Ex-student suing U-M for disciplinary actions taken after sexual misconduct investigation

Submitted by ypsituckyboy on

Don't mean to stir up the Gibbons hornets nest, but per MLive, a former student is suing U-M for disciplinary actions taken after an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct against him. A .pdf of the complaint is attached in the article and sheds some light on what the OSCR process looks like at UM. Plaintiff's counsel basically argues that the whole process is a mess, the OSCR isn't even close to being equipped with the resources or training to take on matters of this nature, and the result is 1st/14th Amendment Constitutional violations by the University.

Link:

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2014/05/lawsuit_claims_u-…

Shakey Jake

May 7th, 2014 at 4:03 PM ^

Prof Gayle Rubin to oversee this inept process at U of M. She has the experience to make sure males get a fair hearing when accused by females.

bluebyyou

May 7th, 2014 at 4:31 PM ^

I simply cannot buy into most university forums being able to conduct a sexual assault investigation and reach a conclusion separate and apart from what was reached in a court of law.  If the matter were referred to authorities and they believe for a variety of reasons that they can't make a case, they typically won't prosecute. What puts a university in a better position to assess the landscape?

There is way too much on the line for the accused should an adverse decision go against him.  As for the argument of anonymity, good luck when a potential employer asks you why you were dismissed from your university, when the school based their decision on a "he said, she said" position or "a woman scorned" and a standard of evidence reserved for civil matters.

 

GoBLUinTX

May 8th, 2014 at 1:08 AM ^

Brendan Gibbons never made those lists?  Government entities are notorious for leaking information they want to leak, as we well know from earlier this year.  Moreover, if the male student has the audacity to challenge the expulsion in a court of law, both his name and reason for the expulsion will become a matter of public record.  

Yeoman

May 8th, 2014 at 2:24 PM ^

Brendan Gibbons is not on a sex offender list and he is not going to prison. He is not required to register with local police each time he moves, or changes jobs, or changes his e-mail address or internet screen name or twitter. He doesn't need to notify authorities every time he plans to cross state lines. It won't be a felony offense if he's found within 100 feet of a playground or gym or athletic field. (I don't know Michigan law, but those are typical restrictions on a registered sex offender.)

Damage was done to him by the leak of his identity, but let's not exaggerate.

gbdub

May 8th, 2014 at 10:03 AM ^

And you missed my point completely. Even though the punishment is similar, that's probably the least relevant factor in whether universities can fairly adjudicate sexual assault.



Besides, I'd be equally annoyed if someone was summarily expelled for plagiarism with similar lack of opportunity to mount a credible defense.



Expulsion is a major expense and life disruption. It will often prevent you from getting into other schools. And since public schools are state actors (and all schools are beholden to Title IX, among other things) there are some important rights that should be preserved.

SWPro

May 7th, 2014 at 9:14 PM ^

I think to some extent the University has to be able to do things like this.

 

There are plenty of legal cases where evidence is lost or mishandled and gathered in an illegal way and someone who is obviously guilty walks or isn't even charged. This at least gives the University a way to protect its campus and student from these types of people.

 

The issue is that the University needs to understand the power its using here and equipped the responsible team to investigate and provide due process.

bronxblue

May 7th, 2014 at 11:01 PM ^

Yeah, I gotta agree with this to a good extent.  It would be one thing if the members of these committees had extra legal training and the proceedings followed acceptable legal standards, but it sounds like it is mostly piecemeal investigations with limited oversight.

I know people complain about the legal system in this country being broken, and in ways it is, but there are laws in place that have been refined and cultivated over hundreds of years to best protect the rights and interests of all involved parties.  In matters where we have clearl legal precedent (such as sexual assault), it is dangerous to deviate from those norms.

