Due Process

Alleging Gender Bias in Rape Case, Student Sues U. Cincinnati

The lawsuit is filled with evidence of the university's wrongdoing.

|

Bear
Bearcat 1922 / Wikimedia Commons

A student is suing the University of Cincinnati for trampling his due process rights and discriminating against him as part of an effort—deliberate, he claims—to convict him of a rape he never committed.

Ethan Peloe's suit paints the campus judiciary procedure as nothing more than a "kangaroo court," where fundamental rules of justice—such as his right to legal representation, cross-examination, and impartial judges—were blatantly ignored. Furthermore, the suit makes a strong case that adjudicators lied to the student about whether they had sought the testimony of campus police officers (UC police investigated the case and decided not to press charges). The suit ultimately concludes that administrators were worried that the U.S. Department of Justice would retaliate against UC if the student was found innocent, biasing the process against him from the onset.

The accusation was this: Two female students said Peloe raped them. He spent the night in their dorm room and tried to have sex with them while they were sleeping, they alleged.

UC police and a grand jury declined to charge Peloe. According to the lawsuit, "significant physical evidence," as well as the testimony of two other students who had also been in the room, exonerated Peloe. The office of the UC General Counsel was determined to punish Peloe, however, and even sent emails to investigators asking them to use a different approach—presumably, one that would reach a different conclusion.

The lawsuit is filled with evidence of the university's wrongdoing. Most notably, Peloe repeatedly asked the adjudicators during the trial whether they had sought exonerating testimony from the police. They told him that the Hearing Panel had reached out to the officers, but this was untrue. The officers actually consulted their union to ask whether they should attend the panel, since they were concerned about suffering retaliation at the hands of the university if they gave testimony aiding Peloe, according to the suit, which also notes that one officer called in sick and another took a vacation on the day of the hearing.

Campus Reform has more:

Peloe's suit also claims that his ARC Hearing resembled a "kangaroo court" and did not fairly evaluate the case. The lawsuit alleges that key pieces of evidence, including the results of a rape kit examination, security camera footage, and witnesses' accounts, were dismissed from the hearing as "irrelevant." In addition, Peloe believes he was not given a fair amount of time to prepare for the hearing.

Peloe is also accusing the university of violating his Title IX rights and discriminating against him on the basis of his gender. The suit goes so far as to name a dean at the university who Peloe claims was biased against him.

Keep in mind that this is just one side of the story. A university spokesperson told WKRC that UC takes its students' rights seriously:

"The University of Cincinnati takes seriously our obligations under Title IX and makes every effort to ensure that our campus is safe for all students, faculty and staff and our processes respect the rights of all students," said M.B. Reilly, director of Public Relations for the University. 

The lawsuit can be found here.

Read more from Reason on the illiberal nature of campus sexual assault trials here.

NEXT: Contain Your Shock: Huge Numbers of People on Watch Lists Have No Connection to Terrorist Groups

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Peloe is also accusing the university of violating his Title IX rights and discriminating against him on the basis of his gender.

    Yes! [fist pump] About damn time.

    I’m curious about why there isn’t a libel and slander claim in there, too, though.

    1. I’d like to see a Title IX suit over how most universities have a Women’s Resource Center (or something similarly named) but not a men’s one.

      1. All of society and history and government and and and stuff is a men’s resource center you sexo-racist /derp

      2. Check your privilege!

  2. Goddamn bitch set him up!
    /MB

    1. +2 Coke Bros.

  3. It’s a sad commentary on academia that using government subsidisation of student loans to create these sorts of kangaroo courts is considered perfectly normal, but suggest it should be used to force schools to have free speech absolutism and people will look at you like you’ve got two heads.

    Not that I’m saying government forcing free speech absolutism on schools is necessarily a good thing as I’m sure in practice it wouldn’t end up that way; it’s just that the very idea of it seems beyond the ken of most people.

  4. The suit ultimately concludes that administrators were worried that the U.S. Department of Justice would retaliate against UC if the student was found innocent, biasing the process against him from the onset.

    It’s undue influence all the way down.

    1. This is one of the biggest issues. I know at XU, where I teach, we were smacked down by the Justice Department for failing to throw out a student, and then when administration (wrongly) went after another student, they were successfully sued for millions. It’s a big catch 22.

