Lind got fellow athletes to have a meeting with her and the accused. Looks like some people respect Lind. Then there is this…
Wow…that is not a good answer. You are supposed to know if the other party is consenting.
I like how the older athletes handled this. Zero tolerance.
Still waiting to read the report. 
How does Haley know the other party consented if he was also drunk? Did she assault him?
The investigation didn’t just last for months. It didn’t start for months. Lots of time for memories to change and fade before anyone was even questioned. Lots of parties for people to attend and confuse with this one in the meantime as well.
@hebegebe, if you really care to know the answers to your questions, you can read the laws, the rules at UVA and the comments and actions from the accused to have your answers. 
@momofthreeboys I don’t think he could have been charged without anyone disagreeing but that doesn’t mean he needed corroboration to avoid being charged. As they said, she had no memory (and didn’t lie claiming she did) so couldn’t refute his version. He said someone tried to get in the bathroom. He said she responded by encouraging him to continue. It didn’t say in this article if anyone else verified they tried to get in or heard her say anything.
I still think a guy climbing onto a roof in the middle of the night is shady as heck. We don’t know how much that story was challenged by any investigators.
I am pointing a highly dysfunctional double standard here.
Many posters are saying that the guy being drunk is no excuse–he should have known that the girl was drunk but could not consent and therefore he is responsible. Why is it not correct that the guy could not consent and that the girl is equally guilty?
Explain with logic please.
Well, we have no corroboration that he was drunk for one thing. He was sober enough to grab his clothes and run out the door on his own two feet when someone banged on the window. She couldn’t take a step without falling and couldn’t even dress herself. According to his own story, he remembers every second of the evening and says he believes it was consensual. So I’m failing to see how the hypothetical that she was a rapist could apply here.
Getting so drunk you don’t know what you are doing is a bad idea.
Getting so drunk you don’t know what you are doing and you rape someone is criminal.
If you suspect you will rape someone when you get drunk, you should not be drinking.
This is just not that difficult a concept. imho.
What is the BAC threshold for consent? Is it the same as driving?
Consider that someone too drunk to legally drive often do so capably enough to get home, a task considerably more difficult than grabbing clothes and running out the door.
Were you talking about Haley or the male athlete?
^I think my post is gender neutral. I just am not aware of any women getting drunk and raping men. I am certainly willing to believe it is a possibility and if it happens, they should be held accountable.
Not all drunk men turn into rapists.
I have to side with hebegebe on this one. No one got charged. We have to assume that in the 96 page report from the college AND the police investigation that plenty of people of knowledgeable people took a close look at this. The idea that two kids can drink a bunch and have sex is as old as the hills…and sometimes it is not illegal. The idea that girls can hop into bed and have sex with someone after knowing them a half hour is also not “new news”. The idea that men will go along with a women who appears to them to want sex is not new news. To label only males as rapists and not females IS dysfunctional thinking and frankly if you can’t figure out who was the rapist…it probably wasn’t rape!
“Many fellow athletes of the accused said he was lucky.”
SUPER DUPER lucky. I have lots of students who were expelled on similar facts or much less. Honestly, I’m stunned that he wasn’t kicked out.
“What is the BAC threshold for consent? Is it the same as driving?”
There is none. BAC doesn’t actually correspond that well to impairment. It’s used for drunk driving because the law needs a bright line and because there’s a lot of research showing that even a little alcohol slows reflexes and impairs split-second judgments needed for driving. But most social drinkers at .08-.10 are in full command of their cognitive faculties; they just shouldn’t drive. If we’re talking about consenting to sex, there are experienced drinkers who can walk and talk at BACs that would have a lightweight like me incoherent or unconscious. If an alleged victim were tested at the hospital and blew .25, that would definitely bolster a claim that s/he was too impaired to consent, but other people might be badly impaired at much lower levels.
