speaking up about the racism of the Title IX adjudication system. The St. Louis chapter of the African-American civil rights organization is supporting state legislation to make campus sexual-assault trials more fair to accused students.

It’s a brave decision for the group, which will undoubtedly face hostility from other progressive organizations that have tarred the legislation as harmful to alleged survivors of sexual assault. “The denial of due process at Missouri’s colleges disproportionately impacts African American men,” John Gaskin III, president of the chapter, wrote in a statement. “And that’s why we call for immediate due process reforms.”

The House and Senate bills would simply provide basic due-process guarantees for students that have already been imposed on colleges across the country by both federal and state appeals courts, including in politically progressive California. The House bill is being sponsored by a victim of sexual assault, who previously told The College Fix that it’s an insult to victims to “believe all women.”

thecollegefix.com-Greg Piper

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
COURTS RULING on Side of Students Accused of Sex & Against Universities. Here’s Why.

, , /

COURTS RULING on Side of Students Accused of Sex & Against Universities. Here’s Why.

 

Nearly a year after having what he claimed was consensual sex and she claimed was assault, the two Aquinas College students were back together, this time separated by a curtain. For 50 minutes they appeared in front of a panel of college employees. In a 10-minute opening statement, the male student defended himself against charges he had sexually assaulted the female student. The female student offered no opening statement. A few questions from the panel later, the hearing was done. Six days later the male student was expelled. Ten months later he filed a federal lawsuit. Several months after that, Aquinas settled the lawsuit. Those involved are barred from talking about the case by the agreement. In filing, the Aquinas student joined a growing tide of male students, accused in campus proceedings of sexually assaulting fellow students, who have lodged federal lawsuits against their schools, alleging discrimination and violations of their due process rights.

“It’s the end of the beginning,” said Andrew Miltenberg, an attorney who represents accused students. Big universities including the University of Southern California, Pennsylvania State University and Ohio State have lost. Smaller schools, including Hofstra University, Boston College and Claremont McKenna College have also been on the losing end of decisions. Another group of schools, including Northwestern University, Dartmouth College and Yale have settled lawsuits. “I still think there’s a lot of confusion out there on what needs to be done (by universities) and there was a need for courts to step in because universities, on their own, weren’t going to get (to fair due process) on their own” Miltenberg said.

Growing number of lawsuits: In 2011, the Obama administration issued what became known as the “Dear Colleague” letter, demanding colleges up their game when it came to sexual assault complaints. Schools also switched to a single investigator method and trauma-informed processes. The single investigator model works by having a single university employee or outside expert interview the accuser, the accused and any witnesses separately and then write up a report. Both sides often have a chance to review the report, but can’t ask each other or witnesses questions.  Since the “Dear Colleague” letter, there have been 319 federal cases in which some action has been taken. Universities have lost 137 decisions, mostly motions to dismiss the lawsuit. They’ve won 119 times. They have ended cases with confidential settlements 63 times. Those numbers don’t count the cases filed and still working through the system. The estimate is one federal case is filed every two weeks. That also doesn’t count cases filed in state court systems.

Case study – University of Michigan: Perhaps the most cited recent ruling in court cases is a lawsuit stemming from the University of Michigan and an appeals court ruling. “Today, we reiterate that holding once again: If a public university has to choose between competing narratives to resolve a case, the university must give the accused student or his agent an opportunity to cross-examine the accuser and adverse witnesses in the presence of a neutral fact-finder,” the court wrote. “Due process requires cross-examination in circumstances like these because it is ‘the greatest legal engine ever invented’ for uncovering the truth. Without the back-and-forth of adversarial questioning, the accused cannot probe the witness’ story to test her memory, intelligence, or potential ulterior motives.”

