Man sues Columbia University over "Carry That Weight"

[Gravekeeper]

As for Knox, she was never acquitted or found not guilty, though both her and Sollecito's appeals resulted in the convictions being provisionally overturned (I'm not sure how that even works), the guilty verdict was later upheld pending a new appeal at which point the convictions were overturned entirely.

Well, honestly, most people are not sure how the Italian legal system even works. I'm not even sure the Italian legal system knows how it even works. >.>

[Andara Bledin]

Well, honestly, most people are not sure how the Italian legal system even works. I'm not even sure the Italian legal system knows how it even works. >.>

Better than the Greek legal system?

... cheap shot, I know... >_>

[Barracuda]

The problem, as I see it, in this case isn't that a student who was raped didn't get justice or the strident demands of a group of students who believe her was ignored. The problem, as I see it, is that people tend to forget something rather important, and that is under our system (and quite rightly so,) someone accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty.

Until I see evidence to the contrary, I am forced to assume that Sukowicz was not, in fact, raped. I need more than the unsubstantiated word of one person before I will treat someone as though they are a violent criminal. And if her alleged rapist is in fact innocent, he has every legal right and moral reason to sue not just the school, but his accuser as well, for she has lied in the most vile fashion imaginable.

Frankly, the evidence I DO see emerging from this case--in the release of texts by the plaintiff's legal team from the alleged victim to her alleged rapist AFTER the supposed attack--support his story. The texts are of a sexual and intimate nature, expressing an interest from Sukowicz in her supposed attacker! How many rape victims on the one hand demand justice for their rape while trying to romantically pursue (one almost might say stalk) their rapist?

Women do not automatically deserve the benefit of the doubt just because they are women claiming a man attacked them. Women do lie, after, just as men do. I hope, for the sake of justice, people in our society learn that allegations are just that-allegations and nothing more-unless there is evidence to back them up.

[Andara Bledin]

That's all well and good until you run up against an organization that refuses to gather the evidence necessary to prove anything at all.

I mean, by that same reasoning, you have to presume that the girl is telling the truth, too, unless you have proof to the contrary.

[Barracuda]

No, you don't. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. Now, if we were talking about her being tried for filing a false police report, then you're right; she would be presumed innocent until proven guilty. But the presumption of innocence is such a fundamental part of a just society that I cannot believe how many people ignore it.

[Canarr]

Because the school has to make a decision on whether to suspend or expel students regardless of criminal court. A criminal court cannot expel him from the school.

I get that, yes; but, my point is, more or less: why would the school put this kind of decision - and thus, liability - on themselves in the first place? Why not pass the burden of collecting and interpreting evidence on to the institution where it is actually supposed to be done: law enforcement?

What I mean is: whenever the college basically passes a sentence - expulsion or not - outside of, or even entirely without, an official ruling, they open themselves up to litigation; either by the accuser (for being to lenient) or by the accused (for being too strict). Why not simply let the police handle the investigation, let the prosecution decide whether to file charges, and let a court decide whether he's guilty. Then, expel him if he's found guilty, let him stay on if he's exonerated. That would also help the college avoid any accusations of wrongdoing when investigating the charges.

Maybe if he didn't want the reputation, he shouldn't have put himself in the position to have such a reputation.

Uh, hang on... but...

The problem, as I see it, in this case isn't that a student who was raped didn't get justice or the strident demands of a group of students who believe her was ignored. The problem, as I see it, is that people tend to forget something rather important, and that is under our system (and quite rightly so,) someone accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty.

Until I see evidence to the contrary, I am forced to assume that Sukowicz was not, in fact, raped. I need more than the unsubstantiated word of one person before I will treat someone as though they are a violent criminal. And if her alleged rapist is in fact innocent, he has every legal right and moral reason to sue not just the school, but his accuser as well, for she has lied in the most vile fashion imaginable.

This. If no charges were filed with the police, so there was no offiicial investigation, then there is no proof that he committed rape... so isn't it, in theory, wrong to treat him like a rapist? What exactly did he do to "put himself in this position"?

That's all well and good until you run up against an organization that refuses to gather the evidence necessary to prove anything at all.

But... if you run up against such an organization, then why would you not go to the police? The only mention I could find on this was that Sukowicz made an attempt that was "too upsetting", so she didn't follow through. I could not find a single piece of evidence brought against Nungesser, except for Sukowicz' word; and should that really be enough to get someone convicted of a crime?

If I look at this without any emotional bias, one way or another, the situation breaks down like this:

1. Student makes complaint to college against other student.
2. College finde complaint unfounded.
3. Complainant does not file charges with the police, so no offiicial investigation.
4. Complainant then starts a publicity campaign to draw attention to the situation, with the explicit goal of getting the other student expelled.

How, exactly, is that not harassment?

[Kheldarson]

But... if you run up against such an organization, then why would you not go to the police? The only mention I could find on this was that Sukowicz made an attempt that was "too upsetting", so she didn't follow through. I could not find a single piece of evidence brought against Nungesser, except for Sukowicz' word; and should that really be enough to get someone convicted of a crime?

