Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: man-receives-sex-act-while-blacked-out-gets-accused-of-sexual-assault

  1. #1

    man-receives-sex-act-while-blacked-out-gets-accused-of-sexual-assault

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ma...rticle/2565978

    Man receives sex act while blacked out, gets accused of sexual assault
    BY ASHE SCHOW | JUNE 11, 2015 | 4:24 PM

    An Amherst College student blacked out, accompanied a fellow student back to her dorm room after drinking in February 2012. While he was blacked out, she performed oral sex on him.

    Nearly two years later, she would accuse him of sexual assault. And under Amherst's guilty-until-proven-innocent (and even then, as we'll see, still guilty) hearing standards, the accused student was expelled.

    The accused student — using the pseudonym John Doe — is suing the college for denying him due process. His lawyer had discovered text messages that prove the accused student did not initiate the encounter and in no way sexually assaulted the accuser. Despite this evidence, the college refused to reopen Doe's case.

    K.C. Johnson, co-author of the book about the Duke lacrosse rape hoax, obtained Doe's lawsuit as well as transcripts from the hearing that found him guilty. Johnson first describes Amherst's Kafkaesque sexual assault rules, which stated goal is to "empower victims" during hearings rather than determine the truth.

    Johnson notes that the school has adopted the "yes means yes" definition of consent — meaning someone has to ask before performing any sexual act on another person and receive an affirmative response. But the standard provides no way for accused students to prove they obtained such consent. (For that matter, given that the sexual act was performed on the accused student, was there any evidence he provided affirmative consent?)

    The school also requires drunk students engaging in sexual activity to "be aware of the other person's level of intoxication" and warns students that "an individual may experience a blackout state in which he/she/they appear to be giving consent, but do not actually have conscious awareness or the ability to consent." Johnson asks how an accused student is supposed to have been aware of another's intoxication or known they were in a "black out state," as Amherst doesn't provide an explanation.

    The entire adjudication process at Amherst, revised after another student claimed the school mistreated her sexual assault accusation, was designed to find guilt, Johnson wrote. An accused student may hire an attorney, but that attorney cannot say anything during the hearing. An accused student may receive a campus "adviser" who "is not an advocate for the student." Meanwhile, the accuser's adviser is absolutely their advocate.

    For Doe, his "adviser" was an administrator who lacked tenure and was trained in "social justice education." Doe was not allowed to directly cross-examine his accuser and could only write down questions for the panel to ask her, leaving no room for follow-ups. The hearing panel, meanwhile, was made up of "student life officials" and another administrators trained in "social justice education" — none of whom had tenure.

    The investigator of the sexual assault claim lacked the subpoena power to actually investigate. Had the investigator been able to properly investigate, they would have uncovered the text messages that proved there was no assault.


    This is one of the few cases where we have an actually good idea of what happened the night in question. Doe accompanied the accuser (who was Doe's girlfriend's roommate) to her dorm room. The accuser performed oral sex on a blacked out Doe (Johnson notes that even the Amherst hearing found Doe's account of being blacked out "credible"). Doe leaves. The accuser then texted two people: First, a male student she had a crush on — whom she invited over after a heavily flirtatious exchange earlier in the evening. Then, a female friend.

    The accuser said during her hearing that she only texted one friend to help her handle the assault as she felt "very alone and confused." But her texts with her female friend give no indication of an assault. Rather, the accuser texted her friend "Ohmygod I jus did something so fuckig stupid" [sic throughout]. She then proceeded to fret that she had done something wrong and her roommate would never talk to her again, because "it's pretty obvi I wasn't an innocent bystander."

    She also complained that the other man, who had come over after the alleged assault, had taken until 5 in the morning to finally have sex with her.

    The accuser found herself friendless after the encounter, when her roommate discovered what she had done.

    Between the encounter with Doe and the accusation — nearly two years later — the accuser developed new friends. And as it happens, these new friends were all "victims' advocates."

    When Doe discovered the text messages, he presented the findings to Amherst. The school refused to reopen his case. K.C. Johnson sums up the case perfectly:

    "Once again: this is a case in which an accuser (to put it charitably) misrepresented written evidence vital to her credibility, and this same material, her words, showed — if anything — that she initiated sexual contact against a student who even Amherst's panel described as 'blacked out.,'" Johnson wrote. "And yet, according to Amherst, [the accuser] is a sexual assault 'survivor.'"