      1. The university has the opportunity to stand up and fight for what is right and moral. They certainly have the capability to compete in the public arena. They’re not some poor sap that nobody gives a crap about or will listen to.

        1. I totally understand that. But it stills sucks that they’re fucked whether they do the right thing or the wrong thing. The government basically said “you have to kick out anyone accused of rape without giving them any chance to defend themselves” and then when they did that, the government gave that kid a million bucks.

          The University was totally in the wrong, but the government policies in these rape cases are extremely broad and completely unfair to both the universities and the accused students.

          1. Perhaps the university will learn its lesson and do the right thing next time….

            I’m betting not.

            Don’t get me wrong. I understand the government is fucking them good and hard. But it’s a damned university, they’re supposed to be smart enough to figure out that the government’s interest is only political in this case and that they are playing the part of the useful idiot.

            Oh, who am I kidding…

            1. Well if they just stopped taking government money then they could…oh wait…

            2. I seriously doubt that the university admin is opposed to these kangaroo courts on principle. These people are the vanguard of the SJWs, after all. They are playing Brer Rabbit to the DOJ’s farmer here: “Please don’t throw me into that briar patch kangaroo court!”

              1. X had repeatedly given students (relatively) fair trials up until the JD smackdown. Of course, that was before they came up with that retardedly bullshitastic statistic that 1 in 4 girls is raped while at college…so who knows now!

          2. But it stills sucks that they’re fucked whether they do the right thing or the wrong thing.

            Then doing the right thing is a no-brainer.

            1. You make a valid point sir!

          3. I totally understand that. But it stills sucks that they’re fucked whether they do the right thing or the wrong thing.

            My heart bleeds for them. The fact is that the very ideas that the government is now pushing came out of academia. Was there a peep out of our colleges and universities when the government said “you have to kick out anyone accused of rape without giving them any chance to defend themselves”? From where I’m sitting, the general public was a lot more upset by it than the academy.

            1. They were a lot more upset than my colleagues…Still, Xavier used to defend students; then they got hammered; then they lost their backbone.

              1. Ohio or New Orleans?

        2. Exactly. Universities, and particularly Law Schools, were very active challenging the DADT by every means possible. They have a lot of experience defending their positions against the federal government. It’s just they are not on the side of the people facing injustice here.

      2. Why isn’t 12XU the school fight song?

        1. I’m not sure. Our fight song kind of sucks. It doesn’t even have words…

  5. Dumb ass college student, white men can’t get positive rights unless they’re gay.

    If this does hold up it will be interesting to watch though. Few things in life are funnier than seeing a prog come to the painful realisation that positive rights can be turned against them.

  6. ‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first – verdict afterwards.’

    1. You know who else did that?

      1. The Black King?

        1. He’s not a king, he just acts like one.

          1. I was talking chess. RACIST!

      2. Che Guevara?

      3. Nancy Grace?

        1. Don’t invoke the Devil please.

      4. The Cardassians?

    2. “Whooo are Youuu”

  7. He needs to declare himself a pre-op transsexual and the fact that these girls would not have sex with him shows that they are homophobic and should be expelled.

    Yes, I know, you are never suppose to go full retard but in a retarded world there is no choice

    1. It’s just crazy enough to work!

    2. In a retarded world, one man against the odds is going where no man dare tread… he’s going Full Retard. Coming to a campus near you.

  8. Exact same thing happened right down the street at Xavier. A star basketball player, Dez Wells, was accused of rape. The grand jury and prosecutor said that there was absolutely no evidence against him at all, but the school still threw him out. He has now gone to Maryland, is still awesome at basketball, and is rich whether he makes the NBA or not because he sued the shit out of XU.

    I’m ashamed of my University and ashamed of my city.

    1. ashamed of my city

      Seems to me this shit can happen anywhere – not just your city.

      1. It’s been especially bad in Cincinnati. We get cases like this constantly, and are under massive scrutiny from DOJ because of some students that we refused to kick out due to lack of evidence. But I’m sure you’re right. It’s not like Cincinnati is some city that just happens to kick out more accusers with no evidence than any other 🙂

    2. This might be a good strategy for my school’s shitty team. If you can’t beat ’em, accuse ’em of rape.

      1. +1 ruining lives for petty personal gain!

  9. Two female students alleged that on March 9, Peloe, who had accompanied them back to their dormitory following a party, attempted to have sexual intercourse with them while they were asleep. The lawsuit claims, however, that video evidence, text message records, and witnesses’ accounts discredit their accusations entirely.