The former doesn't happen because of the latter question. Who are the witnesses to rape? The victim and the accused. And the physical evidence is that they had sex.

So the school goes "Hey, you said you were anally raped, but you've had sex with him willingly before and he says you consented, so we're going with that." And the cops go, "Well we don't have anything but your word you didn't consent that particular time, and your school thinks it's cool, so we can do an investigation, but you're sure you didn't consent and are just regretting?"

It's why rape is underreported and underprosecuted. And it's why this case is hard because, sure, he may be innocent. But he may also be guilty with victims who were further victimized by a system that refused to support them.

[Greenday]

I get that, yes; but, my point is, more or less: why would the school put this kind of decision - and thus, liability - on themselves in the first place? Why not pass the burden of collecting and interpreting evidence on to the institution where it is actually supposed to be done: law enforcement?

Because law enforcement has no legal standing to do such a thing.

What I mean is: whenever the college basically passes a sentence - expulsion or not - outside of, or even entirely without, an official ruling, they open themselves up to litigation; either by the accuser (for being to lenient) or by the accused (for being too strict). Why not simply let the police handle the investigation, let the prosecution decide whether to file charges, and let a court decide whether he's guilty. Then, expel him if he's found guilty, let him stay on if he's exonerated. That would also help the college avoid any accusations of wrongdoing when investigating the charges.

This. If no charges were filed with the police, so there was no offiicial investigation, then there is no proof that he committed rape... so isn't it, in theory, wrong to treat him like a rapist?

He's being treated like an alleged rapist whom the system is working on his side because it makes them look better if people think it doesn't happen on their campus.

If I look at this without any emotional bias, one way or another, the situation breaks down like this:

1. Student makes complaint to college against other student.
2. College finde complaint unfounded.
3. Complainant does not file charges with the police, so no offiicial investigation.
4. Complainant then starts a publicity campaign to draw attention to the situation, with the explicit goal of getting the other student expelled.

How, exactly, is that not harassment?

Ok, #2 is worthless since the institution is known for covering up this kind of activity.

#4 is someone protesting against an unjust system.

Unless she's walks around shouting that he's a rapist by name or follows him around, how in the world IS it harassment? By saying that protesting the system that covers up rapes regularly is criminal is basically encouraging people who have been raped not to step forward about it.

[Canarr]

The former doesn't happen because of the latter question. Who are the witnesses to rape? The victim and the accused. And the physical evidence is that they had sex.

So the school goes "Hey, you said you were anally raped, but you've had sex with him willingly before and he says you consented, so we're going with that." And the cops go, "Well we don't have anything but your word you didn't consent that particular time, and your school thinks it's cool, so we can do an investigation, but you're sure you didn't consent and are just regretting?"

It's why rape is underreported and underprosecuted. And it's why this case is hard because, sure, he may be innocent. But he may also be guilty with victims who were further victimized by a system that refused to support them.

I understand the problem; it's an inherent problem with this crime, which is - by its nature - highly personal and often without witnesses. But... with all possible understanding for the victim: what, exactly, is the alternative? Convict one person of a crime exclusively on the say-so of another person, with no burden of proof? Personally, I'm not sure I'd like to live in such a society.

Because law enforcement has no legal standing to do such a thing.

Law enforcement has no legal standing to investigate a crime? Is the campus in a separate jurisdiction?

He's being treated like an alleged rapist whom the system is working on his side because it makes them look better if people think it doesn't happen on their campus.

And that differs from treating him like a convicted rapist... how?

Ok, #2 is worthless since the institution is known for covering up this kind of activity.

#4 is someone protesting against an unjust system.

Unless she's walks around shouting that he's a rapist by name or follows him around, how in the world IS it harassment? By saying that protesting the system that covers up rapes regularly is criminal is basically encouraging people who have been raped not to step forward about it.

Passing a copy of her complaint to the university on to the college newspaper, which then prints Nungesser's name, is not harassment? Setting his departure from the college - whether graduating, expulsion, or voluntary termination - as one of the goals for her project, is not harassment?

The whole thing is basically a public shaming campaign, directed at Nungesser. It's an attempt at either getting the college to revise their decision and expel him out of fear of negative publicity, or at getting Nungesser to quit on his own. All on, in the end, a baseless accusation - because there is only her word against his that the crime ever happened.

If someone is not satisfied with the way a complaint is handled in their college, are there not ways within the system to address this? Can they not (have, actually) file a complaint with the Department of Education on Title IX?

Sure, this whole thing is definitely a great story of a victim rising up against her vicious attacker and an unjust system that doesn't grant her justice - IF Nungesser is actually guilty of raping her. But... if he's not? Then it's just a giant smear campaign. And I, for one, am not really comfortable going with the whole "Yay, good for her!" line, because I can't shake this nagging voice that says, "But what if he's innocent?"

[Gravekeeper]

Passing a copy of her complaint to the university on to the college newspaper, which then prints Nungesser's name, is not harassment?

