1192
1193

Men's RightsAmherst Student Expelled for Sexual Misconduct Can’t Defend Himself—It Would ‘Impose Psychological Trauma’ on Accuser (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by Daddie0

http://tinyurl.com/hybq8j5

"Remember Amherst College student "John Doe," who was expelled for sexual misconduct, even though he had good reason to believe that his accuser had actually assaulted him? A judge recently blocked Doe's attempt to subpoena his female accuser's text messages on grounds that re-litigating the matter "would impose emotional and psychological trauma" on her.

Consider the implications of this decision. According to Seattle District Judge James Robart, a student who believes Amherst violated his due process rights, wrongfully expelled him, and ignored subsequent evidence that his accuser, "Sandra Jones," was the actual violator of the college's sexual misconduct policies, does not deserve the opportunity to make his case because someone else's feelings are more important.

Whatever happened to believing the victim?

The incident in question took place years ago, during the late night / early morning hours of February 4-5, 2012. Jones was Doe's girlfriend's roommate at the time. Jones went to Doe's dorm room and sexual activity ensued: Jones performed oral sex on Doe.

But Doe was blackout drunk at the time—a detail that Amherst administrators deemed "credible," on subsequent review. Of course, it's questionable whether a blackout drunk student can actually provide the level of consent that Amherst's sexual misconduct policy requires.

Other factors cast doubt on the idea that Jones was the victim and Doe the perpetrator. After leaving Doe's dorm room, Jones texted another male student and asked him to come to her dorm room for sex. She also texted a residential advisor about her "stupid" decision to engage in sexual activity with her roommate's boyfriend. In these text messages, Jones admitted that she was "not an innocent bystander." She also complained about how long it was taking this second male student to do anything sexual with her. She did not file a complaint against Doe until two years later.

It's certainly possible that Jones was forced by Doe to give him oral sex without her consent, left the encounter with a fervent desire for another hookup, mischaracterized her own level of responsibility in a message to the RA, and didn't realize she had been sexually assaulted for another two years (after befriending a number of victims' advocates). It just doesn't seem like the most probable explanation for what happened. But, based on a preponderance of the evidence presented to Amherst administrators, Doe was expelled.

Keep in mind that administrators never reviewed the text messages, and when Doe asked the administration to re-open the case in light of this error, Amherst refused. Doe was given just seven days to appeal the finding of responsibility, but he didn't find out about the texts until months later.

Doe has filed suit against Amherst for mistreating him. He has not sued Jones, although maybe he should have. As part of his case against Amherst, Doe's legal team subpoenaed Jones to testify at the trial and turn over certain documents and records of statements she made about the alleged assault. Jones refused to cooperate.


[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 111 points112 points  (1 child)

Whatever happened to believing the victim?

This was obviously only meant for female supposed victims.

subpoenaed Jones / Jones refused to cooperate

If this was a man, it would be a crime.

This is yet another example of the courts being pro-female and anti-male.

As always gents - protect yourselves as well as you can, and get video evidence where possible. If you're in a US Schooling system, do not be alone with a woman ever, and do not date women in your school.

The pressure women put on themselves to manufacture these rape stories is intense, and after the relationship has ended you a liability to her. Behave accordingly.

[–]newls 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Whatever happened to believing the victim?

Well hopefully it died around the point we started using scrutiny to ensure that the evidence lined up in the right way.

What's scary is that these arrogant, self-righteous judges actually believe they're doing a good thing by doing stuff like this.

[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor 212 points213 points  (31 children)

"“[T]he court for the district where compliance is required must quash or modify a subpoena that . . . subjects a person to undue burden.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(3)(iv); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) "

It'll go the other way on appeal. The burden is widely held as financial; if you are willing to pay, you can pretty much get whatever you want. Source: used to do this as a business. It would appear the plaintiff has money to see this through, so Ms Jones better strap in for having all her noods and slut chats dragged out in front of a jury some day. Poor baby.

These western district courts are well known for SJW horseshit and are also well known for getting their shit overturned.

[–]gistaminute 38 points39 points  (9 children)

Can I sue a former boss who made false statements to get me fired in a similar fashion, like slander + libel? I've been thinking about 30k is worth it to clear myself and expose that guy because he's actually damaged my reputation in a lasting way... is that a reasonable ballpark or are we getting into 6 figures? Not a person who seeks revenge lightly but I want to make this guy live through hell. I'll be able to clear myself with enough time but out of curiosity...

[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor 64 points65 points  (1 child)

I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know, but I do know two things.

1- Litigation in America has mostly become a modern day version of jousting between people that have money. If you don't have money, unless it's a no-duh case, you will never see lady justice do her thing. At least in civil courts.

2- In case like this, discovery alone, including dealing with motions like this, will run well into the five digits.

If you have money and want to fuck with the guy as sport, go for it. Otherwise, why bother?

