Female Student Said, 'I'm Fine and I Wasn't Raped.' University Investigated, Expelled Boyfriend Anyw - Polidicks

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170703]"That university just listened to one side of the story before they were convinced he was guilty of the crime!" "Should we wait to hear the universities side of it before we are convinced they are guilty of this?" "No!" I'm not defending the university, I'm saying it's silly to go around doing the exact same kind of 'investigation' they did, then criticize them for it.[/QUOTE]No it isn't, both the victim and the accused have both said plainly (and they are bringing this as evidence to a real, for-true court of fucking law) that no sexual assault took place but the university arbitrarily declared "nope, nuh uh," and [B]suspended him.[/B] This is what happened. It actually fucking happened. There's no room for interpretation when these things are actual events, and we're saying that this is sick, sexist bullshit and yet another example of a growing problem on American campuses.

[QUOTE=Mattk50;50170741]Oh yeah, the "exact" kind of investigation they did, where we ignore all the parties involved and convict people based on random third parties that later retract their own accusations. Oh wait, no, we've heard from everyone involved already, oops. Im saying that there is no similarity here. Your assertion that anyone who has a problem with this is a hypocrite because we haven't waited for a different trial to finish is completely unfounded.[/QUOTE] The third party never recanted as far as the readings I've gone through show, and we still haven't heard from either the university or education department on the topics, so no we've only heard from one side of the story so far.

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170703]"That university just listened to one side of the story before they were convinced he was guilty of the crime!" "Should we wait to hear the universities side of it before we are convinced they are guilty of this?" "No!" I'm not defending the university, I'm saying it's silly to go around doing the exact same kind of 'investigation' they did, then criticize them for it.[/QUOTE] There is no 'investigation'. ---->>>>ALL<<<<---- of the facts and actions are known in concrete detail. There are no actual sides than what university INSISTS is a side, [I]but does not in this instance actually exist[/I]. Literally fabricated insinuation. You're just trolling semantics.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50170752]No it isn't, both the victim and the accused have both said plainly (and they are bringing this as evidence to a real, for-true court of fucking law) that no sexual assault took place but the university arbitrarily declared "nope, nuh uh," and [B]suspended him.[/B] This is what happened. It actually fucking happened. There's no room for interpretation when these things are actual events, and we're saying that this is sick, sexist bullshit and yet another example of a growing problem on American campuses.[/QUOTE] Where is everyone getting that the boy and girl are on different sides? It's clear the trainer and athlete are on the same side, and the University and accuser are on another, which we have yet to hear from. [editline]20th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=27X;50170764]There is no 'investigation'. ---->>>>ALL<<<<---- of the facts and actions are known in concrete detail. There are no actual sides than what university INSISTS is a side, [I]but does not in this instance actually exist[/I]. Literally fabricated insinuation. You're just trolling semantics.[/QUOTE] Fair trials aren't performed by having the prosecution give their opening statements then immediately skip to jury deliberation. Show me where the accuser or University have given their statements on the matter, even a press release.

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170759]The third party never recanted as far as the readings I've gone through show, and we still haven't heard from either the university or education department on the topics, so no we've only heard from one side of the story so far.[/QUOTE] what the fuck does the third party even have to do with the situation :v He's just some random schmuck sticking his nose in someone else's business. Or are you saying he knows more about the alleged rape than the "rape victim" does?

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170759]The third party never recanted as far as the readings I've gone through show, and we still haven't heard from either the university or education department on the topics, so no we've only heard from one side of the story so far.[/QUOTE]We've heard from three sides, "the university just performed a summary execution on my education!" Then there's, "he didn't rape me, really, he didn't... I just don't understand why this is happening," and finally when the university is pressed about their fuckup they nervously say, "uh, no comment." [QUOTE=plunger435;50170770]Where is everyone getting that the boy and girl are on different sides? It's clear the trainer and athlete are on the same side, and the University and accuser are on another, which we have yet to hear from.[/QUOTE]They are on different sides though, because this is squarely between the plaintiff (Neal) and the defendant (university) in an actual court case, while a third party, the "victim" of a "sexual assault" that prompted the university to effectively expel him, who has her own take on the matter. I don't know how this is so difficult for you to understand, there's even a fourth side in that the person who made the complaint and she isn't being held accountable for making shit up.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50170798]what the fuck does the third party even have to do with the situation :v He's just some random schmuck sticking his nose in someone else's business. Or are you saying he knows more about the alleged rape than the "rape victim" does?[/QUOTE] I'm saying it'd be nice to actually know what they accused the trainer and athlete of, because no where in any of the four articles posted is there an actual statement from them or documents on what was said. Some people are saying it was over a hickey others are saying unprotected sex, so clearly we don't have all the facts yet.

