OT: Tubman Accuser Files Civil Rights Complaint against UK

[Smashcat]

http://www.courier-journal.com/stor...inst-uk-tubman-rape-allegation-case/72820840/

A grand jury declined to indict Tubman on rape charges in February, but a Title IX hearing at UK, which uses a preponderance of evidence as its burden of proof, had previously ruled against Tubman, permanently suspending him from the university, according to the Herald-Leader. A University Appeals Board ruled against Tubman, a former Seneca High student from Louisville, at two subsequent hearings. But according to the complaint provided to the Herald-Leader, Tubman was granted a third appeal which has yet to be scheduled.

The civil rights complaint filed against the university alleges “the University of Kentucky has condoned, permitted and engaged in a hostile environment against the victim of a sexual assault,” by continuing the appeals process, the Herald-Leader reported.

 

[warrior_SW]

And THIS would be why UK made the decision they did, yet they still are getting complaints filed against them...I don't see this one sticking though.

 

[jauk11]

I don't really know enough about the situation to comment a lot, I wasn't there, but it seems like you can sue just about anybody about anything in the US.

Australia has a BEAUTIFUL system, if they still have it, no doubt the lawyers that run most things hate it, but there the law was that if you sued someone and lost the case you had to pay your lawyers fees AND the defendants, sure keeps a lot of trivial lawsuits out of court.

That would never happen in the US, the lawyers run the country.

 

[Xception]

Cut ties and move on , it's in the best interests of all involved to start with a clean slate for Tubman , UK and the accuser/victim . If Tubman wants to attend UK then it's his right to keep appealing but imo the football program should stop encouraging him if they are . We're never going to know what happened and that makes it the only solution , the appeals board maintaining the previous rulings is the best outcome . I'm looking at it as two people , I'm not factoring in that Tubman is good at football and would help the team .

 

[WildCard]

What a sad, sad story. Demonstrates a stunning conflict between Title IX regulations and legal process.

Peace

 

[zcats]

This administration has put the Universities in a nightmare over this issue. They have basically set up a parallel legal system which lacks the protections of the constitution and the courts. Very depressing.

 

[Stretch98]

Don't see how this plaintiff has standing to complain about UK's disciplinary proceeding against another student.

 

[JHB4UK]

I told you people last winter/spring that the accuser & her family were making it impossible for UK to consider bringing Tubmam back. Getting the picture now? UK layer down and slapped him with a lifetime ban despite the DA saying there wasn't a case - and she is STILL suing.

She & her family frequently threatened anyone of authority at UK that they would go to national media and cry about the unfair treatment a poor little girl was getting from a big bad college wanting to protect a football player. All of you who crushed UK over their Tubman decisions have no idea the guns these people had pointing at their heads, all the time, always threatening to pull the trigger.

 

[Tskware]

I told you people last winter/spring that the accuser & her family were making it impossible for UK to consider bringing Tubmam back. Getting the picture now? UK layer down and slapped him with a lifetime ban despite the DA saying there wasn't a case - and she is STILL suing.

She & her family frequently threatened anyone of authority at UK that they would go to national media and cry about the unfair treatment a poor little girl was getting from a big bad college wanting to protect a football player. All of you who crushed UK over their Tubman decisions have no idea the guns these people had pointing at their heads, all the time, always threatening to pull the trigger.

You have been on these boards a long time, and I respect your posts.

On this issue though, my take is 100% opposite. UK could not have F'ed up this case more procedurally if they tried. And actually, rather than immediately running to the media, the end result was that the woman is about to go through the FOURTH hearing on the same issue, not counting the Grand Jury. UK didn't even tell her when one of the hearings was, she found out about it later. If it was your daughter, would you want her to have to testify about a sexual assault multiple times? Does that seem fair or just to you? Aside from the specifics of the Tubman case, a quote in the article says this never ending appeal process is becoming SOP for defense attorneys at universities defending assault cases, keep appealing, keep it in front of one board or the other, until the victim drops out of school and gives up. And 99% of the time the athlete keeps right on playing, either at the original school (Jameis Winston) or a new school (the kid from TCU now at UL and the kid from Georgia who Nick Saban welcomed with open arms)

I agree with the post above who said it is time to move on, nothing good is going to come of Tubman playing here, not sure it is even an option anyway.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

This is a good example of why Universities should not be adjudicating serious crimes. This is outside their experience, expertise and resources. Both sides are likely to have due process complaints. This problem is happening at a growing rate all over the country. Let serious crimes go through the criminal court system and let the chips fall where they may. The schools could then wash their hands of the whole ordeal. Any appeals and complaints could then fall at the feet of professionals, the judges and attorneys involved, but the school would shoulder no responsibility. Universities should stick with minor student issues such as cheating, drinking and so on.