No, its not, because Nungesser's name became a matter of public record when she filed a police report. No one secretly passed it to the newspaper. Nungesser also chose to publicly engage her further putting his own identity out there. He was not quietly going about his life and just happened to be the subject of a witch hunt. He went public and basically said "If she didn't want it in the butt why did she Facebook me?" in an interview with a journalist specifically known for their anti-victim bias in rape allegation cases and general MRA bullshit. Which attempted to discredit not only Emma but the other two accusers as well with things like "Well, she made a dildo joke on a mailing list later so she couldn't possibly have been sexually assaulted".

The first 20ish pages of his lawsuit are the same thing. Even though his lawsuit is suppose to be about the school, the first 20 pages are about how great he is, how Emma is an evil super villain that has spent years scheming to destroying his wonderful life and several variations of "If she didn't want it in the butt why did she Facebook me?". And that's putting aside that when she first made the complaint to the school they told her to try talking to him first.

So even if he is innocent of the rape, he is not exactly innocent in this public clusterfuck. He's been mudslinging and throwing gas on the fire himself too.

[Shangri-laschild]

I would never hope someone was raped so it feels a bit wrong saying this, but I hope she's not lying. Because she is raising a lot of awareness that will be tinted badly if it turns out she is lying. Honestly, it's hard to tell. There is a lot of outright conflicting information including things like the one victim had already graduated when the first round happened so her graduating wasn't what changed things when he was released from charges. Some articles say that she was told she couldn't press legal charges, some say that she decided to not try after the initial interview. And all the conflicting information isn't just from the her vs him side. Ones on her side even have conflicting information all over the place. I hope for everyone's sake that the truth is able to come out because one way or another, there is definitely a victim in this situation.

I don't know how all colleges handle it, but I like how ours handles things. There is a campus police department which means stuff like this is handled by the officers and also the police department and the college work closely together. If an allegation like that is brought to the college, the police department looks into it. And while the officers can't make the decision to expel someone, the decision in the legal proceedings is taken into consideration when the academic decisions are made. I don't think that the police should have the decision over the academic decisions (despite not always agreeing with the decisions that have been made in some cases) and I don't think that colleges should be the ones deciding whether a crime was committed or not.

[Andara Bledin]

Passing a copy of her complaint to the university on to the college newspaper, which then prints Nungesser's name, is not harassment?

There is no passing anything on; it's a complaint, the details of which are public record.

Setting his departure from the college - whether graduating, expulsion, or voluntary termination - as one of the goals for her project, is not harassment?

No. It's really not. She either had to set an end date or do it forever and the departure of her alleged attacker is the most relevant date possible. I imagine if she drops out (unlikely), she's stop at that point regardless of whether he was still attending or not.

The whole thing is basically a public shaming campaign, directed at Nungesser.

No, it's directed at the school. Nungesser is the one who keeps injecting himself into the issue. Yes, he is involved at a fundamental level, but her display is about her and the school; his involvement is academic at that point unless he chooses to make himself a part of her protest.

It's an attempt at either getting the college to revise their decision and expel him out of fear of negative publicity, or at getting Nungesser to quit on his own.

Considering that the end date includes the option of him attending until he graduations, I don't think you can say that is what it's attempting.

If someone is not satisfied with the way a complaint is handled in their college, are there not ways within the system to address this?

Not really, no. Most complaints about how schools handle assault gets punted right back to the school or the complainant gets told to suck it up or change schools. The system is entirely dysfunctional, and typically, unless you're a star sportsball player, the schools care only about their reputations, not the safety or health of their students. The only time the public knows about how many problems there really are is when a case hits the news. Otherwise, it's business as usual at most colleges, who are in the business of selling educational opportunities and keeping their records clear, not taking care of their students; plenty more where they came from.

[Shangri-laschild]

No, it's directed at the school. Nungesser is the one who keeps injecting himself into the issue.

Whether she did it or someone else did, he has been pulled into this. There were lists put up in bathrooms naming alleged on campus rapists with his name on the list. People have left nasty messages, defriended him. Maybe he's guilty and deserves all of it but the point is, he is being brought into it by name whether he sues or not.

Not really, no.

There are other avenues. The fact that the school is being investigated is at least partly because they explored other avenues and made complaints about the school.

[Kheldarson]

Whether she did it or someone else did, he has been pulled into this. There were lists put up in bathrooms naming alleged on campus rapists with his name on the list. People have left nasty messages, defriended him. Maybe he's guilty and deserves all of it but the point is, he is being brought into it by name whether he sues or not.

Except is he brought into this if he put himself there? And not just whether he's the alleged rapist; it's been indicated he's been out responding to this since the beginning. If that's the case, is it harassment just because he's losing his smear campaign?

[Greenday]

Whether she did it or someone else did, he has been pulled into this. There were lists put up in bathrooms naming alleged on campus rapists with his name on the list. People have left nasty messages, defriended him. Maybe he's guilty and deserves all of it but the point is, he is being brought into it by name whether he sues or not.

Well, you can't hold her responsible for those things unless she specifically told other people to do them.