DUE Process Rights

Articles relating to due process rights for our College boys

RULING: Reinstate Football Player. “Univ.Southern Miss. Did Not Extend Due Process”

, , /

RULING: Reinstate Football Player. “Univ.Southern Miss. Did Not Extend Due Process”

A federal judge ordered the University of Southern Mississippi last month to allow a football player to return after the university ruled that he had broken the school’s sexual misconduct policy and suspended him for a year. In ruling on the player’s “emergency motion for temporary restraining order and injunctive relief,” United States District Judge Keith Starrett concluded that the university had not extended due process during a July hearing before the university’s Sexual Misconduct Investigative Team. Starrett ruled, “Allow plaintiff to enter campus for the purpose of attending the courses at the university that he is presently enrolled in and all activities necessary to maintain his athletic scholarship, which may include, inter alia, training, practices, games, team meetings and the like. ”The court prefaced it’s decision by noting that “the purpose of a preliminary injunction is to preserve the status quo and thus prevent irreparable harm until the respective rights of the parties can be ascertained during a trial on the merits. “Only in rare instances is this type of injunction proper,” the opinion went on to read. “In its discretion, based on the totality of the circumstances of this case, the (c)ourt finds this is one of those rare instances.”

wdam  By Tim Doherty

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
COURT RULING: UCSB- A TERRIBLE College Case Shows the High Cost of ‘Believe Women’

, , , /

COURT RULING: UCSB- A TERRIBLE College Case Shows the High Cost of ‘Believe Women’

 A California state court of appeals handed down a decision in a case against the University of California–Santa Barbara that should remind us all of the high costs of a rush to judgment. It should remind us all of the value of due process. So, let’s review — the university violated a basic rule of evidence, withheld key information from John until the day before the hearing, refused to let him question the accuser about that information, and then allowed its lawyer to render objections to John’s case. The court’s conclusion was stinging: “It is ironic,” said the court “that an institution of higher learning, where American history and government are taught, should stray so far from the principles that underlie our democracy.” From coast to coast, accused students — typically men punished for sexual assault with barely a chance to defend themselves — are filing lawsuits containing often-shocking claims. Judges, accustomed to the value of due process, often find themselves stunned at the unfairness of campus proceedings. And if you think that wrongful convictions for sexual assault aren’t serious because the men don’t go to prison, well then talk to the young men whose careers and reputations are shattered before they’ve had a chance to build a life. We cannot have our culture believe that the way of the university is the way forward for our nation. The guiding principles should be clear. Respect women and hear their claims. But “believe women”? No, believe evidence, and give every accused a fair opportunity to defend his liberty, his education, and his career.

nationalreview  By David French

UCSB: She Said He Assaulted Her. Witnesses IN THE ROOM Said It Didn’t Happen. He Was Suspended. By Ashe Schow

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
HUGE WIN For John Doe: CA Court of Appeals is Angry at UCSB for Denying Due Process

, , , , /

HUGE WIN For John Doe: CA Court of Appeals is Angry at UCSB for Denying Due Process

            John Doe Won! 

Below is the first paragraph from the CA Court of Appeals published decision:

“Due process – two preeminent words that are the lifeblood of our Constitution. Not a precise term, but most everyone knows when it is present and when it is not. It is often most conspicuous by its absence. Its primary characteristic is fairness. It is self-evident that a trial, an adjudication, or a hearing that may adversely affect a person’s life must be conducted with fairness to all parties. Here, a university held a hearing to determine whether a student violated its student code of conduct. Noticeably absent was even a semblance “of due process. When the accused does not receive a fair hearing, neither does the accuser.”

In closing the CA Appeals Court wrote:

The (UCSB) Committee reached a significant finding based on nothing more than speculation. We question the committee’s expertise to arrive at this startling conclusion. It is ironic that an institution of higher learning, where American history and government are taught, should stray so far from the principles that underlie our democracy. This case turned on the Committee’s determination of the credibility of the witnesses. Credibility cannot be properly decided until the accused is given the opportunity to adequately respond to the accusation. The lack of due process in the hearing here precluded a fair evaluation of the witnesses’ credibility. In this respect, neither Jane nor John received a fair hearing. The judgment is reversed and the matter is remanded to the superior court with directions to grant John’s petition for a writ of administrative mandate. John is awarded costs on appeal.”

 simplejustice By Scott Greenfield READ the Court’s Published Decision 

 

 

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
LAWSUIT: Male Says TIX Investigation @UW-Madison Violates 5th Amendment Rights

, , /

LAWSUIT: Male Says TIX Investigation @UW-Madison Violates 5th Amendment Rights

Quintez Cephus, the Badgers wide receiver who was suspended from the team following two counts of sexual assault, announced he is bringing federal charges against UW-Madison for violating his constitutional rights to a fair investigation. Cephus argues that the simultaneous criminal and Title IX investigations into sexual assault charges made against him violated his rights. “Defendants have knowingly and intentionally forced Cephus into the predicament of having to either waive his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by choosing to participate in the university process despite the potential harm to his criminal defense- OR- decline to participate in the university’s process, thus leading to the inevitable finding of responsibility and severe sanctions.” The matter, according to the lawsuit, “highlights the widespread issue of colleges and universities, including the University of Wisconsin-Madison, investigating and adjudicating allegations against its students prior to the conclusion of any parallel criminal case.”

