Due Process

Student Expelled for Rape Has Evidence He Was the Victim. Amherst Refuses to Review It.

Process was fair, says Amherst.

|

Sex
Dreamstime

A preponderance of the evidence suggested that John Doe, a male student at Amherst College, raped his girlfriend's roommate, Sandra Jones, according to the college's sexual assault adjudication process. But text messages sent between the alleged victim and other Amherst students point toward the opposite conclusion: that Doe did nothing wrong.

He was expelled anyway—and Amherst has utterly refused to take a look that text messages that might acquit him.

In a just-filed rebuttal to Doe's lawsuit, the college defended its handling of the case—and subsequent expulsion of Doe—on grounds that it was "conducted with fundamental fairness, in good faith, and in full compliance with the College's policies and the law." Amherst maintained that administrators were justified in refusing to reopen Doe's case, since college policy requires that appeals be filed within seven days of a verdict being reached.

But Doe wasn't able to procure new evidence supporting his side of the story until many months after his expulsion. That evidence establishes that Jones—in her own words, no less—was an active participant in the sexual encounter. Amherst just doesn't seem to care.

The incident in question took place on the night of February 4 / morning of February 5, 2012. Doe was drunk to the point of incapacitation when he and Jones—his girlfriend's roommate—began a mutually-consensual sexual encounter. Jones claimed that while she was performing oral sex on him, she withdrew consent and tried to stop. Doe held her head and forced her to keep going, she alleged. Doe denied doing so, but couldn't remember exactly what had happened because he was black-out drunk.

After the encounter, Jones kicked Doe out. She then texted her male residential advisor, and another male acquaintance. She invited the acquaintance to come over, and he spent the night with her.

When asked during the hearing about the text message to the residential advisor, Jones described it thus:

Um, so – so I think I – um, so, – um, so I think I did say like well, something about … Something about – something about like well doing … Well, about … Well, about like well doing a bad thing. But I mean… So actually like well texted him, um, so almost – so almost like right after, um, [Plaintiff] had, um, left. Um, I – when I didn't – so I didn't… So I didn't … So I didn't … So I didn't … I'll have to type.

Jones is a stutterer, and was allowed to type her response:

Um.… I didn't want to address what had happened to me and I was in no position yet to accept that it had been rape. So, in my text messaging to DR, I only said things about the hook-up as if it had been consensual.

The adjudicators never looked at the text messages, instead relying on Jones' recollection of them. Had they read the messages, they might have reached a different conclusion. In reality, Jones admitted to her residential advisor that she "did something so fucking stupid" and "fucked" Doe. She was the active party, not "an innocent bystander," she claimed in the texts.

Jones also complained to the advisor that the male acquaintance she had invited over (ML) wasn't making a move on her. In a subsequent text, she lamented that it had taken ML hours to agree to sexual activity with her.

Of course, it's possible that everything happened exactly as Jones described it. It's possible Jones withdrew consent and Doe continued anyway. It's possible that Jones was unable to process the fact that she had been assaulted, and omitted this detail in her recollection of the encounter to her residential advisor. It's possible that Jones was ready for sexual activity with a different, reluctant partner immediately after she was victimized by Doe. It's possible that the claims she made more than a year later represent the truth, and the claims she made on the actual night in question were merely a coping mechanism.

But how could anyone say this explanation is more likely? That the facts should not be taken at face value? That they should be ignored to the extent that they conflict with Jones' assertions and Amherst's decision?

On Twitter, KC Johnson—a campus due process expert—called the Doe/Jones dispute a "He-said/she-said situation—along w/numerous text messages undermining credibility of accuser's version of events!"

It seems clear to me that a preponderance of the evidence does not establish Doe's guilt. Quite the opposite: a preponderance of the evidence casts doubt on Jones. Amherst's decision to ignore that evidence and defend the conviction of Doe is itself evidence of something: systemic anti-male bias—and manifest unfairness for accused students—in college sexual assault trials.

More from Johnson on the Amherst case here.

