A former Amherst College student filed a suit against the school. The lawsuit claims that Amherst expelled the student, named “John Doe” in the suit, in an effort to appear tough on sexual assault. A female student accused Doe of assaulting her in 2012. According to the lawsuit:
“In the just six weeks from the date the complaint was filed against him, the plaintiff found himself held guilty of assault, expelled from the college, ejected from the campus and branded a sex offender, with his entire future in ruins,” the suit states, in part. “The actions taken by the defendants resulted from a deeply flawed investigatory and disciplinary process during which the plaintiff was denied the most rudimentary elements of fairness promised to him by Amherst in its Student Handbook.”
This is typical of many college sexual assault proceedings. The accused have little to no recourse. They are not allowed representation, not allowed to confront the accuser, not allowed to present counter evidence, and not allowed much of any defense. It is purely up to the judging panel whether the student will face any consequence.
Yet it is curious how anyone could expel the Doe considering the facts. For instance, the woman accusing Doe filed the complaint 21 months after the alleged incident occurred. She gave varying accounts of what happened, initially claiming that the oral sex was non-consensual, then claiming that it began as consensual but became non-consensual later. She claimed she never wrote down any details about the event, including text messages, yet said text messages surfaced. They contradict the woman’s claims about the timing of the alleged assault and the nature of the interaction between her and Doe.
That evidence alone makes this woman’s claims at least questionable. What makes this case different is one other pesky problem: John Doe was blacked out when his accuser performed oral sex on him.
In other words, the accuser is the actual rapist. Continue reading