- EphBlog - http://ephblog.com -

Latest Safety Dance Filings

Here are the latest filings in the Safety Dance sexual assault case:
163-main, 163-1 and 163-2. Followed up by this and that. Any comments?

Reminder:

Why do I call this case “Safety Dance?”

And the lyrics from the song “Safety Dance”:

We can dance if we want to
We can leave your friends behind
‘Cause your friends don’t dance and if they don’t dance
Well they’re no friends of mine.

I say, we can go where we want to
A place where they will never find
And we can act like we come from out of this world
Leave the real one far behind
And we can dance

Alas, John Doe has discovered that, leaving the real world far behind, is not so easy when it comes to the sexual assault bureaucracy at Williams . . .

Key facts:

This is nuts! Does anyone disagree? Read the full document for details, but it is not disputed that Smith only complained about the alleged assault after her attempts to get Doe thrown out for a never-happened honor code violation failed.

I am honestly curious to know if there are readers who agree with the College’s decision to throw Doe out, denying him his degree even though he has completed all the requirements for graduation.

Maud: Settle this case! It is a sure loser for the College. You have had enough bad press already in 2019.

Facebooktwitter
6 Comments (Open | Close)

6 Comments To "Latest Safety Dance Filings"

#1 Comment By Achilles On July 9, 2019 @ 9:53 am

And attorney Rossi wins ANOTHER ruling in court. Williams College’s attorney loses yet again.

When will the college wake up and smell the coffee?

Judge Mark G. Mastroianni: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered granting [163] Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Authorities. As this is a developing area of the law, supplemental authorities which were not previously available may prove helpful to the court.

#2 Comment By 0xEph On July 9, 2019 @ 11:25 am

@Achilles – That’s not the sort of “win” that deserves much celebrating. Most of these sorts of motions are relatively inconsequential, and even if the Williams College attorney fought this one, I highly doubt that Williams was expecting to win this battle.

#3 Comment By GloryDaysChaser On July 9, 2019 @ 12:22 pm

Deleted — DDF

#4 Comment By David Dudley Field ’25 On July 9, 2019 @ 1:39 pm

Would love informed discussion about where this case is going . . . and what Williams should do . . .

#5 Comment By GloryDaysChaser On July 9, 2019 @ 2:03 pm

Ah, yes, DDF, bastion of free speech except when he isn’t. I wrote nothing objectionable, but I guess censorship is just what Ephblog does now.

#6 Comment By Whitney Wilson ’90 On July 9, 2019 @ 2:15 pm

I think the case is in the exact position it was in December. The court is considering a motion for summary judgment (i.e. a request that the court reach a decision on the merits without a trial because there is no meaningful dispute about the facts). The new authorities cited by the plaintiff don’t, on their face, appear to be game changers. The court will issue a ruling sometime. Given that its been pending for over 7 months, its possible that a decision could be coming soon, but who knows.

Based on my reasonably limited knowledge of the case, I would agree with DDF that the College would be best off allowing plaintiff to get his degree. While the details of what happened between the parties can never be know for certain, since the plaintiff is done with Williams from an academic standpoint, there can no on-going safety issue on campus would be caused by giving him his degree. He could be banned from coming back to campus, I suppose.

I haven’t tried to look at what GDC wrote that was deleted (and I’m not sure if I have that ability), but if it was just a flippant comment, I would recommend leaving it up there. While deletion of comments to avoid having a comment section go totally off the rails can be justified, a single comment in a post like this is unlikely to create those kinds of problems. Again, I haven’t seen the comment, so it my position is pretty much a theoretical one.