Sweeping Sexual Assault Suit Filed Against UT

[Coug]

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. -- Tennessee chancellor Jimmy Cheek said Monday that any assertion his university doesn't take sexual assault seriously enough "is simply not true."

..."to claim that we have allowed a culture to exist contrary to our institutional commitment to providing a safe environment for our students or that we do not support those who report sexual assault is just false." -
Cheek

Chancellor Jimmy Cheek defends Tennessee Volunteers against 'false' allegations

 

[OrangeIsLife]

Love the message. Hate the messenger. It's like having Junior Samples read Shakespeare.

 

[supersmo18]

Love the message. Hate the messenger. It's like having Junior Samples read Shakespeare.

Lol I just got a visual of that and literally laughed out loud. lol:

 

[Rifleman]

Love the message. Hate the messenger. It's like having Junior Samples read Shakespeare.

To BR-549, or not to BR-549? That is the question.

 

[ButchPlz]

Colleges slammed with lawsuits from men accused of sex crimes - CBS News

 

[JacketVol]

You are out of your mind to call these women whores. You do not know if they were raped or not. Rape cases like these where the accuser and defendant know each are notoriously murky. Argue over whether the university was wrong to suspend the players based only an accusation, but don't call these women names when you don't know the facts. Its morally repugnant.

Again, CBJ and the university do not deserve to be condemned by the media without all the facts, and neither should these women. Snippets found on a message board or in a legal filing don't represent all the facts.

Being raped doesn't make you a whore but whores can be raped too.

 

[Kristy*]

Colleges slammed with lawsuits from men accused of sex crimes - CBS News

Thanks for sharing. Good to see that the unjustly accused are not only suing the schools that mishandled their cases but are also suing the magazines that misrepresented facts. Tennessean, specifically Anita Wadwani, take note!

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ButchPlz View Post
Colleges slammed with lawsuits from men accused of sex crimes - CBS News

Thanks for sharing. Good to see that the unjustly accused are not only suing the schools that mishandled their cases but are also suing the magazines that misrepresented facts. Tennessean, specifically Anita Wadwani, take note!

Not that all of the accused are faultless (I think Dobbs, Kamara and JRM attempted to assure the public that mistakes were made), but here is a bit of insightful news, that the Tennessean should consider, where a general, across-the-board change began in 2011 as to how programs/schools approach these situations (IE: how UT + its legal counsel has been saying it approached them) --

"The get-tough approach by colleges is attributed largely to a 2011 letter from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. The letter told schools they must promptly investigate allegations of sexual assault and harassment, even if the accuser does not make a complaint to the institution.

Schools that do not comply can face an investigation and a cutoff of federal money. As of mid-March, the Office for Civil Rights was conducting 219 such investigations at 173 schools.

Known as the "Dear Colleague Letter," it has been hailed by advocates who say many schools are now moving in the right direction to address campus sexual assaults.

"For a very long time, there was no due process for victims. Victims were told to withdraw from school. Victims were told to take the semester off," said Colby Bruno of the nonprofit Victim Rights Law Center. Now, "yes, there are more decisions against perpetrators. Yes, perpetrators are being held accountable. And that is going to bother people.""

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ButchPlz View Post
Colleges slammed with lawsuits from men accused of sex crimes - CBS News



Not that all of the accused are faultless (I think Dobbs, Kamara and JRM attempted to assure the public that mistakes were made), but here is a bit of insightful news, that the Tennessean should consider, where a general, across-the-board change began in 2011 as to how programs/schools approach these situations (IE: how UT + its legal counsel has been saying it approached them) --

"The get-tough approach by colleges is attributed largely to a 2011 letter from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. The letter told schools they must promptly investigate allegations of sexual assault and harassment, even if the accuser does not make a complaint to the institution.

Schools that do not comply can face an investigation and a cutoff of federal money. As of mid-March, the Office for Civil Rights was conducting 219 such investigations at 173 schools.

Known as the "Dear Colleague Letter," it has been hailed by advocates who say many schools are now moving in the right direction to address campus sexual assaults.

"For a very long time, there was no due process for victims. Victims were told to withdraw from school. Victims were told to take the semester off," said Colby Bruno of the nonprofit Victim Rights Law Center. Now, "yes, there are more decisions against perpetrators. Yes, perpetrators are being held accountable. And that is going to bother people.""