I have no fucking idea what the hell you're trying to argue plunger, that because we don't have a statement from the accuser we have no right to judge the universities decision? If the accuser does have some concrete proof of the women being raped then it wold a police matter by now, that doesn't seem the be the case though, especially that they had to downgrade the reason he was suspended to sexual misconduct.

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170826]I'm saying it'd be nice to actually know what they accused the trainer and athlete of, because no where in any of the four articles posted is there an actual statement from them or documents on what was said. Some people are saying it was over a hickey others are saying unprotected sex, so clearly we don't have all the facts yet.[/QUOTE] since when the fuck is giving people hickeys and having unprotected sex illegal those are both absurd reasons to kick someone out of college at the end of the day you're talking about two consenting adults having sex, I don't know how you could ever possibly justify kicking either of them out for that.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50170823]We've heard from three sides, "the university just performed a summary execution on my education!" Then there's, "he didn't rape me, really, he didn't... I just don't understand why this is happening," and finally when the university is pressed about their fuckup they nervously say, "uh, no comment." They are on different sides though, because this is squarely between the plaintiff (Neal) and the defendant (university) in an actual court case, while a third party, the "victim" of a "sexual assault" that prompted the university to effectively expel him, who has her own take on the matter. I don't know how this is so difficult for you to understand, there's even a fourth side in that the person who made the complaint and she isn't being held accountable for making shit up.[/QUOTE] At this point you seem to be saying the same thing as me? That the athlete and trainer as on one side and the university and accuser on the other. The accuser being with the university because he's the one who the university will call on for testimony. [editline]20th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50170836]since when the fuck is giving people hickeys and having unprotected sex illegal those are both absurd reasons to kick someone out of college[/QUOTE] Where did I say that's fine to do? I'm saying since there's two conflicting stories on what happened it means we don't know what was actually reported. You can't agree with that?

What we do know is he was suspended on clearly shaky grounds, whats the problem with disagreeing with that?

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170842]At this point you seem to be saying the same thing as me? That the athlete and trainer as on one side and the university and accuser on the other. The accuser being with the university because he's the one who the university will call on for testimony. [editline]20th April 2016[/editline] Where did I say that's fine to do? I'm saying since there's two conflicting stories on what happened it means we don't know what was actually reported. You can't agree with that?[/QUOTE] So you are arguing that a third party person who's reporting the crime should be a more important witness than the people who the crimes are actually involving...? Jesus dude.

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170770]Where is everyone getting that the boy and girl are on different sides? It's clear the trainer and athlete are on the same side, and the University and accuser are on another, which we have yet to hear from. [editline]20th April 2016[/editline] Fair trials aren't performed by having the prosecution give their opening statements then immediately skip to jury deliberation. Show me where the accuser or University have given their statements on the matter, even a press release.[/QUOTE] Sorry but I don't care about your imaginary semantic trolling in the least. [B]There is no basis for a trial[/B], which is why people are typing in the thread thusly. If you're really that bored, I suggest you PM zeke or axelord and have them take over for you cause you're really really bad at this. This is a shopowner and a consumer agreeing that they made an exchange for a sandwich and the bank saying the customer actually "stole" the sandwich because he/she didn't use their credit card to make the purchase like he or she always did before every other time, so the police need to arrest him/her for stealing. It is literally a non-event conflated to have meaning by a 100% outside party. This is me coming in to your house and telling you while you talk to your friend on Skype about sunsets that you're a rapist and yelling loudly over the conversation until you can't say anything edgewise and be heard. If you can't grasp that you're either literally obtuse or semantically trolling... or both.

