Just in: district court denies summary judgment to @CUBoulder on multiple due process grounds--propriety of single-investigator model, lack of x-examination, & withholding identity of key pro-accuser witness. Schedules trial for Dec. 1. 
On single inv'r model, court notes: "Requiring a hearing before a neutral arbitrator would also reduce the risk of error . . . provid[ing] a fresh perspective on any credibility determinations and decrease the likelihood that a party would be erroneously found responsible."
Remarkably blunt conclusion on x-examination--quotes SCOTUS on truth-seeking nature of x-examination, notes obvious need from student's side. "The University’s interests in limiting procedural safeguards relating to student’s hearing rights are less evident."
Court: "This is a classic 'he said, she said' case that turns almost entirely on witness credibility. Without live adversarial questioning, Plaintiff cannot probe the witnesses’ stories to test their memories or potential ulterior motives, or to observe the witnesses’ demeanor."
Court also notes that university's (seemingly inexplicable) decision to withhold identity of pro-accuser witness might have violated due process clause.
Court grants SJ on two other contested counts: university's curious decision to rely solely on police interviews of accuser, univ's decision to use "trauma-informed" training.
Full ruling, from Judge William Martinez (Obama nominee), is below:
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Full ruling, from Judge William Martinez (Obama nominee), is below:
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
