They probably didn’t. None were described, even when they were prompted. And let’s get specific here. What would the specific voluntary acts unmistakable in their meaning be for someone to consent to sex with three guys at the same time in a bathroom?
Oh my. I just popped back into this thread and the one post I read was # 640! 
Check out Dotson’s testimony on p. 17. He says he apologized later to the accuser, saying what he had done was inappropriate. He said he “thought” she was “cool with what they were doing.” If he had gotten her unmistakable consent, he wouldn’t “think” she had consented; he would know that she consented, and he would have had nothing to apologize for. His interview is entirely inconsistent with his getting her explicit consent or even thinking he needed it, and entirely consistent with a belief that he could do whatever he wanted until she started to cry.
I think you’re reading to finely into how people talk. A normal person probably would say “I thought she was OK (or cool or whatever jargon one uses) with what we were doing.” People aren’t mind-readers which is what makes the concept of consent so difficult. Also, most people are not overly thoughtful about what words they pick when responding to questions, they are often more interested in answering the question quickly rather than stopping and being selective about their language.
People aren’t mind readers, especially horny young men who are in the mood to start sticking their private parts in various orifices of a young woman in a bathroom while their friends are doing the same thing.
**PEOPLE AREN’T MIND READERS AND THAT IS WHY THEY NEED TO GET EXPLICIT CONSENT./b These guys idea of consent seems to have been that she wasn’t crying yet.
Guessing that a woman you’ve just met wants you and two of your friends to start fooling around with her at the same time in a bathroom at a party? Not a reasonable guess. You should not go forward under this assumption. You need to confirm her agreement to this plan before you execute it. If you don’t, you’re probably a rapist.
Oregon kicked the guys out… After basketball season. Kicking them out was the right call.
Take a deep breath CF - not all sex is rape, not all sex is assault…something sex is just sex. And unless money changes hands, plain old sex is not illegal nor is it subversive. It takes two people and two people don’t get to the point of actual sex in the absence of coercion, force, drugs or being passed out without some interpretation of willingness from both parties. I can tell that drives you crazy from the use of all caps…, but unfortunately it’s pretty true.
momofthreeboys, you don’t have to defend rhe guys every time. I guess you don’t when there is a video. Almost every single time.
These Oregon guys… Echhhh.
True, why would I argue when there is evidence…nothing to discuss or argue about. It’s more fun to pick at colleges that fall on the sword because presumably these are pretty smart people working in our foremost colleges and universities. If someone comes up with a good case where the woman got her civil rights violated by a college making horrendous decisions about her sex life and turning a blind eye to evidence I’ll be happy to defend that also 
No. You won’t. Why pretend?
The FSU case that you mentioned in The other thread…Poor FSU.
I just lol.
Whatever. Go defend the Oregon guys.
Go defend FSU. Even the DA doesn’t do that.
I am pretty liberal on sex but these gangrapes are really pushing it for me. 
I’m mixed on the Oregon guys (which I’ll get to in a minute) but to me the underlying question is still a conundrum: Should colleges investigate and adjudicate felony sexual assault if it’s the only way to remove alleged perpetrators from campus, especially if the police are unwilling to prosecute?
This is a tough problem. Channeling every case of sexual assault through the college grievance procedure seems to assure unfair outcomes in murky cases, but abdicating responsibility altogether seems irresponsible even without the OCR’s mandates. There really is no easy answer.
Even changing the standard of evidence won’t remedy the faults in the campus grievance procedures. The colleges just don’t have the expertise, the facilities or the the budgets to operate as combined police inspectors, lawyers, judges and juries. They can move swiftly but not thoroughly, not professionally and often not fairly or transparently.
The result is bad decisions both for the accused and the accuser.
I’m in favor of no-contact orders, counseling for the alleged victim, monitoring of the accused. I’m in favor of colleges getting more deeply involved in partnerships with their local police departments, in providing intensive support so that alleged victims can present credible cases to the police. If there’s enough evidence to justify expelling the accused, then there should be enough evidence to justify prosecution.
If there’s not enough evidence then we’re back to the coin flip decision again.
I thought the article in the Brown Daily by Nicole Boucher from 2011 was a good analysis of the complexities, though I must say that four years later they’re no less complex.
In the Oregon case, even though a consensual 3M+1F foursome is unpalatable, it’s not illegal and not unbelievable. The college – albeit belatedly – did decide that the basketball players were responsible and did suspend them. As far as I know the accused players didn’t appeal the decision and are not in the process of filing a suit against the university. So in the end, the result did favor the accuser, despite the DA’s refusal to pursue.
Personally I think the DA should have taken up the case in light of one of the player’s prior accusation. If he wasn’t aware of it, then he didn’t do a very thorough investigation.