What bothers people isn't that perpetrators are being held accountable. What bothers people is that schools have been forced to set up kangaroo courts that use a low standard of evidence to punish someone for a crime that real courts have the highest standard of evidence possible for.

There's no reason schools should be using anything than less than a clear and reasonable evidence standard of proof to punish kids for this. Using a preponderance of evidence just means that they can kick kids out of school if they think there was a 51% chance that the crime actually happened.

That's what bothers me. It pretty much makes it so that male college students are putting their educations at risk any time they have sex. And a panel of administrators can ruin a kid's future and have him labeled by his peers as a sex offender for something they're 49% uncertain he did.

 

[Kristy*]

What bothers people isn't that perpetrators are being held accountable. What bothers people is that schools have been forced to set up kangaroo courts that use a low standard of evidence to punish someone for a crime that real courts have the highest standard of evidence possible for.

There's no reason schools should be using anything than less than a clear and reasonable evidence standard of proof to punish kids for this. Using a preponderance of evidence just means that they can kick kids out of school if they think there was a 51% chance that the crime actually happened.

That's what bothers me. It pretty much makes it so that male college students are putting their educations at risk any time they have sex. And a panel of administrators can ruin a kid's future and have him labeled by his peers as a sex offender for something they're 49% uncertain he did.

Exactly. If there is not enough proof to even bring criminal charges, then how could there possibly be enough proof to kick the student out of school?

And as far as publications go, true news articles should be written to display the facts neutrally. The Tennessean (and others) has failed to do so.

 

[UT-Rex]

What bothers people isn't that perpetrators are being held accountable. What bothers people is that schools have been forced to set up kangaroo courts that use a low standard of evidence to punish someone for a crime that real courts have the highest standard of evidence possible for.

There's no reason schools should be using anything than less than a clear and reasonable evidence standard of proof to punish kids for this. Using a preponderance of evidence just means that they can kick kids out of school if they think there was a 51% chance that the crime actually happened.

That's what bothers me. It pretty much makes it so that male college students are putting their educations at risk any time they have sex. And a panel of administrators can ruin a kid's future and have him labeled by his peers as a sex offender for something they're 49% uncertain he did.

Let me clarify my point: our school DID (so it seems) hold the student-athletes (those referenced in the Complaint) accountable, which is something that seems to have been lost in the Tennessean articles.

IE: since the 2011 focus of the Dear Colleague letter (Title IX recommendations from a lay-person's perspective), the school (just as the Pres, the Chanc + counsel have stated) has been taking and dishing-out the available precautions and penalties, in good faith as is the intent of the new focus (in the school's efforts to NOT promote a culture the likes of which the Tennessean claims the school promoted).

 

[edyeary]

Just wondering. Has anyone commented on these newpaper articles in the Tennessean? And if so, how many have taken the newspaper to task for their biased sh!77y journalism?

 

[ButchPlz]

Just wondering. Has anyone commented on these newpaper articles in the Tennessean? And if so, how many have taken the newspaper to task for their biased sh!77y journalism?

Lots of people have commented. SJWs will continue to rattle out bullsh*t about how Tennessee fosters a culture of rapists and drown out all reason. I had been hoping the fact that Rolling Stone is about to be put through the absolute sh*t, along with the Gawker/Hulk Hogan case, would cause journalists to be more reasonable. Unfortunately, overweight, sweaty, neckbearded 'feminist' tumblrinas drive clicks.

Political note, these idiots are the ones who don't realize their excessive overreactions to everything are the reason we end up with effing Trump as the likely GOP nominee.

 

[Remy]

Thanks for sharing. Good to see that the unjustly accused are not only suing the schools that mishandled their cases but are also suing the magazines that misrepresented facts. Tennessean, specifically Anita Wadwani, take note!

She AND The Tennessean have gotten very quiet when it was found out she claimed an assault against her ex husband. No bias there right?

 

[AM64]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ButchPlz View Post
Colleges slammed with lawsuits from men accused of sex crimes - CBS News



Not that all of the accused are faultless (I think Dobbs, Kamara and JRM attempted to assure the public that mistakes were made), but here is a bit of insightful news, that the Tennessean should consider, where a general, across-the-board change began in 2011 as to how programs/schools approach these situations (IE: how UT + its legal counsel has been saying it approached them) --

"The get-tough approach by colleges is attributed largely to a 2011 letter from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. The letter told schools they must promptly investigate allegations of sexual assault and harassment, even if the accuser does not make a complaint to the institution.

