^^I thought he pled guilty to misdemeanor battery? If so I doubt he would not be on a sex offender registry.
“It defies logic that the consequences against this student aren’t more severe, but he comes from a very wealthy family. One parent is Managing Director of an international asset management firm.”
I know exactly where he lives. I would call it nice upper middle class suburbia, but it’s nowhere near where the “very wealthy” live in this neck of the woods. Not a “prestigious” name area, not a gated community, not the “mansion” section of town, etc. Of course, you can’t always tell people’s wealth from their house and it may be that the father makes beaucoup bucks and it’s not reflected in where they live. But I think any one of us just driving by it wouldn’t gasp in astonishment or anything.
A year’s probation seems right for a misdemeanor. He probably did have a good attorney who was able to poke enough holes in the prosecution so they settled for the misdemeanor battery.
Again, we don’t know what weaknesses are in the case. They have to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. We speculated that they may be missing victim testimony. Maybe there are witnesses or text evidence that are just strong enough to defeat reasonable doubt. We don’t know enough to figure out why this is happening this way.
@Hanna, these two rape cases would have gone to court separately or together?
That’s a prosecutorial decision.
@Hanna, Do you think it would be more effective to try both cases at once?
I was almost on a jury. The guy robbed 3 different banks. Many of the prospective jurors mentioned they would have a hard time being neutral. One guy accused of robbing three different banks. With witnesses…what are the odds the guy is not guilty? Many prospective jurors said this.
People are human… One guy raped two women? Under similar situations? People may say they are neutral… But one guy…two accusers…
I would think this would benefit the prosecution to try both cases together. Just my opinion with little info. 
I did read a tiny piece off of Yahoo today that said the prosecutor had very little evidence on either case and perhaps had overcharged. There weren’t any specifics, but no one knows what the evidence really was.
“Do you think it would be more effective to try both cases at once?”
No idea. Criminal trial strategy like that is way outside my wheelhouse. It might vary based on knowing the judges/juries in that county. Prosecutorial budget/staffing might matter.
“One guy raped two women?”
But that’s just it. They have to start from zero with the assumption that this did not happen. And as I understand it, the accusations weren’t independent; the earlier woman only made a statement to police after hearing about the second. They may have been friends or sorority sisters. One or both may have fuzzy memories of the night. This is PLENTY to expel someone, and indeed he’s gone from IU. But do you get to the point where no reasonable person could doubt his guilt? I guess the prosecutors decided they couldn’t risk it…or maybe they’re complicit or bad at their jobs.
@Hanna, I don’t know enough about this case to come to the conclusion that there could have been a guilty verdict or not.
@dstark Reading the account in the Indiana Daily Student, it would have been very difficult to obtain a guilty verdict in the first case. Sorority sisters witnessed them having sex through the victim’s window, but the issue would have been consent. There apparently had been a substantial amount of drinking with a group of brothers and sisters moving back and forth between frat/sorority houses prior to a dance. The victim apparently blacked out and couldn’t remember what happened, according to the report. Though she filed a report, she did not want to pursue a criminal complaint. So, yes, a very challenging case for the prosecution. Yet just enough risk of a bad outcome to the defendant that he chose–wisely IMO–to plead guilty to a greatly reduced charge.
If there was a plea bargain, it was because the prosecutor thought he might not win a conviction on a greater charge. The fact is there might not have been any rape at all.
I am very wary of “sympathetic” rapes which crawl out of the woodwork to support another rape claim, particularly after reading extensively about the Mattress Girl case, in which two people made completely fabricated claims to support someone they thought had been raped.
Finally, I think rape is a police matter, not something for colleges to adjudicate. Colleges shouldn’t be deciding guilt or innocence in rape cases, or settle title issues on property, or making decisions on descent and distribution, making child support decisions, or adjudicating murder cases, or anything else what should be the sole province of a court of law.
@EarlVanDorn college’s are adjudicating many offenses that some might think are the “sole province of a court of law.” For example, take a look at University of Mississippi’s M Book. Their student conduct code allows university jurisdiction over a lot of potentially criminal offenses. These include alcohol/drug possession, fraud, false identification, disorderly conduct, assault and battery, harassment, stalking, arson and even possession of weapons and explosive devices. They specifically note that the offenses are actionable both under the university conduct system and may also be subject to criminal/civil liability.
Whether you think they should be adjudicating these matters is another question, but it’s not just sexual assault that is actionable in both systems.
@HarvestMoon1 In all of the things you mention, punishment will not take place if the student is found “not guilty” in a court of law.
http://conflictresolution.olemiss.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/09/MBOOK20153.pdf describes some activities which are against the student conduct rules and also illegal. It does not say that conviction in a court of law is a prerequisite for student conduct discipline.
For example, for alcohol violations, it says (emphasis added):
Similar wording exists with respect to hazing, theft, and other violations.
Earl my point is that you say sexual assault is a “police matter” and I am simply pointing out that there are a lot of other “police matters” that universities adjudicate. Sexual assault is one among many. The adjudication processes are independent.
@HarvestMoon1 I see your point, and in fact students will frequently be punished for minor offenses for which there is no arrest. But for many of the offenses you cite, punishment will not take place following a “not guilty” finding in court. My problem with the sexual assault adjudications is that they are now based on a preponderance of the evidence rather than the standard that has existed for all other offences, which has essentially been the “clear and convincing evidence” standard.
Under the current Title IX standards, if they think someone is even slightly more likely to have committed the offense than not they must find the student guilty. Given all of the brain-washing that goes on that women never lie about rape (what a joke), it ensures that males will always receive an unfair adjudication. At the very least when the falsely accused are exonerated those making the false accusations should be expelled and prosecuted.
And by the way, the more I read about the IU case, the most I’m convinced it’s a total crock. It’s a shame that this guy was forced to plead guilty to anything.
@EarlVanDorn could you share your sources? TIA
This article quotes the prosecutor was to why there was a plea deal and why the two cases could not be tried together. As noted on the news this morning, the facts were too different to make a “pattern” and so the first accusation could not be raised at the second trial and vice versa. The prosecutor did not believe there was enough evidence to win at trial and so went with the plea bargain.
http://www.idsnews.com/article/2016/06/prosecutor-expands-on-why-enochs-case-didnt-go-to-trial
This simply is not accurate @EarlVanDorn. If you read the disciplinary procedures in University of Mississippi’s M Book you will find that violations of the student code of conduct are adjudicated under a “more likely than not” standard (pg. 62 sec. K.) That is a “preponderance of the evidence” standard. This includes everything from drug/alcohol violations to hazing and theft. The penalties for those offenses include expulsion.
I use University of Mississippi’s code because it is a school you mention often in your posts. Yale’s policy for violations under it’s general code of conduct is clear “preponderance of the evidence” as well.