Quote:
A federal judge has ruled that a series of claims by a student-athlete against his school will go to trial after he was branded a rapist during a campus hearing even though a local prosecutor who investigated said the case should be dropped.
A ruling from U.S. District Judge Arthur Spiegel rejected the request by Xavier University to toss the entire case. It ordered a trial on claims by Dezmine Wells regarding breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, libel through injury to his personal reputation, his profession reputation and with malice, negligence and discrimination.
The school released only a statement on the dispute.
Were pleased that the court dismissed a number of the claims at this point, the university said. The courts decision was based solely on the facts as alleged by Mr. Wells and his lawyers in their amended complaint, as is required by court rules at this early stage in the litigation. After the actual facts are disclosed to the court, we are confident that the result will vindicate Xavier.
Catherine Sevcenko, an attorney, commented on the website of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education that Wells was expelled for sexual assault in spite of the local prosecutors public statements that the evidence did not support the accusers allegations.
The underlying theory of Wells case is that Xavier used him as a scapegoat to prove to the Department of Educations Office for Civil Rights (OCR) that it was cracking down on sexual assault claims after OCR investigated the university for violations of Title IX in 2012, she said.
...
Warner was found guilty of sexual assault by a campus court in 2010, despite the facts established at the time by city police. Officers not only refused to charge him in the case but also alleged his accuser made a false report. Police issued a warrant for her arrest.
Even so, the university process found Warner guilty, and it took 18 months. During that time, Warner not only was banned from the UND campus but also from all college campuses in the state.
In the Wells case, on which the judge ruled this week, court documents outline the scenario: Wells was part of a truth or dare game on July 7, 2012, with other students, including his upper-class female resident adviser.
Plaintiff alleges that during the game his resident adviser exposed her breasts, removed her pants, gave him a lap dance, and kissed him several times. He further alleges that later in the evening, the resident adviser invited him to her room, where she asked him whether he had a condom, and where they both willingly engaged in a sexual encounter. Plaintiff alleges multiple witnesses who saw the resident adviser shortly thereafter indicated her demeanor was completely normal.