The impact of the cases: Students getting expelled for sexual assault accusations felt branded and that they would suffer reputation harm that would last well past college. So when they saw flaws, they began to sue and courts began to question procedures. Universities are definitely aware of the court trend, Miltenberg said. He is finding he can draft a complaint listing a number of issues, present it to the university before filing and have universities tell them to slow down the process and work with them to get a fair hearing.

freep.com D. Jesse

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter

, , , /

EX-USC KICKER Sues. While Playing w Girlfriend a ‘Third-Party Non-Witness’ Accused USC Kicker & Got Him Expelled 2 Credits Shy of Graduating

Former USC kicker Matt Boermeester has filed a lawsuit in United States District Court, alleging the school ruined both his academic and athletic careers when he was expelled from the university after a “third-party, non-witness filed a false report” about a supposed altercation between him and his girlfriend in early 2017. The lawsuit includes seven causes of action, including selective Title IX enforcement, breach of contract, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress and represents the latest step in Boermeester’s ongoing legal battle with the school. In 2017, Boermeester, who remains two classes shy of graduation, sued for his expulsion to be overturned in superior court, but the attempt was unsuccessful.

USC initiated an investigation into the incident involving Boermeester and his girlfriend, former USC tennis player Zoe Katz, after a USC student told his roommate he saw a physical altercation between the couple out his window late one night. The roommate told his father, USC men’s tennis coach Peter Smith, about the incident and Smith reported what he was told to the school, as required by law. The couple who is still together insisted that they were just playing around and that nothing untoward happened. USC saw things differently and reached out to Katz to help her. Administrators in the school’s Title IX office allegedly told Katz she was a victim, even as she denied being one. She said one administrator told her, “I’m sorry that you feel that way” when she denied being attacked by her boyfriend. School officials, according to Katz, claimed she had battered wife syndrome and just couldn’t see that she was a victim. Boermeester and Katz, who remain in a relationship, both vehemently denied the university’s conclusion. Boermeester was never arrested, nor was he the subject of a police investigation.

“I want to be very clear that I have never been abused, assaulted or otherwise mistreated by Matt,” Katz said in the statement. “He is an incredible person, and I am and have been 100% behind him. Nothing happened that warranted an investigation, much less the unfair, biased and drawn out process that we have been forced to endure quietly.”

“What happened to Matt Boermeester at USC should terrify anyone who believes in the right to due process and innocent-until-proven-guilty,” said Matt’s attorney Andrew Miltenberg. “Based on nothing more than a third-party report by a non-witness – essentially a rumor that was easily and repeatedly disputed – a star athlete lost his education and his future career in the NFL. “By subscribing to anti-male stereotypes and insisting that the girlfriend of a football player must somehow be a victim, [Means] and USC officials have made a complete mockery of the Title IX process. The process my client was forced to endure and the end result was nothing less than abusive” said Miltenberg. READ Federal Lawsuit: Boermeester v USC, et al

espn.com -Bonagura dailywire.com -Schow usatoday.com -Perez

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
DUE PROCESS Group Kicks Off Campaign to Expose Flaws of ‘Start by Believing’

, , /

DUE PROCESS Group Kicks Off Campaign to Expose Flaws of ‘Start by Believing’

Plaintiffs in due-process lawsuits against colleges for biased Title IX proceedings are rarely named. They tend to proceed under a pseudonym such as John Doe. As a result, it has been challenging for advocates of due process to personalize the issue for the nation’s students, parents and lawmakers, who have the power to impose statewide rules on disciplinary adjudications. Now one due-process group is seeking to personalize the issue of kangaroo courts that railroad students accused of sexual misconduct. Stop Abusive and Violent Environments published a Change.org petition to convince U.S. Attorney General William Barr to revoke Justice Department funding to “Start by Believing” programs, which have thus far received nearly $9 million in federal grants.

SAVE’s petition highlights the case of Matt Rolph, who was cleared of sex crimes by a jury in 2014 but ruled a rapist by Hobart College months earlier. The college “decided to make an example of him” by conducting a fake investigation, SAVE writes in the Change.org petition. It didn’t record interviews, review “innocence-proving text messages” sent by his accuser, obtain records supporting the accuser’s “claim of medical problems caused by the incident,” or “resolve inconsistencies among witness statements.” The jury exonerated him in less than a day, and a court let his Title IX claims go forward against the college in 2017. But Rolph is “just one of the many thousands of Americans who have been victimized by “victim-centered’ investigations,” SAVE writes:

“Start By Believing” tells investigators to investigate cases from an “initial presumption” of guilt, to slant their report to “corroborate the victim’s account,” and to even make sure the sexual encounter does “not look like a consensual sexual experience.” A longer web resource on Start by Believing explains how the techniques used in biased investigations are contrary to “long-established investigative ethical codes,” ignore the well-documented bias against men in the criminal justice system, and amount to “near-religious teaching,” in the words of a Harvard law professor.

thecollegefix -Greg Piper

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
LAWSUIT: Successful Black Purdue Student on Football Scholarship is Accused by White Girl. Black Male is Railroaded.