    The case also shows how a male student can be accused of sexual assault even if the evidence suggests he might have been the one assaulted.

  2. #2
    Original Dude
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Winterfell
    Posts
    3,709
    My brain feel like a big pile of spaghety after reading that...

    So in clear word, dude get girl to her room, passed out because he was drunk, she then decided to suck him for ....(insert whatever reason), dude don't even know as he is asleep. Then for unknown reason 2 years later she fill a complain against him because ...?? There friend didn't want to speak to her anymore???

    So more or less girl is thecnically the victime but actually the agressor, while dude is considered the agressor but is clearly the victime as he didn't do anything, hell he was passed out...

    This makes no sense... At least please tell me the poor dude won't end up in jail..
    Life is a party ! Death is the Hangover.. 70-49-6

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    deplorable basket case
    Posts
    337
    For any young man desiring to improve his lot in life by going to college these days I highly recommend one of these

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chasti...n_frontaal.jpg

    On a more serious note, considering this guy was expelled, I can safely say that any guy enrolling at Amherst in the future does not deserve a penis, might as well have it surgically tucked in.

    If I ever come across a resume in the future showing a degree from this school it's going right in the trash.

    But I do really hope this innocent young woman recovers from her trauma.

  4. #4
    Hopefully the young man was able to transfer to a lower-cost college, get a degree, and become gainfully employed.

    If so, this could have a very happy ending.

    Guy gets BJ, but unfortunately cannot remember it as a result of alcoholic blackout. In spite of him clearly being a rape victim as defined in most laws, the fancy private college kicks him out of school. He uses the fancy marketing materials from the college to show how much more he would have earned if he had been allowed to finish his degree there, instead of never getting a degree or getting one at a less reputable school. He gets a really big check, which makes it a fantastic BJ - in spite of the fact that he cannot for the life of him actually remember it. But he can use some of the money to get BJs in the future. And hopefully if can all be kept confidential due to him being a rape victim (although the college might fight that pretty hard on that, just to reduce the settlement amount). If you were the guy, you really do not want the story popping up whenever someone googles your name.

    By making the woman the victim under their ridiculous guidelines, instead of the person who was actually raped, and by creating a kangaroo court system, they may have opened themselves up to huge liability. If this continues to happen, college administrators will logically decide to leave law enforcement to the actual police and the established court system. If someone is sexually assaulted, she (of he) would need to go to the police. Only if convicted would the perpetrator be kicked out of school. Of course the police in college towns are notoriously hostile to college students, so only true rapes would be given attention.

  5. #5
    Yep Mike, you got it correct. This is how the US has evolved and particularly on the college campuses. Rule of law doesn't seem to matter anymore. We can thank the leftist, Marxist, militant feminists for this. The same type of thinking that gave us C36. Do-gooders.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    deplorable basket case
    Posts
    337
    Before anyone overreacts, it should be understood that not ALL feminists think it's acceptable for a women to rape a man when he's impaired, maybe.

  7. #7
    I am not talking about a woman raping a man (which clearly happened in this case). The big concern is the current wave of anti-white male militant feminist activism that has taken over the college campuses of North America. But I agree, wrong is wrong. And I think that people within the movement (feminists) will grow weary of this game. This is nucking futz!

    It reminds me of the witch-hunt of the 80's-90's surrounding repressed memories and the child abuse convictions. This is where the social workers and psychiatrists talked children into testifying against their parents saying that they were sexually abused. Sean Penn produced a nice documentary called Witch Hunt about this.

  8. #8
    I agree with you, hungry, but money talks louder than reason and it talks faster, too.

    Courts take a dim view of competition. When the great basketball coach Jerry Tarkanian took on the NCAA, he won because the NCAA was acting like it was the Justice System, minus Due Process. Once the court kicked the NCAA's ass, it started to back down on its bullshit. Every coach celebrated, even squeaky clean Bob Knight because they hated the power of these administrators.

    Now we get a college that specifies rules (yes means yes) and the consequence of a violation of those rules results in the deprivation of future economic benefits and results in current emotional trauma. That might be acceptable if the accused is guilty, but their version of a trial is so weak that it did not allow evidence clearly showing that the guy should have been the one saying yes and the actual state laws (which certainly override some student handbook language written by social worker types) would hold that the guy was being raped.

