Men fight back against sex assault charges

Thes guys we are talking about are participating in risky behavior. I was a professional gambler. When you partake in risky behavior, you can lose.

I think in the UCSD case, Jobn is being used for political gain. I hope he isn’t paying for his lawyers. His legal bills are going to be high.

I used to work with these guys at Bank of America. They would go to a Giants game at Candlestick Park. Get drunk. Look for fights. Then get into fights.

Even if they won the fights… They could lose in court.

I liked one of the guys. He was a nice guy when he was sober.

I don’t know what happened to these guys. :slight_smile:

I’d have to go back and re-read the testimony but my recollection is that there was a whole line of questioning about his history of coupling alcohol and sex. If questioning on sexual history is prohibited for the accused then the same should apply to complainant. He said he was “blacked out”. Why not just take that at face value and apply it to the night in in question?

@Demosthenes49 - I agree with your point, but IIRC (private) colleges take the position that they acting in an independent capacity and are not a party to the action. However, although my post might not have been clear, I tried to highlight the problems with this when I wrote “In principle, …” and then proceeded to point out the conflicts of interest that cause the colleges not to be truly independent agents. You are right to point out that the college is often both investigator and adjudicator. My understanding is that the recent trend has been for colleges to appoint an “independent investigator” - who is technically not an employee of the college - in order to mitigate their vulnerability here.

Of course, there’s a reason that having an independent judiciary was considered an important advance in civil rights 300 years ago. Regardless, I believe that the courts have pretty much agreed with the position the colleges have taken.

P.S. I have a typo in my previous post. I meant to write “people who think the accused would be better off being subject to a criminal trial for rape instead of a college hearing are also completely misguided and definitely don’t understand the risks involved.”

That seems to be a very principled position. Although I don’t agree with your conclusion on legal and pragmatic grounds and for other reasons of principle, if this is where you’re coming from then I respect you’re argument. However, I get the impression that others in these threads aren’t being as thoughtful as you are, and my comment was meant to give them something to think about.

Added - I should emphasize again that many sexual assault victim’s advocates have argued that colleges have a vested interest in sweeping sexual assault claims under the rug; for example, they accused them of giving short shrift to victim’s claims to keep their Clery act statistics low. I think there is strong evidence that they are right - for example, IIRC colleges that are put on surveillance by the OCR miraculously seem to see their Clery act statistics double while they’re on watch.

Because the college tribunals are not inherently fair and in the lawsuits, at least, it is apparent they don’t even follow their own rules as stated in handbooks, documents, and correspondence. I like the UCSD lawyer, he thinks like me. He’s also a family friend so guessing this is pro bono. The kid wants to be a lawyer. The accuser ruined his chances as of this moment in time. Does the punishment fit the crime because the punishment is a whole lot more than suspension in terms of future utility. This is alot more than about if he diddled her in bed the next morning and months later she got angry. If he doesn’t get this removed and get into lawsuit I could see this one turning into a civil suit against the women. I hope she’s got a true story down pat.

UCSD Jane Roe was also participating in risky behavior. And in her case, it’s difficult to see what would even count as a win. How is anything good going to come of this? Does she think John Doe would marry her? I optimistically hope that a Canada-study-style intervention could slap some sense into young women like her.

Maybe the arbitrators didn’t believe John Doe because when he says that he had sex with Jane Roe at night, then woke up in the morning and never touched her, it sounds inherently implausible.

If colleges outsource the entire sexual assault proceedings, both investigation and adjudication, are they better off? That could mitigate the appearance of conflict of interest. OTOH, Occidental outsource both investigation and adjudication, and they still got sued.

@momofthreeboys, John at UCSD ruined his own chances. John shouldn’t have fed the woman drinks and had sex with her.

John rolled the dice. So far… He is a loser. I hope getting his rocks off with somebody who confided with him was worth it.

Error in my #481 reverse "complainant"and “accused” in second sentence.

He ruined his own future by pouring drink after drink for her, then assaulting her. She made mistakes, but he is responsible for assaulting her.

He didn’t assault her. What the heck is wrong with her. She didn’t want sex in the morning. She had sex the night before and originally said it was consensual…only the morning attempt at sex was not consensual and even then it took her a long time to decide that. I’d tell her to get her a** out of the bed then. So someday she’s going to get married and if she doesn’t want sex in the morning she’s going to call the police hoping that some governmental authority is going to save her from her own decisions? I think not. Can no one see how ludicrous this is?

I don’t think he knows what he is doing. First he gets the suspension increased from one quarter to four quarters. Yeah, nice work. Now his defense for John Doe is that sexual touching of someone who is repeatedly protesting does not count as sexual misconduct. Nobody is going to buy that; it just makes Doe’s situation worse. The lawyer should have just told John Doe to take the one quarter suspension quietly.

IIRC, the statistics go right down again when the OCR surveillance disappears.

I am a guy. I was taught by my parents that I was responsible for anything that happened because of my partaking in sex. Women may have different motivations than I do.

Definitely took some fun out of sex. :slight_smile:

There were some children born out of wedlock in my family. :slight_smile:

Personal responsibility was big in my family. I was responsible for my own actions. ( not just about sex).

If I fed a religious, virgin woman drinks and then I had sex with her, I have a responsibility because of my actions.

I don’t think he used a condom. John is lucky he didn’t make a baby.

How can someone “feed” an adult woman drinks? Talk about infantilization of women! Yikes!

You are a busy guy, JohnDoe4. In more ways than one. John Doe is accused in almost every case. If we could lock up John Doe, college rapes would decline 66.72 percent. :slight_smile:

You can “feed” anyone drinks if they are brought drinks and aren’t aware of any alcohol in them.

Yeah, that darn John Doe. But he does end up dead a lot too…

OTOH if we could teach Jane Roe to take responsibility for her actions college rapes would drop by 95.82%.

Well, there is 4 of you and only one of her. :wink:

We have a different notion of feed, then. To me, to feed someone just means to give someone food (or drink) with the expectation that they will eat (or drink) it. I have no problem of saying, of a supported bike event, that they fed us well (as I hope they would). If a friend stopped by at lunchtime, I’d later mention that I fed him sandwiches and fresh lemonade, or whatever.

Google confirms that other people use the term the same way: “I fed him gel shots,” “they fed us barbecued chicken,” “a pleasant couple took me in and fed me a good dinner.”

We can argue semantics all we want but Jane Roe is responsible as an adult for having consumed the said drinks. No one fed her anything. If she knew that she would lose her inhibitions when drunk then she shouldn’t have imbibed. Men are not responsible in this day and age for the chastity of women.