, , /

LAWSUIT: Successful Black Purdue Student on Football Scholarship is Accused by White Girl. Black Male is Railroaded.

A football player expelled from Purdue in 2017 after facing sexual assault allegations has brought a reverse discrimination lawsuit against the University. Brandon Roberts, who began at Purdue on a scholarship in fall 2016, claims multiple violations, including one of Title IX. Two other violations alleged by the documents are Title VI, a statute to prevent any discrimination on the grounds of race, color or national origin against anyone receiving federal funding, and due process, which is protected by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

The documents provide, in specific detail, why Roberts and his counsel, John H. Haskin and Associates, decided to pursue legal action against the University. Before the events for which Roberts was expelled occurred, he “was a successful student with an unblemished disciplinary record that additionally was on scholarship and playing for Purdue’s football team.” The documents allege that because Roberts is an African-American man and the individual who claimed he sexually assaulted her is a white woman, the University’s investigation was “preordained.” The other offense mentioned is that because of the sexual assault allegations and expulsion, Roberts’ dream to play professional football was “dealt a serious blow.”

purdueexponent.org -Staff

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
LAWSUIT: Intolerable Boston College Successfully Limits Scope of $3M Lawsuit

, , , /

LAWSUIT: Intolerable Boston College Successfully Limits Scope of $3M Lawsuit

The scope of the jury trial taking place next month in the $3 million lawsuit being brought against Boston College will be limited solely to whether or not administrative interference took place, specifically a breach of contract or violated a basic fairness principle. It will not consider whether an alumnus described as “John Doe” in court documents was wrongfully convicted of indecent assault. That scope is more along the lines of what University attorneys argued to Massachusetts District Court Judge Denise Casper. Doe’s representation posited that potentially-exculpatory evidence in Doe’s case should be brought before the jury. Casper said that only the information that the BC disciplinary hearing board, which originally heard Doe’s case, should be considered by the jury. Additional information, like forensically analyzed video and DNA evidence that was not available to the BC hearing board, will not be admissible in the trial.

The primary issue of the March 14 hearing was whether Doe’s request to admit exculpatory evidence was within the parameters of proving that Doe was not afforded a fair disciplinary hearing by BC. The University argued that such evidence would mean that Doe is getting an “on merit” trial on the basis of whether or not he sexually assaulted a fellow BC student on the 2012 AHANA Leadership Council Cruise while reporting on the event for The Heights—which is not among the issues remanded back to district court by the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Doe argued that the nature of the hearing process and the final decision of the hearing board are inextricable. Casper disagreed, saying that since the appeals court affirmed Casper’s original summary judgement decision in BC’s favor on counts of breach of contract in the 2014 independent review of the hearing, gender bias, Title IX claims, and negligence, only the hearing process can still be considered.

bcheights By Jack Goldman

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
SETTLEMENT. Good News. Bellarmine University Settles With Falsely Accused Male

, , /

SETTLEMENT. Good News. Bellarmine University Settles With Falsely Accused Male

An accused male student at Bellarmine University turned to the courts for his constitutional due process rights to be upheld. Earlier the male had secured a temporary restraining order (TRO).  A TRO commands the parties in the case to maintain a certain status until the court can hear further evidence and decide whether to issue a preliminary injunction. So, the male won a TRO and then BellarmineU settled with the male… Often we never learn the details of settlement agreements because an innocent accused male will choose having his record expunged so he can move forward with his career, his life. The innocent male will choose this path, and then the college demands secrecy.  This is why the general public continues to be ignorant of the numerous males who are falsely accused and railroaded by their beloved college. Secret college settlements. Read: BellarmineU male student on study abroad left in paris after falsely accused

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
SURVEY: UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTS Support Due Process But Are Too Scared to Speak Up

, , , /

SURVEY: UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTS Support Due Process But Are Too Scared to Speak Up

Wonder why you’ve heard so little support for the Department of Education’s proposed campus sexual-misconduct revamp from college leaders? They may be too afraid to publicly agree with it.