Schools that do not comply can face an investigation and a cutoff of federal money. As of mid-March, the Office for Civil Rights was conducting 219 such investigations at 173 schools.

Known as the "Dear Colleague Letter," it has been hailed by advocates who say many schools are now moving in the right direction to address campus sexual assaults.

"For a very long time, there was no due process for victims. Victims were told to withdraw from school. Victims were told to take the semester off," said Colby Bruno of the nonprofit Victim Rights Law Center. Now, "yes, there are more decisions against perpetrators. Yes, perpetrators are being held accountable. And that is going to bother people.""

I see this like the alligator and swamp issue. Find the damn drain! Schools either band together and fight the DOE on this issue, or alternatively continue debating the efficacy and preferred aroma of very expensive alligator repellent in hundreds of court cases. Having said that, it is absolutely incumbent for all schools that they protect all students.

 

[I40flyer]

What bothers people isn't that perpetrators are being held accountable. What bothers people is that schools have been forced to set up kangaroo courts that use a low standard of evidence to punish someone for a crime that real courts have the highest standard of evidence possible for.

There's no reason schools should be using anything than less than a clear and reasonable evidence standard of proof to punish kids for this. Using a preponderance of evidence just means that they can kick kids out of school if they think there was a 51% chance that the crime actually happened.

That's what bothers me. It pretty much makes it so that male college students are putting their educations at risk any time they have sex. And a panel of administrators can ruin a kid's future and have him labeled by his peers as a sex offender for something they're 49% uncertain he did.

School shouldn't be setting up courts at all. Schools should be taking care of education, we have DAs, criminal courts, and real judges. There is something very wrong with a school having it's own court system, and as it doesn't have the power to put someone in prison-what is it? The UT police dept, should 100% of the time refer all criminal complaints (felony) to the DA, and utilize the Sheriff's Dept for help such as DNA etc. where they are not equipped.
I'd hate to see High Schools deciding, "Let's be like UT and have our own judges and courts". Many public schools have full time police, why not make them XXX High School Police? It would be just as stupid.

 

[CPA]

The Board of Trustees has a closed door meeting scheduled next week with their lawyer about the Title IX lawsuit.

 

[Iam4utalways]

The Board of Trustees has a closed door meeting scheduled next week with their lawyer about the Title IX lawsuit.

They should tell them to drop the suit and charges won't be filed against those involved, for such offensive and untrue allegations.

Or bring what you got and be prepared for a counter suit.

UT has been slandered, use that as the leverage to get them to drop the suit.

What a horrible mess.

Maybe at one time Title IX was needed, but not for this type of litigation, now or back in the day.

 

[bigdaddy]

School shouldn't be setting up courts at all. Schools should be taking care of education, we have DAs, criminal courts, and real judges. There is something very wrong with a school having it's own court system, and as it doesn't have the power to put someone in prison-what is it? The UT police dept, should 100% of the time refer all criminal complaints (felony) to the DA, and utilize the Sheriff's Dept for help such as DNA etc. where they are not equipped.
I'd hate to see High Schools deciding, "Let's be like UT and have our own judges and courts". Many public schools have full time police, why not make them XXX High School Police? It would be just as stupid.

The courts are manditory due to title 9. They weren't set up by choice but by mandate.

 

[RikidyBones]

The Board of Trustees has a closed door meeting scheduled next week with their lawyer about the Title IX lawsuit.

Who's their lawyer in this? Plaintiff or defendants?

 

[I40flyer]

If these courts can hear criminal cases, such as rape, does double jeopardy apply? If the UT court finds a rape did happen, and a given person is the rapist, can the UT court sentence them to xx amount of years in prison? If NO and NO, how are these courts, courts? Either they are a court of not. Of course the school should have a mechanism for handing out discipline for breaking rules etc., but this is a far cry from serious felony charges. If Title IX requires schools to have courts, are those chosen to be the "judges" given the status of Federal Judge? This entire "Univ Court" aspect isn't in keeping with the Constitution regarding courts. Once again, I'll state no one should be punished for any crime, until they are found guilty by a real court. Also, UT should get out of the "Court" business-it can lead to no good for the school.

