Man sues Columbia University over "Carry That Weight"

[Gravekeeper]

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?

Thats kind of my problem with this. He came out swinging at her when she did not identify him to begin with. I'm not sure I buy a claim of harassment now that he realizes hes lost the war of public opinion he willingly engaged in. He tried to publicly discredit his accusers and does so again in his lawsuit. While painting himself as an innocent angel in all of this that is the victim of some sort of complex evil girl scheme ( for which he offers no explanation as to why anyone would go to such lengths against him. )

She did not name him publicly. He went to the press to smear her and his accusers and specifically went to a reporter known for a long history of attacking rape victims. He is also suing the school but by and large made the lawsuit about Emma. If it was really about Emma he would have sued her for libel, but if he did that it could backfire spectacularly on him if everyone involved actually testifies in court. Plus she likewise has grounds to sue him for libel too so he risks a counter suit.

[Shangri-laschild]

Except is he brought into this if he put himself there?

Thats kind of my problem with this. He came out swinging at her when she did not identify him to begin with.

http://columbiaspectator.com/2014/05...alleged-rapist It sounds like the school newspaper named him before he went to the press. And maybe she didn't name him publicly but what are the odds that none of her friends knew and that word didn't spread? Or that one of the other girls didn't name him to friends? It sounds like people, at least mutual friends, were already reacting before he was publicly named. And if he didn't do it, I can understand not wanting to be called a rapist or having your name listed as a rapist and wanting to fight back against that even when it was on a small scale. Maybe he doesn't know why they decided to do this. I've had friends attack me pretty hard out of nowhere before and it can be confusing as hell. No, not to this level and for the record, but my point is simply that you don't always know the reason someone is going after you. Sometimes it can be very bewildering. I was best friends with someone and we came back from spring break and she told me we weren't friends anymore and if I tried to talk to her, she would scream at me to go away. To this day, I have no clue what happened. And I'm not ruling out him being a rapist but it does sound like this started effecting him before he got involved or at least, before he publicly got involved.

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

The first part of my sentence was me trying to point out that whether it was her or not wasn't the point. I'm not trying to place blame on her at all, I'm trying to point out the results of something that happened.

[Canarr]

@Andara & Gravekeeper:
There's a difference between having one's name be public record - where people still need to expend some effort to learn it - and having one's name be printed in a newspaper article. But, you're right: the article wasn't printed until May last year, after she started her project; I was hasty in my declaration. My apologies.

Still, this isn't exactly a clear-cut scenario, I'd say. What I'd like to hear from those here who suggest the college was wrong in their handling of the case, is an alternative: how *should* this have been handled? How should a disciplinary board - or law enforcement, for that matter - decide allegations of a crime with no witnesses or evidence?

[Gravekeeper]

And I'm not ruling out him being a rapist but it does sound like this started effecting him before he got involved or at least, before he publicly got involved.

But does the rumour mill constitute harassment and does the university have any responsibility or even capacity to control the rumour mill?

When he went public he smeared his accusers. He is now claiming that gender bias as the basis of the harrassment. Let me just snip out some excerpts from the lawsuit so you can see how ridiculous this is. Like I said prior, it reads like a wishful thinking screenplay for a made for tv movie:

When Paul was accepted at Columbia University as a John Jay Scholar four years ago, he and his whole family were delighted. At that time, Paul was a curious and open 19-year old with a wide range of interests and was eager to contribute to the community of one of the most prestigious universities in the country with his multitude of interests, which he wished to expand and develop in return. His parents were convinced that Columbia would be the place where Paul would receive important stimuli for his academic and personal advancement. Paul and his parents imagined Columbia University to he a place where Paul’s critical thinking, his alert mind, and his intellectual curiosity would he fostered, and where he would make experiences that would nurture and strengthen him for life.

Paul was also active in many social events, and he had a lot of friends.