 

[shutzhund]

Didn't believe that contrived accusation she made against Tubman and she's proving herself to be more than a bit unstable now. If they walk like a duck……………..

How would you like to have your son to start dating her?

 

[bigblueinsanity]

I told you people last winter/spring that the accuser & her family were making it impossible for UK to consider bringing Tubmam back. Getting the picture now? UK layer down and slapped him with a lifetime ban despite the DA saying there wasn't a case - and she is STILL suing.

She & her family frequently threatened anyone of authority at UK that they would go to national media and cry about the unfair treatment a poor little girl was getting from a big bad college wanting to protect a football player. All of you who crushed UK over their Tubman decisions have no idea the guns these people had pointing at their heads, all the time, always threatening to pull the trigger.

Anyone with common sense knew UK had to ban Tubman due to PR issues/pressure. At that time, MSM were killing people over this issue and causing tons of PR problems. Thats cooled off a bit, but still not enough to make any other decision other than dismissal.

Legally, it didnt matter because there would be lawsuits either way.

Yes the title IX procedures are an absolute joke. Theyre in place to give the schools the ability to kick a out a male student based on allegations alone. Equality? Hardly. Nothing equal or just about it.

 

[zcats]

Well said BBFGa. These kangaroo courts are a travesty and frankly I doubt they are legal under the constitution. None of us know what happened between these two people. This is a legal nightmare and of course we get one side of a complaint from a lawsuit and have the usual bandwagon jumpers running for a rope.

From all accounts this was a very complex and twisted story. Nobody got jumped in a dark parking lot. The university is not the students legal protector nor are they their parents. It is impossible to determine who is the victim in many cases like this or if both parties expressed bad judgement. The University is in a no win situation brought about by the current federal administration. They are forced to adjudicate an accusation without the resources, experience or in my opinion, authority. It is a matter of time before this flawed process is struck down by the court. These claims belong in the courts.

 

[Pike 96]

You have been on these boards a long time, and I respect your posts.

On this issue though, my take is 100% opposite. UK could not have F'ed up this case more procedurally if they tried. And actually, rather than immediately running to the media, the end result was that the woman is about to go through the FOURTH hearing on the same issue, not counting the Grand Jury. UK didn't even tell her when one of the hearings was, she found out about it later. If it was your daughter, would you want her to have to testify about a sexual assault multiple times? Does that seem fair or just to you? Aside from the specifics of the Tubman case, a quote in the article says this never ending appeal process is becoming SOP for defense attorneys at universities defending assault cases, keep appealing, keep it in front of one board or the other, until the victim drops out of school and gives up. And 99% of the time the athlete keeps right on playing, either at the original school (Jameis Winston) or a new school (the kid from TCU now at UL and the kid from Georgia who Nick Saban welcomed with open arms)

I agree with the post above who said it is time to move on, nothing good is going to come of Tubman playing here, not sure it is even an option anyway.

Have you ever had a relative accused of sexual misconduct at a school? Because I have and have seen the obsurdity of this process up close. It is beyond frightening what can be considered sexual misconduct and you feel held hostage by the schools "process". You have NO ability to depose the accuser, have an attorney or guardian provide guidance at interviews and hearings, or even look at the evidence presented against you. In Tubman case for instance, when the evidence was thoroughly reviewed by a grand jury, charges were not pursued. Despite out skepticism against lawyers and the legal system, it surely is a MUCH for accurate and fair process verses what the Universities arr doing.
The accused life can be just as devastated as the accuser in these cases. Before my personal experience with this process, I would hear stats from advocacy groups like 1 in every 2 females would be a victim of sexual assault while at college and I felt shocked and worried for the victims. After what can truly be considered sexual misconduct by these ruling bodies...it put that misleading Stat in a whole new light.

I think the natural reaction by most of us in these type of situations is to either consciously or subconsciously think the accused MUST have done something wrong because what woman in their right mind would accuse someone of sexual assault when it didn't actually happen. Be very leary of that tendency in a case where no criminal case is pursued. The level of "evidence" needed to accuse someone of sexual misconduct under title 9 is laughable and frightening to say the least and the code of conduct these students agree to is nothing more than a blank check in these situations to try and cover the universities from any and all possible liability.
Like someone said previously in this thread...we should be just as concerned for the very realistic injustice against our sons as we are against our daughters in these cases.

