Video And Forensics Showed He Was Innocent But College Suspended Him Anyway. He Was Just Awarded More Than $100k.

A former Boston College student was accused of violently groping a woman as he crossed a crowded dance floor on a student cruise in 2012. Now that student was awarded more than $100,000 in damages after a jury determined the school violated his contract and “basic fairness” when it found him responsible despite evidence suggesting otherwise.

The male student, referred to in court documents as John Doe, was arrested for the alleged groping, but the charges were dropped after video from the cruise and forensic analysis seemed to show Doe had not committed the assault. Doe tried to tell campus investigators about an “alternative culprit” he saw just as the woman screamed and who allegedly told Doe that he had groped her. Boston College instead allowed this other suspect to testify against Doe and a senior administrator suggested he be put “at ease” when testifying.

The College Fix reported that a school adjudication panel couldn’t reach a verdict until a senior administrator discouraged them from a “no finding” resolution. The panel then found Doe “responsible” for “indecent assault and battery,” which is what he was originally charged with by police before those charges were dropped. The original allegation claimed “penetrative assault” against the woman on the dance floor.

Doe sued the school and the lawsuit actually resulted in a jury trial – the first of such lawsuits since the Obama administration changed school guidelines regarding campus sexual assault. Other lawsuits resulted in settlements or dismissals before reaching a trial.

At the trial, the Fix reported, Catherine-Mary Rivera, who chaired the hearing to determine Doe’s responsibility, testified that school adjudicators did not treat the hearing “as a search for truth,” which the outlet suggested likely swayed the jury.

The Boston College Heights reported that school administrators testified that they “had questions about [the alternative suspect’s] honesty” because he kept changing his story. For example, the student’s story was inconsistent about “whether or not he blacked out on the night of the cruise and his claim of lying to Doe that he blacked out.”

These administrators also apparently doubted the testimony of other witnesses, who were drunk during the incident. The college apparently discounted the testimony of the victim’s friend, referred to as “Betsy,” who was sober and claimed there were multiple people between Doe and the victim at the time of the incident. Still, the school found him responsible.

Boston College proposed jury instructions at the trial, claiming it was not contractually obligated “to hear Doe’s side of the story prior to the hearing” or to “proceed with the hearing prior to the end of the criminal investigation.”

U.S. District Judge Denise Casper had initially dismissed Doe’s lawsuit, but the 1^st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived it. Casper severely limited Doe’s ability to present his case, professor and author K.C. Johnson said in a tweet. Casper “significantly restricted the number of witnesses” Doe could present, including “virtually all of his experts.” Casper also limited the jury to determining only if Boston College breached its contract with Doe and denied him “basic fairness.” The jury determined that the school had, and awarded Doe nearly $25,000 in lost tuition and $77,600 for lost income due to the one-year “set back” of his planned start of law school.