A potential lawsuit about college disciplinary processes outside of the sexual assault context. As always, normal rules apply and it is highly unlikely that everything in the lawyer’s letter is gospel truth.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2016/12/babson_backs_off_apology_sought
Interesting comments from the Wellesley police…I wonder if the spitting etc. did not occur, or whether the allegations went uncorroborated because witnesses declined to participate.
I read that article as reporting the investigation got it right and concluded there was not evidence to support the spitting etc. Their complaint appears to be directed toward the Babson officials who restricted their access to campus immediately after the event. They later lifted that restriction after the investigation was complete. Their lawyer is now contending Babson officials acted too quickly resulting in damage to their reputations.
^ I would assume the issue has a lot more to do with the public comments made by the administrator prior to the investigation concluding, along with the issues involved in the honor board. There has also been prior articles where the allegation was made that another administrator admitted the charges weren’t substantiated by the police investigation, but the administrator was unsatisfied and wanted to reopen an investigation. I believe it is this “reopened” investigation that is referrenced in the present article.
@hanna, we will probably never know.
Considering the entire source of that news is coming from the lawyer of one of the students threatening a lawsuit against Babson for their condemnation of their alleged conduct, is there a possibility the lawyer may be putting strong spin on that part that upon scrutinization of the actual report, doesn’t hold up?
Am curious as I’ve seen defense attorneys berated in open court by judges for press releases which spun things to the point they were teetering on the line of “alternative reality” in the words of one of those judges.
The boys were suspended within 48 hours so no investigation by the school was yet underway. Their lawyer is taking issue with the apology letter written by Babson’s president and other statements that were made by school officials impugning the boys within a day or two of the incident. There is no questioning of the investigative process here as that finding is what the school’s reversal is based upon:
At no time was anyone willing to corroborate the spitting and other offenses that appeared on social media. So the 2 boys are claiming that Babson officials acted too hastily in their statements and in issuing the restrictions on the boys.
Seems to me they could be right but their fraternity suspended them immediately as well.
“is there a possibility the lawyer may be putting strong spin on that part”
Of course. That said, direct quotes are less likely to be made up. And it’s hard to spin an absolute statement like “no corroboration.”