    That’s … bizarre.

    1. You’re going to have to be more specific, Sidd.

    2. The UC Police determined
      that another female students was
      present in the room when
      Peloe allegedly raped the
      two female students. Neither of the other two females heard
      or observed anything consistent with a rape.

      WTF

      1. The problem is that the government has basically told these schools that they must take the “victims” at their word and don’t have to give the accused parties any voice or listen to evidence from the other side. The school shouldn’t be let off the hook at all, but the Justice Department has basically threatened any school that doesn’t take the exact action that UC took…

        1. Which reflects the larger truth, that universities have turned into appendages of the State with no will of their own. All of this talk about truth to power and challenging your mind and ideas is just talk. Where is the will to stand up for what’s right?

          1. I think this is a case of confusing the cart for the horse. Does the political class of today look more like the Harvard faculty lounge of the 50s, or does the Harvard faculty lounge of today look more like the political class of the 50s?

            Whoever controls the king’s education crafts the king’s future reign and thus the monarchy. Whoever controls the education of the masses crafts the future conduct of the masses and thus the democracy.

            1. If it were Harvard or Duke, I would believe that the university has no interest in protecting the accused. But at a Jesuit Catholic university? There has to be some moral resistance to what’s going on, so why isn’t anyone standing up and speaking out?

              1. I’m on your side, and at Xavier and there was definitely a lot of push back…from Xavier basketball fans… but as far as faculty was concerned, they mostly sat idly by, hoping that no one would accuse them of being rape apologists…

                Those of us who did not were mostly ignored…

                1. Out of curiosity, was there infighting among the administration over this issue? Or are they just trying furiously to cover their ass?

                  1. Almost no dissent from the administration. A handful of faculty, a huge percentage of the student body, and just about everyone else in the city of Cincinnati was against Dez being kicked out, but admin wanted to prove to the government that they weren’t a bunch of rape apologist woman haters like before!

                    Check out this article if you’re interested.

                    http://www.jdsupra.com/legalne…..tin-15238/

              2. Catholics are the most immoral of all. . . that’s why.

          2. Kent State?

            1. zing

          3. Which reflects the larger truth, that universities have turned into appendages of the State with no will of their own. All of this talk about truth to power and challenging your mind and ideas is just talk. Where is the will to stand up for what’s right?

            Wait until the State is Republican, and they can stand up for what’s Left.

        2. The lawsuit makes a pretty definitive case that school officials just didn’t gave a damn about being fair. But there isn’t much evidence that they were concerned about the DOE OCR.

          1. You’d be surprised. This has been an issue specifically in Cincinnati, and the government has been coming down really hard on Cincinnati schools. UC should nut up and defend its student, and maybe you’re right, and they didn’t even want to in the first place, but the Justice Department shares a massive part of the blame in what is becoming an epidemic in higher education.

          2. I’m pretty sure the DOJ is just a pretext here, to give cover to a bunch of university admin SJWs who wanted kangaroo courts anyway.

            1. Look, Xavier used to give fair trails to its students, and we got a smack down from DOJ. They basically told us we had to kick anyone accused of rape out of school. But then when we’re successfully sued, the DOJ sure ain’t payin the bill…But ya, the administration needs to do the right thing regardless.

              1. “Look, Xavier used to give fair trails to its students, and we got a smack down from DOJ.”

                Okay, and was the President of Xavier going from media outlet to media outlet making his case to the public that the government was demanding the school revoke due process? Was he or she out there explaining to anyone who would listen that this was the sort of thing McCarthy pulled in accusing people of being communists back in the 50s? Was he or she out there defending the right to a fair trial? It sure doesn’t sound like it.

                1. No. Father Graham is a narcissistic closet homosexual. He would never put himself out there,

                  1. Then on some level, isn’t he committing the university to a stand in favor of the policy? And if that’s the case, I hate to say it, but it doesn’t seem right to complain that the government “forced” them into the policy that got them sued.

                    1. It goes both ways. The University definitely shares in the blame, but the government is making the decision a much easier one for it to make.

        3. the Justice Department has basically threatened any school that doesn’t take the exact action that UC took…

          No.

          The justice department did not tell schools to ignore and hide evidence that exonerates the accused.

