An MSU Student Said an Athlete Raped Her. Officials Found Him Innocent, Then Expelled Him—and He Had No Idea.

MumpheryA female student at Michigan State University accused a star athlete and graduate, Keith Mumphery, of sexual misconduct in 2015. Officials investigated the claim, and cleared Mumphery of wrongdoing—partly because of the numerous inconsistencies in the female student’s story.

Months later, after the female student (“Jane Roe”) appealed the decision, MSU changed its mind and expelled Mumphery. The university attempted to inform Mumphery of the appeal, second investigation, and subsequent expulsion, but his MSU inbox was full, and administrators’ emails bounced back.

Mumphery earned a spot in the National Football League and played for the Houston Texans, at first blissfully unaware he had been found responsible for sexual misconduct and banned from MSU. His football career came to a sudden end, however, in June 2017, after The Detroit Free Press published an article revealing the expulsion. Mumphery was cut from the team two days after the article was published.

That’s all according to Mumphery’s lawsuit against MSU, which he filed last week. The former athlete is represented by Andrew Miltenberg, an attorney who has defended many students accused of sexual misconduct. (I’ve interviewed Miltenberg here.) Miltenberg also defended Grant Neal, who was wrongfully expelled from Colorado State University-Pueblo for sexually assaulting his girlfriend, even though she stated firmly that he had never raped her. Neal later won a settlement from CSUP.

Mumphery’s situation resembles Neal’s, and suggests a similarly egregious violation of not just due process but basic fairness. Mumphery, like, Neal was a black man—his alleged victim, like Neal’s, was a white woman. I suspect that students of color are disproportionately punished for violating Title IX, the federal statute understood by college officials to compel sexual misconduct investigations, and my suspicions are shared by several writers and legal experts who cover this subject. (Atlantic contributing editor Emily Yoffe has written that students of color are “vastly overrepresented in the cases I’ve tracked,” and this has been my experience as well.)

Here are the details of the sexual misconduct allegation against Mumphery, as recounted in the lawsuit.

Mumphery met Roe, a freshman student, on Tindr in November 2014. Mumphery had already graduated from the university, and was pursuing a master’s degree in communications. They gradually lost touch with each other, and Mumphery moved to Florida in January 2015 to train for NFL scouting. He returned to campus on March 14, 2015, to participate in an NFL scouting opportunity. On March 17, Roe texted Mumphery, and invited him to come to her dorm room. She also sent him a topless photo of herself, according to the lawsuit.

Around 9:00 p.m., Mumphery ate dinner in his car outside Roe’s apartment building. Roe would later claim he was dealing drugs out of his car—an “outlandish” falsehood, according to the lawsuit.

After finishing dinner, Mumphery entered Roe’s dorm room. Roe was sober, according to the lawsuit. She changed clothes in front of him, and then they started kissing. This gradually progressed to sexual touching, and digital penetration once Roe had disrobed.

“There was never any pushing or other form of aggression,” according to the lawsuit. “Rather, the entire encounter was consensual in nature.”

The encounter came to a halt when Mumphery—still fully clothed—said that he would only have sex with Roe if he was wearing a condom. (Mumphery later told the investigators, “My sister got a baby and I don’t have sex without a condom.”) Roe allegedly became so distraught about this development that Mumphery phoned a friend to ask for advice. Roe spoke with the friend as well. She became angrier and angrier, according to the lawsuit, and Mumphery decided to leave before things escalated further.

The next day, Roe told the police that Mumphery had raped her. The prosecutor declined to pursue charges, however, in part because Roe did not respond to the prosecutor’s request for a meeting.

The fact that law enforcement declined to pursue criminal charges did not deter the university from conducting its own investigation. Indeed, as readers of my previous coverage of other cases like this are well aware, the police process is totally independent from the Title IX process. And so MSU administrators with the Office for Institutional Equity (OIE) looked into the matter on their own.

Their conclusion, issued in September 2015, was that “the preponderance of the evidence did not support Roe’s allegation of non-consensual sexual intercourse.” The OIE investigator, Dr. Catherine Riley, noted that Roe made several statements undercutting her credibility.

This finding was emailed to Mumphery at his MSU email address. But Mumphery never saw it: His MSU inbox was full, and he had little reason to check it. He had been drafted by the Houston Texans the previous May, and wasn’t living on campus.

