Close
SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

  • Like
    Like
    255k255k

Student Wrongfully Expelled for Rape Triumphs in Court: Due Process Beats 'Yes Means Yes'

The University of Tennessee shifted the burden of proof and violated the rights of accused student Corey Mock.

Robby Soave|
Corey MockRam Tough / YoutubeA judge overturned the expulsion of Corey Mock—a University of Tennessee at Chattanooga student and star wrestler—after determining that UT’s administration had improperly required Mock to prove that he was innocent of sexually assaulting another student.
The decision is a significant blow to the concept of affirmative consent. According to Judge Carol McCoy, UT’s consent standard wrongfully shifted the burden of proof and violated Mock’s due process rights.
Mock’s expulsion stemmed from a sexual encounter with a fellow student, Molly Morris, during the spring of 2014. Morris and Mock had me online and quickly become friends; they hung out on several occasions and decided to attend a house party together. Morris had too much to drink—someone might have slipped her something, though no evidence established this—and went to the bathroom to be sick. Mock found her, took her to a bedroom, and they had sex.
A week after the incident, Morris told Mock that she had not given consent. Three months later, she formally accused him of raping her.
The campus judicial process initially cleared Mock, but UT Chancellor Steven Angle took an interest in the case after meeting with Morris. Angle asked the campus adjudicators to re-hear the case. This time, Mock was found guilty.
The rationale was atrocious. As KC Johnson of Minding the Campus explains:
Angle, for his part, argued that Mock had failed to prove that he had obtained affirmative consent—that is, that Mock, not UTC, had the burden of proof in the initial hearing. UTC hadn’t adopted a “yes means yes” policy, but Angle inferred it through various provisions in the school’s code, and in other writings.
UT’s decision was a powerful confirmation of due process advocates’ worst fears about affirmative consent policies. I have long-argued that the “Yes Means Yes,” when judged by university officials, in tandem with a preponderance of the evidence standard, creates a de facto assumption that an accused student is guilty unless he can prove otherwise--turning innocent until proven guilty on its head.
Consider what evidence Mock would have had to present at his hearing in order to clear himself. Only a signed document—or, perhaps, a video of the encounter—could have definitively established that he had Morris’s permission to proceed. Do college administrators really expect students to draw up consent papers, or film sex tapes? (Sadly, some activists do.)
Earlier this week, Judge Carol McCoy recognized the fundamental unfairness of Mock’s situation and agreed with him that UT had established an impossible standard. According to her ruling:
The UTC Chancellor improperly shifted the burden of proof and imposed an untenable standard upon Mr. Mock to disprove the accusation that he forcibly assaulted Ms. Morris. He made no finding that Ms. Morris did not consent, intertwined the definition in SOC 7 of sexual assault and sexual misconduct, and made no distinction as to which acts had occurred.
The Washington Examiner’s Ashe Schow reports that Mock and his family are relieved:
Mock's father, in an email to the Washington Examiner, said that he and his son are "very pleased with the judge's decision; we weren't sure if anyone was going to follow the law, and this has restored our faith." But he is aware that UTC may try to appeal the ruling and that this case may not be over.
As for what's next for Corey Mock, his father is unsure.
"No idea where Corey goes from here, he is weighing his options, something he hasn't had in a long time," Mock's father wrote. "This is the first good news we have had in over a year and we are thanking God and trying to enjoy it."
The ruling is obviously a great outcome for Mock, and perhaps UT administrators will be less eager to railroad accused students in the future. But many more judges will have to reach the same conclusion as McCoy if anything is to be done to stop affirmative consent policies from sweeping the nation’s campuses.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.
  • AlmightyJB||#
    Scientists make a robot that can have babies
    log in or register to reply
  • Libertarian||#
    Sounds like an unnecessarily complicated way of obtaining spare parts.
    log in or register to reply
  • AlmightyJB||#
    But it learns to make them better
    log in or register to reply
  • Heroic Mulatto||#
    Morris and Mock had me online and quickly become friends
    Say no more! Say no more!
    log in or register to reply
  • hurts_donut||#
    They'll take over right when the universe burns out. Looks like the jokes on them. Humans win again.
    log in or register to reply
  • hurts_donut||#
    This was in response to JB's post but still applies to the article.
    log in or register to reply
  • Jerryskids||#
    UT Chancellor Steven Angle took an interest in the case after meeting with Morris
    .
    Was this by any chance a private meeting? Was there some sort of quid pro quo involved, a 'tit for tat' so to speak, a little "I'll scratch your back if you'll rub my front" sort of arrangement? But more importantly, can UT Chancellor Steven Angle prove that there was not any hanky-panky or jiggery-pokery going on at this meeting? After all, it's not on me to prove that there was, it's on him to prove that there was not. Right?
    log in or register to reply
  • Libertarian||#
    You had me at "jiggery-pokery."
    log in or register to reply
  • Otis B. Driftwood||#
    Wow, it sure has been a shitty year for Anna Merlan.
    log in or register to reply

Leave a Comment

You must have an account and be logged in to comment.
Click here to register, or here to login if you already have an account

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

advertisement
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%