          1. You’re 100% wrong about that. The DOJ has basically told schools that they must take every word of the accuser at face value. Interesting article about a bill reinforcing this absurd mandate.

            http://www.mindingthecampus.co…..e-process/

            Doesn’t let the school off the hook, but the feds have been fucking schools over on this issue for a few years now.

            1. And yet another reason I don’t like Rubio.

              1. RACIST!

              2. Yeah, he’s pretty much dead to me, too.

          2. Another very interesting article on something that happened at my university that parallels the sentiment.

            http://www.jdsupra.com/legalne…..tin-15238/

      2. So he’s supposedly raping two women, with another in the room.

        How does this pass the laugh test?

        Excuse me, roomie? This fellow is raping me. Please call the police.

        This must be another of those “when a drunk penis and a drunk vagina screw, the penis is a rapist”.

        Imagine two drunk men bringing a drunk woman back to their dorm room from a party, and they all have sex, with a third man in the room.

        Imagine the bizarro world where that drunk woman is then prosecuted for rape.

        Try to imagine it. I simply can’t.

        But switch the genitalia around, and it’s Social Justice! Penises are EVIL!

        1. “Imagine the bizarro world where that drunk woman is then prosecuted for rape.”

          Of course, in some places, she would be prosecuted for adultery, but that’s another story.

        2. They allege that he tried to rape one, she ran out, and he then raped the other. Yea, the story isn’t very believable. What I find interesting is the conspiracy. Regardless of who is right, there’s two or more people willfully lying about a serious crime.

          1. Has Peleo given a plausible explanation for why these two girls might want to frame him for rape?

            How exactly did they know each other?

            1. I don’t really think that’s his responsibility is it?

              1. If I was a cop doing a report, I want to get a little more context than “four girls and a boy were in a room with the lights out and two of the girls say the boy tried to rape them.”

                Point being, the girls’ story isn’t very believable. OTOH, the idea that two girls would just decide on a whim to frame a guy for rape is also pretty far out. A single girl tried to frame the Duke lacrosse team. Two girls conspiring together to frame a guy is less likely.

                Maybe they’re just crazy bitches.

                1. Two girls conspiring together to frame a guy is less likely.

                  Sure. But the other option is that two girls are conspiring to defend the rapist. It’s very bizarre either way.

            2. No.

              All I know is that they go to different schools and were at two parties together that night. I get the impression they met at the first.

              1. One of the problems with not having due process is that the facts don’t come out at the same time so everything seems weird. Who knows what the story would look like if they were all given equal rights.

      3. Like these two sentences, the lawsuit goes back and forth on whether there was one or two other females in the room.

        1. The third chick may have been in and out. So to speak.

          1. The fourth chick. Man, I really wish I could get a college do-over.

            1. I always quit counting after the third chick, anyway.

            2. I really wish I could get a college do-over.

              Back to college? No way. Not today.

  10. Men should boycott these institutions. Let them become all-female campuses where the students flee to the neighboring co-ed campus to get their buzz on.

    Next, the anti-white speech code campuses.

  11. Is there a gender bias in the lack of alt-text?

    1. It’s the violence inherent in the system.

      Help! Help! I’m being repressed!

      1. Be quiet!

  12. Sentence first, trial afterward.

    OFF WITH HIS HEAD!

  13. http://s3.documentcloud.org/do…..awsuit.txt

    The students allege that the met Peloe at a party on West Clifton Avenue and later at another party at the University Park Apartments.

    The students allege that Peloe accompanied them back to their room in Daniels Hall. The students allege that they were intoxicated. The students admitted to drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana.

    One of the students alleges that she went to sleep but was awakened by Peloe attempting to have sexual intercourse with her. She alleges that she told him no and ran from the room.

    The other student alleges that Peloe then got into bed with her. She alleges that she had passed out and was awakened by Peloe having sexual intercourse with her.

  14. There’s a recent article on this subject on Minding the Campus (an awesome website for people interested in higher ed who aren’t Marxists) about a recent senate bill that gives rights to accusers, but never even attempts to mention rights of the accused:

    http://www.mindingthecampus.co…..e-process/

    1. Rights of the accused? Like that’s really a thing. Stop making things up.

  15. The UC Police obtained significant physical evidence which exonerated Peloe. The evidence included:

    b. Text messages obtained by a forensic review of the students cell phones called significant portions of the students? stories into question. For example, although the students claimed to be passed out, they still sent a number of text messages. In addition, later messages joked about the case.

    c. Another female student was present in the room when the alleged assault occurred. This student did not witness anything illegal.

    d. On March 27, 2014, a UC Police Detective told Peloe?s mother that the two female UC students claimed to be unable to recall certain significant facts from that evening.

