Title IX

Expelled for Sexual Misconduct and Falsely Accused of Having HIV, an Indiana Wesleyan Student Had To Take an STD Test During the Coronavirus Pandemic

"It's far worse than we could have imagined," the student's attorney tells Reason.

|

It was October 29, 2019, when John's life took a frightening turn: The Indiana Wesleyan University (IWU) student suffered a seizure that knocked him unconscious for more than 15 minutes.

Additional seizures in the subsequent weeks necessitated several emergency trips to the hospital. He was prescribed medication that made him feel very tired and forced to refrain from physical activity, jeopardizing his likelihood of returning to the baseball team. John missed a significant amount of class time, but by the end of the semester he was still on track to graduate in the spring.

The coronavirus pandemic has prevented IWU from holding a formal graduation ceremony, so the school plans to mail the diplomas next week, but John won't be getting his. On December 12, the administration expelled him for sexual misconduct, just three weeks after receiving a complaint from a female student, Amy. (I am using pseudonyms for both.)

Now John is suing IWU officials for breach of contract and infliction of emotional distress. His case is similar to the hundreds of other lawsuits filed against universities for violating principles of basic fairness in Title IX sexual misconduct adjudication. But it's unusual in one notable way: Unlike many other accused men, John is also suing his accuser.

That's because Amy didn't just accuse John of sexual misconduct. She also allegedly told one of her professors that he had given her HIV, according to documents obtained by Reason and cited in the lawsuit. What's more, IWU never told John about this: The information didn't come to his attention until months later, after his attorneys uncovered it. The discovery necessitated that John—an immunocompromised person—take a trip to a medical facility to be tested for HIV in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. His test came back negative.

"We did not have to bring a claim against [Amy], but once we dug into the documents and saw what was there, it was shocking," Kristina Supler, an attorney for John, tells Reason. "We knew IWU's process was markedly unfair, but what has already been learned through expedited discovery, it's far worse than we could have imagined."

John and Amy met during the fall semester. They engaged in amorous activity throughout the month of October, having sexual intercourse on one occasion. They were technically violating school policy: IWU is a private, Christian school that has banned sexual activity outside of marriage. IWU also prohibits students of the opposite sex from congregating in each other's dorm rooms without official permission. Amy had repeatedly been reprimanded for breaking curfew and was told she could face repercussions for any further violations. On the evening of Saturday, November 16, after John texted her to come over, Amy opted to climb a rope ladder and sneak through John's second-floor window to visit him.

Amy and John made dinner and watched a movie on his couch with John's roommate, according to his lawsuit. Then John's roommate went to bed, and the couple had sex. Amy would later tell IWU officials that she told John "no" and "stop," but John denies that she ever said anything of the sort. On the contrary, she was enthusiastic and fully consented, according to John's account.

"Afterwards, Amy continued to hang out in John's dorm room talking with John and then spent time in his roommate's bedroom talking, laughing, and texting John in the other room," the lawsuit reads. "Later that night and the next day, Amy communicated multiple times with John and his roommate by text and snapchat, without any suggestion that something was wrong."

By Monday, Amy apparently felt differently. A friend of hers told this friend's mother—an employee at IWU—that Amy said she had been raped. The mother then informed IWU's Title IX official, who is responsible for handling sexual misconduct matters involving students. The official reached out to Amy, who filed a formal complaint. Dean Andrew Parker immediately imposed a no-contact order between Amy and John, and interviewed the latter on November 21.

John met with the administration again on December 9, in the middle of finals week. By December 12, Parker had already decided to find John responsible for sexual assault and dismiss him from the school for at least a year. John received a letter from the university explaining that Parker had determined it was "more likely than not" that Amy had not consented to sex with John. Parker told John he could reapply to be a student in the spring of 2021. He also barred John's coaches—with whom John was quite close—from speaking to him.