Advertisement

NEXT: A survey of legislation on Second Amendment issues in 2015

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. But how could anyone say this explanation is more likely? That the facts should not be taken at face value? That they should be ignored to the extent that they conflict with Jones’ assertions and Amherst’s decision?

    Easily. All you have to do is not give a shit about truth, honesty, fairness, or justice. And we all know that the people actively pushing these policies give zero fucks about those things. Because this is political. It’s GENDER WAR. It’s KULTUR WAR. That is all it is, and nothing more.

    This kid should sue the living fuck out of Amherst if he can.

    1. In spite of the many millions of federal loan dollars and grants it receives annually, I’m sure Amhurst is just private enough to be an at-will institution as far as expulsions and withdrawals are concerned.

      1. Even millions of dollars in public subsidies can’t buy their civil right to railroad a person, Hugh.

        1. Money talks, civil rights walk.

        2. But being an at-will institution means they can ask someone to leave for any reason or no reason, so long as that person doesn’t belong to a protected class and they make it clear they aren’t booting him because he belongs to that class.

            1. Bingo. They can expel Mr. Doe for any reason they want. They can’t falsely tell the world that he is a rapist.

              If I were on the jury for this I would award Mr. Doe at least half of Amherst’s Endowment. The intention would be to cripple their ability to continue to exist as a University.

    2. I’M NOT FIGHTING THE KULTURKAMP, IT’S FIGHTING ME!!!!!!!!!

      1. Don’t make me use the sit down gun, JJ.

        1. Is it anything like a sod-off shotgun?

          1. I’LL KILL YOU

              1. Did you watch the clip? More like True Detective. Or am I the only one who said “Colonel Chestbridge!” when the person wearing the crow’s head mask shot Colin Ferrell on this season of True Detective?

            1. Bzzzzt! Sorry, that was the wrong answer.

              The correct reply should have been “Close…Your…Mouth” Fer chrissakes, it was in the clip you linked to.

        2. I am not a number, I am a FREE MAN! with an eagle head. And a shotgun. In another show …

      2. What sort of camp is a kamp? Does it concentrate?

        1. Think education with an extra side of RE

          1. Does it labor?

            1. It kinda more labors you

      3. So you want to give absolute power back to a Catholic monarch, subject to papal decree and approval? Because that’s what the Kulturkampf was about.

    3. This kid should sue the living fuck out of Amherst if he can.

      I agree. But, wouldn’t that be engaging in KULTUR WAR?

      1. Do you actually think you just made a point, Bill? I’m genuinely curious.

        1. Well, by the very standards you offered, this kid should just laugh and mock the college.

          If I’m wrong, I welcome any arguments or evidence to you can offer to show that.

          1. You accuse me of being a rapist, you attempt to destroy my life, you put me through hell, and the right thing to do is ‘ha, ha, ha, I laugh at you, I mock you’?

            What are you talking about?

        2. Well, by the very standards you offered, this kid should just laugh and mock the college.

          If I’m wrong, I welcome any arguments or evidence to you can offer to show that.

          1. Bill, I’m going to say this in the nicest way I can manage right now: this issue seems to have made you literally retarded. If you can’t understand how him suing the school for getting fucked over is different from not engaging SJWs on the terms of their choosing, there’s no hope for you. Just go home, you’re drunk.

            Seriously, you need to step back and think about how stupid what you just said is. You normally don’t get like this so I’m thinking maybe you just need to ponder it for a bit.

            1. If what I’m saying is so ridiculous, maybe you can answer a simple question for me? Do you think these tribunals happen in a vacuum? Or do they happen in the context of the broader culture?

              This shit happens because the culture has been saying it’s okay. The left KULTUR WARRIORS have risen to a position of authority where they can get CEOs and Nobel laureates fired and get poor schmucks like Doe kicked out of school. Real people with their lives ruined. And they’ve got the federal government openly supporting them in doing so. Do you think that was just happenstance?

              And as much as you or I might root for Doe in a lawsuit, his chances are limited at best because a wide part of the culture has deemed it acceptable to throw away reason, honesty and justice when dealing with the new “class enemies”.

