Federal court gives men a weapon to fight back against false accusers

Students Accused of Rape Can Fight Back // Court OKs Suits Against University, Employees, and Female

With so much attention focused on alleged failures to prosecute students accused of date rape, the problem of universities whose judicial proceedings are unfair to the accused have been largely overlooked

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PRLog (Press Release) - May 19, 2014 - WASHINGTON, D.C. -- WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 19, 2014): With so much attention focused on the alleged failures of many universities to forcefully prosecute male students accused of date rape and sexual assault, the problem of universities whose judicial proceedings are unfair to the accused, and/or are overzealous because of pressure from female students or otherwise, have been largely overlooked.

But now a new judicial ruling gives those wrongly convicted a powerful new weapon - they can sue the university, the employees who participated in the proceedings, and even the accused herself in federal court for substantial monetary damages and other remedies, notes public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who was twice called a “radical feminist.”

After a school tribunal at Saint Joseph's University found a male student to have committed sexual assault arising out of an incident of allegedly consensual sexual intercourse, he took legal action, says Banzhaf, who has been successful in over 100 sex discrimination proceedings.

The federal court held that he was entitled to sue the private university under the state's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, and that he could also sue the university, university employees, and the female complainant for defamation (slander), with the court holding that their accusatory statements about him were not legally privileged.

Interestingly, the court said that he could also sue the female complainant for intentionally interfering with his contractual relations with the school; an important ruling, suggests Banzhaf, because for such an intentional tort he can seek much higher punitive damages in addition to general damages. Also, the court ruled that the mere fact that the tribunal found that the male student had committed the wrongful act complained of was not conclusive as to his guilt or innocence, and did not shield the female complainant from this type of legal liability.

Several additional claims by the plaintiff were not accepted by the court on the basis of the complaint which had been filed, but the court said that the male student was not precluded from bringing up these claims again, provided they were properly pleaded.

These claims included, said Banzhaf: breach of contract, violation of Title IX (discrimination against him by the school on the basis of his gender), negligence, making public statements which place him in a false light, and intentional infliction of emotional distress (which might also warrant punitive damages).

"Female university students in 'he said, she said' rape and sexual assault cases, who were dissatisfied with the way the school handled the situation, are increasingly seeking legal remedies.

But now men who feel that the pendulum has swung too far, or that they were not treated fairly in school judicial proceedings, suddenly also have powerful legal weapons on their side.

Also, says Banzhaf, it is likely that some attorneys will take these cases on a contingency fee basis, so that both rich and poor students can go after both the universities and any women who improperly accuse them. Female students, knowing that they may have to repeat their allegations under oath in open court, may think carefully before bringing any unfounded charges, he predicts.

Source

Well shut my mouth. This is a blessing,it truly is. It's about time someone in government took action and gave men a legal remedy to fight against the injustice of being falsely accused. This is what activism and making our concerns known accomplishes. There are lots of twists and turns on this road but if it yields victories such as this one then it is worth it.

Your rights to own personal property...may be none

Act Now: Don't Let Copyright Holders Steal Our Property Rights! From Demand Progress:

Do you really own the smartphone you’re using to read this email? If you sold your computer, would you be breaking the law? A federal court in New York says you would be.

It's unbelievable, but trademark and copyright holders really are trying to take away your right to sell things that you own: Please add your name at right to fight back.

The First-Sale Doctrine gives us the right to sell most property we own. But if the Supreme Court supports the lower court’s decision, we won't really “own” anything if it's from a different country. We expect them to issue a ruling later this year.

The President can urge the Court to side with consumers; then Congress will probably weigh in on the issue, no matter how the Court rules.

If we lose this fight, anybody who wants to resell foreign products, from Macbooks and iPhones to our clothing and textbooks, will have to ask copyright holders for permission first. And they'll have the right to deny it!

It's bad for so many reasons: It'll undermine Craigslist and Ebay, hurt the environment, increase incentives for manufacturers to move jobs off-shore, and effectively ban the traditional American yard sale.

To sign petition: click here

Sounds like you are renting rather than owning. This is a example of copyright lawsuits gone astray. The judge needs to do the right thing and rein in these out of control control freaks who like to mess up people's lives.