 

[Perrin75]

For those who actually read the article, could you help me sort something out. It says that there were two appeals, and a third one has been granted but not scheduled. However, a couple of paragraphs later it says:

Tubman’s first appeal resulted from his inability to appear for the initial Oct. 8 hearing because he was at a court proceeding. The second appeal was based on the accuser not appearing for the second hearing, though the complaint noted two employees of UK’s Violence Intervention Program Center told her appearing could compromise the ongoing criminal investigation. The accuser participated in the third hearing by phone, but Tubman appealed again on the grounds that two police officers had testified together during the hearing and his advisor was not allowed to whisper to him.

So, which is it. Were there three or four appeals? Regardless, it does appear that this current law suit is simply legal maneuvering and has nothing to do with the merits of the case. Each of the people involved made an appeal to have the hearing rescheduled. The accuser actually forced a third appeal by not appearing, which goes against everything that is being claimed in the lawsuit.

I have no idea whether or not Tubman committed a crime, but from the article it doesn't appear that anything is out of the ordinary when it comes to the appeals. However if the accusations on the third appeal are correct, then it does appear UK has made some serious procedural violations, but it was Tubman who had his Civil Rights violated. Expect another lawsuit if they find in favor of the accuser.

 

[Rhavicc]

Haven't believed her story since I read the police report. Just don't buy her walking her "rapist" down to the lobby immediately after, and not sure where she came up with a witness, when said witness wasn't even in the dorm.
Just felt like more of a case of ex-couple drama that got too out of hand.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I don't really know enough about the situation to comment a lot, I wasn't there, but it seems like you can sue just about anybody about anything in the US.

Australia has a BEAUTIFUL system, if they still have it, no doubt the lawyers that run most things hate it, but there the law was that if you sued someone and lost the case you had to pay your lawyers fees AND the defendants, sure keeps a lot of trivial lawsuits out of court.

That would never happen in the US, the lawyers run the country.

Exactly Jauk, too many lawyers in legislatures. In Georgia, I can't even give my kid's a place to build a house without a lawyer getting involved. I suspect it won't be long before we have to have one to buy a truck. They are making sure there is a huge need for their services because of new laws they creat. Something about that seems unethical.

 

[jauk11]

We do have our three branches of the government to balance things out, of course Obama has made a mockery of that. And then two thirds of my state's legislature have law degrees, and judges in most cases are just lawyers with a robe on, and to get to be a governor or President you almost have to have one to get that far. My theory is that most politicians have to have a law degree to know how much they can steal without getting caught.

When I went to UK long ago the lawyers were a very clannish group that stuck together, and it has gotten much worse over time. A good deal of the laws passed today are new laws to get more money out of the public to pay their salaries or, as you mentioned, make themselves more necessary.

Seems to me the girl/woman isn't that anxious to put this behind her and get on with her life, is she having an abortion or child? And I think Petrino's folly was really dumb to let him talk her into an abortion that he arranged AND paid for, she could be living it up for 18 years (or 21) with part of the $55,000,000 he got for skipping out on UK, instead of rotting in prison.

 

[Real Deal 2]

UK has screwed this up as Tskware claims. NO doubt about it.
I will say and I have said all along that if like most victims of these type of crimes, the victims usually want to remain anonymous and keep out of the lime light. I have heard too much talk from her and the lawyers who feel like they can bully and blackmail the University into paying them off. Grand Jury has already said there is not enough evidence to go forward. It is always about the money, now they are wanting their go away money.

I think UK has bungled the hearings but the bottom line is alleged victim is now wanting her pay day, the FB player is no longer at UK, her and her lawyers want there $ and it is so obvious. Subpoena witnesses who were friends, dated her, had relationships with her and see how this plays out.
They should be happy that they got the kid kicked out of school even though a grand jury said not enough evidence to go to trial. Now it is about trying to get paid and it always about the money and was from the beginning.
IMO

 

[Mojocat]

This is a good example of why Universities should not be adjudicating serious crimes. This is outside their experience, expertise and resources. Both sides are likely to have due process complaints. This problem is happening at a growing rate all over the country. Let serious crimes go through the criminal court system and let the chips fall where they may. The schools could then wash their hands of the whole ordeal. Any appeals and complaints could then fall at the feet of professionals, the judges and attorneys involved, but the school would shoulder no responsibility. Universities should stick with minor student issues such as cheating, drinking and so on.

I hate to go full poltical knucklehead, but it fits. University culture these days is undeniably leftist - which in this context means pro-feminist and therefore anti-male. True story. The "hearings" are really kangaroo courts, no lawyers allowed, none of the constitutional protections afforded defendants. There was a time - too long a time - when good old boy culture meant star athletes could get away with anything. That was wrong. This cultural shift to the other end of that spectrum - which results in a situation where accused = guilty - is just as wrong...

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Yep, there is a saying, 180 degrees from sick is still sick.