              The ONLY way any of this shit is going to stop is if these shitheels are recognized as the third-rate Stalinist turds they are, if people stop pretending that rejecting them amounts to an implicit endorsement of Pat Buchanan / Rick Santorum style religious conservatism. But, yest, that is a culture war.

              1. Bill…..the term KULTUR war is used when people are attempting to change the culture, or establish a culture to be a certain way. Defending yourself against tyranny is not part of a culture war. It is just defending yourself.

                You’ve just made virtually everything in which there is a conflict, part of Kultur War, because it occurs within the context of a culture. Used as you have used it there is no meaning to the words culture war.

      2. I agree. But, wouldn’t that be engaging in KULTUR WAR?

        No. That’s really stupid, Bill. Come on now.

    4. I would become their worst nightmare. I would sue them to the fullest extent of the law. And I would use legal tactics designed to burn up as much time of the senior administration as possible. I would further file as many and varied civil rights claims as possible. I would also look for any and all chances to sue senior admins personally. I would then get myself booked on every national media venue possible to turn the spotlight on these turds. By the time i was done, they would be BEGGING me for the chance to reinstate me. But no mercy would come.

      These types of progressive trash must be dealt with in this manner. When they misstep, they need to be attacked to the point they are afraid to leave their homes. Much in the way they attempt their nonsense with real Americans.

      1. Lawsuits take too long. Woodchippers are quick and efficient.

    5. It’s funny how gender is now becoming “class”, with the white men being the privileged “bourgeoisie”, and women being the poor, oppressed “proletariat”. I guess that’s what happens when you inject Marxist philosophy into feminism. They believe women should own the means of production, but not actually be the ones producing. Leave the manual labor for the men, all the women want white-collar jobs.

      1. How is that different from pre-Marxist economics?

      2. In retrospect, not that much. However, my point that women are turning into commies still stands.

    6. No. All you have to do is not give a shit about *the patriarchy’s* truth, honesty, etc. Because the patriarchy’s truth, honesty, etc. is fundamentally violative of wymyns’ truth, honesty, etc.. This phallocentric insistence on “objective” truth is just an oppressive way of silencing and marginalizing wymyn and refusing to deal respectfully with their narratives. Amherst should be commended for its efforts, however tentative, to give wymyn a safe and supportive space in which to are allowed to tell their stories and engage the institutional oppression that victimizes them every day of their lives, just because they were born with two X chromosomes (or have decided to identify with people with two X chromosomes).

      1. Are you sure you dont write for Jezebel?

  2. She was the active party, not “an innocent bystander,” she claimed in the texts.

    Rape culture is really insidious /s

    1. Internalized misogyny!

      1. She hates her own guilty cunt.

  3. Of course, it’s very probable that everything happened exactly as Jones described it. It’s almost certain that Jones withdrew consent and Doe continued anyway. It’s most likely that Jones was unable to process the fact that she had been assaulted, and omitted this detail in her recollection of the encounter to her residential advisor. It’s certainly understandable that Jones was ready for sexual activity with a different, reluctant partner immediately after she was victimized by Doe. It’s a near certainty that the claims she made more than a year later represent the truth, and the claims she made on the actual night in question were merely a coping mechanism.

    Oh Robby, when will you ever learn?

    1. Took me a second…

      1. That long?

  4. In a subsequent text, she lamented that it had taken ML hours to agree to sexual activity with her.

    Smart kid. Well, except for eventually agreeing to it.

    1. You think a niggling little detail like whether sex actually took place would have saved Mr. Doe from the wrath of campus social justice?

    2. With that stutter she might have only asked him once or twice in those several hours

      1. In hindsight, with her stutter using “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” as their safe word probably wasn’t a good idea.

      2. I think with her stutter she might have asked him about a hundred times:

        “will you fu-fu-fu-fu…etc. etc…..me-me-me”.

    3. Could you imagine if it was a man saying this about a woman? That the woman had taken hours of constant pressure to finally agree to sexual activity?