    In contrast, the Detective indicated that Peloe was very forthcoming.

    f. The Detective told Peloe?s Mother that if the criminal charges were eventually dropped, he would support Peloe in a civil suit against the two female UC students.

    23. Rape Kits were submitted to the crime lab for analysis.

    a. On information and belief, the results of the analysis of the rape kits are consistent with the version of events provided by Peloe.

    1. later messages joked about the case.

      I’d like to know what they think is so funny about ruining an innocent persons life.

      1. He’s not an innocent person. He’s a male.

  16. …”They told him that the Hearing Panel had reached out to the officers,”…

    Uh, doesn’t requiring testimony include actions a bit beyond ‘reaching out’?

    1. Oh, they reached out to the officers, alright.

      “It would be better for everyone if you weren’t available for the hearing” is reaching out, after all.

  17. this is just petty:

    36. At the ARC Hearing, Peloe was prohibited from presenting evidence in support of his case. Specifically:

    a. The Chair of the ARC Hearing Chair initially declared that all evidence had to be submitted 24 hours in advance of the ARC Hearing. This requirement does not appear in the UC Code of Conduct, which governs the hearing. When pressed on this issue, the Chair of the ARC Hearing left to room to consult, on information and belief, with Defendant Cummins. When the Chair of the ARC Hearing returned, he
    no longer claimed that there was a 24 hour notice rule, but instead stated that the admission of evidence was in his ?discretion? and that he would not permit Peloe to present any evidence.

    1. Remarkably stupid, as he just took personal responsibility for the decision to exclude evidence. Was he personally named in the lawsuit? If not, why not?

      1. Great point. Nope, not named. Only Dean Cummins.

        1. His name implies rape.

    2. If that’s not a kangaroo court, then they don’t exist at all.

    3. A rule doesn’t exist, so the Chair will create rules as he wishes to get the outcome he wants.

      If that is not an admission there an effort to railroad Peleo, I don’t know what is.

  18. With one woman claiming he tried to have sex and a second woman claiming she woke up with him having sex with her, I’m surprised the cops didn’t send it to the DA. The testimony must’ve been real dodgy for the police to back down.

    1. Schools will kick kids out even after the DA tells them point blank that there is no evidence and that they’ll probably be successfully sued if they kick the kid out. It’s getting to be a huge problem, and the DOJ is totally encouraging it almost to the point of forcing the school’s hand.

  19. deep pockets. no due process. let me know how that works out for you.

  20. Sad that our constitutionally protected right to a fair trial is gone and we now must resort to civil suits based on the dreamed up concept of gender bias to defend ourselves.

    First they came for the male college students….

    1. Universities don’t have to follow the constitution with regards to due process, so even when the DA says that there is absolutely no evidence at all the school can say “thank you very much, the kid’s still kicked out” and there’s not a goddam thing anyone can do about it (except sue for discrimination and slander and shit…)

      1. It’s not that they don’t have to follow due process; it’s that you’ve got the DOJ that they must not follow due process.

        (Of course, you already knew this.)

        1. 🙂 Thank you. Excellent point

        2. “it’s that you’ve got the DOJ telling them….”

        3. Hmmmm they keep using that word, Justice. I do not think it means what they think it means.

  21. Wait, wait…it’s illegal to discriminate against *men* now? Crap…

  22. Where do YOU fall in the “Rape Culture Map of Culpability“?

    Are you a ‘sexist bystander’?
    A ‘hyper-masculine facilitator’?
    (I’m thinking that involves Frat Guys in some way)
    Or simply a casual ‘Denigrator of Women’?

    Perhaps you’re just rapey-rapists who think Rape is No Big Deal and are constantly belittling rape? Probably! since most ‘libertarians’ by default are defined as ‘hating the poor’ and ‘blamers of victims’

    Also! For the more philosophically inclined – read Thomas Aquinas: Rape Apologist

    1. re: the rape apologist meme,

      I like how the worst thing about that quote according to them is the othering of same sex rapes. Obviously we need more tolerance for gay rapists.