On October 27, Roe appealed MSU’s findings—an option available to her under university policy, and required by the Obama-era Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, which enforces Title IX. According to Mumphery’s lawsuit, MSU manfestly violated Mumphery’s due process rights by failing to notify him of this second investigation. Administrators eventually held a hearing on the matter of Roe’s appeal—a hearing neither Roe nor Mumphery attended (the latter having no idea it was taking place).

On March 21, 2016, MSU reversed its initial finding and declared that Mumphery had committed both sexual assault and “sexual exploitation” for calling his friend to discuss the encounter. He was prohibited from enrolling in classes at MSU until 2019 and banned from campus.

A spokesperson for Miltenberg’s office tells me that MSU never successfully informed Mumphery of this finding, since the emails bounced. He didn’t find out until he came to MSU for a golf outing, at which point a football coach told him that he wasn’t allowed on campus.

“Note—MSU clearly had the ability to contact him, since the MSU Football program invited him to the outing,” Miltenberg’s office told me. “So it’s not like they were unable to track him down.”

The Detroit Free Press article on his case came out a few months later. The revelation shocked many in the Houston sports world: Houston Press sports writer Sean Pendergast asked, “how in the hell are we just finding out about all of this now?”

But the Freep article was appallingly misleading. Notably, it failed to mention that MSU officials initially cleared Mumphery of wrong doing, and then revisited the matter without Mumphery’s awareness or participation. That’s a consequential omission, given that the article resulted in Mumphery’s dismissal from the Houston Texans.

There are two sides to every sexual misconduct dispute, and it’s of course possible Mumphery did something very wrong on March 14, 2015. But the investigator who actually spoke with both Mumphery and Roe—Catherine Riley—decided that a preponderance of the evidence favored Mumphery’s account. Only the subsequent investigation, in which neither Roe nor Mumphery nor Riley participated, produced a finding of guilt. The former athlete presents a strong argument that MSU wronged him, and should make amends while guaranteeing that this never happens to another accused student.

In a statement, Miltenberg accused MSU of railroading Mumphery in order to distract from its mishandling of the Larry Nassar sexual abuse scandal.

“In order to arrive at their predetermined outcome of guilty, Michigan State conducted a sham investigation and blatantly ignored the due process rights of my client, who at the time had already graduated from Michigan State and was training in Florida,” said Miltenberg. “The University repeatedly and systematically failing to give him notice of the appeal and the subsequent second investigation. Mr. Mumphery continues to suffer ongoing harm, including damages to his reputation and the permanent loss of employment and educational opportunities.”

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2shSTqS
via IFTTT

The College Scam: New at Reason

A new book makes the case against education. Who would argue against education?

Economics professor Bryan Caplan. He tells John Stossel that “what we need to do is to go back to a world where college is not so accessible.”

That’s because most people don’t learn much in college. Studies find that a third of people haven’t learned anything detectable after four years in college.

Yet government pours about $80 billion a year into college subsidies.

“Taxpayers ought to know that they’re getting ripped off,” Caplan tells Stossel.

Click here for full text, a transcript, and downloadable versions.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel.
Like us on Facebook.
Follow us on Twitter.
Subscribe to our podcast at iTunes.

The views expressed in this video are solely those of John Stossel, his independent production company, Stossel Productions, and the people he interviews. The claims and opinions set forth in the video and accompanying text are not necessarily those of Reason.

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2IWANSe
via IFTTT

Protectionism vs. Cheap Beer: New at Reason

Located on the outskirts of Philadelphia, American Keg is the type of small, blue-collar manufacturing business that might earn praise from President Donald Trump. It’s the only remaining American manufacturer of stainless steel beer kegs, and CEO Paul Czachor is proud to use only American-made steel.

But American Keg is in jeopardy of going out of business, and the culprit is none other than Trump himself. The president’s 25 percent tariff on steel and 10 percent tariff on aluminum apply only to imported metal, but they will increase the price of domestic products too, because, well, that’s what tariffs do, writes Eric Boehm in the latest issue of Reason.