  5. All men are predators and all women are victims. This is how it will be from now on–get used to it.

    1. No it won’t.

      After the crash physical strength will once again count towards food on the table and women will recognize that pussy and childbearing are their major assets.

      1. Believe me women already know where their major asset is and how to use it to control the weaker sex.

  6. Jones claimed that while she was performing oral sex on him, she withdrew consent and tried to stop.

    So… was it fellatio or irrumatio?

    1. The guy must have a cat penis – she couldn’t escape the barb.

    2. A succubus can’t stop succing once she starts. They’re born that way

  7. Ya know, you can gripe about lawyers all day long, and then you need one. I’ll bet Mr. Doe is lawyering-up as we speak

    1. People gripe about lawyers because lawyers rig the system so people will need them. It’s a legitimate gripe.

      1. Is that you Dick the Butcher?

    2. I’d say yes as he’s filed a lawsuit against the school.

      In a just-filed rebuttal to Doe’s lawsuit, the college defended its handling of the case?and subsequent expulsion of Doe?on grounds that it was “conducted with fundamental fairness, in good faith, and in full compliance with the College’s policies and the law.”

      1. “In a just-filed rebuttal to Doe’s lawsuit”

        Oops.

  8. Procedures were followed. Amherst has a procedure whereby you get a swift whack on the head followed by a sharp knee to the groin, similar to the procedures followed by many police departments. That’s procedural due process.

  9. His crime was having penis

    1. His crime is time
      and it’s eighteen and life to go

  10. So this guy is the luckiest and unluckiest dude this year?

  11. It’s only “rape” if a man does it.

    Also, I had heard before that he was passed out at the time and awoke to her giving him head. Is that not true?

  12. Um, so ? so I think I ? um, so, ? um, so I think I did say like well, something about ? Something about ? something about like well doing ? Well, about ? Well, about like well doing a bad thing. But I mean? So actually like well texted him, um, so almost ? so almost like right after, um, [Plaintiff] had, um, left. Um, I ? when I didn’t ? so I didn’t? So I didn’t ? So I didn’t ? So I didn’t ? I’ll have to type.

    Semi-on topic. I don’t know why I came across this, but a few days ago I ran across a video of Emma Sulkowicz talking about a concept she calls “aggressive friendliness” for something called “project desire”. Nothing related to her mattress project or the rape.

    It was a three minute ramble about how she talks to people at parties, and it was abundantly clear that she has the intellectual depth of a Snapchat-addled tween.

    1. Content and substance and ideas and in fact actual semantic payload are tools of the patriarchy. Setting forth a proposition and defending it with arguments is a tool of the patriarchy.

    2. Weaponized nice is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of.

  13. Let’s just hope that the campus SJW’s don’t learn about this shit!

    1. What? Actors DON’T work for free? I’m just shocked. SHOCKED, I tell you! /s

  14. Is John Doe…

    {takes Fist’s glasses away from Alamanian and dons them}

    …really, really his name?

    1. GIVE ME THOSE BACK YOU’RE USING THEM WRONG

    2. Puns.

      How do they work?

  15. This guy should self-identify as a woman and boom, protected class. Reckanize.

    1. You’re surprisingly good at this, Paul.

      (narrows eyes)

        1. Yesterday was brutal. I couldn’t even go out to the pool because the chemicals are off and need to be stabilized. Ugh. I actually contemplated hoofing it over to Denny Blaine Park* to swim in the lake.

          * A lot of people don’t realize that Denny Blaine is a nude park/beach.

          1. I’ve seen the kind of people willing to bare it all in Seattle, no thank you.

            Saturday went to the 3600′ level up around Snoqualmie so my friend could sight in his .308.

            We ended up having an honest-to-goodness heat casualty. Heat exhaustion. Had to high-tail it down the mountain and get him some fluids.

            Dude was talking gibberish, vomiting and was glassy-eyed.

            Lived for over 20 years in a harsh desert which was famously littered with the bodies of conquistadors who succumbed to the elements. Never once had an incident. And at that time, no one used sun screen or carried water.