There's a couple of pages about how wonderful Paul is as statements of fact. -.-

After this there is like 10 pages of "She wanted it in the butt because Facebook" instead of any sort of explanation for why the school is culpable in harassment. Then it goes into "bitches be jealous, yo"

As is evident from Emma’s Facebook messages to Paul during the summer prior to their sophomore year, Emma’s yearning for Paul had become very intense. Thereafter, she continued pursuing him, reiterating that she loved him. However, when Paul did not reciprocate these intense feelings, and instead showed interest in dating other women, Emma became viciously angry.

But he is victorious!

Paul readily prevailed against Emma’s false allegations in spite of his being precluded from presenting Emma’s Facebook messages either during the Emma Investigation or at the Hearing itself.

The evil girl conspiracy begins:

In an effort to bolster her ease, and driven by her feelings of rejection and interest in making a public impact and statement, Emma approached several women with whom she was friendly, encouraging them to each report Paul to the University for sexual misconduct. Two women acquiesced.

She wasn't raped because she didn't act like it:

There was also no evidence whatsoever that Emma’s attitude or behavior
regarding Paul had changed after the alleged incident.

The evil girl plot thickens:

On December 3, 2013, only a few days after Emma’s appeal had been rejected, Paul was ambushed in front of his dorm by reporters from the New York Post and followed by a paparazzo on his way to class. At that time, Emma was already being advised by a publicist and/or a lawyer with great media expertise

He then alleges that the newspaper article ( which it turns out did not actually name him to begin with either ) was a breach of confidentiality because the university did not advise him that the article was going to run.


The evil girl plot extends to evil faculty:

At the latest at this time it was clear for Emma and the other two accusers that they did not have to fear any disciplinary action for her defamatory breach of confidentiality. This knowledge becomes a booster for the harassment campaign against Paul by Emma and her advisors.

The president announces further reform measures on how they handle sexual assault cases. This is "bowing to demands":

President Bollinger, instead of correcting Emma’s false and defamatory
statement, published a statement in which he bowed to the activists’ demands by announcing further measures.

The evil girl scheme hatches a plot:

Having gained some traction in denouncing Paul by name, Emma proceeded to the New York Police Department ("NYPD") to criminally charge Paul with rape. Her goal was to publicly brand Paul as a rapist

( Yes, he is saying that the only reason she filed a police report was to make his name a matter of public record ).


The evil girl scheme gets advised by other successful evil girl schemers:

Emma was impressed by the actions of Lena Sclove, a Brown University student who had publicized the name of a male student suspended by Brown University for sexual misconduct. Like Lena Sciove, she intended to publicize Paul’s name such that he would withdraw from Columbia.

Evil facltuly helps the evil girl scheme:

Emma’s efforts to wreak havoc on Paul’s life were reignited by Columbia
Professor Jon Kessler. Professor Kessler directed Emma to transform her personal vendetta against Paul into a Columbia-sponsored calumny. Under the guise of "performance art," Professor Kessler and Emma jointly designed her senior thesis project (the "Mattress Project").

This is all because he's male:

In complete disregard of Paul’s rights to be free of, among other things, gender based harassment and gender based stalking, Columbia has allowed Emma to carry the mattress into each of her classes, the library, and on Columbia campus-provided transportation.

Evil president won't defend him because he's male:

President Bollinger showed no public regard for a student in Paul, who was being victimized by Emma’s campaign of false charges of criminal conduct that the University had rightly determined lacked any substance. President Bollinger thus displayed a contemptible moral cowardice in bowing down to the witch hunt against an innocent student instead of standing up for the truth and taking appropriate steps to protect Paul from gender based harassment.

And men have it so hard:

He was targeted because he is a male, and attacked for his (consensual) sexual activity. The Mattress Project subjected Paul to verbal aggression, intimidation, and hostility based on his gender.

The government gets ensnared by her evil girl scheme:

Emma’s campaign has even ensnared United States Senator Kirsten Gilhbrand, who has also irresponsibly publicly branded Paul a serial rapist in the course of bringing Emma to President Obama’s State of the Union Address as the Senator’s guest of honor.