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170842]Where did I say that's fine to do? I'm saying since there's two conflicting stories on what happened it means we don't know what was actually reported. You can't agree with that?[/QUOTE] I can. I just don't see how it's relevant. Am I missing something?

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170770]Where is everyone getting that the boy and girl are on different sides? It's clear the trainer and athlete are on the same side, and the University and accuser are on another, which we have yet to hear from. [editline]20th April 2016[/editline] Fair trials aren't performed by having the prosecution give their opening statements then immediately skip to jury deliberation. Show me where the accuser or University have given their statements on the matter, even a press release.[/QUOTE] They suspended him there is not other side of the story. There was no crime committed and yet punshimet was doled out. What do you understand about the situation? HE WAS ACCUSED OF RAPE BY THE THIRD PARTY, THE WOMAN SAID IT WAS NOT RAPE, HE WAS PUNISHED ANYWAY. T I can think of no way to make this any more clear.

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170826]I'm saying it'd be nice to actually know what they accused the trainer and athlete of, because no where in any of the four articles posted is there an actual statement from them or documents on what was said. Some people are saying it was over a hickey others are saying unprotected sex, so clearly we don't have all the facts yet.[/QUOTE] [url]http://denver.cbslocal.com/2016/04/19/csu-pueblo-grant-neal-suspension-consensual-sex/[/url] Sexual assault. [url]http://www.dailycamera.com/cu-news/ci_26990238/cu-boulder-facing-title-ix-suit-from-male[/url] Sexual assault. [url]http://lawnewz.com/crazy/lawsuit-woman-swears-i-wasnt-raped-university-kicks-out-male-student-anyway/[/url] Sexual assault. [url]http://reason.com/blog/2016/04/19/female-student-said-im-fine-and-i-wasnt[/url] Sexual assault. Shall I go on? You want actual documents, go petition the university and get denied because there's laws specifically there to prevent that. "We don't have all the facts!!!" We have a sex-related suspension. A "victim" who says the sex was consensual. A guy who's suing the university for suspending him. A "victim" who says the sex was consensual.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50170860]So you are arguing that a third party person who's reporting the crime should be a more important witness than the people who the crimes are actually involving...? Jesus dude.[/QUOTE] Why do you keep putting words in my mouth I've never said, of course the accuser is going to be the star witness for the defendant because he's literally their only witness. I didn't say he's more important than anyone else, just that the university will clearly use him because their entire case rests on his shoulders on a statement he gave that no one besides them has heard.

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170888]Why do you keep putting words in my mouth I've never said, of course the accuser is going to be the star witness for the defendant because he's literally their only witness. I didn't say he's more important than anyone else, just that the university will clearly use him because their entire case rests on his shoulders on a statement he gave that no one besides them has heard.[/QUOTE] Do you really expect a statement to win a court case?

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50170870]I can. I just don't see how it's relevant. Am I missing something?[/QUOTE] Because the entire story doesn't even make sense? He is reported to the board for giving her a hickey, then why does a bunch of explicit details about unsafe sex show up in her statement? It's clear none of the media outlets reporting on it have the full story either. [editline]20th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=mooman1080;50170930]Do you really expect a statement to win a court case?[/QUOTE] lmao I don't even expect this to go to court, University is going to take a plea deal for sure. Why does everyone think I'm defending the university

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170935]Because the entire story doesn't even make sense? He is reported to the board for giving her a hickey, then why does a bunch of explicit details about unsafe sex show up in her statement? It's clear none of the media outlets reporting on it have the full story either. [editline]20th April 2016[/editline] lmao I don't even expect this to go to court, University is going to take a plea deal for sure. Why does everyone think I'm defending the university[/QUOTE] I don't get the hell you're saying then, how would what the accused say change what happened? What is your point?