            1. I think it’s that natives here don’t realize how much you have to hydrate when it gets like this, because they normally never have to. As someone who grew up in the horrible heat and humidity of the southern New England summer, I have some familiarity at least.

              1. Fall of 2000 I flew tyo Seattle. Woman next to me was flying home, had spent the Summer in Louisville. She complained asbout the heat and humidity. I told her it was the mildest summer I could remember. She didnt believe me.

                1. That shit is no joke. I did my Army basic training at Fort Knox in August and September of ’89. Coming from a fairly dry climate of eastern WA State it was quite a system shock. The moment I got off the plane in Louisville it was 90 degrees and 90% humidity. It did not improve after that.

                  Not one goddamn bit.

                  1. Good grief, what a bunch of pussies y’all are.

                    I drank two gallons of water today, spent half the day on a tractor in 90% humidity and 100 degrees. Heat index ( I didn’t check it) felt like 110.

                    We could use some fuckin’ rain around here.

              2. “As someone who grew up in the horrible heat and humidity of the southern New England summer”

                Just, stop.

  16. Should someone point out that Amherst College is named after Amherst, MA, which is named for Jeffrey Amherst who is known for the only documented instance of Europeans giving blankets from smallpox victims to American Indian enemies during the Pontiac War?

    1. I’m sure they’ve done penance for it. You don’t see Brown wringing their hands over their endowment which was begun, in part, by wealth from the slave trade. They just set up a committee then made a public apology and gave money to certain campus centers.

      1. Is that the right link? It examines Ward Churchill’s claims about the US Army in the 1830s. ILETDO was referring to this event (1765):

        http://academic.udayton.edu/he…..ntro02.htm

        Evidence there is much more in favor of the prosecution.

        1. I think we can trust Ward Churchill. He has never lied about anything.

          1. Paul’s link is excellent. It’s the record of all the lies WC told. It just doesn’t seem to be relevant to In League’s original comment.

          2. That’s Chief Churchill to you!

          3. I wouldn’t mind running into him in a bar somewhere and finding a valid pretext to beat the shit out of him. An opportunity for that level of catharsis is rare indeed. Also, I want to test a theory I have that he shrieks like a little girl when you beat his testicles and he begs like a wino for mercy.

            1. Just so we’re clear, My back went out on me recently, and I am taking a LOT of pharmaceuticals for pain management in the short term. So if my posts are uneven and contain more strangeness than usual, well, tough shit.

        2. By “prosecution”, you mean the people vs. Ward Churchill?

          Yeah, I got the right link. Churchill fabricated the fucksticks out of that account.

          1. Sorry, I’m not explaining this very well. Your link to Churchill’s shit is about him fabricating a story of the US Army giving smallpox blankets to the Mandans in 1837. No doubt he made that up.

            In League’s point was about the British Army giving smallpox blankets to Indians in the 1760s. And there is a pretty good paper trail saying that happened.

            1. Oh, apologies. Yes, I’m not as familiar with the Amherst angle as much as I am with the Churchill /Zinn angle which is bullshit– if I may put a fine point on it.

              I’m still skeptical of the Amherst story because there’s lots of problems with carrying around blankets that are infected with what was considered a deadly disease in 1760.

              “Here, Paul, throw these Anthrax-infected sheets into the back of your cart and take them to the orphanage!”

              You’ll likely kill everyone who handles them along the way.

              1. Good point. No solid proof but there was intent and some execution of intent. But it is also possible the Indians contracted the disease simply being around other infected people.

                1. But it is also possible the Indians contracted the disease simply being around other infected people.

                  That is THE most likely scenario.

                  Boatloads of cases of native people dying from shit brought to them by early explorers.

                  1. Well, if Churchill says it happened it must be gospel. After all, that disreputable, talentless hack would NEVER lie, right?

                  2. and millions of white folk dying every year from cancer thanks to the natives tobacco. i’d say everyone sucks,

                    -FFM

                  3. and millions of white folk dying every year from cancer thanks to the natives tobacco. i’d say everyone sucks,

                    -FFM

      2. I was considering quoting the letters and deciding against it… figured it was well known enough and the letters are quoted in the Wikipedia article.

