I just wish Johnson had gotten more money.

So do I. But I wonder how much good making colleges pay will actually do. They will simply pass the cost of the damages on to their students. Soon, the cost of tuition will simply factor in the anticipated settlements paid to wrongly accused male college students.

But then again, colleges are now in the business of determining the upper limit of student loans, and simply charging students all that a student loan will give them. So, how much more can they raise tuition?

Making colleges pay is still a step in the right direction. It was a huge blunder on the part of the Obama Administration to make colleges responsible for investigating the allegations of sexual assault. In fact, this is one of those moments that requires someone to get in Obama's face and scream, "How fucking dare you?"

Colleges are neither competent or qualified to investigate crime (other than plagiarism or cheating, perhaps), and that is not what a college is for.

Allegations of sexual assault should and must be handled by law enforcement. And the more judges that rule this way, even someone as dense and clueless as the President is certain to notice.

I don't think Obama gives a damn. Yelling at him for his use of government power for correct social posturing will just reinforce that he has "done the right thing" in his mind, since the result is that he gives big government institutions and the people who support his party more power. What he really needs to hear, from someone he respects (I'm not sure he respects anyone's opinion other than his own), is to quote Oliver Cromwell, "I beseech you in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken." Although I'm not sure his ego could handle that either.

On an unrelated note, I may have to use this:

"I beseech you in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."

"I beseech you in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."

No, don't say that to Obama; he'll just think that you mean in his bowels.

What Patrick said. It's not like the administrators are having to pay the judgments personally. It's just another line item in the budget, for the taxpayers or donors to ante up for. And I don't know how satisfactory the judgment is going to be for Johnson either... that amount is a tiny fraction of what he could have made in the NFL, and the accusation will dog him for the rest of his life.

this is one of those moments that requires someone to get in Obama's face and scream, "How fucking dare you?

May I go out on a limb, and say that I suspect Teh Won's response will be I only found out about my administration's policy when I read about it in the New York Times?

I mean, really? you expect him to take actual personal responsibility for his own administration's actions?

Here's another one:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/11/03/sexual-harassment-policy-that-nearly-ruined-life/hY3XrZrOdXjvX2SSvuciPN/story.html

Days after the initial meeting with the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, I received a phone call from the Rhodes Trust informing me that they had received an anonymous tip that I had been accused by a fellow student of sexual misconduct. Next came a call from my summer employer, who, having received a similar anonymous tip, rescinded my offer of full-time employment upon graduation.

Months later, long after I had already withdrawn my Rhodes candidacy, the New York Times somehow also learned of the “confidential” complaint made against me, and that the Rhodes Trust had been aware of it. The paper then published a lengthy article revising the narrative of my pursuit of the scholarship and suggesting that I had intentionally misled media into believing a feel-good sports story that never was. The Times later printed a retraction, but the damage was already done; I was publicly humiliated. The memory of being told by the Committee that I had “nothing to clear my name of” was searing.

Nothing more than bind the accused witch and throw him in the river. If he floats, he's a witch, fetch him out of the water and burn him at the stake.

If he sinks, well, he was innocent, fetch his body out of the river and give him a decent burial. Welcome back to 1692, people.

I wonder if the people pushing such an agenda ever realize that the pendulum swings freely, in both directions? Ye have sown the wind, ye shall reap the whirlwind.

I wonder if Johnson will sue Krakauer in civil court?

IRA: "May I go out on a limb, and say that I suspect Teh Won's response will be I only found out about my administration's policy when I read about it in the New York Times?"

Be careful, that limb is going to break! I don't disagree with you except that I don't believe Obama bothers to read anything. If he isn't busy picking his final four picks, or playing basketball or golf, then he is busy showing up on talk shows such as Ellen or The View. Pfft! He even has more important things to do than going to a Supreme Court Justice's funeral!

So, no, he won't read about it in The New York Times or anywhere. Even if his advisors are telling him what the consequences of "his" policies are he certainly isn't listening to them because he already knows better than anyone else anyway. Why listen to advisors or read anything?

...police investigated, but cops and local prosecutors closed their cases against the student without charging him.

