Kate Murphy

kmurphy@enquirer.com

A University of Cincinnati student, found guilty of sexual assault by UC, filed a federal lawsuit against the university Friday.

The male graduate student, identified only as John Doe in his lawsuit, alleges the university violated due process and Title IX in how it handled the investigation and ruling of the case against him. Title IX is a federal law passed in 1972 that protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance.

Doe is facing a one-year suspension from UC for allegations that he sexually assaulted another female student in September 2015.

The students met on Tinder and had consensual sex at Doe's apartment, according to the lawsuit. The female student, identified only as Jane Roe, reported the incident to the university as a sexual assault about a month later, the lawsuit states.

This incident was one of nearly 100 reports of sexual assault and harassment on and around UC's campus that year, according to university crime statistics. Those crimes include forcible sex offenses, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking. More than 70 of them occurred on campus and in residence halls.

"What sets this case apart from some of the other cases we’ve brought is the University of Cincinnati is pushing the envelope in what they can do in these hearings beyond where any other school has gone," Doe's lawyer, Joshua Engel of Mason, said in an interview. "We have hundreds of years of history suggesting that the ability to cross-examine and confront your accuser is essential to having a fair and accurate process."

The university has not yet filed a response in court; a spokesman wasn't available for comment late Friday.

Jane Roe reported the alleged assault to UC Police in December 2015 and it was sent to the UC Title IX Office, according to the lawsuit.

But university records obtained by The Enquirer show no evidence that a Title IX complaint was filed with the university.

The lawsuit states two former UC Title IX coordinators, Jyl Shaffer and Remy Barnett, questioned both students during the investigation. The university held a hearing months later on June 27 and found John Doe guilty of violating the Student Code of Conduct.

Doe is fighting the fairness of that hearing. In the lawsuit, he alleges the university didn't allow him an opportunity to fairly defend himself. His complaint claims there was a lack of evidence and he could have refuted Roe's credibility had he been able to question her at the hearing, but she didn't attend.

The lawsuit states he was treated as if he was "guilty from the start" and wasn't allowed to be represented by counsel.

Doe appealed the ruling, but the university rejected it, according to the lawsuit.

In September, he received a letter from UC Dean of Students Juan Guardia that he would be suspended from UC effective Dec.10, according to the lawsuit. He will be eligible to re-enroll on Jan. 2, 2018.

The lawsuit alleges UC presumed Doe was guilty "in order to look good for the Department of Education and advocates" in light of "criticisms of a possible 'rape culture' " on campus.

"UC’s decision-makers and its investigator were motivated to favor the accusing female over the accused male, so as to protect themselves and UC from accusations that they had failed to protect female students from sexual assault," the lawsuit states.

University records of Title IX complaints obtained by The Enquirer reveal more than 400 were filed in 2015. Only four individuals were found responsible and disciplined for committing physical abuse or harm by UC's Administrative Review Committee.

Those reports include incidents that are "sexual in nature and non-sexual," according to university officials.

According to the documents, there were more than 260 of those cases in 2016 up to Sept. 20 and none of the accused were found responsible. It appears this case is not on that list.

The Enquirer will update this story as more information is available.

Editor's note: This story has been updated to clarify attribution to the claim that the sex was consensual.