It is pretty clear men have been raping drunk women since the invention of wine and spirits. I am sure there were a few women rapists sometime in history. I am not personally aware of any women raping drunk men who are age peers.
But if having sex without consent is rape, and if the man is too drunk to give consent, why aren’t women who have sex with drunk men guilty of rape?
I would like to know UVA’s thinking on the consent issue. Is UVA saying the lack of consent is unproven because Lind didn’t know what happened?
Why didn’t what the wrestler saw and what the policemen saw (he saw vacant eyes) matter in this case?
Looks like the older athletes saw this case differently than UVA.
I understand this case not going to court, but UVA has a different standard.
@momofthreeboys, we don’t have to assume UVA has this correct. The track record of the schools or the judicial system isn’t very good in these cases.
Baylor, PSU, FSU, Tennesseee, Hobart and Smith come to mind pretty quickly.
You are free to assume what you want.
Hebege has a point. And if we are at a point in history where we are going to totally ruin young male lives on a claim, then the reverse is also true. Men should absolutely be able to claim that certain women are predators and a threat to all the males on campus. Sounds alittle funny doesn’t it? But the point is entirely valid. If as a society “we” are going to say that people that have sex with drunk people are a threat to all the students on campus and need to be kicked out/expelled/have their lives ruined we absolutely shouldn’t limit that to only females. The difference is that most men don’t turn down “free” sex, but I guarantee you plenty of men have woken up after having sex with a female who was the aggressor and thought OMG I never would have slept with that one sober. If you don’t believe that…ask men. If you play with fire you might get burnt. I pretty much firmly believe our criminal system “has it right” in terms of labeling criminal sexual behavior and I believe our court system has it right when they choose to not litigate claims where two people willingly drink and have sex but one of the two regrets it in the morning - both men and women. The DOE needs to get out of the bedroom in my opinion. I think UVa has “gotten the message.” Can’t wait to see how much Yale agrees to bend over and pay.
“Why is it not correct that the guy could not consent and that the girl is equally guilty?” For one thing, if a guy was that drunk that he couldn’t consent, was literally falling down drunk, given the nature of male sexuality ie the active nature of it, it kind of implies that if he was able to perform he was in charge of his faculties enough to be able to consent. The level of alcohol that would take to make a guy at that kind of level of out of it likewise would interrupt the physical aspects of sex. The other reason is that the guy claimed to remember the whole thing, which is another indicator he was in control of his faculties enough to be consenting. It is kind of like the Stanford case, if the guy who did that was truly out of it not to be able to consent, his running away indicates he knew what he was doing and it was wrong.
Could there be a case where the guy was so drunk that he could be considered non consenting? Sure, if a guy was that drunk and didn’t remember, and the partner had sex with him (if a guy) or a girl when he was drunk used a dildo on him or something like that, then she would be guilty. I am not saying that the UVA guy was guilty of rape, I think it was so gray the university was right, but the argument that if a guy and a girl are drunk making him having sex non consensual doesn’t fly if he was performing a regular male sex act (ie active partner), for the reason I just gave, that IMO if the guy was that blacked out he wouldn’t be able to perform at all.
“But if having sex without consent is rape, and if the man is too drunk to give consent, why aren’t women who have sex with drunk men guilty of rape?”
Under current rules, they can be. Penetration is not required for sexual assault under most schools’ definitions, and if it occurs, the penetrated party can still be the attacker. But men don’t accuse women very often. I have a number of hetero cases where the male student’s high level of drunkenness was not in dispute. It’s also not in dispute, in three of those cases, that the male student was sleeping it off in his own car or bed when the female arrived and woke him up. But if the female student files an accusation, and the male feels that he was the one taken advantage of, he typically cannot file a complaint in response because that’s retaliation.
So in theory, absolutely, the drunk guy can accuse the girl (drunk or sober). But he has to do it first, and it doesn’t happen much.
You underestimate the potency of testosterone in an 18 year old. He can perform long after he knows better.