  23. How is it that universities are suddenly adjudicating felonies? Why are cases like this not simply turned over to the local police? If there’s an alleged rape in a Post Office facility, do officials there get to decide guilt or innocence? How about at a private company?

    1. DOJ is forcing them to.

    2. Oh believe me, these cases all go to the police. In fact, UC police officers are City of Cincinnati officers themselves. The problem is, that the police and DA say there is absolutely no case at all and the school says “FUCK OFF!”

    3. Of course they do , ask Ben Roethlisberger. You’re hearing about colleges so much because right wing sources hate colleges because they think they’re Democrats

      1. Right wing sources hate colleges because they destroy young men’s lives in order to prove their liberal bona fides. There’s nothing democrat vs. republican about this story. It’s right vs. wrong plain and simple.

        1. Is the NFL out to do the same? Why don’t you hear about them so much on right wing media?

          1. When the fuck did the NFL kick an innocent player out of the league for an alleged rape with no proof?

      2. I think you’re hearing about colleges so much because a) there’s a lot of money involved in the form of tuition, grants, etc, b) students are in tough spot because they’re relying on the college for their career, c) students typically can’t afford legal representation, d) most people go to college at an age where they’re trying to figure out who they are which leads to questionable decisions and alcohol gets involved.

        It creates an environment where rights aren’t clearly defined and the consequences can sometimes be unjustly severe. For most people, getting kicked out of a school is a significant financial set back.

      3. Of course they do , ask Ben Roethlisberger.

        Who was innocent, by the way.

      4. I didn’t realize the NFL held a kangaroo court and found Rothlisburger guilty.

        1. In what type of court does an innocent man get a 5-game suspension, then?

  24. So, I think what you’re saying is, if a guy goes to college and makes sure everything he does is 1) on the up-and-up and 2) well-corroborated by physical evidence, he can make a pretty sweet buck off the school. Hell, maybe he should pay off a couple of girls to make an incredibly weak rape case just to help reap the rewards. Eat your own, progs, eat your own.

    1. Coming to a theater near you.

    2. Maybe that’s what happened in this case. Qui bono?

  25. they were concerned about suffering retaliation at the hands of the university if they gave testimony aiding Peloe, according to the suit, which also notes that one officer called in sick and another took a vacation on the day of the hearing.

    Municipal or campus, the police demonstrate just where serving the public is on their list of priorities. A few notches lower than “not sleeping more than 60 consecutive minutes on the job.”

    1. That quote is total BS. UC campus police are CITY OF CINCINNATI POLICE OFFICERS!!! The school can’t retaliate against them. They’re just trying to cover their own asses. Fucking pigs

      1. A word from the U to the PD could cause trouble.

        And, if you’re a cop, you are not going to take any personal job-related risks. So why risk it, when you can just take the day off?

        1. Fuck. You’re probably right…goddamit!

  26. the results of a rape kit examination, security camera footage, and witnesses’ accounts, were dismissed from the hearing as “irrelevant.”

    The Harvey, Illinois police department has set a nice precedent. Rape kit, schmape kit!

  27. Wait ’til Peloe gets a paternity claim filed against him.

  28. That makes no sense at all dude.

    http://www.AnonWorld.tk

  29. I’d be interested to know the thinking behind the defendants in this lawsuit. The list seems really, really short. The obvious candidates are the hearing officer and the two accusers.

    There also seem to be obvious claims missing, namely, libel and slander, tortious interference with contract, and undoubtedly many more.

    Lots you can do here without getting into the swamp of whether the U has an obligation to provide due process.

  30. Oppression has no logic?just a self-fulfilling prophecy, justified by a self-perpetuating system.

    Gloria Steinem, 1994

    1. Did you just quote Gloria Steinem? I hate you!

  31. “Peloe’s suit also claims that his ARC Hearing resembled a “kangaroo court” and did not fairly evaluate the case.”

    It is worse than Reason let’s on.

    From the aforementioned Campus Reform article…

    “Under the UC code of conduct, lawyers may not act as spokespersons or vocal advocates at the hearings; students may only cross-examine witnesses with written questions?questions that the hearing board can disallow; and the accused student cannot compel other students or university employees to attend the hearing.”

    Left to their own devices, this is the justice system these people have created.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.