Stanford Sued After Following Another Student Suicide

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t think people would be defending a male athlete throwing hot coffee on a female athlete for some perceived wrongdoing that had been investigated and dropped by two different investigatory agencies.

That's not the issue. Throwing hot coffee on another person is not defensible.

The concern is how the university handled that transgression. Was it overly punitive? Was it appropriate to threaten removal of her degree? Is it fair that other students who commit physical assault don't face similar consequences? Should her previously clean disciplinary record (3+ years on campus) be considered? Should their knowledge that she was seeking therapy factor into how they delivered this news? Was it necessary to draw out the process for six months and deliver the threat of expulsion within hours of the filing deadline? Was there appropriate due process? And the bigger question...did the sum of their actions contribute to her death?

Stanford's OCR judicial process was under scrutiny for over 10 years prior to this incident. Reforms were recommended. It seems many of those reforms were not implemented.

I'm not sure the university will be held accountable, but one can hope this leads to reform of their disciplinary process. This is a life that could have been saved with a different approach...that's the real tragedy here.

Can you please give examples on how it was overly punitive? I read the complaint and I don’t see it.

you don’t think that including not receiving her degree is punitive for allegedly throwing her coffee given her history at school. Really?

So, you don’t seem to understand how these things work and your indignation is misplaced.

She wasn’t being investigated for throwing coffee on someone. She was being investigated for assault which covers everything from throwing coffee on someone to beating someone to within an inch of their life. The punishment for assault on any campus is going to be up to expulsion.

The school doesn’t determine the punishment before running through the investigative process because you don’t want to tell the accused the limits of the punishment and then find out there was much worse behavior. Realistically, if there was nothing beyond the coffee, she wasn’t going to be expelled.

+1

Actions have consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many men accused of sexual assault at Stanford received an email threatening to withhold their diploma? I would be shocked if it were any. Certainly if a woman decides not to file a complaint, there is no discipline.

Meanwhile, she spills coffee. He doesn’t file a complaint. And Stanford still goes for the nuclear option. That’s an absurd over reaction. Did they learn nothing from Brock Turner?

I’m so furious. I was part of a similar incident at Dartmouth. The deans tried to push me into the campus disciplinary system and were pissed when I went to the Hanover police and asked to press charges. I was repeatedly asked by an administrator responsible for my access to course registration and on-campus job recruiting to drop the charges because it would be “better” to deal with it on campus. For them.

In the end, I stayed on campus during a break to testify in court. Unfortunately the prosecutor accepted a plea deal the day before. The incident- in which I had done nothing- ultimately affected my recruiting and my life after graduation.

Rest in peace, Katie Meyer. I hate what they did to her and respect her so much- anyone who doesn’t understand the power an institution has over its students in this kind of scenario is ignorant and naive. I wish they hadn’t cornered her like this.

How is this remotely similar? You were the victim, Katie was alleged to be the assailant.

The point is that universities should NOT be allowed to handle these situations.

The real problem is that the original sexual which was reported on campus was ignored by the university, and none of this might have happened if the university had properly addressed the sexual assault! Instead, Stanford, Dartmouth, and a host of other universities have broken extralegal disciplinary processes that do nothing but serve the university and its PR. Imagine if the original assailant had been punished? Instead he’s walking free and a girl who stood up for her friend was dragged into a convoluted, opaque system of punishment.

Adults don’t “stand up for their friends” by committing assault (yes, that’s what it is) and deliberately burning someone with a hot liquid. No. Sorry.

This could only be posted by a man, because I have known multiple adult women in college and grad school who, facing inaction by a university, threw a beer, a plate of dining hall food, trash, etc. at the assailant of their friend. Sometimes the only option left to show in public that friends will stand up for their victimized friend is a petty and stupid but very public act- like the coffee thing. And if you knew anything about Stanford biking culture, the layout of campus, and the fact that most athletes know each other at least by face, this would seem so much less “shocking” to you.

Six days later is plenty of time for cooler heads to prevail. I don’t think people would be defending a male athlete throwing hot coffee on a female athlete for some perceived wrongdoing that had been investigated and dropped by two different investigatory agencies.

Yes. Women should just get over a sexual assault in less than a week.

I only saw one investigatory agency. And interesting they felt they could investigate and make a decision on the football player in less than a week, but the soccer player has it drag on for six months

It was reported to the police and Stanford, there were two separate investigations.

Was if reported to the police? I did nor see that anywhere.

