What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Student expelled for consensual sex - Title IX abuse (1 Viewer)

RedmondLonghorn

Footballguy
This is the worst example I have seen in a long string of cases where Title IX has been used as weapon against male students accused of sexual misconduct. In this case, his accuser wasn't even the "victim". The fact that the alleged victim has maintained from the start that the sex was consensual doesn't seem to be in dispute, but the action against the male student went on anyway, ultimately resulting in his suspension for multiple years (which is effectively an expulsion). All of this happened without a whiff of due process.

It looks like the plaintiff has a very strong case against CSU-Pueblo. But he is also attempting to sue the Department of Education over the guidance it has provided to colleges on Title IX sexual assault cases. The "Dear Colleague" letter that the DOE sent to colleges a few years back is central to the case. It is apparent that many colleges and universities have interpreted that letter as a mandate to utilize processes many would call draconian (and arguably unconstitutional) against male students, often with little evidence.

Reason - Link

Huffington Post - Link

Denver Post - Link

The first link is from Reason magazine. It is a Libertarian publication. In the interest of balance, I also included links from Huffington Post and the Denver Post.

 
On October 23, they went to the movies together. Afterward, they kissed and engaged in consensual sexual behavior. They did so the following evening as well. These were not drunken hookups: these were mutually-agreed upon encounters, according to the details in the lawsuit. 

At one point, Neal expressed concerns about giving Doe a hickey—a kiss mark on her neck—because the other trainers might notice it. Doe encouraged him to do so anyway, and promised to wear a hoodie the next day. These and other anecdotes demonstrate Doe's full complicity in the sexual activity that took place, though her statements are even more definitive. 

The hickey was indeed noticed by another trainer, described as the "Complainant" in the lawsuit. When confronted, Doe confessed to the Complainant that she and Dean had engaged in sex. According to the lawsuit, the Complainant "presumed" this sex was nonconsensual, and reported it to the director of the athletic training program. 

Later, when Doe found out, she gave Neal the bad news, and texted him the following messages: 


"One of the other Athletic Training students screwed me over!...She went behind my back and told my AT advisor stuff that wasn’t true!!! I’m trying so hard to fix it all." 



Neal and Doe met in person to discuss the situation. Without Doe's knowledge, Neal recorded their conversation. This audio recording further establishes that their sex was consensual. While in Neal's presence, Doe fielded a phone call from a coordinator of the athletic training program and stated "I'm fine and I wasn't raped." She then called her mother and told her the same thing. 

Both Doe and her mother pressed the administrators of the athletic training program—a husband and wife team—to drop the matter, but it was too late: they had already informed the Title IX office. 

To be clear, CSUP apparently believes that Title IX requires the university to investigate a student for sexual misconduct, even when his alleged victim resolutely insists that he is innocent and does not want the issue investigated. Administrators essentially treated Doe like an object that belonged to them—one that no one else was allowed to touch. 

Neal and Doe, it should be noted, had consensual sex again—probably because they genuinely liked and were interested in each other, despite the university's herculean efforts to keep them from touching each other. 

 
So she was the university employee and the one with "official power".  But he got kicked out.  Yeah, that makes sense.

I have a 16 year old and fear for him during his college years.  This stuff has gotten absolutely ludicrous.

 
So she was the university employee and the one with "official power".  But he got kicked out.  Yeah, that makes sense.
I see where you are trying to go here, but she was also a student. Neither really had any power. 

 
I see where you are trying to go here, but she was also a student. Neither really had any power. 
We had a 20 year old kid in Tuscaloosa arrested for something like this.  He did something for the high school system (trainer, teacher's aide, something).  Had a consentual relationship with an 18 year old HS senior at a different school.  HS girl screamed to the hills like this girl that she wanted this guy and that she consented to all of their activities. Everything is perfectly fine and legal except because he is a state school employee and she is a student he is now looking at 15 years thanks to a law we have here and elsewhere that tries to curb teacher-student sex.  ####### crazy as the net they have cast is way, way too big.  He is challenging the constitutionality of the law (I agree with him) - under the law an 18 year old UA student who worked in the UA library would be looking at 15 years for having sex with another 18 year old freshman - he is in a position of "power".  

That's what I was thinking about (yes, I realize this is a Title IX item).

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top