[–]TRP Legal ExpertColdIceZero 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Lawyer here. Your is comment is accurate.

[–]1Entropy-7 11 points12 points  (1 child)

$30k is your entry fee unless it is a gimme. I'm not sure of the rules in the USA but a trial will set you back at least $30k and "costs" will only give you about third of that back.

This shit drove me insane when I was a divorce lawyer. The bitch would simply lie through her teeth and no judge would call her on it unless my guy wanted to lay out $30k for the trial process.

[–]1FunAndFreedom 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Got stuck in a development lawsuit against an estate once and from that experience I can vouch that your numbers are just about right. I won as the other sides argument amounted to "I didn't know I was selling under market" (they signed multiple times and had an attorney in the original deal), but there was no recouping the legal costs or time. Discovery alone lasted a couple weeks if I recall correctly and the lawyers racked up at least a hundred hours a piece.

[–]SpacePotatoBear 12 points13 points  (0 children)

eh, not worth the hassle.

BUT if he is telling people you're a shit person etc, you can likely get a Cease and desist order from a lawyer (so he can't keep spreading shit) and if he violates that, its easy money.

but the fired part will be trickier and frankly, not worth your time or effort.

[–]KnowBrainer 20 points21 points  (0 children)

You could hire hoodlums to rough him up for 3 figures. He'd probably sign an affidavit afterwards. If not, you can do a LOT of roughing up for 30k.

[–]Endorsed ContributorBluepillProfessor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You can sue your boss for WAY WAY less than $30,000 out of pocket. You may even be able to find a sucker to take it on contingency and you should be able to find plenty of employment lawyers to take it on contingency if you put up $1,500 - $3,500.00 for costs/retainer.

[–]newls 13 points14 points  (3 children)

This is exactly what happened in the Ched Evans case. A female judge decided that there was so much repetitive evidence from the accuser's past, that they had to use it and cross-examine here. Result: Ched Evans cleared.

Lesson learned: Female judges judge women more fairly than male judges do.

[–]forallmyfans2 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

actually the Ched Evens case was more he got found guilty, then his rich girlfriend literally bribed people to lie in court and call the alleged victim a slut.

and thats not speculation. its all documented.

[–]Gawernator 4 points5 points  (16 children)

How will he be able to recover old text messages during discovery? From the cell carrier? I don't think iMessages are stored for example.

[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Apple saves everything, excepting normal retention policies. It is encrypted with customer keys, which they keep separate, so the only way to get this stuff is through a valid court order and it is going to cost you. SMS is usually retained for less time by the carriers, but is infinitely easier to pull off the actual phone.

[–]VermillionManMarch 41 points42 points  (2 children)

Rather than just preach to the choir about these injustices, we as men CAN change the tide of public opinion and SJW-influenced institutions. TALK to your peers and colleagues about this type of thing.

Remember to use neutral objective language for a general audience. Instead of calling those responsible "Rabid SJWs" and "idiot Libs," neutrally call them misguided.

Instead of invoking principles that are difficult to articulate fully in a casual conversation, invoke people's self-interest. "This is part of something something agenda something Marxist Frankfurt school" will cause most people to tune out. "Imagine if it was your son/brother/friend in this unjust situation, what would you want then?" is difficult to argue back against, and very likely to plant seeds of doubt and question in your audience's mind.

I believe the Misandry Bubble is ready to burst. If our goal is to hasten this process and move forward with a better, less misandric society, we'll be much more effective by maintaining frame and sharing with our peers and social connections injustices such as these in neutral, relateable terms. The SJWs are very vocal; remaining silent on issues like these has given them power by our default.

[–]wanderer779 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The thing that was keeping people silent was fear of the consequences of speaking out. The internet changed this a lot and so did the alt right/Trump/anti pc/whatever you call it movement. With that being said a lot of people still have reason to fear reprisals for challenging the left. By all means keep calling out this shit anonymously on the internet and at home, but in public you need to consider the consequences before speaking.

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Good post. This is by the way applicable to other areas as well.

For example, you don't defend Trump's election and call Hillary's voters libcucks, but you point out that there were very valid points that spoke against her (for example the fact that the DNC rigged the primaries to push her through, or that her glorious "women are the primary victims of war"-quote and the mindset this demonstrates etc.).

[–]Hillarysdilddo_2016 48 points49 points  (1 child)

Help me understand this.

If I murder a bunch of people and they need to discover text messages on my phone as proof. I can just say that would really hurt my feelings if it was made public and then I can legally not comply with the order?

As a male, invalid defense.

As a female, valid defense.

Did I get that right?

[–]wanderer779 14 points15 points  (0 children)

With a stupid and/or evil judge a lot is possible. This is why we have appeals. But you'll never get rid of white knights.

[–]Chymaera 21 points22 points  (0 children)

So 'MUH FEELS' is more important than justice.