The latest annual survey of college and university presidents by Inside Higher Ed and Gallup reveals some presidents are hiding their “true feelings” about the proposal by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, which would enshrine due process protections for accused students in binding regulations. Notably, Inside Higher Ed didn’t bother noting its finding in its news report on the survey. You have to turn over your personal information to Inside Higher Ed and its financial sponsors in order to see the full report, which buries the finding in a table. The Inside Higher Ed report on the survey at least acknowledges that many college presidents belatedly criticized the Obama administration’s guilt-first Title IX guidelines, which were never subjected to regulatory notice-and-comment procedures.

Skeptical as they are about the wisdom of the DeVos proposals, though, campus leaders say some action was needed to correct overzealousness on the part of the Obama administration on campus sexual assault. Half of all presidents – 42 percent of public university leaders and 60 percent of those at private colleges – agree or strongly agree that “the Obama administration’s approach did not place enough emphasis on due process for those accused of sexual assault or harassment.

thecollegefix Greg Piper

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
LAWSUIT: Accused High School Male Says Virginia School Violated Due Process Rights

, /

LAWSUIT: Accused High School Male Says Virginia School Violated Due Process Rights

A Northern Virginia high school student is suing the state’s largest school system, arguing that he faced discrimination after a female student accused him of sexual harassment. The case is the third in the past year calling into question the school system’s handling of sexual harassment allegations. This latest lawsuit says male students are treated “disproportionately harsher” when facing sexual misconduct accusations than female students in Fairfax public schools. The 18-year-old identified as John Doe claims Fairfax County Public Schools inadequately investigated accusations leveled against him by a female at Robinson Secondary School. The male student, who has a 3.2 grade-point average and was on the school’s wrestling team, was transferred to an alternative school and was placed on probationary status. The student is asking a federal judge to clear his record, which the student said could jeopardize his college wrestling scholarship and admission to a “prestigious” university.

“If a male student and female student are both engaged in mutual sexual contact or touching on school grounds, it is common for the male student to be punished and for the female student not to be punished, based on gender,” the lawsuit says. Jesse Binnall an attorney representing the student said the 187,830-student school system does not have appropriate measures to address sexual harassment allegations.

fredericksburg.com By Debbie Truong

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
PENN STATE Settles w John Doe. Investigation Violated Doe’s Due Process Rights

, , , /

PENN STATE Settles w John Doe. Investigation Violated Doe’s Due Process Rights

An out-of-court settlement has been reached in one of three suits against Penn State over the way the university investigates and disciplines students accused of sexual misconduct. Terms were not included in the settlement notice filed Friday in U.S. Middle District Court. The plaintiff John Doe immigrated to the United States in 2002, and became a citizen eight years later. The litigation stems from a Title IX panel that found Doe violated the university’s Student Code of Conduct. Doe says he was suspended and expelled from a seven-year program affiliated with Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University as the result of false allegations of nonconsensual sexual activity with a woman in the same program. He describes himself as a “victim of unlawful, targeted, biased, arbitrary and capricious disciplinary actions at the hands of Penn State administrators.”

Doe contended the disciplinary process in sexual misconduct cases is tainted by anti-male bias and it violated his due process rights. The university responded the investigation was “fundamentally fair” and denied that its disciplinary process is gender biased. A preliminary injunction Brann issued Aug. 18, 2017, prevented the university from enforcing sanctions against Doe, which included suspension for the fall semester and bans from campus housing and the pre-med program. A month later the university notified Doe the panel’s findings and sanctions were vacated and he would be retried. Penn State later abandoned those plans. Two other suits that similarly challenge the disciplinary process are pending before Brann.

pennlive.com By John Beauge

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
«< 41 42 43 44 45 >»