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2shjl4O
via IFTTT

What It Means That ICE ‘Lost’ 1500 Refugee Children: Reason Roundup

Information about immigration agents, unaccompanied child refugees at the border, undocumented minors in the U.S., and which president started what has gotten mixed up in a number of ways over the long weekend. It turns out, many “Trump era” immigration problems have their roots in Obama-era enforcement and policies.

A photo purportedly showing new all-babyseat-outfitted immigrant detention buses in “Trump’s America” went viral, after being shared by Fusion anchor Jorge Ramos in a now-deleted tweet. But as many people pointed out, the photo was from 2016, during Obama’s presidency.

In a post retweeted more than 15,600 times, ABC Houston’s Antonio Arellano, described the vehicle as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency “prison bus just for babies.” But according to a 2016 press release from the family detention center that owned the vehicle, it was there “to provide offsite field trips” for the 4- to 17-year-old children enrolled in the center’s school. “Field trips consist of going to a variety of places, such as the San Antonio Zoo, seeing a movie at the local theater, going to the park, etc.,” said the GEO Group press release.

The bus may be a symptom of a broken immigration system, but it’s not anything sinister in and of itself, and certainly not some special new transport created to roundup undocumented babies in Trump’s America.

That’s not to say that ICE has’t been up to evil things, under the Trump or Obama administrations.

These allegations are based on federal records obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). They concern cases of unaccompanied minors caught attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border between 2009 and 2014. (Read the full report here.) These days, it’s ICE’s treatment of refugee minors traveling with their families that’s raising alarms.

Earlier this month, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said anyone attempting to “cross the border unlawfully” would be prosecuted and that if they had a child with them, “that child will be separated from you, probably, as required by law. If you don’t want your child separated, then don’t bring them across the border illegally.”

That news got conflated with another story, that of the government “losing” nearly 1,500 immigrant children. Many connected the dots and assumed these “lost” children were the same tots taken from their families by border agents, but this is incorrect.

The 1,475 unaccounted-for refugee children were explicitly ones who were caught at the border unaccompanied by a family member or adult. These kids are processed by the Office of Refugee Resettlement, then released to immediate or extended family or “other people that the child has a pre-existing relationship with,” according to lawyer Josie Duffy Rice. “If none of those categories apply, then the kids normally stay in a shelter.”

In checking in on these kids, the Departemnt of Health and Human Services didn’t put in a ton of effort. “Basically by all accounts HHS did a cursory reach out to check on these kids,” explained Rice.

The children may be lost, or they may be with people trying to keep them away from immigration agents for a reason. “The problem,” writes Ephrat Livni at Qz, “is that many of those missing kids may well be with their parents or families, and they may have gone off the grid deliberately to avoid” ICE agents. Livni explains further:

Once a child joins a sponsor, the ORR relinquishes responsibility—that’s what has people up in arms now. The sponsorship agreement essentially leaves it up to the child and their sponsors to show up for further immigration proceedings.

That’s not great. But demands to crack down on ORR release policies could make things worse for the kids who disappeared, and for those who will continue to arrive alone at the border. Asking ORR to be more strict about releasing undocumented kids, and keeping an eye on them after they are released, could make it harder for sponsors to step up and take in their family members. It could also incentivize more disappearances for those who do, forcing more families to exist underground to avoid authorities.

FREE MINDS

Instagram shadowbans sex-worker rights and strippers.

The #stripper category on Instagram is also no more.

FREE MARKETS

As usual, more regulations made things worse. “If you’re located in the EU, you’re probably getting consent requests from every service you’ve signed up for since 1975,” writes Mona Ibrahim at Polygon. The European Union’s General Date Protection Regulation has led to compulsory revamping of privacy policies set by video games, social media sites, and virtually anything with a digital component. The change has led to an overwhelming amount of updates for customers in the U.S. as well as the E.U. “But, frankly, the disclosure requirements under GDPR seem to have one over-arching effect, and that’s content-dense privacy policies that aren’t as easy to navigate as companies want to believe,” writes Ibrahim.

And while this may satisfy legal requirements under GDPR, the practical effect is information fatigue, despite guidance from the appropriate authorities to eliminate just that. These regulations were supposed to make things simpler for everyone, and they are not.

So what are the rights granted under GDPR? How are they enforced? Will you be able to take advantage of these new rights, or will they only benefit those in the EU?