Evil Empire

May 7th, 2014 at 4:13 PM ^

the plaintiff's counsel's criticism of the process sounds reasonable and could be completely accurate, yet her client may still have committed rape.  The all-thumbs panache with which the university has handled these cases makes me feel better for protesting The Code back in 1995.  Thanks a bunch, Maureen Hartford.

jmdblue

May 7th, 2014 at 4:16 PM ^

 I once heard Amy Poehler (I think) say that almost every woman she knew had been at least "kinda" raped.  I mentioned this to my sister and she agreed....but if rape means the female in the encounter wishes she hadn't had sex it really sucks for the guy.   I completely agree that No means No.  That said, it isn't fair to have a couple drinks, engage in activity one may or may not want to engage in, then go for legal proceedings when consequences or regret hits....

sadeto

May 7th, 2014 at 4:46 PM ^

Important distinction: the woman in this case did not "go for legal proceedings", she went to the university, whose process is not a legal process. 

Unfortunately for the plaintiff, appeals courts in other states have upheld the right of universities to establish and enforce codes of conduct outside of the legal system. I don't see this going anywhere. 

jmdblue

May 7th, 2014 at 4:59 PM ^

still, she went to an authority to seek some sort of exoneration for herself or justice for her attacker.  And she got it.  There is likely a ton more to this story than we're reading and surely 2 kids who really regret a very stupid night. 

ypsituckyboy

May 7th, 2014 at 5:05 PM ^

2 things:

1) It may not be a "legal" proceeding in the sense that a court makes a determination of innocence or guilt, but it is most definitely legal in the sense that certain constitutional rights (read: legal rights) of the accused are at risk.

2) The question here isn't whether states/universities have a right to establish and enforce codes outside of the legal system. The question is whether the University even remotely followed those codes. 

markusr2007

May 7th, 2014 at 7:26 PM ^

,"mentally incapacitated" by alcohol or narcotics, then they are in no position to grant consent.

Period.  This is what the law says in Michigan and most other states as well.

http://sapac.umich.edu/article/189

I'm willing to wager that most college freshmen male are completely clueless about this and the risks that emanate from it.

 

 

gbdub

May 7th, 2014 at 7:58 PM ^

There is, or ought to be, a distinction between "intoxicated" and "mentally incapacitated". Either that or there should be a lot more cases where both parties are expelled for rape. Or at the very least the genders of the plaintiffs should be more even.

That's the problem with your "period" - it's not really enforced that way, and realistically never will be. Even your comment assumes that only males need to know that a drunk person can't consent.

Yeoman

May 8th, 2014 at 2:31 PM ^

...that the law in Michigan doesn't concern itself with consent. It's not illegal to have sex with a woman who was unable to give consent because she was intoxicated, unless the intoxication was involuntary. Slip something in her drink, it's an assault. If she gets drunk on her own, it's not. (In Michigan, that is. Other states differ.)

That's one of the critical differences between the university's code of conduct and state law. The university is trying to discourage conduct that is not illegal and they are within their rights to do so.

Sambojangles

May 8th, 2014 at 10:38 AM ^

Correction: it was Amy Schumer, no Poehler, who said every woman had been a little raped. If you google her name and "rape" you can see the full context of the comment. I'm glad you brought it up, because her view is much more nuanced and realistic than the polarizing, black-and-white words we see in the media and on this here message board on the subject.

GoBLUinTX

May 8th, 2014 at 11:00 AM ^

It sounded like she equates morning after remorse for a bad decision the night prior as an act of rape.

"Where am I?  Who is this guy?  Did we, did he?  I was raped."  

But why the pretense, Andrea Dworkan famously said that sexual intercourse between a man and a woman is always an inherent act of violence.  

mGrowOld

May 7th, 2014 at 4:45 PM ^

If the article is true then this is a case of "guilty until proven innocent".  20 years ago I was accused of sexual harrassment by a female emloyee and had to spend a LOT of money to defend myself and the attitude within my company was "of course you're guilty.  Why else would she make such an accusation unless you're guilty". I lost what I thought were some friends and It damned near ruined my career and my marrage and I did nothing to this person.

Very long (and painful) story but right before it was set to go to trial she made a settlement offer to me which I rejected.  At which point she dropped everything and disapeared from the company.  I dont know if "all females have been a little bit raped" or not because I'm not a female but I can tell you there is an overwhelming presumption of guilt leveled against males once charges like this are filed.  And not just in AA.

