NKyTribune Staff Report
Northern Kentucky University has filed a response to a complaint by “Jane Doe” (female student) over a “sexual abuse” incident in a campus dorm.
“Jane Doe” filed a 19-page lawsuit in January in Campbell County Circuit Court, naming NKU Pres. Geoffrey S. Mearns; NKU Police Chief Les Kachurek; Kathleen Roberts, senior advisor to the President and Title IX coordinator; and Ann James, Senior Associate Dean of Students and Deputy Title IX Coordinator.
A response was filed yesterday on behalf of these defendants by two attorneys with the Lexington law firm, Sturgill, Turner, Baker, & Maloney. Their response was addressed to the U.S. District Court Eastern District Northern Division in Covington. Attorneys Katherine M. Coleman and Joshua M. Salsburey are both graduates of the University of Kentucky College of Law.
The response asks that the claims be “dismissed with prejudice,” (note: this means it can never be filed again) and that the university be awarded reasonable attorney fees and “any and all relief” it may be entitled to.
The 18-page response also takes exception to a number of the allegations in the suit, including:
That the neither the student nor her parents were informed of sexual assaults on campus or made aware of its “dated policies and procedures.”
The university’s response: “Plaintiff and/or her parents were provided with information concerning sexual assault on NKU’s campus as a part of Freshmen Orientation and was advised of NKU’s policies concerning sexual assault, which policies are published and readily available to Plaintiff, her parents, and the public through NKU’s website” and that the university also publishes crime statistics on its website.
It further states that the student was informed of “policies and procedures” at the time of her “notice of sexual assault to NKU and through the investigation and hearing process.”
That Doe was assaulted and raped by a Northern Kentucky University student.
The university’s response: The student notified the university of her sexual assault by “another NKU student (Student M) nine months prior to the date she reported the assault.”
That universities around the country have “advised students to stay within their inadequate systems of handling sexual assault matters” to avoid publicity that would affect admissions.
The university’s response: “Expressly denied,” stating that the student was advised of “policies and procedures” and of her right to file a formal complaint with NKU and initiate an investigation, and her option “to file a criminal complaint with the police” in addition to the internal complaint. They further state that “no victim” is required or can be compelled to file a criminal complaint.
That the internal hearing panel found “it was more probable than not” that Doe was telling the truth but that the university “did next to nothing” to protect her from “further anxiety and harassment.” The complaint goes on to detail Doe’s views of her experiences related to “Student M’s” lack of “punishment.”
The University’s response: “Deny that the panel found that she was “telling the truth” or “had been assaulted as described” but that it found it “more likely than not that Student M engaged in sexual misconduct/non-consensual sexual intercourse,” in violation of NKU Housing Policies and Student Code of Conduct.”
The response also says that “sanctions imposed against Student M” were made in “good faith” and in accordance with policy and procedure and were enforced. And that Doe has “at all times” had the right to raise concerns and could appeal. “Plaintiff made no appeal.”
Allegations that Student M was permitted access to the dining facility used by Doe are not accurate, says the University’s response. Because of renovations to the other full service dining facility, Student M was directed not to use the Norse Commons dining facility “during those hours identified by (Doe) for her use.” The response says that the No Contact Order was in place and that their investigations into Doe’s complaints revealed no violation.
Later in the document, the university states that Student M’s subsequent election as president of a fraternity on campus is irrelevant to imposition of sanctions.
That the student and her parents were met “with indifference” in a meeting with President Mearns.
The university’s response: President Mearns expressed “concern and empathy for the Plaintiff and her family.”
“President Mearns, in accordance with NKU policy and procedure, has no direct involvment in sexual assault investigations, hearings, appeals or sanctions.”
That an email circulated by campus Police Chief Les Kachurek was intimidating to Doe and attempted to violate her First Amendment rights regarding a peaceful protest on campus.
The university’s response: The university challenges the characterization of the email and denies related allegations.
That a letter from the university’s “outside counsel” (Katherine Coleman) threatened Doe that if she filed a lawsuit, the university “will expose all records related to this incident in support of its defense.”
The university’s response: The complaint “intentionally misstates and mischaracterizes the communication . . .for inflammatory purposes.” The university denies the allegations.
That Doe has been a victim of exclusion of education programs or activities, effectively denied equal access, has been shown deliberate indifference, has been subject to harrassment, has suffered lose of educational opportunities and been subjected to emotional distress, and that NKU failed to protect her.
The university response: Denial of all allegations and makes reference to “Plaintiff’s “prior false public accusations.”
“The University Defendants affirmatively state that they carried out their obligations in good faith pursuant to University policy and procedure and all applicable federal and or state statutes, regulations and guidance,” says the response.
* * *
In further defense of the suit, the University claims the “Plaintiff may have failed to mitigate any and all of her alleged damages and/or aggravated same by her own actions or inactions.”
Kevin Murphy, the attorney for Jane Doe, has asked for a trial by jury, a declaratory judgment and for statutory attorney fees and costs.
The university’s counsel is asking that claims be dismissed, that the University Defendants be awarded costs, including reasonable attorney fees, and for “any and all relief to which the Defendants may be entitled.”
* * *
To read both legal documents in full:
* * * *
You may also be interested in the NKyTribune’s earlier story on the student’s complaint:
NKU student files suit against the university
Student protests by carrying mattress on her back