The college issued this counterclaim in response to accuser’s lawsuit.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/256331009/Jane-Doe-v-UO-Counterclaim
To me their response is fairly flimsy and their handling ham-fisted, but at least they explain their thought process in admitting Austin and what led them to delay the sexual assault hearing, which I believe are the main issues in the accuser’s suit. (One point of interest is that Austin, the player with the prior accusation, wasn’t eligible to play for Oregon that Spring anyway.)
I think there’s a fourth possibility: Because the accused is conflicted and regretful. She may feel so remorseful that she sees rape as the only acceptable explanation to justify her behavior. She may come to this conclusion on her own, or be persuaded by family, friends or victim advocates.
Young women like young men have powerful hormonal drives which may supersede their personal morals or common sense, especially if alcohol is involved or they are new at exploring their sexuality. I think men are better equipped emotionally to brush off bad sex as bad sex, but women tend to take their own bad decisions harder and more personally. An immature distressed young person could easily see a false accusation as the only way out of situation that she can’t face up to emotionally or socially.
I would add momrath that a conflicted, deeply regretful woman may not consciously make a false accusation, but may reframe her memories in such a way as to truly believe she was assaulted to protect herself psychologically. Similarly, I would think, a guy may convince himself there was consent when there was none.
We have been discussing these issues over several threads and I am really getting discouraged. One Brown case suggests money and power may have influenced the board to protect the accused, the second to essentially railroad the guy. We read heart wrenching stories of women who have been assaulted and have to see their rapists every day and similarly upsetting stories of guys who maintain their innocence and are denied their education.
One answer is to have lesser punishment in the grey zone cases, but then the schools get labelled by activists for never having expelled a rapist or not adequately supporting victims. The level of proof should be pretty high to expel a guy, but a lesser punishment such as a suspension could require lesser proof and still be a strong consequence, yet that may not satisfy the victim or her supporters.
Activists rightfully support victims and blame colleges for not doing enough to support them. Late teen and young 20-something’s May have a harder time seeing the shades of grey the colleges deal with. More research and more education on all sides is needed on all sides of the issue. I was glad to see that the senate is changing some aspects of the proposed legislation to include protections for the accused.
Me too. Activists don’t get to define how societies puts boundaries on behavior. They can lobby but ultimately it is the greater society that defines those boundaries. It is fluid and it does change over time but generally change is defined in the courts as tested against basic constitutional rights.
How far is too far?
I’ve been following this thread and think that I have benefited from reading the views discussed here, even though I think some opinions have been voiced a bit loudly. I think that more discussion of some very complex issues can only be beneficial, especially if voiced calmly and respectfully, because given the complexities there must be room to talk.
Anyway, I have learned some important information to ponder, and to discuss with my college-bound son and my friends with college-bound boys and girls. And we will be looking at this issue when the final decision is made shortly.
dstark there’s alotta holes in the FSU and Oregon stories…not too many holes in UofM or Occidental. Find one with no holes where the woman was deprived of her civil rights and access to due process and I’ll advocate.
momofthreeboys, I don’t know what your definitions are. It is obvious if you read about the FSU case, the woman had no shot. I don’t know why you need me to point anything out on that case or any other cases.
And I am not even saying Winston assaulted the accuser in the FSU case. The accuser just never had a chance.
When cases aren’t investigated, the woman has no chance.
I disagree with you on the OXY case. There were guys concerned enough about the woman to follow her around. Multiple guys followed her around. I can see why OXY ruled the way they did.
How about showing some compassion for women who were assaulted but can’t win their cases because of a lack of evidence? Legally, the women shouldn’t win but they were assaulted. How would you feel if you were assaulted and you could not win your case? You wouldn’t be too happy.
How would you feel if you were drugged and lost your memory and found out later you were violated?
I agree with you on the UM case. We don’t have all the information on any of the cases. We don’t on the UM case. With what is public, I don’t understand how the guy lost.
The Brown case with the wealthy family involved…It was possible the accused was giving the accuser a bad time. But then the rape charge a week later and then the father gets involved…The guy got screwed.
I do talk to younger people. I talked to my daughter who was in a sorority. Not that I need to be told this but she told me there are women who regret having sex after the fact. She doesn’t know anybody who did this but it wouldn’t surprise her if a guy was falsely accused after the fact.
There are also guys who are up to no good and are assaulting women.
The oxy case is one in which a consequence other than expulsion would have been more appropriate. The woman clearly consented and went out of her way to find him again. She knew what she was doing, drunk or not. Part of the responsibility should be on her. Perhaps he should have said no and so some punishment was appropriate, but not to be expelled for sexual assault. If she had been ok with it, as many women are, would it still be a crime? Does criminality really depend on the level of regret of the woman?
How many texts did the Ohio guy send, trying to get the woman to sleep with him? Was it 5, or was it 500? Persistently pressing for a romantic or sexual relationship when the other person doesn’t want one will get you fired; that’s sexual harassment, and it’s equally harassment if it’s done at college. I don’t see the problem with suspending the harasser.
I don’t think the guy should have been expelled. A suspension would have been ok, but I don’t make the rules.