    2. And now they’re making up for it by railroading an asian man. Makes complete sense.

  17. …in full compliance with the College’s policies…

    This part seems irrelevant.

    1. to the contrary, we may have found the problem.

      1. Well, irrelevant as a defense.

  18. “Doe was drunk to the point of incapacitation when he and Jones?his girlfriend’s roommate?began a mutually-consensual sexual encounter. Jones claimed that while she was performing oral sex on him, she withdrew consent and tried to stop. Doe held her head and forced her to keep going, she alleged. Doe denied doing so, but couldn’t remember exactly what had happened because he was black-out drunk.”

    Apparently by her admission, Jones *consented to and engaged in* oral sex with someone who was *black-out drunk*. Jones is probably a rapist by legal standards, and certainly by university standards.

    Oh wait, I forgot about the vagina exemption to rape laws and regulations. Never mind. Carry on.

    1. Jones is probably a rapist by legal standards, and certainly by university standards.

      Yup. Well, except for the little-known vagina proviso. No one with a vagina can ever be a rapist.

      1. What is up with the slut shaming?

        Why do wimmen with little-known vaginas get a pass? Just because some tart has shown her muffin to every guy in the dorm, that doesn’t mean that she can be blamed.

  19. Here’s your fucking slippery slope!

    Nurse Matt Hickling weds his 4 y/o cancer patient

    What’s next? Plural pedophilic cancer weddings?

    1. It’s not the marriage that’s the problem here, it’s the inevitable divorce.

      1. The honeymoon will probably be a problem too.

    2. correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t Florida Man a male nurse and wasn’t he gone for a couple of weeks?

  20. “… Amherst has utterly refused to take a look that text messages that might acquit him.”

    They don’t want to open Schrodinger’s box.

      1. There’s something fishy about this whole thread

  21. In a just-filed rebuttal to Doe’s lawsuit, the college defended its handling of the case?and subsequent expulsion of Doe?on grounds that it was “conducted with fundamental fairness, in good faith, and in full compliance with the College’s policies and the law.

    So, IOW, they now believe that they are the cops? Procedures were followed! All administrators made it home safely!

  22. Yes, but what does Jezebel think?

    Or, should I just assume that they completely ignore these stories when the narrative isn’t shaping up right?

    1. Let me guess = marcotte or someone will get hold of this and determine that “Right Wing Media has Jumped All Over This Case“, something something something MRA-crybabies, blah blah blah Real Victims Being Ignored, yadda yadda Probably Raped Someone Else Before, herbledy derbledy gerbledy Slut-Shaming Pile-On…. etc.

  23. the college defended its handling of the case?and subsequent expulsion of Doe?on grounds that it was “conducted with fundamental fairness, in good faith, and in full compliance with the College’s policies and the law.”

    Um, so ? so I think I ? um, so, ? um, so I think I did say like well, something about ? Something about ? something about like well doing ? Well, about ? Um, I ? when I didn’t ? so I didn’t? So I didn’t ? So I didn’t ? So I didn’t ? I’ll have to type. My final examinations, however poor the results, were “conducted with fundamental fairness, in good faith, and in full compliance with the College’s policies and the law.”

  24. “Once again, justice will be done. Our lives will be reaffirmed, safe and secure. Here on Cardassia, all crimes are solved, all criminals are punished, all endings are happy. Even the poorest of our subjects can walk the streets in the dead of night in perfect safety. You’re only one man, but your conviction will be a salutary experience for millions.” – ST:DS9 “Tribunal”

    Why do they keep reading dystopian sci-fi as an instruction manual?

    1. Well, it’s a proven fact proggies masturbate to 1984.

  25. Doe was drunk to the point of incapacitation when he and Jones?his girlfriend’s roommate?began a mutually-consensual sexual encounter.

    If this is the agreed narrative of events, why was Jones not given the boot for assault as well?