Check out Polygon for a good explainer. And see Andrea O’Sullivan, writing here earlier this month, on how the new rules will make Facebook and Google even more powerful and “the EU’s GDPR should serve as a cautionary tale for Americans eager to rein in tech titans.”

QUICK HITS

  • “Even when the criminal-justice system finally admits it got it wrong,” writes Radley Balko, “it does so in a way that assigns the least culpability possible to the people who are most culpable for the injustice.”
  • Trump’s on-again, off-again future meetup with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un gets a boost today by a visit from Chairman Kim Yong Chol, who will meet with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in New York.
  • Virginia Republican Rep. Thomas Garrett announced yesterday “that he is struggling with alcoholism and will abandon his run for a second term in Congress so he can focus on recovery and his family,” reports The Washington Post.
  • The infamous “Marshmallow Test” experiment might not mean what we think it means.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2sonLpC
via IFTTT

Is the FBI’s Inflated Encryption Problem a Mistake or Part of an Agenda? New at Reason

Christopher WrayIf you were to take law enforcement at its word, you would believe that the encryption techniques that secure our data actually end up serving criminals who would do us harm. For the past few years, the FBI and other authorities have revived the “War on Crypto” because they say it prevents them from accessing devices that they need to bring killers and terrorists to justice.

FBI director Christopher Wray has been fond of claiming that the Bureau was locked out of some 7,775 devices last year. In January, he argued that “being unable to access nearly 7,800 devices in a single year is a major public safety issue.”

It turns out that the FBI wildly inflated those figures, according to the Washington Post. The Bureau still doesn’t know the exact number of devices that have apparently been so central in the miscarriage of justice. If previous numbers are to be believed—which have hovered around 700 to 800 devices—the true number is probably closer to 1,000.

The FBI told the Post that “programming errors” were responsible for the over-counting, since they were apparently pulling their numbers from three separate databases. But that excuse seems awfully convenient, given the agency’s recent antagonism towards security technologies. Andrea O’Sullivan takes a deeper look.

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2kxiZmc
via IFTTT

Brickbat: For Sale

For saleFor his senior prank, Kylan Scheele listed Truman High School in Missouri for sale on Craigslist. The asking price was just $12,275. School officials suspended him for the remainder of the school year and barred him from taking part in graduation. They say the ad was an “implied threat” because it mentioned a “loss of students coming up.” Scheele says he was referring to the graduating class.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2LE7rKu
via IFTTT

Democratic Senators Who Voted Against Iran Deal Blame Collapse of Iran Deal for High Gas Prices: New at Reason

Displays of political hypocrisy just don’t get any more brazen than the recent press conference by four Senate Democrats criticizing President Trump for soaring gasoline prices.

The Democratic Senate leader, Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), claimed that the price increases were “directly” related to “President Trump’s reckless decision to pull out of the Iran deal.” What Schumer didn’t mention was that he had voted against the Iran deal. Senator Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) also voted against the Iran nuclear deal, and he, too, was at the Capitol Hill press conference denouncing the high gas prices.

As for the supposed link between the Iran deal and gas prices, not even the nonpartisan fact-checkers at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center bought Schumer’s argument. The Annenberg Center’s FactCheck.org researched the issue. It found that other factors, such as robust global economic growth and a decision by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries to curb production, were more influential.

Having two senators who opposed the Iran deal show up to denounce Trump for pulling out of the Iran deal was only the beginning of the hypocrisy exhibition, writes Ira Stoll.

Read the whole thing here.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2skWa8O
via IFTTT

An English Teacher’s Incorrect Correction of a Trump Letter Illustrates His Critics’ Reflexive Condescension

A glance at Donald Trump’s Twitter feed is enough to show that the president does not have a firm grasp of punctuation and tends to capitalize words arbitrarily. By comparison, the form letter that Yvonne Mason received from Trump, which presumably was written by a staffer on his behalf, is a model of care. Yet Mason, a retired English teacher in Atlanta, thought the letter was so riddled with errors that she marked it up, posted a photo of it on Facebook, and sent the “corrected” version back to the White House. I know about this incident only because The New York Times thought it was worth a story, as part of a continuing series on what a huge doofus the president is.