 

[bigdaddy]

If these courts can hear criminal cases, such as rape, does double jeopardy apply? If the UT court finds a rape did happen, and a given person is the rapist, can the UT court sentence them to xx amount of years in prison? If NO and NO, how are these courts, courts? Either they are a court of not. Of course the school should have a mechanism for handing out discipline for breaking rules etc., but this is a far cry from serious felony charges. If Title IX requires schools to have courts, are those chosen to be the "judges" given the status of Federal Judge? This entire "Univ Court" aspect isn't in keeping with the Constitution regarding courts. Once again, I'll state no one should be punished for any crime, until they are found guilty by a real court. Also, UT should get out of the "Court" business-it can lead to no good for the school.

All that is required for these "courts" at a university is basically enough smoke to be a fire. And all they can do is dismiss the student. They aren't punishing for crimes, just having a board review to see if they want particular student in thier university. And once again these courts are required by title 9. If they university didn't do it they would be in violation

http://knowyourix.org/title-ix/title-ix-in-detail/

 

[I40flyer]

This is my point. I understand these "Courts" being in place for civil matters, but when criminal allegations have been made, schools would be Far better off, referring the matter to a real criminal court, and the elected DA, 100% of the time. They dismiss a student, that is latter found to be not guilty, or the Grand Jury does not return a True Bill, etc., then the school is over reaching, at the very least. I don't believe Title IX requires the school (any school) to have a court that "Pre-Tries" a student in a criminal matter. In fact, this may hinder a real criminal investigation/trial. Some have read Title IX and determined sexual harassment includes such things as rape, confusing school rules, civil matters with criminal matters.

 

[volfan102455]

This is my point. I understand these "Courts" being in place for civil matters, but when criminal allegations have been made, schools would be Far better off, referring the matter to a real criminal court, and the elected DA, 100% of the time. They dismiss a student, that is latter found to be not guilty, or the Grand Jury does not return a True Bill, etc., then the school is over reaching, at the very least. I don't believe Title IX requires the school (any school) to have a court that "Pre-Tries" a student in a criminal matter. In fact, this may hinder a real criminal investigation/trial. Some have read Title IX and determined sexual harassment includes such things as rape, confusing school rules, civil matters with criminal matters.

Regardless of the issue, the school has to make a decision on whether a student can or can't remain in school if someone files a complaint of wrong doing against that student. They have to decide whether there is a risk of harm by the student to others.

This is not a good situation for any university to have to deal with. But I agree with them having to deal with it from the perspective of making a decision on whether the student is allowed to continue at their education or not.

And I totally agree with the way Coach Jones has handled these.

Playing a sport or attending a specific university is NOT a right. It is a privilege that is earned, with that privilege maintained by following the rules and guidelines established by the parties that are allowing one that privilege.

What gets lost in all of this is regardless of what happened or didn't both parties allowed themselves to be in a questionable situation that lead to the circumstances they found themselves in. At some point folks need to learn to take responsibility for their actions and stop blaming others that had no part in the decisions that they made.

 

[82_VOL_83]

If these courts can hear criminal cases, such as rape, does double jeopardy apply? If the UT court finds a rape did happen, and a given person is the rapist, can the UT court sentence them to xx amount of years in prison? If NO and NO, how are these courts, courts? Either they are a court of not. Of course the school should have a mechanism for handing out discipline for breaking rules etc., but this is a far cry from serious felony charges. If Title IX requires schools to have courts, are those chosen to be the "judges" given the status of Federal Judge? This entire "Univ Court" aspect isn't in keeping with the Constitution regarding courts. Once again, I'll state no one should be punished for any crime, until they are found guilty by a real court. Also, UT should get out of the "Court" business-it can lead to no good for the school.

They aren't courts. Would you people stop this moronic BS. The most they can do is kick you out of school. They have had the ability to do this since we'll before I was there in one way or another. I am absolutely sure that were they given the choice they would refer everything having to do with criminal behavior to the DA.

If I were in this type of hearing at UT the first question I would ask is "did you file a sexual assault charge with the police?". If the answer is no, the burden of proof would increase exponentially.

Edit: How can double jeopardy apply? These are not courts.