John immediately sought an appeal, raising a number of issues concerning both the finding against him and the manner in which the decision was made. IWU used a single-investigator model to handle the accusation, and thus John was never provided a hearing at which he could cross-examine Amy or address the evidence against him. In fact, he never received even a written statement detailing Amy's account, nor was he invited to submit one himself. He accused Parker of mischaracterizing his roommate's statements: His roommate, in fact, had offered to submit a statement bolstering John's case, according to the lawsuit.

"Dean Parker ignored [Amy's] entry into John's room via rope ladder, ignored her texts to him after the encounter, and ignored evidence suggesting that a bruise she alleges he caused actually came from slipping on the ladder," wrote John in the lawsuit.

John also took issue with Parker's contention that John's medical condition had made him "angry or aggressive," assertions that John was never afforded an opportunity rebut.

In any case, his request for an appeal was denied.

John's lawsuit raises a number of credibility issues regarding Amy.

For one thing, IWU offers amnesty to people who file sexual misconduct complaints in the event that the investigation of the complaint turns up evidence that the accuser committed a policy violation. Amy was on thin ice with the administration following her repeated curfew violations. Filing a sexual misconduct report might have been one way to protect herself from getting into any further trouble.

Then there was the HIV claim. On December 11, an IWU professor, Anneke Stasson, filed a report indicating that a student—Amy—had previously said she had been raped. Amy was now requesting a grade of "incomplete" for the class, despite the deadline having passed. Stasson asked Amy how she was doing and if her rapist was still on campus. Amy said that he was, and according to Stasson's report, "She then told me that she had been tested for STDs and she tested positive for HIV. It makes me really worried to think the guy who gave her HIV is still on this campus."

Parker received Stasson's report on the same day that he ruled against John. This creates just two possibilities: One is that he didn't believe Amy's claim to be HIV positive, but nevertheless still ruled that Amy's account of what happened to her was more credible than John's. The other is that he did believe Amy, but nevertheless failed to warn John that he was at risk of having contracted HIV. At no point did any IWU official inform John about the HIV possibility, according to the lawsuit.

It was not until months later, after John had decided to move forward with a lawsuit against IWU, that his attorneys discovered Stasson's report. The attorneys then asked IWU to verify Amy's HIV status, but school officials said they were under no obligation to do so, according to the lawsuit. Left with no other choice, John—who was sheltering in place with his family in California—had to break quarantine on April 6 and travel to a medical facility to take an HIV test, despite the general need for immunocompromised individuals to avoid exposure to potential COVID-19 vectors.

Amy explained to Inside Higher Ed that Stasson had misunderstood her: She never told the professor she had tested positive for HIV, Amy claimed. She also said she did not find out about Stasson's report until March, and would have set the record straight if she had known. She even faulted the university for not telling John about the report.

"I have no respect for him whatsoever but the decency would be to inform him regardless," she said, according to Inside Higher Ed.

Indiana Wesleyan University did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but a spokesperson told Inside Higher Ed: "Indiana Wesleyan University is committed to creating the safest campus community possible for our students. We closely follow federal regulations for the investigation of sexual assault and have personnel who have been thoroughly trained in process and procedure."

In any case, the HIV claim motivated John to add Amy and Parker as defendants in the lawsuit.

"We want this student to be able to resume classes and get his degree," Susan Stone, an attorney for John, told Reason. "And we want the university to make reputational repair."

Advertisement

NEXT: California Coronavirus Antibody Studies Likely Wrong That 12.4 Million of New York City's 8.4 Million Residents Have Already Been Infected With the Virus

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. For one thing, IWU offers amnesty to people who file sexual misconduct complaints in the event that the investigation of the complaint turns up evidence that the accuser committed a policy violation. Amy was on thin ice with the administration following her repeated curfew violations. Filing a sexual misconduct report might have been one way to protect herself from getting into any further trouble.