Don’t get me wrong. The president is a huge doofus. But Mason’s markup of his letter does not reinforce that point. In fact, none of Mason’s corrections is correct, although there are at least two mistakes in the letter that she neglected to note. Mason’s showy but erroneous pedantry illustrates the tendency of Trump’s opponents to cast policy disagreements as questions of competence and to delight in everything that reflects badly on him, even when that thing is not, strictly speaking, true. These tendencies, which mirror Trump’s own fondness for ad hominem attacks and recklessness with facts, alienate potential allies while confirming his supporters’ conviction that he is sticking it to a supercilious elite that holds them in contempt.

Mason, a Democrat, had sent Trump a letter asking him to visit the families of the 17 people who were killed in the February 14 shooting at a high school in Parkland, Florida. “I had written to them in anger, to tell you the truth,” she told the Times. “I thought he owed it to these grieving families.” The subtext here, of course, is that Mason wants more gun control than Trump is willing to support. When Mason got back the form letter, which cites various steps that Trump took after the Parkland massacre to “improve both school and community safety”—steps that Mason views as woefully inadequate—she transformed this policy dispute into a “grammar & style” lesson.

“Have ya’ll tried grammar & style check?” she scrawled in the upper left corner. “Poor writing is not something I abide,” she told the Times.

Almost all of Mason’s corrections are complaints about capitalization. Specifically, the letter capitalizes the words federal, state, nation, and president even when they are not components of proper nouns. That is not A.P. style. That is not Reason style. That is not my style. But as the Times notes, it is White House style:

A style manual for the federal government calls for capitalizing “Nation” and “Federal” when the words are used as a synonym for the United States. It says “State” should be capitalized when it is referring to the government or legislature. In letters from Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush that constituents posted online, words like “Nation” and “President” are capitalized.

The staffer who wrote this form letter can hardly be faulted for following the federal government’s style manual, even if you and I might disagree about the rules it contains. Nor did he do anything wrong by referring to the Justice Department’s proposed ban on bump stocks as a “rule,” a term that seems to have puzzled Mason. The letter’s author can fairly be criticized for omitting the word criminal from the name of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and for writing this sentence:

As president, one of my top priorities is the safety of America’s youth, who are the future leaders of our great Nation.

The misplaced modifier here suggests that the president is “one of my top priorities.” Better: “One of my top priorities as president is the safety of America’s youth, who are the future of our great Nation.” Even better: Let’s argue about the president’s policies instead of his “grammar & style.”

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2GXJlXt
via IFTTT

Free Speech Loses at University of Virginia: New at Reason

U.Va protestsIf any state university is right to limit speech by members of the public on its grounds, the University of Virginia is that university. Last summer it played unwilling host to a mob of torch-bearing white supremacists shouting “Jews will not replace us!” and other repellent things.

The next day, demonstrations by more white supremacists at Lee Park in Charlottesville led to violent clashes with counterprotesters and the murder of Heather Heyer. It was a shocking episode that made news around the globe.

So you can understand why the university has adopted a new policy restricting speech on the grounds by persons or groups not affiliated with the school. Under the new policy, those who wish to speak on the grounds may do so only in one of nine outdoor locations. Would-be speakers, pamphleteers, and the like must request a reservation at least seven days in advance (but no more than one month in advance), and the reservations are good only for two-hour blocks Monday through Friday. An applicant cannot make more than one reservation a week. Applicants cannot use a location that is in use by somebody else at the same time.

There’s just one thing, A. Barton Hinkle explains: No public university is right to do limit protests in this manner. Especially not U.Va..

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2LBT3SR
via IFTTT

Renewable Energy Mandates Are Making Poor People Poorer: New at Reason

Escalating electricity prices are regressive—poorer people pay a higher proportion of their incomes heating and cooling their houses than do richer people. Low-income folks also tend to live in draftier dwellings and retain older, less energy-efficient appliances and climate-control systems. Consequently, anything that raises the price of power will impose bigger relative costs on the poor.

As renewable energy mandates and rising “ecological” taxes have driven up electricity prices, an increase in energy poverty has become a problem in countries such as Germany and the United Kingdom, writes Reason‘s Ronald Bailey.

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2GWLLpd
via IFTTT