    1. Aren’t you paying attention to the comments? Because she’s a woman and therefore not responsible for her actions!

  26. She is sucking his dick but decides enough is enough? Maybe she didn’t want him to ejaculate in her mouth. So why didn’t this little prick teaser work in the hand and finish him that way?

    Because she’s a prick teaser???

    1. Maybe a lesson from Monica?

  27. The politically correct need only expel male students under suspicion to earn the necessary credits to enter heaven. The truth has nothing to do with anything. There are no credits awarded for finding males students “not guilty” of sexual predations. Negative credits are incurred by finding a female student at fault of any kind. This is so basic; what’s the big deal?

  28. “You say you were raped? OK, let’s take you down to the police station so you can file a report. If the guy is arrested, we’ll suspend him until the charges are resolved.

    “What? You want *us* to adjudicate his guilt? I’m afraid your traumatic experience has gotten you confused – we’re not equipped to adjudicate rape complaints, that’s for the real-world courts to handle.”

    1. Well said.

      “In loco officiaris”?

  29. Um, so ? so I think I ? um, so, ? um, so I think I did say like well, something about ? Something about ? something about like well doing ? Well, about ? Well, about like well doing a bad thing. But I mean? So actually like well texted him, um, so almost ? so almost like right after, um, [Plaintiff] had, um, left. Um, I ? when I didn’t ? so I didn’t? So I didn’t ? So I didn’t ? So I didn’t ? I’ll have to type.

    Jones is a stutterer, and was allowed to type her response:

    Really Robby? Couldn’t just say she was a stutterer from the start? Just seems mean to print that.

    1. Maybe she didn’t stutter until this horrific incident?

      1. I was going to make a joke about “k-k-k Ken,” but that would look too much like “KKK Ken.”

    1. The evidence:

      is that these people bore me.

      Seriously though, there are people on the good side of this fight describing him as “passed out,” and as someone who enjoys his alcohol, passed out is vastly different than blacked out. I’m willing to admit that blacked out, he could have behaved badly. But, since we don’t know the facts, her behavior does not clearly prove anything. ::brain implant begins shocking me:: Sorry guys, all accusers are telling the truth.

      1. What’s going on? Did I just black out?

  30. This kind of pandering, extreme no-accountability feminism on college campuses is what expanded the fan base of extreme right wingers like Rush Limbaugh when he became popular in the early 90s.

    Even if she says what happens is true, why is the guy’s actions during a drunk blackout any more criminal than her actions which even by her own admission she initiated. Shouldn’t she be guilty of forcing herself on his male member initially? So wasn’t she the rapist first?

    1. Like the magic ability of people not being able to be racist if they are of colour, humans with vaginas are incapable of rape.
      Proglodyte Maxim #3001

  31. How do you withdraw consent as a stutterer with your mouth full? Maybe she should have texted him?

  32. “she lamented that it had taken ML hours to agree to sexual activity with her.”

    Oh, I bet.

    “Um, so ? so I think I ? um, so, ? um, so I think you should l-let me.. ? Something about ? something about like well, we should ? Well, I want to ? Well, about like, but I mean? So actually I ? I w-want to…I want ? So I w-want ? Um, so, I really want to…but, like, I really w-want to….

    …s-suck your dick.”

  33. “Doe denied doing so, but couldn’t remember exactly what had happened because he was black-out drunk.”

    I’m willing to bet the same policy they used to hammer Doe says something about being too drunk to provide consent. However, the fact that the girl admitted to starting a sexual encounter with someone too drunk to provide consent seems to be completely irrelevant. Title IX suit, anyone?

  34. Maybe she started stuttering when she was performing fellatio…

  35. It sounds like he was too drunk to properly consent and thus was raped, but nobody cares. If I recall, the law has “Being forced to penetrate” as a far lower offense than rape, and is hard to actually get a conviction on it.

  36. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,

    http://www.Careersonline10.tk

  37. Not the first time a woman sleeping with her roommates “boyfriend” cried wolf. Very typical response actually.

  38. They got the outcome they wanted, why change it for reality and stuff?

  39. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.online-jobs9.com

  40. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.online-jobs9.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.