    No, not possible. Womyn never lie about being raped, even if there’s a clear motive to do so. #BelieveAllWomyn # TimesUp #Whatever,GoFuckYourselvesSJWs

    1. They ESPECIALLY don’t lie about whom they get HIV from.

      1. Nor do they lie about even having HIV in the first place and then furiously backtrack later when it turns out they don’t have it. No sirree, not them.

      2. Change Your Life Right Now! Work From Comfort Of Your Home And Receive Your First Paycheck Within A Week.xzc. No Experience Needed, No Boss Over Your Shoulder… Say Goodbye To Your Old Job! Limited Number Of Spots Open…
        Find out how HERE……More here

  2. With all due respect, why is any of this the business of IWU?

    1. Title IX. It’s a whole giant ball of Federal law that requires it’s own title. It’s been stretch and abused over the decades that it now is the biggest legal joke ever. A very bad joke. Being told over and over by very bad people.

      The sex happened on campus, thus IWU has legal jurisdiction. Not the police, the university. Even if the sex happened off campus, the parties will still students, and thus the university has legal jurisdiction over matters of rape. Not the police, the university.

      Of course, the university can’t imprison anyone. They can only expel and not refund any tuition. But it still can destroy a person’s life and reputation.

      1. And apparently put it on their permanent record.

        1. Permanent academic record. Not sure that’s an actual public government record that anyone at the courthouse can look up.

      2. The correct answer to Rich’s question, is that the federal government subsidizes universities; thus, has a say in how they are run, well because anti-sex discrimination was a big deal to Democrats until Bill had Monica service him. Conscripting liberal universities to implement their desired rules via Title IX, they get the universities to do their dirty work, while molding the universities and society to more liberal thinking, or so they thought. What they’ve really managed to do, is make a university education worthless if it’s not in a STEM field. Actually worse than worthless, because you become a debt slave to government from which bankruptcy is no escape. Just like indentured servitude due to debts, facilitated slavery for control freaks, just like many Democrats want. If it weren’t for Democrats, there wouldn’t be a student loan program from which you can’t discharge your debts via bankruptcy, and that is funding liberal professors while making many government debt slaves.

    2. Lily, Make 6150 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website…. Read More

  3. Amy and John made dinner and watched a movie on his couch with John’s roommate, according to his lawsuit. Then John’s roommate went to bed, and the couple had sex. Amy would later tell IWU officials that she told John “no” and “stop,” but John denies that she ever said anything of the sort. On the contrary, she was enthusiastic and fully consented, according to John’s account.

    This is where, absent evidence, eyewitness testimony, or something resembling proof, the matter should have been dropped.

    “Afterwards, Amy continued to hang out in John’s dorm room talking with John and then spent time in his roommate’s bedroom talking, laughing, and texting John in the other room,” the lawsuit reads. “Later that night and the next day, Amy communicated multiple times with John and his roommate by text and snapchat, without any suggestion that something was wrong.”

    And yet, for some reason, I am expected to #BelieveAllWomen.

  4. Are we allowed to question whether Amy herself even has HIV or does that cut too close for some civil libertarians comfort?

  5. Amy explained to Inside Higher Ed that Stasson had misunderstood her.

    So Amy admits that there was miscommunication between her and Stasson, and ultimately the investigator, over at least one critical fact. And now people are supposed to trust the verdict?

  6. Now, I don’t know whether or not this guy is guilty. I wasn’t there. (I wasn’t invited.)

    However, as noted above, Title IX has been applied so as to make universities into policing and adjudicatory agencies – and they seem to do a worse job even than the real-world justice system, which isn’t exactly perfect. The only thing I can say in favor of the campus “justice” system is they don’t seem to do plea-bargains, so at least there’s a hearing of *some* kind, though not it seems of a kind which represents the best of our judicial tradition.

    1. If this article is accurate, the guy is not guilty of rape for sure. And he did NOT get a hearing, contrary to your assertion about “campus justice”.