Good job.

[–]2CHAD_J_THUNDERCOCK 15 points16 points  (0 children)

The Trump admin have said they are going to fix/reverse all of this Title IX bullshit. Soon will be less of these stories, fingers crossed.

[–]kyledontcare 10 points11 points  (0 children)

There should be a statute of limitations on these charges of 30-90 days. It takes her two years to say she was raped? If they're truly "raped" they should also file a report and visit an ER for treatment. This would get rid of many of these frivolous incidents. Many times rape is just "regret" because she, "didn't like it." This is a reasonable expectation.

[–]Djbbst 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Good lesson to be learned here. #1 focus on studies and get your degree first. Then have fun. It's not worth the risk.

[–]GrabHerByThePEPE 15 points16 points  (1 child)

Cause I would refuse a BJ when I've been drinking on a weekend.

[–]BeachCruisin22 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Just pull a Dennis Reynolds and video tape everything

[–]Endorsed ContributorBluepillProfessor 10 points11 points  (1 child)

I mean I don't advocate it...but if it were me, there would be no accuser. This is beyond outrageous. What about the guys feelings who was kicked out of school because some skank blew him when he was passed out.

Absorb that for a moment. A chick sucked his dick while he was passed out and HE gets thrown out of school YEARS later after she brings charges. Then, years after that a judge tells him you can't defend yourself because it might hurt the skanks feelings.

I really thought the courts would straighten out this case at least. Unbelievable!!

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I mean I don't advocate it...but if it were me, there would be no accuser.

Ignore the accuser for a moment - the actual problem here is the whiteknight judge.

I mean, think of it: the girl is probably a psycho, and she (or some other psycho with some other dude) would have pulled a stunt like that either way, simply because (as the story with the frog and the scorpion goes) "it's my nature".

What really riles me up, however, is that there are people in the legal system who actually make themselves accessories to these psychos' shenanigans instead of protecting normal people from them.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Fuck it. I'm moving to Mexico; Where it's safe. At least, we'll have both cartels and a huge wall to protect us from degenerate cuckhold american culture.

[–]scottlapier 8 points9 points  (3 children)

Kafka is rolling in his grave. I can't believe that due process and jurisprudence is being trumped by "Feelings."

If this is what our Universities are turning into, we face an uphill battle to return to a normal society...

[–]Elodere 4 points5 points  (2 children)

The mess we see today has caused thousands of graves to turn into electrical turbines at this point.

[–]Forcetobereckonedwit 2 points3 points  (1 child)

If only disgust could power the grid...

[–]grewapair 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You'll note the absence of protest marches.

[–]Dishevel 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Trump needs to get rid of title IX.

[–]tomtomthebombomb 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So men can't defend themselves anymore is what you're saying. Essentially, I mean, that's how I understood it.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

As an atheist, I pray that Donald Trump's wall succeeds in keeping future american refugees from coming into Mexico. It only takes one millennial hipster from Seattle or Portland to threaten the freedom of Mexico as a whole.

How long gone America is... You know something is wrong when Mexicans start moving back home to Mexico. XD !!!!

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

[–]jawsofthearmy 3 points4 points  (2 children)

iMessages are not stored but on the phone. Texts are stored on carriers server. iMessage is also encrypted phone to phone. So your carrier cannot see what is being transmitted.

Some people call iMessage texting. You'd be surprised how many people do not know the difference

Sorry about the previous post. Need to stop looking at reddit half sleep

[–]Brewjo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Need to stop looking at reddit half sleep

Good point. If I'm up this late and not doing a line off a hookers tits, I've got no excuse...

[–]MikoLassen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is terrible man... is there something we could do?

[–]Jayboah 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Jesus wept. I hate being a man.

[–]RICCIedm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

where can I find the conversations ? What is the proof of the story that you have presented?

[–]greatslyfer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"Whatever happened to believing the victim?"

The fact that people can lie?

What's the point of an investigation then you morons?

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Consider the implications of this decision. According to Seattle District Judge James Robart, a student who believes Amherst violated his due process rights, wrongfully expelled him, and ignored subsequent evidence that his accuser, "Sandra Jones," was the actual violator of the college's sexual misconduct policies, does not deserve the opportunity to make his case because someone else's feelings are more important.

Actually, the implications are even worse than that - it tells you that the judge already considers you guilty and an open-ended trial is not to be expected. Because if he was truly on the fence in that case, why would he operate under the assumption that one party is the victim by default?

There was a case in Germany, where a guy's attorney wasn't even able to properly question the false accuser because the judge basically told him "how can you treat her like that after all she has gone through!" (and in Germany it's even worse because we don't have juries, i.e. if a judge has already made up his mind, you're basically fucked unless your lawyer is a serious badass). I sincerely wonder why lawyers get away with this.