At risk of getting negged, here is an abridged, but still lengthy version of the "Dear Colleague" letter the DOE Office of Civil Rights sent to colleges and universities explaining their responsibilities regarding Title IX and sexual assaults:
"If a school knows or reasonably should know about student-on-student harassment that creates a hostile environment, Title IX requires the school to take immediate action to eliminate the harassment, prevent its recurrence, and address its effects. Schools also are required to publish a notice of nondiscrimination and to adopt and publish grievance procedures. Because of these requirements…, schools need to ensure that their employees are trained so that they know to report harassment to appropriate school officials, and so that employees with the authority to address harassment know how to respond properly. Training for employees should include practical information about how to identify and report sexual harassment and violence. The Office of Civil Rights recommends that this training be provided to any employees likely to witness or receive reports of sexual harassment and violence...Schools may have an obligation to respond to student-on-student sexual harassment that initially occurred off school grounds, outside a school’s education program or activity. If a student files a complaint with the school, regardless of where the conduct occurred, the school must process the complaint in accordance with its established procedures. Because students often experience the continuing effects of off-campus sexual harassment in the educational setting, schools should consider the effects of the off-campus conduct when evaluating whether there is a hostile environment on campus. For example, if a student alleges that he or she was sexually assaulted by another student off school grounds, and that upon returning to school he or she was taunted and harassed by other students who are the alleged perpetrator’s friends, the school should take the earlier sexual assault into account in determining whether there is a sexually hostile environment. The school also should take steps to protect a student who was assaulted off campus from further sexual harassment or retaliation from the perpetrator and his or her associates. Regardless of whether a harassed student, his or her parent, or a third party files a complaint under the school’s grievance procedures or otherwise requests action on the student’s behalf, a school that knows, or reasonably should know, about possible harassment must promptly investigate to determine what occurred and then take appropriate steps to resolve the situation, ...the school’s Title IX investigation is different from any law enforcement investigation, and a law enforcement investigation does not relieve the school of its independent Title IX obligation to investigate the conduct. The specific steps in a school’s investigation will vary depending upon the nature of the allegations, the age of the student or students involved, the size and administrative structure of the school, and other factors. Yet…, the school’s inquiry must in all cases be prompt, thorough, and impartial. In cases involving potential criminal conduct, school personnel must determine, consistent with State and local law, whether appropriate law enforcement or other authorities should be notified."
If ChicagoSemanhole can understand big words like "grievance" (I know, a calculated risk for a grad of Florida Safety University), I think even they would realize, based on what has been reported and the actions of other F$U "students" after the case went public, that his adminstration acted in a woefully inadequate manner regarding this assault.
Lulz
That was a long read.
Majored in mathematicks and econometricks so big words are kind of a new thing, I'm more familiar with Nash's equilibrium and actuarial science. .
But Copying and pasting title 9 doesn't prove anything, and ignores the facts of the case.
Try to keep up.
Read slowly...
FSU interviewed Winston in January!!!
Understand me?
The girl either spoke to rape counselors, or didn't. Somebody is lying. Either her or FSU. Given the lack of consistency in her testimony, it doesn't make me "pro-rape" to question her honesty. She already lied about being drugged, drunk, and unconscious.
Understand me?
Her history of lying doesn't mean a crime wasn't committed, but why lie? It seems strange.
her lack of honesty is an issue, the prosecutor also mentioned that.
Either way The truth will come out.
If the girl refused to press charges with the police OR FSU CODE OF CONDUCT, then there can't be a title 9 investigation. It's up to the accuser to bring forward an investigation.
Try copying and pasting the part that clearly explains that rule of title 9.
Since Winston "plead the 5th" and the girl never mentioned Darby and SHE SAID Casher wasn't in the cab or apartment, FSU interviewing those two players a year later isn't a violation of title 9.
This isn't that complicated. For the 100th time, I never said Winston was innocent or that TPD is not corrupt. I don't know Winston or his sexual activities,
But the girl is far from an "obvious" victim, and FSU knew about the "Dear Colleague" letter. They knew Obama was creating stricter rules, so why would they "wait a year" and create more questions when they "were obviously covering it up"?
You guys are confused rather easily for graduates of such a great university.