      1. I said, open quotes, campus, open quotes again, justice, close quotes, system, close quotes.

        Thus:

        “campus ‘justice’ system”

        1. Eddy – you said *some* kind of hearing. There wasn’t – she just made a complaint and it was accepted. It seems you probably meant the University process is highly flawed but with quotes, asterisks and apostrophes, it is certainly possible to be unsure of exactly what you meant.

  7. ‘Sexual misconduct’ is a nebulous, meaningless, subjective term. A catch all the stuff can be made to mean whatever someone want it to mean.

    It’s pure bullshit.

  8. Amy had repeatedly been reprimanded for breaking curfew and was told she could face repercussions for any further violations.

    Made a mental note at this point in the story of the probable motivation for her claim, and it turned out on reading further that, yes, I was correct.

  9. Oh, c’mon, the guy attended a co-ed college and then had sex with one of the students? Clearly, he was just asking for a rape charge. He got what he deserved for being so stupid.

    1. Stay away from American women, they are unsafe at any speed.

      1. That’s the nadir of your comments.

  10. All of the incentives for the administrators are to do exactly what they did here.

    The fact that the mother is a university employee makes this worse. Mother needs to protect the reputation of her devil spawn who loves the forbidden fruit. I bet she looks like Carrie’s mom.

  11. Keep yer britches on and none of this can happen. The downside of getting laid is not worth the momentary pleasure.

    1. There is no actual requirement that they have met, let alone taken their britches off, for this to happen.

  12. They were technically violating school policy: IWU is a private, Christian school that has banned sexual activity outside of marriage.

    If that’s school policy, then he violated it, and can be expelled. Full stop.

    Not the sort of place I would choose to go to college.

    1. I have to agree with you that he violated the policies and can be expelled. But I am also 100% positive per this article, he didn’t rape her so she should be expelled too.

  13. Wasn’t this “more likely than not” standard created by Obama? Why hasn’t Trump rescinded it?

    1. Very good question. Paging K. Kardashian, stat!

    2. Correct me if I’m wrong, but Obama made the lesser evidentiary standard mandatory, while under Trump it’s gone back to being optional, meaning universities can still *choose* to use more likely than not as their standard, which apparently many universities are already inclined to do (why “give” extra rights to students?).

    3. It wasn’t a standard, but rather guidance with the threat of the DOJ behind it and also I believe withholding DOE funds. But it looks like the universities adopted it wholeheartedly and even though DeVos has issued new guidance to increase the legal requirements for conviction, the universities have stuck to the previous guidance which isn’t surprising given the types of people that run the university administrations.

  14. Sorry! I support TRUE victims of sexual abuse and violence. First of all, that HIV claim is hearsay. Second, it appears “Amy” found the errors of her sexual libido way and needed to CYA so she wouldn’t be expelled from IWU. Shouldn’t the texts and snapchat from Amy post-sex be evidence enough to support the true victim here – John?

    1. ChazH – remember Emma Sulkowicz the mattress girl? Post sex communications were completely ignored even though they too were friendly because she was traumatized or similar.

    2. ChazH – remember Emma Sulkowicz the mattress girl? Post sex communications were completely ignored even though they too were friendly because she was traumatized or something similar.

    3. John was a co-villain in this tawdry affair. (I am presuming John had a fair opportunity to know the school’s policy, and neither John nor his attorneys suggested otherwise).

      By slandering John, Amy turned her co-villain into a victim.

  15. Honestly, none of these people in this article are that great.

  16. Judy Smith started working for them online and in a short time after I’ve started averaging 15k a month••• The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start••• This is where to start… More Details

  17. Last month i have made and received $93,826 by working online from homein my part time.I am a student and was doing this in my free time for 3 to 4 hrs a day using my laptop.Very simple and easy to do work and regular earning from this are just awesome. Now every person can get this and start making money online byfollowing steps on this website…for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot……..
    Read More

    1. Why are you such a peter breath?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.