The $1 jury verdict that should terrify Cornell
A federal jury in Maryland ruled last week that the University of Maryland let harassment of a cleared student continue. An outside hearing officer had cleared him of sexual assault in 2021 and found his accuser’s credibility badly undercut. According to his lawsuit, students then told his club lacrosse team he was a rapist, and he lost his spot. The jury called the school’s response “clearly unreasonable” and awarded him $1. That may be the cheapest lesson in the history of higher education.
TL;DR
- A federal jury found the University of Maryland failed to prevent harassment of a student cleared of sexual assault charges, awarding him $1.
- The case highlights the contrast between legal processes that require proof and public reactions that often condemn individuals based on accusations alone.
- Examples like the Duke lacrosse case and a current Cornell allegation demonstrate the severe consequences of rushed judgments and the importance of thorough investigations.
- The author argues for allowing police and prosecutors to handle felony allegations first, rather than campus panels, and for enforcing anti-harassment rules for all students.
- The article stresses the need to reserve judgment, let investigators finish their work, and hold those who spread rumors accountable.