The Fifth Amendment is important because it protects us from having our rights abused by the government. The Fifth Amendment says that we cannot have our life, liberty, or property taken except by due process of law… For Mr. Cephus, without due process he could face permanent suspension from the football team, expulsion from the university and a criminal record.

dailycardinal By Jon Brockman

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
EXCELLENT! Title IX Policy Change @MiamiU. Implements Cross-Examination

, , , , /

EXCELLENT! Title IX Policy Change @MiamiU. Implements Cross-Examination

 

Miami University’s student conduct process and Title IX Protocol will now give the accused student or their agent an opportunity to personally cross-examine the accuser, rather than channeling questions through the chair of the hearing, according to a recent email by Dean of Students Kimberly Moore. “When the credibility of one or more of the parties is at issue and suspension or dismissal is a possible sanction, students will be given the opportunity to ask questions directly of one another following questioning by the hearing officer or panel,” Moore wrote. This change is in compliance with a recent Sixth Circuit federal court of appeals decision which applies to public universities in Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennessee.

thecollegefix By Greg Piper  Thank the Courts for Rescuing College Kids From Unfair Sex Assault Charges 

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
GOOD NEWS. DeVos Expected to Change Campus Sex Assault Proceedings To Be Fair

, , , , /

GOOD NEWS. DeVos Expected to Change Campus Sex Assault Proceedings To Be Fair

DeVos has argued that the policy put in place under President Barack Obama is skewed against the accused. She is expected to issue new rules in the near future. At stake is whether schools should require higher standards of evidence when handling complaints and whether both parties should have access to that evidence. Also under review is the use of mediators and the possibility of the accuser and the accused cross-examining each other. When issuing temporary guidance last year, DeVos said she was looking for a more balanced approach.

Cynthia Garett, who heads Families Advocating for Campus Equality, said one false accusation can ruin a student’s life. She said many of the accused students she represents experienced traumatic flashbacks when they watched Kavanaugh testify. Garett said she supports DeVos’ plan to give a greater voice to the accused.

“It is no longer going to be easy to find someone guilty,” Garett said. “But justice has never been easy and it shouldn’t be easy to ruin someone’s life.”

businessinsider

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
JUDGE RULES: Lawsuit Against Boston College Going to Jury Trial

, , , /

JUDGE RULES: Lawsuit Against Boston College Going to Jury Trial

Judge Denise Casper has ordered the breach of contract lawsuit pending against Boston College to a jury trial.  Breach of contract and basic fairness claims made by the plaintiff, who claims BC mishandled his case when he was accused of sexual assault, will be considered during the trial. It is the first breach of contract lawsuit to go to jury trial after the “Dear Colleague” letter was issued in 2011 by the Obama administration that redefined Title IX guidelines. It is the second due process lawsuit to go to a jury trial: In 2011—eight months after the Obama letter was issued—the University of the South went to trial with a plaintiff identified only as “John Doe.” Doe won $26,500 of a requested $5.5 million on a fairness of process argument. Charles Wayne, one of the lawyers who argued on behalf of the plaintiff against the University of the South, is arguing the case on behalf of the plaintiff in the lawsuit against BC. The plaintiff is seeking expungement of his disciplinary record and $3 million in damages.

bcheights.com By Jack Goldman

 

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
5 SIGNS You’re In The Midst Of A Moral Panic

, , /

5 SIGNS You’re In The Midst Of A Moral Panic

Moral panics, or instances of mass hysteria, have occurred throughout history. Two of the most notorious are the Salem Witch Trials and the Satanic Panic. The panics almost exclusively involve women and children and fears for their safety, especially from sexual abuse. We are in the midst of another such panic. The current panic has been playing out in the military and on college campuses for nearly a decade, but with the advent of the #MeToo movement, the mass hysteria is creeping into our regular legal system as well. The following are five of the biggest signs that we are experiencing another bout of mass hysteria, this time over sexual assault and harassment.

1. Due Process Goes Out The Window Due process is the cornerstone of our legal system, but in times of mass hysteria, it becomes the enemy.

2. “Believe The Victim” This may be the biggest tell of a moral panic.

3. Misleading And Faulty Statistics In today’s sex assault panic, we see multiple inflated statistics allegedly confirming an epidemic.

4. Evidence, Schmevidence In today’s sexual assault panic, the dismissal of exculpatory evidence runs rampant. On college campuses, accusers who continue to socialize with men they later accuse of sexual assault and who sent flirtacious and friendly text messages are said to be showing signs of trauma.

5. Pseudo-Scientific Theories About Memory Reign Supreme The science of memories always pops up during moral panics. On college campuses, therapists, friends, and school administrators help corrupt accuser’s memories (which are often foggy due to alcohol) by telling them that a drunken hook-up was actually sexual assault. Once the idea is implanted, an accuser fills in the gaps in their memory with the idea that they must have been sexually assaulted, and interpret consensual acts in that way.

dailywire.com By Ashe Schow

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
«< 17 18 19 20 21 >»