This entire thing is about him and him alone. Not, you know, the handling of sexual assault cases on American campuses:

Emma’s campaign of gender based harassment and defamation of Paul received widespread news coverage both nationally and internationally.

Google is now in on it:

During this time, a Google search for "Emma Sulkowicz" automatically suggested Paul’s full name as part of the auto-complete search feature. It to this day suggests "who raped Emma Sulkowicz" when googling "Emma Sulkowicz," and reveals Paul’s name immediately.

I feel compelled to point out that this is only from the first half of the lawsuit which totals 53 pages.

[Rageaholic]

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.

I agree with this. While there are a lot of unknowns with this particular case (Was he harassed? Was he guilty? Ect.), there is a problem when someone who was only accused of a crime can have their name dragged through the mud as if they were actually guilty.

[Andara Bledin]

@Andara & Gravekeeper:
There's a difference between having one's name be public record - where people still need to expend some effort to learn it - and having one's name be printed in a newspaper article.

If the newspaper is the one that outed him, why isn't he going after them? Or naming them in his suit? Why is he demonizing the protester in his suit against the school.

The guy is a douche and has acted like one throughout. Yes, it sucks that he has allegations of rape against him but when he acts like a self-involved Narcissistic ass in the face of such allegations, I'm not inclined to feel sorry for him or feel that he really has much of a case; he brought most of this shit on himself.

[Shangri-laschild]

But does the rumour mill constitute harassment and does the university have any responsibility or even capacity to control the rumour mill?

That's skipping quite a few steps in between and if it had just been the rumor mill and then he sued the school as a result, I'd completely say that even if he was innocent, that was wrong. It went further than that though and even if he hadn't gone to the media, his name was published in the paper and her project would have only increased that even if she wasn't the one specifically naming him. I can't see how he would have been kept out of this even if he didn't fire back.

The evil girl conspiracy begins

If he is in fact innocent (which again, we don't know because it doesn't seem to be in dispute that a thorough investigation was not done) then I don't see this as being a terribly off base way to feel given how far this has gone and how much it's effecting him.

She wasn't raped because she didn't act like it

It's completely true that not all rape victims act the same way and how they react is not proof towards whether they were actually raped or not. I don't agree with that being used as an argument. It could also be argued that not everyone accused of rape handles the allegations the same, or even properly and how they deny it is not always proof towards whether they are guilty or not. This is the kind of thing, especially with the amount of news coverage that it is gaining, that could follow him for the rest of his life. And we don't know for sure that he's guilty so why shouldn't he be able to stick up for himself? I'm not trying to say he's doing the best job defending himself and hell, in general just cause someone isn't a rapist doesn't mean they aren't a whiny douche bag which maybe he is, I don't know.

He then alleges that the newspaper article ( which it turns out did not actually name him to begin with either ) was a breach of confidentiality because the university did not advise him that the article was going to run.

Who is it that originally named him then? All I caught was that the newspaper defended it as if it hadn't already been publicly named in the media. I don't think that the paper should have been required to contact him. I do think that in general the interest of getting all the facts first, the newspaper in when running a story might want to contact involved parties. That doesn't make them obligated to.

( Yes, he is saying that the only reason she filed a police report was to make his name a matter of public record )

The quotes from her on the matter seemed to be along the lines of wanting to speak up so that he couldn't do it to others or the protect anyone else he might go after. Unless I'm missing another reason she might have filed the report, I don't see how this isn't the goal, to have them go after him for being a rapist. Which I don't have any problem with whether he is a rapist or not. If he is a rapist, wanting someone to be known for what they are to protect future victims is a perfectly good reason. And either way, I think this whole thing needs to be investigated further since clearly it wasn't really in the first place.

This entire thing is about him and him alone. Not, you know, the handling of sexual assault cases on American campuses:

Emma’s campaign of gender based harassment and defamation of Paul received widespread news coverage both nationally and internationally.

