ASHE SCHOW: Judge orders USC to let accused student return to school.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert H. O’Brien granted Dixon’s request for a stay of the results of a disciplinary process that was “lacking in due process, with no hearing, no right to counsel, no rules of evidence, no presumption of innocence, no right to possess copies of witness statements and evidence and no right to confront witnesses against him,” according to Dixon’s writ of administrative mandate. . . .
The next day, the accuser told her boyfriend, another USC athlete, about the encounter. He was never called as a witness during the disciplinary hearing, which Dixon believes is because the boyfriend felt the encounter was consensual.
The accuser had sought medical tests a week after the encounter, but declined at the time to participate in a criminal accusation. Two weeks after the sexual encounter, the female student filed an accusation with the university.
The accusation was investigated solely by Allee, who is named in Dixon’s lawsuit against the university. Not only did Allee conduct the investigation and interview witnesses, she also was responsible for determining a judgment against Dixon and assigning sanctions.
USC claims to provide students a “fair, thorough, neutral and impartial investigation,” yet Allee’s background is in victim advocacy. So not only was she the investigator, judge and jury determining Dixon’s fate, she was also an advocate for the accuser — a conflict of interest that is only exacerbated by the fact that Dixon’s guilt in this case is by no means clear-cut. . . .
This is another clear case of accused student’s lacking any semblance of due process. Dixon was not given a hearing, allowed to see the evidence and witness statements against him or allowed to confront his accuser. He was allowed legal counsel, but his attorney could not represent or speak for him during the disciplinary process.
Dixon’s attorney, Mark Hathaway, issued a statement in response to the judge’s ruling.
“Judge O’Brien agreed with Bryce that USC’s Title IX sexual misconduct investigation was unfair and lacks due process.” Hathaway said. “USC’s investigator acts as police, prosecutor and judge. There is no hearing, no right to counsel, no rules of evidence, no presumption of innocence and no right to confront witnesses. Courts are beginning to recognize the injustice imposed on students.”
Kangaroo courts. I hope that Congress will take a hand, but until then it’s mostly the judiciary that will have to enforce accountability.
UPDATE: Note the diversity at USC’s Office Of Equity And Diversity. (Thanks, Twitter!) Can an office that contains not a single male possibly be fair to male students? Can you say “hostile educational environment?”