Title IX Is Broken: USC Kicker Booted For Nothing

B1GTide said:

This is an example of investigators seeing what they want to see - something which supports conclusions that they have already made - and ignoring evidence and testimony which refutes their conclusions. This is a pervasive mentality. It is the primary reason that so many innocent people end up in jail.

Click to expand...

By KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor January 31

On April 4, 2011, the same day that President Obama formally announced his reelection bid, his Education Department, with no advance notice, reinterpreted Title IX as giving the federal government authority to dictate the specific procedures that colleges must use to adjudicate student-on-student sexual assault allegations.

This “Dear Colleague” letter, issued by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), told all of the more than 7,000 colleges that receive federal money to use the lowest possible standard of proof, a preponderance of evidence, in sexual assault cases (though not in less serious matters such as cheating and noise violations). The letter required universities to allow accusers to appeal not-guilty findings, a form of double jeopardy. It further told schools to accelerate their adjudications, with a recommended 60-day limit. And, perhaps most important, OCR strongly discouraged cross-examination of accusers, given the procedures that most universities employed.

The Obama administration never explained the timing of this document’s release. Nor did it explain how a plainly worded, 40-year-old anti-discrimination law had become a fount of such highly controversial mandates.

In early 2016, Oklahoma senator James Lankford, who has emerged as an important defender of campus due process, requested that the Education Department provide the legal basis for the Dear Colleague letter. The response was less than convincing, even though the Obama administration had nearly five years to come up with a rationale. In a single paragraph, then-OCR head Catherine Lhamon maintained that the 2011 letter merely “reminded” colleges and universities of a requirement to use the preponderance of evidence standard, which, she asserted, OCR had previously established in two unpublished letters with individual universities. (In one of these cases, the alleged perpetrator was a professor, rendering it of little use to analyzing student-on-student allegations.) Lhamon said nothing about the source of OCR’s claimed authority to require that colleges allow accusers to appeal not-guilty findings, that they discourage cross-examination of accusers or that they accelerate adjudications. She implied that these provisions were so obvious that OCR correctly issued them without seeking public comment.

Click to expand...

Isaiah 63:1 said:

I wish it were that. Unfortunately, it's a clear result of a 2011 Obama Administration edict to universities. Some detail, courtesy of the Volokh Conspiracy:

Click to expand...

Redwood Forrest said:

It is very simple how the travesty found acceptance. Speak out against it and you are all over the local, state and national news as being a sexist. PC at its finest.

Click to expand...

B1GTide said:

Nothing in this requires that investigators consider young men guilty just because they are accused, nor does it require that they ignore evidence indicating innocence.

Click to expand...

Redwood Forrest said:

“The Title IX investigation began…after a neighbor witnessed Boermeester (USC’s kicker) and Zoe Katz roughhousing. The neighbor told his roommate, who told a coach in USC’s athletic department that Boermeester was abusing Katz. The coach then reported the incident to the Title IX office.

Katz said she was summoned to a mandatory meeting with Title IX officials, where she told investigators that the two were playing around. Katz was subsequently told that she “must be afraid of Matt,” she said. She told officials she was not. Boermeester has not been arrested or charged with a crime.

“When I told the truth about Matt, in repeated interrogations, I was stereotyped and was told I must be a ‘battered’ woman, and that made me feel demeaned and absurdly profiled,” Katz said. “I understand that domestic violence is a terrible problem, but in no way does that apply to Matt and me.”

Katz said that she has “never been abused, assaulted or otherwise mistreated by Matt.” Katz said the Title IX office made her feel “misled, harassed, threatened and discriminated against,” and caused her to hire an attorney.

“The Title IX office’s response was dismissive and demeaning,” she said.

https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/title-ix-broken-usc-kicker-booted-nothing/

Another example of a warped politically correct world. As someone said today on radio art Briles was accused of looking the other way and then when they do not look the other way and report what they see ..... it causes the innocent to get railroaded. WAY TO GO NCAA.

Click to expand...