- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,350
- Reaction score
- 6,591
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
There was more evidence, some of which is detailed in the article I linked to. I'm not going to read it to you. AFAIK, there was nothing preventing the accused from providing those texts to the school. The failure to do so was his.
So he didn't do anything wrong. But you still support his expulsion based on the accusation?
He didn't obtain them until after he was kicked out for no reason. And after obtaining them, and providing them to the school, it didn't matter any.
AFAIK, there is no claim of discrimination. It's about due process.
And while it may not have been rape, that doesn't mean the accused did nothing wrong.
I didn't say that he didn't do anything wrong either. Nor did I say that I support his expulsion.
Try to address something I've actually said.
According to Amherst, he wasn't expelled "for no reason".
There was more evidence, some of which is detailed in the article I linked to. I'm not going to read it to you. AFAIK, there was nothing preventing the accused from providing those texts to the school. The failure to do so was his.
The disputed sexual encounter began late on a Friday night, when Jones, the accuser, and Doe were sophomores. He had been dating her roommate, who was out of town, for a month.
According to accounts by the accuser and witnesses given to Allyson Kurker, the outside investigator brought in by Amherst, Doe arrived in a fourth-floor dormitory lounge where several friends had gathered. He was very drunk. She was tipsy.
Within minutes, they were “making out’’ in front of the others, and then left and went to her dorm room.
In her initial written complaint, Jones said that in the dorm room, the entire encounter was forcible. But in her interview with Kurker and during the hearing, she said the oral sex was initially consensual; then, after Doe boasted about “hooking up” with both her and her roommate, she told him to stop. He refused to do so, she said, according to the hearing transcript.
In his defense, Doe said he was not the kind of person who would do such a thing. But he told the disciplinary board he was so drunk that night he had no memory of the encounter.
During the 2013 hearing, Jones’s roommate testified that she had learned Jones had exchanged text messages with a resident dorm counselor just after the alleged rape. But the school made no effort to contact the counselor or obtain the texts, according to the hearing record.
When a hearing officer asked Jones about those texts, she replied: “I didn’t want to address what had happened to me and I was in no position yet to accept that it had been rape. So in my text messaging [to counselor] I only said things about the hook-up as if it had been consensual.”
I didn't say that he didn't do anything wrong either. Nor did I say that I support his expulsion.
Try to address something I've actually said.
According to Amherst, he wasn't expelled "for no reason".
Well this approach is not a solution, and convicting the innocent won't reduce rapes.
The suit seeks $75,000 and names the school, President Carolyn Martin and several officials for moving “with enormous speed to expel John Doe, eject him from the campus, and destroy his reputation.”
Yea there is. From the article you posted, that you are telling others to read;
What’s more, the lawsuit also asserts that the action taken against John Doe, who is Asian-American, is part of a pattern since 2013 in which the college has sanctioned only “male students of color’’ for sexual misconduct
Well, I just read your article, again and the closest I could find about any type of "evidence" that the guy committed sexual misconduct was this....
No other evidence what so ever. The only "evidence" that I see is that she accused him of rape and that's it.
According to him he was.
IOW, it's wrong for the school to believe the accuser based only on her accusation, but it's OK for you to believe the accussed based only on his accusation
There is other evidence (ex he admits to having sex and being drunk)
His words, And her words. And in the fact that no evidence of wrong doing took place.
This guy wasn't "convicted" of anything.
A private business decided that they didn't want him as a customer.
On the one hand conservatives and FOX News argue that a business should be able to refuse service to anyone they want (as long as that "anyone" is gay), yet on the other hand they argue that business should be required to provide service to anyone who wants it.
Do you even double-standard, bro?
His lawsuit is frivolous and stupid:
Destroy whose reputation?
Oh, right, John Doe's.
Yeah, I won't be doing any business with that "John Doe" any time in the near future, I tell you!
:roll:
dude needs to quit being a crybaby looking for an easy payday, take his transcripts to some other university somewhere, finish his degree, and move on with his life.
Yeah, I know, sometimes the world isn't "fair".
Boo, hoo.
Suck it up and quit being such a pansy.
If drinking and or sex is grounds for expulsion, colleges are going to have a hell of a time keeping classrooms full.
I support people people not being punished based solely on an accusation. And rather than cherry pick, address the whole of my post. He said it was consensual, she said it was at times, and no evidence says otherwise that anyone has shown.But you dismiss accusations when it comes from the female and accept them when they come from the male
And there is evidence of wrong doing taking place.
Even in a criminal trial, an admission that the accused had blacked out and had sex with the accuser would be considered evidence (but not proof) that a crime had been committed
I support people people not being punished based solely on an accusation. And rather than cherry pick, address the whole of my post. He said it was consensual, she said it was at times, and no evidence says otherwise that anyone has shown.
Yes and the word of the accuser saying it was consensual means nothing? Her actions after mean nothing? If this woman hadn't gone around telling people this was consensual or if some other evidence were to surface even remotely suggesting rape, we would be having a different conversation. But I don't know of many rape victims who voluntarily put in writing that they had consensual sex the day after being raped.
Is that supposed to be our response to allegations of racism?
He wasn't punished based solely on an accusation and there was more evidence
You keep saying that. Provide some.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 already covers that.
But this isn't a matter of a college kicking the kid out because of race, color, religion, or national origin.
This is a matter of a business refusing to serve an unprotected class (potential rapist) because continuing to business with the kid could potentially damage the college's brand.
Doesn't a private business have a right, even a fiduciary responsibility, to protect its brand and its future profitability?
I already have
no you haven't. you claim two people both stating that sex is consensual is evidence of rape. Or if some drinks they are guilty of rape.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?