Erik_in_Dayton

May 7th, 2014 at 5:04 PM ^

It's an extraordinarily difficult reality.  Statistics and anecdotes (I've had a good number of female friends over the years) tell me that girls and women are abused, raped, or harassed far more often than they make false reports.  However, a story like yours scares me, and I can very much understand the desire of a person accused of something like that to be treated as an individual rather than a part of a greater trend.*  Yet we as a society don't seem to be doing a good job of dealing with that trend.  I don't have many answers. 

 

*My father was sued on a similarly crap race discrimination claim when I was a teenager - this despite the fact that he probably violated equal protection laws on a regular basis by favoring racial minorities over whites while hiring. 

gbdub

May 7th, 2014 at 7:45 PM ^

Of course, unreported assualts being more common than false accusations is a product of the difficulty of getting a case through the current legal system. It's a tough, painful process, and only an extremely motivated plaintiff (either a real victim or a real sociopath) will go through that. But if you make it easier to file a report and get someone punished, and if you codify the assumption that no one makes false accusations, more people will probably make false accusations - the risk reward calculus changes. Many have made the argument "it's fine to remove due process, because so few women make false charges", but that fallaciously assumes that the existing due process isn't part of the reason that so few false charges are filed.

jmdblue

May 7th, 2014 at 5:06 PM ^

I think is a feeling of having been coerced into sex.  Not via a voilent attack or even a forced date rape.  Just a situation where the woman doesn't want to have sex and winds up feeling helpless against it.  If this thread's story is mostly true, we see a situation where if the woman is willing to make some noise or get nasty she can almost assuredly avoid intercourse.  That said there is no telling what actually happened in that bunk. 

gbdub

May 7th, 2014 at 7:36 PM ^

Which is a fine concept and something that ought to be encouraged. But when you start handing out expulsions, I think there needs to be some reasonable mens rea on the part of the perpetrator.

I think we have a culture that encourages bad sex that people often regret and/or makes people feel that there's something wrong with them if they want to say no. But I think education is the solution, not legal action against people who honestly thought they were just taking yes for an answer.

Sac Fly

May 7th, 2014 at 4:49 PM ^

I agree, this article is very pro plaintiff.

MLive spends most of the article painting the picture of an innocent man wronged by the university, before conveniently inserting a few important details at the end.

There are holes in the story, which is understandable when you only get one side.

ypsituckyboy

May 7th, 2014 at 5:07 PM ^

The article isn't really pro-plaintiff. It's just discussing the complaint filed by the plaintiff, which should be pro-plaintiff unless you hired an awful attorney.

SurfsUpBlue

May 7th, 2014 at 6:08 PM ^

The article was based upon the complaint filed in court and an interview with the plaintiff's attorney.  UM refused to comment in any meaningful way. The author has no obligation to make up a defense for UM.  

French West Indian

May 7th, 2014 at 5:15 PM ^

...a bit of a tangent, but I recently read a piece that makes the argument that "because of its prison system, the US is the only country in the world where more men are raped than women."  So, despite the usual assumptions, it's not just women who can be victims.

Sounds like prisons need a Prisoner Code of Conduct so that they punish prisoners internally (in addition to whatever legal penalties might be involved).  Ok...I'm not making sense anymore & will shut up.

gbdub

May 7th, 2014 at 7:25 PM ^

There's definitely a disconnect. Male on female rape is a serious crime, something that most people are rightly horrified by. Male on male rape in prison is a punchline, or worse, considered a justified punishment.

French West Indian

May 7th, 2014 at 10:22 PM ^

"Male on male rape in prison is a punchline, or worse, considered a justified punishment."

I'm assuming that you're like 2 m tall with 25 cm penis and have never had to bend over for a job promotion.  There's really no joking about male-on-male rape.  Or maybe you're just so ugly nobody's ever wanted to fuck your lame ass.

grumbler

May 12th, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^

This is one of those "I read it on the internet so it must be true" stories.  If you look more closely at the linked story, you will see how dishonest it is.

Not that you basic point is wrong, but your evidence is probably false.

grumbler

May 12th, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^

This is one of those "I read it on the internet so it must be true" stories.  If you look more closely at the linked story, you will see how dishonest it is.

Not that you basic point is wrong, but your evidence is probably false.