And his lawsuit can allege things that the Columbia lawsuit did not. Each Plaintiff is different. Tubman's case is worth more . A lot more. He is a highly skilled athlete who can reasonably be expected to play pro ball. Due to the Rice situation the NFL is very leary of any player with the baggage of a rape allegation false or not. It is not speculation. It is foreseeable that this could literally cost him millions of dollars.
If he comes back to play for UK he is a much much stronger position. Looks like he was falsely accused and should be no problem . HOWEVER if he is kicked out of school it looks like he is guilty . His reputation is ruined . NFL will think twice or three themes about taking on that baggage. If the facts are what has been portrayed on this board I think he has been horribly wronged.
As I have pointed out previously Ray Larson's people are the best. They deal with this all of the time. It is obvious that they felt something in the young lady's case did not ring true. Their standard of proof was even much less than the 50.1% in a civil matter and they would not touch it. Neither should UK.
The members of the committee I understand are professors. I suggest in their required reading they read "The Oxbow incident " which involved an illegal lynching.
This looked like the best place to tag in on this thread. Let me first say that I have every sympathy for a victim of "true" sexual assault and no sympathy whatsoever for any man who actually commits any such assault.
In the wake of UofL basketball player Chris Jones recently being exonerated by a Grand Jury (i.e., "no true bill") on similar accusations I did a little Google research on "lawsuits against colleges for false sexual assault charges". I'm not going to post any links as there are a number of reports and, in general, each case must stand on its' own merit but I would urge anyone who wants a better understanding of the "complexity" of these situations to do so.
Not that it makes any difference, I will also note that "damages" from a potential and statistically unlikely professional career would have no merit whatsoever. In one case I read about a young man was dismissed from school in his last year who had a lucrative Wall Street job lined up after graduation. (FWIW, I saw nothing of him suing the school for said damages).
Several things I gleaned from reading other reports about "sexual assault on campuses"...
1. Unless the victim acknowledges it was consensual there is virtually no mechanism for the accused to "prove" his innocence. From the accused's standpoint, short of video evidence (yeah, sure) there is little evidence to prove him innocent. Even evidence of continued "friendship" after the incident (i.e., texts, Facebook, e-mails, meetings, etc.) have been determined to be insufficient to prove consensual.
2. Title IX (yes, that Title IX) requires schools to investigate reports of sexual assault. This aspect of Title IX has been a major point of emphasis in recent years.
3. On campus investigations are done in parallel to the criminal justice system but performed by school officials usually without legal training. There are enormous differences in "standard of evidence" in the two systems. The on campus procedure require scant evidence or burden of proof of the crime (the accusation alone is often sufficient) but results in harsh academic punishment (i.e., expulsion). Without question, the possible withholding of Federal funds for a Title IX violation is the backdrop for all on-campus investigations.
4. In cases involving alcohol, the on campus "finding" is often "too drunk to consent".
5. Lawsuits by alleged offenders against the school are becoming a bit more frequent but to date have been largely unsuccessful.
Peace
...Hope these "progressive" jackasses are happy
