Court Rules Yale Student Who Reported Rape Can be Sued for Defamation
“The Connecticut court ruled 7-0 that because he had fewer rights to defend himself in university proceedings than he would in criminal court, the rape accuser can’t benefit fully from immunity granted to witnesses in criminal proceedings.”
The man who was accused was exonerated by a criminal court and now he is suing. Good for him.
The Associated Press reports:
Yale student who reported rape can be sued for defamation due to school’s procedures, court says
In a decision scrutinizing how colleges investigate sexual assault allegations, Connecticut’s highest court ruled Friday that a former Yale student is not immune from a defamation lawsuit by a fellow student who was exonerated in criminal court after she accused him of rape.
The Connecticut court ruled 7-0 that because he had fewer rights to defend himself in university proceedings than he would in criminal court, the rape accuser can’t benefit fully from immunity granted to witnesses in criminal proceedings.
The unanimous ruling came despite warnings from more than a dozen violence prevention groups that such immunity is crucial to prevent rape victims from being discouraged to come forward.
It’s one of the few state court rulings on the topic in any U.S. court and could be cited widely in future cases, legal experts said. It ruled that Jane Doe, the pseudonym she used in court proceedings, was not immune from liability for statements she made to Yale investigators accusing fellow student Saifullah Khan of raping her in her dorm room in October 2015.
The decision could add to the already vexing problem of sexual assaults going unreported, violence prevention groups said in a brief to the state Supreme Court.
“Without protections from retaliation, including absolute immunity, victims will be dissuaded from using school reporting and disciplinary processes and will lose out on their education while perpetrators dodge accountability,” a lawyer for the groups wrote in a filing supporting the accuser’s immunity rights.
Khan is suing Doe and Yale over the rape allegations and his November 2018 expulsion from the school, saying the sex was consensual. Khan was criminally charged, but a jury acquitted him earlier in 2018.
CT Supreme Court: "Statements made in sexual misconduct disciplinary proceedings that are offered and accepted without adequate procedural safeguards carry too great a risk of unfair or unreliable outcomes."
Yale accuser not entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity. pic.twitter.com/wcnVXNRGMX— KC Johnson (@kcjohnson9) June 23, 2023
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
including absolute immunity
“You must believe the woman”? Sorry, but no. That’s evil and unjust.
I’m interested in hearing about why a false accuser in a regular courtroom would have immunity. If you can show that the allegation wasn’t simply a mistake but a willful lie, then it seems you should be able to sue for defamation (and demand she be charged with filing a false report), or there’s no downside to making false accusations.
Given how strict immunity statutes are in rape prosecutions, can you even allege the accuser is lying? So many normal defense safeguards do not apply in rape cases.
Hmm. It seems like there is an out to protect people’s rights to report sexual assault to on-campus authorities–give the alleged attacker “adequate procedural safeguards”. Why in the h#ll wouldn’t the attacker be entitled to the same procedural safeguards available in court anyway?
Campus Kangaroo Courts Must Go!
Why and how do colleges insert themselves in criminal cases. They have an interest in protecting their reputation that precludes their participation as an impartial adjudicator.
Heaven forbid that regretful “hookups” and vengeful ex-girlfriends might be dissuaded from falsely accusing men of rape.
Or, ex-wives saying the ex-husband is or has sexually abused the children.
The sexual revolution – the gift that keeps on giving.
Ain’t that the truth.
“The decision could add to the already vexing problem of sexual assaults going unreported, violence prevention groups said in a brief to the state Supreme Court.”
But there shouldn’t be school based procedures, and this would not even be a question. She would report an alleged crime to the criminal justice authorities, and she’d be entitled to all the legal safeguards of that system.
If this causes school based procedures to be avoided by accusers, that’s a benefit. If they really mean it, dare to call the police.
Speaking of which, how is Oberlin progressing towards another large payout with their Title IX Kangaroo Courts stuff?
“The decision could help solve the already vexing problem of false charges of sexual assaults being reported” Much better.
It’s about time, now let’s expand this to false charges of racism and every other “ism”
No, you should not have a free pass to make false allegations. Imagine that.
Also, the headline is wrong:
Who Reported Rape
Should be:
Who Alleged Rape
When you report something that didn’t happen, you are alleging it, not really “reporting” it.
My initial reaction was this was a horrible decision because women should be fully able to report rape. But then I thought about why. The answer is simple. The Obama/Biden DOE rules which remove basic constitutional protections for alleged rapists create the problem. Universities anxious to keep the money pipeline running follow the DOE rules and guidelines.
LI should follow the defamation case when it is filed. You made your bones with the Gibson Bakery case. You’re good at this, and you should do it again. Some helpful links:
The court ruling
https://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR347/347CR30.pdf
The amicus brief naming the activist groups that wanted to shield the liar
https://nnedv.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Khan-v-Yale-et-al-amicus-brief-AS-FILED-6.17.22.pdf
LI bones were well-formed and solid for a good while before the Gibson case.
Probably so, but let’s say that it was a turning point. Happy now?
This is an improvement, but an imperfect solution. To me, the big loser in this anonymous reporting of “bias incidents” are the student body at large which lives in constant fear of being dragged into a Star Chamber proceeding before the Title IX Office. By definition, one cannot sue someone who made an anonymous complaint.
In the normal judicial process, the prospect of cross-examination deters false accusations. But the Title IX process (particularly in the pending Biden proposed rules) curbs that. Of course, if the man can sue his accuser in the civil courts, that might be a solution. However, most women who decide to make a false rape accusation would not be aware of this.
The Title IX procedures (and most college “bias incident reporting systems” specifically address non-retaliation rules. Under the Biden proposed rules, the goal of non-retaliation even purports to curb the First Amendment when student journalists seek to provide coverage if they offer factual accounts such as this article.
Heaven help us when the Federal Goverment uses the threat of cutting off funding to a college to override centuries of common sense and notions of due process.