I urge everybody to read the article linked by @mom2and above, and ponder what your thoughts might have been if this was the first article you read about this particular accused. Several posters referred to him as a “rapist” or referred to two “known rapes.” Well, he’s not a convicted rapist, because he pled to a lesser charge. It does sound like the evidence would have made a conviction in criminal court very difficult.
What a college should do with a case like this is even more difficult. I do believe that colleges should be able to take multiple complaints into account in a way that courts cannot–because the potential consequences to the accused, although serious, are not as serious as imprisonment. Still, you have to have some minimum level of proof even in a college disciplinary proceeding, and this case may not have had it.
And just a point on how we react to evidence. Several people reacted strongly to the point that the second accuser had a laceration. But they didn’t know until they read the second article what the prosecutor knew, which was that the camera evidence would suggest that the accuser had sex with other individuals after this particular accused. So the evidence of laceration is useless against this particular accused.
I just hope that the additional information is given the same media coverage as the initial information was. I can clearly see why they did not continue with the rape charge.
@GnocchiB I’ll let you Google the story, but the prosecutor has released more information. In the case of the original rape charge, the girl was videoed kissing and making out with a guy about 30 minutes after her so-called “rape.” And the DNA test apparently showed evidence of multiple partners.
The story also explains how the dredged up rape case had similar facts, with the girl claiming she was passed out drunk and unable to consent, but photos and/or video showing that she was fully capable.
When college girls act in a so-called “slutty” fashion they often face expulsion from their sororities. The only way to stop this is to make a false rape charge, which is likely what happened here.
That’s a bit harsh EarlVanDorn…but I must say I’m firmly in the camp of solid investigating when someone says “rape.” That’s a horrific thing yet time and time again you read about colleges and universities attempting to adjudicate someone who will forever be labeled a sexual assaulter or rapist with little investigation, no subpoena power and denying the accused the ability to exhibit things like tweets and videos that might clarify the situation. This one appeared weak from the get go and it’s no wonder the prosecution is “explaining” given the media frenzy about rape in general. Huffpost just started a series today analyzing Colleges and Universities and just what they are (or aren’t) doing with students accusing rape and students accused of rape. Should be an interesting read and a nice counter article to the activist blogs if the author does a balanced job. There’s also an excellent “primer” online by the National DA’s Assoc for prosecutors about how to handle claims of sexual assault with a voluntarily intoxicated accuser. It’s very clearly spells out the hurdles in the absence of assault. Just google Prosecuting Alcohol-facilitated Sexual Assault. It’s almost 10 years old, but the challenges remain the same.
?? Not sure what point you are trying to make. Yes, the primer is to “help” prosecutors with cases where there is very little to no evidence of force, assault, battery evidence…whatever you want to call it.
Where you say “claims of sexual assault with a voluntarily intoxicated accuser,” and then say in the next line “absence of assault,” I was asking for clarification of terms.
How is assault both the claim and the assumed missing component of a claim?
Perhaps a better way to put this would be the absence of evidence inconsistent with consent (other than the testimony of the accuser). Those are the really difficult cases.