Thr complaint fails to mention that but it is in the Stanford statement.

The statement given by Stanford stated that the football player's alleged conduct was turned over to the local police.

[Anonymous]

I was in a similar situation in college receiving that kind of communication for a minor mistake and will never forget the lonely panic, especially because it was too late at night to call home in a different time zone, I was too embarrassed to go to friends until I understood what was happening, and I was too compliant to say something back to the administrators who contacted me, as well as too naive to realize I could have. We didn’t really have documents on the internet at the time, so my version of Katie Meyer’s frantic toggling between screens was furiously paging through the rules section of my course book to try to understand. I ended up graduating late because of it, and even with a diploma and it being mostly a secret, the shame followed me for years.

This isvery much how I envision her reacting. I’m sorry that happened to you and I hope you feel less shameful now.

[Anonymous]

All you are suggesting is shortening the SOL. Now it will be five hours earlier. So what. That’s not a substantive change at all.

You are simplifying my point but this is not worth arguing about. I noted above that I think there will be wholesale changes to the entire investigation and hearing process at Stanford, and based on publicly available information those changes sound warranted. Regardless of the merits of the parents' case, I think these changes will happen. As I suggested, let's wait and see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I was in a similar situation in college receiving that kind of communication for a minor mistake and will never forget the lonely panic, especially because it was too late at night to call home in a different time zone, I was too embarrassed to go to friends until I understood what was happening, and I was too compliant to say something back to the administrators who contacted me, as well as too naive to realize I could have. We didn’t really have documents on the internet at the time, so my version of Katie Meyer’s frantic toggling between screens was furiously paging through the rules section of my course book to try to understand. I ended up graduating late because of it, and even with a diploma and it being mostly a secret, the shame followed me for years.

This isvery much how I envision her reacting. I’m sorry that happened to you and I hope you feel less shameful now.

I don’t feel less shame, but thank you. The few people I’ve told the story to said things like “you should have known”, and “it was your fault, what did you expect.” So I don’t tell anyone now.

That’s why I have so much empathy for Katie Meyer, especially when I read all of these posters saying how she messed up and should have been ready to pay the price. For every person that says people make mistakes and should be forgiven, there are far more in the other camp who are ruthlessly unforgiving of others. They’re more than happy for the world to be an “every man for himself” place and they’re grateful for others’ mistakes and see them an opportunity to pull ahead. It’s like being in a hurdles race and constantly hoping the rest of the heat will hit a hurdle and fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

All you are suggesting is shortening the SOL. Now it will be five hours earlier. So what. That’s not a substantive change at all.

You are simplifying my point but this is not worth arguing about. I noted above that I think there will be wholesale changes to the entire investigation and hearing process at Stanford, and based on publicly available information those changes sound warranted. Regardless of the merits of the parents' case, I think these changes will happen. As I suggested, let's wait and see.

As this thread shows, others feel the opposite. A tragic death that wasn’t anyone’s fault. I hope her family finds as much peace as possible but this lawsuit seems to have little merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the mid 90s while a college junior, my roommate and I received a disciplinary citation for excessive noise in our dorm room after 10pm, this was in the fall. We needed to pay a fine or do community service. We ignored the notice and the follow up, until in May at the start of finals we received a notice that if we dis nit comply we would not be able to return to college the next year. We both freaked out, roommate paid the fine and I did not have enough money left so I did comm service in the midst of finals.

Sharing this because, while I was scared to pieces by the uni’s notice and the timing was awful, I knew I deserved it and had to own up and didn’t question how the uni handled it. I do wonder if language about “not graduating” or in my case, not being permitted to return to school, is standard for any disciplinary violation, because I wouldn’t call a dorm noise complaint a high stakes action to be disciplined. This was all a different time, of course.

That’s really interesting and has so many parallels. I’m curious if you can imagine if you had received that communication but without the “you can pay a fine or do community service” options and just the open-ended threat that you might not be able to return to campus. What do you think you would have done first, who would you have called, etc.?

I was in a similar situation in college receiving that kind of communication for a minor mistake and will never forget the lonely panic, especially because it was too late at night to call home in a different time zone, I was too embarrassed to go to friends until I understood what was happening, and I was too compliant to say something back to the administrators who contacted me, as well as too naive to realize I could have. We didn’t really have documents on the internet at the time, so my version of Katie Meyer’s frantic toggling between screens was furiously paging through the rules section of my course book to try to understand. I ended up graduating late because of it, and even with a diploma and it being mostly a secret, the shame followed me for years.

