Sixth Circuit: Miami University engaged in gender discrimination when choosing to prosecute the male, instead of the woman, when the male was blackout drunk and unable to provide consent

nascarracer99316 · 2018-02-09T23:58:51+00:00

What a surprise.

Believe the women and ignore the man.

Vandechoz · 2018-02-09T17:50:41+00:00

They didn't really decide anything, they just said that some of his claims were reasonable enough that they shouldn't be dismissed. Mostly, they affirmed the lower court's dismissals, though.

It's hard to say if he'll succeed on any of his claims. From the sounds of it, he doesn't have a lot of evidence. I don't know if he's being hindered or not with regard to access to transcripts because he hasn't made it to trial (because of the dismissals).

[He] alleges that she told him “I’ll bet you do this [i.e., sexually assault women] all the time.”

I doubt he has any proof of this. If it was said in front of witnesses, he might prevail in court. Otherwise, well, real courts have a higher standard of evidence than the system he was shoved through.

Unrelated and not really important, but something that bothered me:

But Jane’s statement is internally inconsistent with regard to her description of the oral sex: she states both that “I said no” and “I never said no.”

She stated that she said "stop", not "no". She was being pedantic, not inconsistent.

Also unrelated, there's an interesting case that is referenced in there, Goss v. Lopez:

Having chosen to extend the right to an education to people of appellees' class generally, Ohio may not withdraw that right on grounds of misconduct, absent fundamentally fair procedures to determine whether the misconduct has occurred, and must recognize a student's legitimate entitlement to a public education as a property interest that is protected by the Due Process Clause, and that may not be taken away for misconduct without observing minimum procedures required by that Clause.

Apparently this sort of protection has not been decided by SCOTUS, and has not been consistently decided by the Circuit Courts.

Comments