    If this is all true, had should get massive MONEY DAMAGES as they say on late night lawyer commercials. Once colleges start paying MONEY DAMAGES to college guys and girls who are having sex, they might just decide to get out of the business of regulating campus sex and leave that to the state laws - which seem to suffice for the rest of the US citizenry.

  9. #9
    i am watching Britt Hume and they are discussing this case. The university is following guidlines from the Federal Government and the young lady in question cannot be cross examoned because she may be intimidated. The left has said that 1 in 5 women are sexually assaulted during their college years. Sounds like the Duke Lacrosse case and the bogus rape at UVA that Rolling Stone reported. This is the kind of thing that happend during the cultural revolution in China or when the Nazis took over Germany. WTF

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Visiting Planet Earth
    Posts
    4,160
    Hello all,

    When I read this story yesterday I had the same reaction as Halloween Mike, it's so nuts it makes your brain ache. It's totally f'ed up.

    Quote Originally Posted by hungry101 View Post
    i am watching Britt Hume and they are discussing this case. The university is following guidlines from the Federal Government and the young lady in question cannot be cross examoned because she may be intimidated. The left has said that 1 in 5 women are sexually assaulted during their college years. Sounds like the Duke Lacrosse case and the bogus rape at UVA that Rolling Stone reported. This is the kind of thing that happend during the cultural revolution in China or when the Nazis took over Germany. WTF
    Britt Hume?

    You know Hungry, so far you've already blamed or connected this with Feminists, Liberals, Communists, and Nazis. Half of this group is the antithesis, political opposite of the other half, yet infer they're all the same mind. What are you going to blame this on next...zombies and aliens? What has happened is the Department of Education issued new rules guidelines lowering standards of proof in an effort to make it easier to protect women from sexual assault because previously it was extremely tough to do in a college campus culture environment where men generally got away with "boys will be boys" mentality in these educational systems. Where were your complaints when the advantage was all on the other side and the system of redress, prosecution, and punishment did to women what it is now grossly doing to this male victim? There was plenty of blaming the victim then too as even other women would persecute the female victims who were humiliated and driven out.

    What has happened is a woman student made an accusation and because of the new standard being "more likely than not" (where have you heard that before) because of whatever story or evidence there was lead the college to expel a male student, we know now but the school had no good evidence of then, who was the real victim. It was only 13 months later, as noted in every article I can find, that the texts proving the female lied for some sort of embarrassing personal reasons and the guy is the real victim. I'm as perplexed and angry as any other reader of this case that the college somehow refuses to reopen the case. They are being freaking damn ridiculous. As it often happens in educational institutions Amherst has set up guidelines for hearing cases that are legally improper and deny individuals their Constitutional rights. It's an endemic attitude among these educational systems to set things up to seize control like an autonomous state, but to say it's because of Feminists, Liberals, Communists, and Nazis and whatever else one might try to dig out this episode is...misguided...to be gentle.

    Many educational systems have a habit of acting like fiefdoms that feel free to exceed constitutional rights to protect their interests of personal survival, profits, and likely some misguided political, social, or religious philosophy beyond the laws of the state and country. In this case they are also 100% loathe to admit they made a mistake because of the publicity and legal settlement costs so they are sticking to what is now looking like an insane decision. They are out of their minds if they think this will hold up in court yet they are fools enough to stand by their earlier decision not because of being like Feminists, Liberals, Communists, and Nazis, but because they are arrogant and determined to preserve themselves even though their position is conversely self-damaging. They will get their punishment in the end.

    I know Hungry you are a conservative. Fine. In looking around the web I see many conservative sites are going after this issue like wolves smelling blood to use it for their own political purpose. It's great fodder for them with a national election year coming up. You're entitled to your opinion and I respect that. But when anyone starts conjuring specters of Feminists, Liberals, Communists, and Nazis, etc (which don't fit together philosophically or ideologically)...I see someone digging into the nonsensical programmed Conservative demonology old file catalogs for answers instead of trying to look at the situation and be fair. WTF!

    Cheers,

    Merlot

    (prediction...pile on)

    BTW - source of the original the link in the first post is the Washington Examiner, which is "is owned by Denver billionaire Philip Anschutz[4] and which also owns the influential conservative opinion magazine The Weekly Standard."
    Last edited by Merlot; 06-17-2015 at 12:12 PM. Reason: additional citation

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •