Federal Judge Issues USC Shock, Facts Altered As “Unacceptable” Bias In Criminal Findings

University of Southern California President C. L. Max Nikias has a lot to answer for as his Title IX office miserably fails to provide a fair investigation for his students.

The year of 2017 garnered in a few new truths for the people of America to recognize and understand. The first was that the failed policies of yesterday suggesting that America was “naturally” losing its wealth due to the nature of globalism were simply untrue. A second was that the realm of social media decides sexual harassment cases.

College students across the nation are faced with difficult decisions regarding dating, relationships, and narrative established can ultimately ruin lives. Now a judge overseeing a Title IX case in California has overturned the ruling after finding that the university’s administration was working in a biased manner against an accused male.

It was in October of 2015 when the “John Doe” in this case was accused by a female student at USC of aggravated sexual assault. This is a time where this kind of behavior is not tolerated as everyone can agree that “no” means no. However, as the complexities of life unravel to show us that things are not always so simple, the truth has to be found. That is why college campuses establish offices to verify these statements before potentially ruining lives.

However, that is not the case for the University of California as their Title IX office does not offer civil liberties to their students. This country’s legal system provides a means for the accused to defend themselves in a fair court of law but these offices undermine the legal system and administer their own justice. The idea is sound in that these institutions should be able to verify the claims on their own because it is their students. When they become biased though, it should end.

This office is supposed to represent equality under the eyes of the institution and yet it has been manipulated into ruining lives just to earn notches for careers.

During the investigation against the accused Doe, Title IX officials that were coordinating with both Doe and his representation offered what they thought of those who demanded a fair trial. One has to see that the narrative that many in the United States have convinced themselves, especially those within government or academic positions, that males are rapists and women do not lie. Title IX Coordinator Gretchen Dahlinger Means was the one in charge of ensuring a fair investigation and yet she calls the accused “motherfuckers” when she failed to end a phone call.

Means was describing Doe and his representation because they were questioning the legitimacy of the investigation when the Title IX office failed to investigate key witnesses. Doe’s roommate is supposedly a key witness as he is the only one who can verify some relevant facts such as when the accuser left or the manner in which the two were acting. Messages between Doe and the accuser reveal the facts to be blurred as Doe was accused of sleeping around and upsetting the accuser.

After months of communicating and continued meetings, Doe was officially accused and under investigation. The Title IX office was convinced that Doe was guilty and was ready to configure the evidence to look this way. However, they did not count on the fact that the judge that would be presiding over the case would think twice about the failure to provide a fair investigation. It was obvious to the judge that both Means and other Title IX officials were not giving Doe a fair investigation.

The Title IX Coordinator Gretchen Means did nothing to protect a student because she had a bias in the case. She believed that Doe committed the crime and sought to manipulate the investigation to prove it.

This is the kind of behavior tolerated in the academic realm where bullies like Means try to intimidate their opponents. Means was actually saying, “Do these motherfuckers know who I am?” after their phone call because they were actually fighting back but she never ended the call. Doe believes that he did not do what the accuser was saying and key testimonials could have proven that to be true and yet this biased office had no interest in the truth.

These officials were truly just looking for another student to crucify for either personal satisfaction or approval from higher-ups. This is the kind of atmosphere that students are subjected to where a student cannot even get a fair investigation involving an alibi and yet liberals are prepared to call this higher learning.

This is obviously not an atmosphere that is friendly towards the accused, even the hint at it could end relations between students because one believes something that could be untrue.

The unfortunate thing regarding this case is that the judge only ordered the original investigation was biased and that another had to be conducted. Doe’s misery continues as he surely wishes he just went to get a trade instead of trying to get a college education as it has no doubt spiraled his personal and financial life into a frenzy.