I, too, felt a lot of shame - there was no way I would have called my parents whatever time of day I received the notice (my parents and I think many back then were much less involved in my day to day life - I only spoke to them once a week or so). I also was embarassed that my roommate could just pay the fine and I could not. And everyone I knew was busy in reading period although I am not sure I would have confided anyway - it did feel very lonely and scary. I do remember going into the dean’s office the next day and sobbing because I was so worried I would be kicked out of school, and the dean did not coddle me but nor made me feel targeted - I mostly remember thinking this was all my fault and how did I get into the mess/let it fester so long. Anyway, I have a lot of sympathy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the mid 90s while a college junior, my roommate and I received a disciplinary citation for excessive noise in our dorm room after 10pm, this was in the fall. We needed to pay a fine or do community service. We ignored the notice and the follow up, until in May at the start of finals we received a notice that if we dis nit comply we would not be able to return to college the next year. We both freaked out, roommate paid the fine and I did not have enough money left so I did comm service in the midst of finals.

Sharing this because, while I was scared to pieces by the uni’s notice and the timing was awful, I knew I deserved it and had to own up and didn’t question how the uni handled it. I do wonder if language about “not graduating” or in my case, not being permitted to return to school, is standard for any disciplinary violation, because I wouldn’t call a dorm noise complaint a high stakes action to be disciplined. This was all a different time, of course.

That’s really interesting and has so many parallels. I’m curious if you can imagine if you had received that communication but without the “you can pay a fine or do community service” options and just the open-ended threat that you might not be able to return to campus. What do you think you would have done first, who would you have called, etc.?

I was in a similar situation in college receiving that kind of communication for a minor mistake and will never forget the lonely panic, especially because it was too late at night to call home in a different time zone, I was too embarrassed to go to friends until I understood what was happening, and I was too compliant to say something back to the administrators who contacted me, as well as too naive to realize I could have. We didn’t really have documents on the internet at the time, so my version of Katie Meyer’s frantic toggling between screens was furiously paging through the rules section of my course book to try to understand. I ended up graduating late because of it, and even with a diploma and it being mostly a secret, the shame followed me for years.

I, too, felt a lot of shame - there was no way I would have called my parents whatever time of day I received the notice (my parents and I think many back then were much less involved in my day to day life - I only spoke to them once a week or so). I also was embarassed that my roommate could just pay the fine and I could not. And everyone I knew was busy in reading period although I am not sure I would have confided anyway - it did feel very lonely and scary. I do remember going into the dean’s office the next day and sobbing because I was so worried I would be kicked out of school, and the dean did not coddle me but nor made me feel targeted - I mostly remember thinking this was all my fault and how did I get into the mess/let it fester so long. Anyway, I have a lot of sympathy.

meant to say I have a lot of empathy but I do have sympathy, too!

[Anonymous]

Stanford will lie like it always does.

Stanford is not worth the degree at all.

They lied for Musk got sued and lost no way I'd send my kid there.

[Anonymous]

As this thread shows, others feel the opposite. A tragic death that wasn’t anyone’s fault. I hope her family finds as much peace as possible but this lawsuit seems to have little merit.

Is this the same poster who keeps responding? You keep missing the point! I said “regardless of the merits of the parents’ case” because I am
not at all certain that they have a good case. I do think there will be changes to Stanford’s disciplinary process and procedures no matter what happens with the parents’ case because of the way the Katie Meyer disciplinary process was handled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As this thread shows, others feel the opposite. A tragic death that wasn’t anyone’s fault. I hope her family finds as much peace as possible but this lawsuit seems to have little merit.

Is this the same poster who keeps responding? You keep missing the point! I said “regardless of the merits of the parents’ case” because I am
not at all certain that they have a good case. I do think there will be changes to Stanford’s disciplinary process and procedures no matter what happens with the parents’ case because of the way the Katie Meyer disciplinary process was handled.

DP. I am still not seeing the issue with the disciplinary process. I read the entire thread and the complaint filed by the parents. From what I see, there is a process that involves a right to defend. They have a deadline for action. They offer support at, what appears to be, no cost to the student.

It’s not clear to me as to whether it was followed consistently because I don’t know the procedure and we don’t know what happened with anyone else. But that’s different than having a flawed procedure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As this thread shows, others feel the opposite. A tragic death that wasn’t anyone’s fault. I hope her family finds as much peace as possible but this lawsuit seems to have little merit.