The dean of students, however, recommended he be expelled. (He appealed and has since graduated.) The university had ruled that “the evidence supported a finding that [he] had sexually assaulted Ms. Roe, the opposite of the conclusion reached by the more experienced detectives of the police department,” according to the lawsuit.

Because liberal arts professors are smarter and know better than experience police detectives.

Sometimes I wonder what kind of individuals raised these spoiled-rotten, it's-never-my-fault-even-if-the-evidence-proves-ortherwise womanchildren.

$245,000. The University of Montana (and the taxpayers of Montana) should be grateful that the quarter back was merely an "an NFL hopeful" and not an NFL prospect; and that university wasn't held liable for the money the quarterback (as an NFL prospect) might have made in the NFL.

Wanna bet if he'd made the NFL, the woman would have emerged years later, like the devil to Daniel Webster, and demanded her "due?"

Sometimes I wonder what kind of individuals raised these spoiled-rotten, it's-never-my-fault-even-if-the-evidence-proves-ortherwise womanchildren.

I wonder that every day, especially when "individuals" (aka parents) continue to have their hands out despite producing such unspectacular results with the resources they're given.

And just think of how much he'll have left over after the attorney takes his share.

It's not uncommon - in fact, it's normal - for the attorney to claim the lion's share of the damages.

In fact, this is one of those moments that requires someone to get in Obama's face and scream, "How fucking dare you?"

Naw, just file a sexual misconduct claim against his daughters, and then sue the school when they dismiss the for gender bias

"It's not uncommon - in fact, it's normal - for the attorney to claim the lion's share of the damages."

Not true, Patrick. It is quite uncommon for fees to amount to a majority of the damages. Perhaps you are thinking about costs incurred?

On the main topic, it is astounding that college women put up with this -- if one assumes that college women are decent people. Perhaps that is no longer a reasonable assumption ... .

"it is astounding that college women put up with this"

It's almost as if absolute power tends to corrupt.

Following Conan the Grammarian:

How you feel about your abilities and errors is a good indicator of your skill. A highly competent person understands his errors and has empathy for other people who have had to endure them. This motivates him to learn more and not repeat mistakes or near misses. He understands that professions and tasks outside his field involve skill and experience which he doesn't have.

A person of average competence sees errors as unavoidable and nothing to worry about. He sees things as not his fault, because everyone is imperfect. He believes that he knows enough, and thinks that he can do everything as well as people who specialize in a subject. He wonders why most problems in life haven't been solved already. (Obama is an example.)

easyopinions.blogspot.com/2009/02/solution-is-simple.html#dunning

Dunning-Kruger effect: The hubris of the incompetent.
Motto: I could do that better than you, if I wanted to.
=== ===
Wikipedia [edited]: The Dunning–Kruger effect is a bias in thinking. People may make bad choices and be incompetent to realize it.

The unskilled overrate their own ability as above average. The highly-skilled underrate their abilities, often below the self-rating of the unskilled.
=== ===

University deans have power. They worked for it, so why not use it. They are "obviously" much more intelligent than average, and so they decide to step in and do the right thing which is not apparant to their inferiors.

In their view, due process is a useless procdedure which slows down justice.

"In their view, due process is a useless procdedure which slows down justice." via Andrew M Garland

I think you are unintentionally giving these deans WAY TOO MUCH credit for integrity (their view/actions based on their perception of "justice").

I think they are whores simply following the money/power which at the moment is NOT coming from single white men as it did 15 - 20 years ago via the alumni.

As Amy points out, once the alumni get involved (withholding funds) this stupidity will stop as the colleges will get the alumni involved politically (withholding funds).

Worse case scenario is that alumni funds are not needed for profitability then the single white men will continue to be screwed.

"I think you are unintentionally giving these deans WAY TOO MUCH credit for integrity (their view/actions based on their perception of "justice").

I think they are whores simply following the money/power which at the moment is NOT coming from single white men as it did 15 - 20 years ago via the alumni."

I think you are mistaken. If, hypothetically, a racist regime took over the DOE next year and said "expel all blacks if there's even a hint that they're troublemakers" I doubt the colleges would go along.

They're doing what they're doing today because they despise white male fratboys.

I gotta side with Dee here. They are acting out their ideology. This is who they are and what they do.