The Daily Orange is a nonprofit newsroom that receives no funding from Syracuse University. Consider donating today to support our mission.

Editor’s note: This story includes descriptions of sexual assault.

A former Syracuse University student and men’s club hockey player is suing the university after he was retroactively expelled over sexual assault allegations he claims were part of a “homophobic panic.” 

The lawsuit, which was filed in the Onondaga County Supreme Court on Friday, alleges that SU violated its own policies and abused its discretion by retroactively expelling the student and withholding his degree. 

SU does not comment on pending litigation, said Sarah Scalese, senior associate vice president for university communications. The university has not filed a response to the lawsuit yet.

The suit dates back to a March 2019 sexual encounter that the student, identified in the lawsuit only as John Doe, said set off a series of anti-gay attacks against him from his teammates and ex-girlfriend. 

Doe is requesting that SU vacate its decisions finding him responsible for sexual misconduct and expunge the allegations from his transcript. The lawsuit also asks that SU immediately award Doe his degree.

Following a team party on March 2, 2019, the plaintiff and another student who worked with the team returned to the plaintiff’s apartment and had oral sex, the suit alleges. The encounter, which the plaintiff said was initiated by the other student, was consensual, the lawsuit claims.

Word of the sexual encounter spread while the hockey team was in Philadelphia for a tournament, the lawsuit reads. The other student involved in the sexual encounter previously faced ridicule by members of the hockey team who suspected he was gay, the suit alleges.

On March 19, 2019, that student texted Doe’s roommate claiming the encounter was not consensual and said that he was not gay, the lawsuit says. 

The student filed a Title IX complaint about the encounter on March 27, 2019. The next day, another Syracuse hockey player filed a Title IX complaint alleging that Doe had touched his inner thigh without consent in September 2017. A day after that, another player alleged to Title IX officials that Doe had exposed himself in his apartment in September 2018. 

Finally, on April 1, 2019, SU filed a Title IX complaint on behalf of another student and player who had called the Department of Public Safety and Syracuse Police Department on March 20, 2019, to allege that Doe tried to rape him. 

SPD never filed any charges against Doe and has no records of any criminal investigation or report against him, the lawsuit alleges. The student later admitted to SU that he had exaggerated aspects of the incident to the police, saying Doe had tried to kiss him rather than rape him, according to the lawsuit. 

Investigators from SU’s Title IX office first interviewed three of the students who alleged misconduct by Doe between March 27 and April 1, 2019, the suit says. The student who had reported his allegations to SPD and DPS refused to participate in the investigation, but SU continued to move forward with a complaint on his behalf. 

While the Title IX office conducted interviews related to the investigation, hockey team leaders coordinated meetings to discuss Doe, the lawsuit alleges. It further claims that the players withheld evidence and refused to turn over group texts where they coordinated their testimony against Doe. 

SU placed Doe on interim suspension on March 28, 2019. The university denied his appeal of the suspension on April 5. 

Former student sues SU after sexual assault allegations, expulsion by The Daily Orange on Scribd

Though the university strives to complete Title IX investigations within 60 days, Doe’s case continued for 463 days, the lawsuit states. SU may extend the timeline for investigations in “exceptional circumstances” but must regularly notify the involved parties of its updated timeline, according to SU’s student handbook. 

Doe never received such notifications or timelines, the lawsuit alleges. 

SU did not interview Doe or the students who had filed allegations against him until May 2019, allowing “damaging, homophobic rumors” about him to circulate for months, the suit says. Doe’s roommates refused to live with him and belittled and mocked him on social media, it states. 

One of the students who later testified against Doe was also photographed wearing a T-shirt that included the nicknames of hockey team members. Doe’s nickname on the shirt was covered by a piece of white tape with what Doe’s lawyers believe to be a homophobic slur written on it, the lawsuit states.

On July 8, Doe’s former girlfriend filed a Title IX complaint alleging that Doe had coerced her into sex on at least three occasions during their multi-year relationship. The lawsuit claims her allegations were spurred by the anti-gay attacks the hockey team had made against Doe.

In September 2019, Doe requested that SU hear all five complaints against him together. Doe “believed the complaints represented a coordinated effort to target him based on a homophobic panic spread throughout the hockey team and spread to his ex-girlfriend,” the suit says. 

Doe thought that consolidating the cases would streamline the process and allow the university to see his accusers’ collaboration, the suit says. 

SU agreed. On April 1, 2020, SU’s Title IX hearing board found Doe responsible for four of the five allegations and retroactively expelled him.

Since Doe would have graduated in May 2019, the ruling prevented him from obtaining his degree. 

The lawsuit argues that SU “endorsed the homophobic panic,” overlooking inconsistencies and changes in Doe’s accuser’s stories. 

Doe appealed SU’s decision, arguing that the numerous delays in the investigation and hearing prejudiced his ability to receive a fair process. He also argued that the sanction was disproportionate and that the hearing board did not consider issues of witness bias, collaboration and homophobia.

“The university’s logic was apparently that complainants, no matter how inconsistent and no matter how questionable their motives, have strength in numbers,” the lawsuit says. 

The Appeals Board upheld all of the findings against Doe. While the investigation’s timeline may have been “frustrating” to Doe, the delays had not deprived him of a fair process, SU said at the time. 

Published on October 25, 2020 at 10:30 pm

Contact Michael: msessa@syr.edu | @MichaelSessa3