Yet there was one accuser whom he was found to have been responsible for sexually assaulting someone by the university. He isn't completely clean here.
Possibly not, but that doesn't excuse inventing rape allegations. The guy sounds like he was kind of sleazy, but that doesn't make him a rapist.
You don't know if she invented rape allegations. You really don't know one way or the other. Just as him committing sexual assault on another woman doesn't make him guilty with another person (certainly makes him more than sleazy though), the mattress woman texting him and doing all the things she did doesn't mean she is lying. Seems you are comfortable judging without knowing the key facts.
So you are saying that you were right for once, but it bothered you, so you reverted to being wrong, like on everything else.
You should know I take your cyber stalking seriously. The fact that you have mentioned wanting to fight me and you know who I am and where I work isn't a laughing matter. I sincerely hope you are just harmless, and I think you are - but you never know.
That was overturned on appeal, is my understanding. The woman couldn't be bothered to show up to the appeal, because it would interfere with her job.
They were calling her at her job every day and she had already gone through the process (which took years once). I think saying someone "couldn't be bothered" is a way to spin things.
Stop defending this priveledged trash and her rich parents. Her mom actually tweeted a link to her "artistic" sex video smh.
I would say if you are accusing someone of sexually assaulting you, an act that will potentially ruin that person's life, and you stop because 1. the school is calling you at work, and 2. you don't think it is fair that the system allows the person an appeal, then yeah, couldn't be bothered is a fair enough description. It was too inconvenient would be another way to say it. Sour grapes might be another. The point is, this woman showed how important she thought it was that Mr. Nungesser be held accountable, which was not important enough to field phone calls at work and get over her anger at their being an appeals process. Ultimately, the outcome is that he was found not responsible for her claim, just like the other ones. That means no substantiated claims against the man. If anyone is spinning it is you, as you are the one claiming that he was found responsible (at this point there is no such finding) and that he is not completely clean (his record would disagree with you).
Clearly I read her letter, since I posted, verbatim, what she said in her letter with regard to the appeal/re-trial. Did you miss that somehow? An accused person has rights, including a right to appeal. The college disciplinary board (or whatever they called the body handling his case) agreed that his appeal raised sufficient issues to grant him a new hearing. That happens in real courts as well as these college kangaroo courts. She chose not to participate in the rehearing of his case for exactly the reasons I listed. That you think his appeal and rehearing should not count is irrelevant. He pointed out the issues with the original hearing, the powers that be agreed that the issues were serious enough to invalidate the original hearing, and thus he was granted a new hearing. At the new hearing he was found not responsible. The outcome may or may not have been different if this woman had shown up, but she chose to pass. As far as the college, his record, and any other official source is concerned, he has a clean record. His accuser, not facing cross examination, has posted an anonymous letter to Jezebel, and for some reason you think that must be taken as gospel. I think we have due process rights for reasons, a major reason being so that a mere accusation is not enough to condemn someone.
He was found not responsible because she decided not to go through the ordeal again. Do you have any idea of what it's like for a woman to be sexually assaulted? I wonder if you have compassion for any of the women in your life.