Is this the same poster who keeps responding? You keep missing the point! I said “regardless of the merits of the parents’ case” because I am
not at all certain that they have a good case. I do think there will be changes to Stanford’s disciplinary process and procedures no matter what happens with the parents’ case because of the way the Katie Meyer disciplinary process was handled.

There are several posters who disagree with you.

[Anonymous]

"If you just read the headlines, I can understand why many question the merits of the lawsuit. .

But digging deeper, it's hard not to conclude that Stanford's handling of the case was overly punitive and inconsistent with their handling of other campus disciplinary cases. That contributes to the mental health crisis on campus...the sense that discipline is arbitrary and unfair, and certain groups of students are protected by the university while others face more severe consequences. There's no question she shouldn't have poured coffee on the football player. Yet reading the details of how it was handled, I can't see how anyone can logically conclude that the university's actions and threats were appropriate. College kids aren't known for sound judgment...I get that there are lessons to be learned and responsibility to be taken, but I'm floored that anyone in the administration thought this approach was a sound way to produce those outcomes. Clearly it wasn't.

One can only hope that this tragedy might lead to reform. Sadly, a lawsuit is sometimes what it takes for change to happen."

+1000

I'm a Stanford alum. I'm very familiar with the Fundamental Standard and the disciplinary process. There was absolutely no reason to threaten expulsion for what she did. The school's disciplinary process goes overboard and is very unevenly applied. There was no need to go nuclear on her like this for something that didn't involve serious harm to the victim.

There is a group of alumni lawyers who have been working to reform the process for a few years now, as well as an internal committee that has called for changes to no avail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"If you just read the headlines, I can understand why many question the merits of the lawsuit. .

But digging deeper, it's hard not to conclude that Stanford's handling of the case was overly punitive and inconsistent with their handling of other campus disciplinary cases. That contributes to the mental health crisis on campus...the sense that discipline is arbitrary and unfair, and certain groups of students are protected by the university while others face more severe consequences. There's no question she shouldn't have poured coffee on the football player. Yet reading the details of how it was handled, I can't see how anyone can logically conclude that the university's actions and threats were appropriate. College kids aren't known for sound judgment...I get that there are lessons to be learned and responsibility to be taken, but I'm floored that anyone in the administration thought this approach was a sound way to produce those outcomes. Clearly it wasn't.

One can only hope that this tragedy might lead to reform. Sadly, a lawsuit is sometimes what it takes for change to happen."

+1000

I'm a Stanford alum. I'm very familiar with the Fundamental Standard and the disciplinary process. There was absolutely no reason to threaten expulsion for what she did. The school's disciplinary process goes overboard and is very unevenly applied. There was no need to go nuclear on her like this for something that didn't involve serious harm to the victim.

There is a group of alumni lawyers who have been working to reform the process for a few years now, as well as an internal committee that has called for changes to no avail.

Maybe you should reread the parents lawsuit against Stanford University.

The actions of the soccer goalie warrant consideration of expulsion as an appropriate penalty. Any university student engaging in an intentional,vigilante assault based on rumor against a university student on university grounds in which resulted in harm should be--at a minimum--expelled.

The parents' lawsuit pleads that even if their daughter's action was intentional, Stanford should have taken into consideration that Meyer "was standing up for the victim (and teammate) of a sexual assault." (Notice how the parents' lawyers cleverly left out the word "alleged" before "sexual assault" ?)

The soccer goalie was probably playing the Stanford disciplinary system hoping to get away with the assault & battery on the technical ground of expiration of the statute of limitations. It didn't work and she wasn't adult enough to take responsibility for her actions.

Just wait until the evidence that Meyer was furnished pursuant to the school's investigation.

Nobody wanted any physical harm to come to the soccer player, but, if she was a threat to the community--even if self-justified vigilante justice motivated her into action--expulsion is the minimum punishment that should have been considered. And Stanford clearly wanted to make the defendant goalie aware of the possible consequences so that she would take the matter seriously and seek counsel--or, at least, respond to the evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My brother graduated from Stanford and first exhibited signs of schizophrenia-like mental illness while there. I later found evidence that he had been diagnosed while still a student. My family was never alerted. He proceeded to fall apart and explode his life in his 20s. He has still not gotten help/medication and has never supported himself…. The fact he was a Stanford graduate went from a badge of honor and achievement to a weight around his neck— a medal he would never live up to.

Privacy laws prohibit schools from telling parents about their student's health matters.

Which is why I insisted my daughter sign the waiver.