[QUOTE=mooman1080;50170951]I don't get the hell you're saying then, how would what the accused say change what happened? What is your point?[/QUOTE] It wouldn't change what happened, it would tell us what happened, no one actually knows what the accuser said to the University at this point beyond conjecture. That's what I want to know, how did all these explicit details about their sex life come out if he just offhandedly mentioned a hickey to the board?

[QUOTE=plunger435;50170973]It wouldn't change what happened, it would tell us what happened, no one actually knows what the accuser said to the University at this point beyond conjecture. That's what I want to know, how did all these explicit details about their sex life come out if he just offhandedly mentioned a hickey to the board?[/QUOTE] Ok. How is the relevant to the guy's suspension, you're curious about how this information reached the board exactly, what are you even arguing for?

[QUOTE=mooman1080;50170981]Ok. How is the relevant to the guy's suspension, you're curious about how this information reached the board exactly, what are you even arguing for?[/QUOTE] That it would be nice to have the complete story before people jump in making comparisons to KKK lynchings. It's relevant because we still don't know the official reason for the suspension or evidence they had in their investigation. I haven't and won't defend the university on the matter, nor do I think the suspension was justified.

The official reason is sexual misconduct, which came after the person was accused of rape. So you're saying people are wrong to think that this might of happened because of radicalism or rape hysteria on college campuses because maybe they legit have an "official" reason or sympathetical reason to suspend him, despite the fact that we both agree the suspension was unjustified? So you just don't want people to assume the extremely likely possibility given modern college campuses track record that this is a case of gender discrimination brought about by radicalism? If such a reason does occur then fine, but being things as they are now, I think people are more than with in reason to make the assumptions they are making.

[QUOTE=mooman1080;50171068]The official reason is sexual misconduct, which came after the person was accused of rape. So you're saying people are wrong to think that this might of happened because of radicalism or rape hysteria on college campuses because maybe they legit have an "official" reason or sympathetical reason to suspend him, despite the fact that we both agree the suspension was unjustified? So you just don't want people to assume the extremely likely possibility given modern college campuses track record that this is a case of gender discrimination brought about by radicalism? If such a reason does occur then fine, but being things as they are now, I think people are more than with in reason to make the assumptions they are making.[/QUOTE] You don't think it's weird that he was reported for giving her a hickey and yet the statements start talking about them having unprotected sex in detail?

:snip: didn't refresh

[QUOTE=plunger435;50171078]You don't think it's weird that he was reported for giving her a hickey and yet the statements start talking about them having unprotected sex in detail?[/QUOTE] No. If the accuser claimed to witness the act in full then it still means nothing, you need more than word and that's the sad fact of the matter. Furthermore unless I'm mistaken the women in qeustion said the accuser noticed the hickey, the statements about what took place could be word of the accuser them selves. If you're trying to imply something just say it.

[QUOTE=mooman1080;50171115]No. If the accuser claimed to witness the act in full then it still means nothing, you need more than word and that's the sad fact of the matter. Furthermore unless I'm mistaken the women in qeustion said the accuser noticed the hickey, the statements about what took place could be word of the accuser them selves. If you're trying to imply something just say it.[/QUOTE] Oh no, you misunderstand, I'm not saying that the accuser gave them that evidence or anything, I'm saying from how much sensitive information they have on the matter it sounds a lot like the trainer gave them a statement on it along with the accuser.

[QUOTE=plunger435;50171131]Oh no, you misunderstand, I'm not saying that the accuser gave them that evidence or anything, I'm saying from how much sensitive information they have on the matter it sounds a lot like the trainer gave them a statement on it along with the accuser.[/QUOTE] Your point?

[QUOTE=Svinnik;50168281]Universities shouldn't be allowed to investigate these things themselves. Hand it over to the police who actually know how to deal with this stuff.[/QUOTE] honestly, congress[I] needs[/I] to reform title-9 so that schools aren't responsible for investigating if the allegid crime is a felony as long as they file it with the police, thats the only reason why they have to do this is because title 9 currently forces them to, which isn't bad its just schools tend to either do absolutely nothing, or in this case, absolutely fuck up everything