Technically those are two separate things.
1. Campaign of gender based harassment
2. Defamation of Paul
Which doesn't make it an all about him thing. And for the record, I'm not supporting how much he is making this about gender at all, I'm just pointing out that that statement doesn't make it all about him. I think the gender discrimination parts are definitely stupid of him at the very least but like I said, being a douche doesn't make you a rapist or give you less rights to defend yourself.

Google is now in on it

Seeing as how he isn't also suing Google, this comes across more as pointing out how large the effects to him are because of this. If he was definitely innocent, would you have a problem to him objecting to this? While I agree it isn't well written, you seem to be viewing it from the standpoint that he definitely raped her which we don't know for sure.

[Gravekeeper]

It went further than that though and even if he hadn't gone to the media, his name was published in the paper and her project would have only increased that even if she wasn't the one specifically naming him. I can't see how he would have been kept out of this even if he didn't fire back.

His claim is sexual discrimination by the school leading to a coordinated effort to harass him by a fellow student and faculty. As well as an endorsement of that harassment by the president and board of directors.

While it's true his name would have come to light after becoming a matter of public record it is not the school's responsibility that police reports are a matter of public record. Nor did he make any move to bring his complaints of harassment to the school. He, in fact, blames the school for not notifying him of rumours on campus and newspaper articles discussing sexual assault problems on campus.

He then chooses to go public and try to smear his accusers. Going to a reporter with a years long history of discrediting rape victims ( who is also a supporter of Gamergate and Women Against Feminism amongst other wonderful things ). Instead of any respectable journalist or news outlet.

If he is in fact innocent (which again, we don't know because it doesn't seem to be in dispute that a thorough investigation was not done) then I don't see this as being a terribly off base way to feel given how far this has gone and how much it's effecting him.

If he is innocent he has every right to be upset. However, he has gone about this as a narcissistic, sexist asshole. He is completely free to defend himself, but he has done so by attacking the alleged victims. Then being surprised when that doesn't play well in the court of public opinion.

Who is it that originally named him then? All I caught was that the newspaper defended it as if it hadn't already been publicly named in the media..

He was eventually named in the paper in a later article after his name became a matter of public record. But again, his name is a matter of public record at that point so as you say, the newspaper and the university have no obligation to notify him or protect his identity from public knowledge.

And either way, I think this whole thing needs to be investigated further since clearly it wasn't really in the first place.

The university fucked it up right out of the gate, yes. Which is what she was protesting. The university literally violated Title XI from the moment she first contacted them by telling she should try to talk to her alleged attacker first instead of going ahead with a complaint. At the time, university guidelines also did not permit either party to have legal counsel ( they instead student representatives ).

All the victims also allege that the questioning they faced by the university was unnecessarily invasive and embarrassing. Which is also one of the reasons one of the accusers gave up fighting his appeal after the school initially ruled against him. The other being that he brought the appeal after she graduated and was no longer on campus.

I think the gender discrimination parts are definitely stupid of him at the very least but like I said, being a douche doesn't make you a rapist or give you less rights to defend yourself.

No, it doesn't. But his lawsuit is definitely allllll about him. Everything everyone else involved does is solely about him according to the lawsuit. Never mind all the language he uses through out which sounds like a petulant 13 year old. Its all very....unprofessional(?) I guess is the word. Like he wrote it himself without much in the way of legal counsel. Given that its also a bloated 53 pages and tends to read like a conspiracy theory I don't know how much luck he's going to have with it. -.-

Seeing as how he isn't also suing Google, this comes across more as pointing out how large the effects to him are because of this. If he was definitely innocent, would you have a problem to him objecting to this? While I agree it isn't well written, you seem to be viewing it from the standpoint that he definitely raped her which we don't know for sure.

My problem with him complaining about Google saturation is that he himself contributed to it and Google auto complete is just traffic trends. His name doesn't auto complete to anything remotely defamatory these days ( if it did at all during the time he claims ). Nor does Emma's auto complete to his name either.

It also does not auto complete to his name when you enter "who raped Emma Sulkowicz" like he claims it does "to this day".