Can any current Williams student comment on this? It seems like this student is going to have his entire academic and professional career seriously deterred for reason that I honestly can’t comprehend.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/williams-college-suspended-male-student-for-not-dating-girl-after-kissing-her-lawsuit/
This is a poorly written article that provides scant information for readers to understand & evaluate the situation.
Attending a small, rural LAC, is much like living in a tiny town–seems as though everyone knows each other’s business. In addition to a lack of privacy, small incidents can get blown out of proportion.
Publications like the one cited exist to stir up outrage and contempt toward liberal-leaning institutions of higher ed. They will invariably make the college’s response sound stupid, frivolous, and irresponsible, no matter what the actual facts of the situation may have been. The goal of the student journalists who write for these rags is to get picked up by prominent nationwide channels - the more inflammatory their account, the more likely they are to achieve this goal and make a name for themselves.
Is the particular situation as ridiculous as the writer makes it sound? It’s possible, but you’ll never be able to tell by reading sources like this one. This author attends UMass Boston, on the far side of the state from Williams, and based his story wholly on the assertions of the plaintiff. If you’re truly curious about what occurred, Williams’ own student journalists, writing for an in-house publication that doesn’t receive outside funding based on slant, would be a better place to start. https://williamsrecord.com/2020/03/anonymous-student-sues-college-over-alleged-title-ix-violation-in-sexual-misconduct-case/
@aquapt. I’m not saying that your understanding of the outside publication is wrong.
However, the student reporter from UM Boston wrote a pretty fair article and it wasn’t contradictory to the Williams student article imho.
And it’s hard to believe the student run paper isn’t a little William’s centric.
Both told the story.
It appears that he was a bit of cad and perhaps reckless with her naïveté.
It’s certainly not worthy of suspension.
Perhaps derision among her friend group. And even that might not be warranted without all of the facts.
It seems no information exists that there was non consensual activities. If it’s actually what has been described it’s really big time over reach. They’ll lose.
The linked article describes a plaintiff’s (John Doe’s) claims much as the attorney’s for the plaintiff would present them. In this sense, it was designed to persuade the reader as to the merits of the plaintiff’s case and to direct your sympathies toward him. Since the presentation was decidedly one-sided, no sufficiently reasoned conclusion can be drawn against Williams on the basis of this article alone. Nonetheless, I agree with @privatebanker that, irrespective of its slant, the linked article doesn’t inherently contradict the reporting by the Williams Record.
I think the point is, we don’t know. It isn’t surprising that his legal complaint makes the Title IX complaint sound unfounded. The tone of the UMass student’s piece is very, “Isn’t that outrageous?!” Well, if his side of the story is the whole truth, then sure it is. But isn’t that typically the case when someone denies an accusation and offers their own narrative?
The Williams student’s piece acknowledges his side of the story but makes clear that the available information is one-sided because the formal accusation and other relevant testimony are confidential, but that the college apparently feels they have a defensible case. Maybe you’re right, and they’ll lose. But if it were that clear-cut, wouldn’t their lawyers be telling them to settle? Bottom line, we just don’t know, and responsible journalism should acknowledge that we don’t.
@aquapt that’s a fair assessment.
Not surprising because it’s incredibly hard to find objective reporting these days from professional journalists.
Most folks today don’t mind because they gravitate towards those reporters and publications that share many of their own views. It’s only slanted, generally speaking, when it deviates from said world view.
It’s always fairly easy to identify an angle or personal opinion influencing the direction, tone and selection of quotations in the article.
This cub reporter probably went into the assignment looking for the confirmation. It’s de riguer.
The College Fix doesn’t disguise its mission. Its home page states that it’s dedicated to “right-minded” reporting. In this sense, the linked article serves as ideologically based commentary that includes supporting information only.
(Re #5: attorney’s → attorneys.)
^ Meant reply #4 above.
I reread the article cited by the OP & read the article cited in post #2 above.
The difference in the quality of writing and in the construction of each article is substantial. The article published in The Williams Record is far superior in my view.
The last sentence of the article in The Williams Record is the most important piece of information offered by either writing. It informs readers that the school has not yet responded to the lawsuit. This explains the seemingly one-sided versions of both articles as they only have the plaintiff’s version of events and allegations.
Based on what was shared in the two articles, predicting an outcome at this time is unwise & unfair as we have only a one-sided version of the events and proceedings.
On the surface, the issues appear to focus on due process claims and evidentiary rulings which probably dealt with issues based on hearsay & relevance.
It is unclear as to whether or not the male plaintiff could have had or did have an attorney during the college level proceedings. If plaintiff willingly chose to proceed without an attorney after being expressley given the right to do so, then it may affect the outcome of some issues.
Also unclear is the “standard of review” which will or should be applied in the formal court proceeding. For example, is this a hearing de novo or will the court sit as an appellate court limited to the record developed at the college level hearing ?
Sometimes trial courts–in this case a US District Court–act as appellate courts. If so, then procedural errors resulting in violations of one’s rights (both procedural & substantive rights) will be reviewed if properly raised in the complaint. Typically, the record established below cannot be supplemented unless plaintiff sought and was granted a new hearing at the administrative level. But, according to one of the articles cited above, plaintiff is only seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief.
Again, since no answer to the plaintiff’s complaint has yet been filed, we only have one side of the story at this time.
In order to make a fair initial assessment, it is best to wait until an answer to the complaint has been filed. The plaintiff may then file a response to the answer.
Usually the law requires an answer to be filed within 20 to 30 days after the defendant / respondent has been served with a copy of the lawsuit. Any response to the answer often must be filed within 10 to 15 days of service upon plaintiff of the response. A response to an answer is usually not required unless a judge orders a party to do so.
Settlement negotiations can begin at any time if both parties are willing to enter into talks.