Can we assume this kid is expelled permanently? Not from this class, not from this school, but from all normal public school?

If not, and this is accepted behavior in school today, I change my mind on arming teachers and I give each one one free shot per year. That teacher's restraint was legendary.

If his parents haven't publicly apologized, they deserve public outing and humiliation. He learned that behavior, likely at home, and if they don't forcefully denounce it, they're encouraging it.

Find this kid and brutally shame him into surrendering himself. I hope his school identifies him and expels him.
This is why citizens arrest allows you to do whatever is necessary to keep criminals in place, someone should have knocked his ass out. If it cost him a few teeth, good.
This wasn't the first time he did this, judging from his actions and attitude. Because people are afraid to stop criminals, fearing liability, he's going to do it again until he robs the wrong place and gets shot in the head.

@Mordhaus Yeah. Transparency and privacy issues don't mix well.

I run into this where I work. Personnel decisions are made and the managers can never tell us the details. We just have to trust. [Of course, if we know the employee personally, we can ask them directly.]

Same here. That kid has a right to privacy. He also should have a right to see the proceedings of why he was expelled. I don't know if he can. If he can, then he can decide to make public the reason he was expelled.

All good points.

And.

What happens in a court of law is subject to the law. Which is not the same as justice.

I stand by my original question -- what did the university know that we don't know?

There are a lot of suppositions in your well reasoned response to my comment.

I have no suppositions. I have questions.

What did the university know that we don't?

Maybe it is nothing, as you suppose here. And maybe those roommates saw or heard something that scared the bejeebers out of them.

Here is a supposition that you did not put forth -- did the roommates only report the encounter as rape because this guy has dark skin? There could be a racist component to this.

Supposition. What are the facts? What information did the university use to justify expelling this dude?

I don't know.

Of course rape can occur at any point leading up to and even during the act. If you have penetrated your partner and they say stop, you stop.

However, I would ask what other evidence could there possibly be? Obviously we can't know, but one would assume that a motivated prosecutor would have gathered all possible evidence. We know from the victim's statements that she can't recall much of the night, is unsure she said yay or nay during the sex, but that she didn't think he should have been prosecuted. Her roommates are the ones that reported the 'rape', but they clearly didn't give any evidence the court saw as worth convicting on. If their statements were what USC went by to expel him, that would be available via the court and I'm sure someone would have posted them.

We simply do not know and can only go by the video and the statement of the 'victim'. She seemed to be walking fine and signed her name correctly, so either she is an extremely functional drunk or she was sober enough to make those choices. She said she didn't think he should have been charged with rape. To me, that should exonerate the defendant. It did in a court of law, but not in a closed off Title IX hearing.

I suspect that what happened is what happens in other colleges. The college determines what is going to look worse publicity wise and litigation wise, then expels based on that. The problem is that in the Title IX process, there is no real fairness. You can have an advisor present, but not a lawyer if the school objects. One person decides your fate. There is no appeal process. The burden of proof is not defined as to who it is upon. I am sure that the lady in charge went by some procedure and not merely off personal opinion/belief, but we can't investigate to find that out.

To sum up, are we at the point where we should not have intimate relations if either person has imbibed any type of substance? Should we request that a video camera or audio recorder be present at any sexual liaison? Do we need witnesses like they used to have at the consummation of royal weddings? Perhaps a written contract? It just seems pretty ludicrous to me to have a video and the statement of the person that was supposed to have been raped, yet somehow we still had a punishment given to the individual accused of the raping.

Oops. That information is NOT presented anywhere.

What I was thinking, and didn't say, is that legally there is no case.

Consent at the beginning is not consent at the end. A man can rape his wife. That wasn't possible for most of human history -- it is now.

So although there is plenty of evidence that she gave consent at the beginning -- video proof of consent -- that doesn't mean that he didn't do something later that the university looked at and said -- apparently, since they expelled him -- constituted sexual intercourse without consent.

How they arrived at that conclusion, we don't know. It is missing from what is reported here.

It is absolutely not clear to me that he is "clearly innocent".

Because a man can rape his wife. Right? Do you agree, @Mordhaus?

That lovely video showing that consent is like offering tea lays out the logic pretty clearly. Saying yes to tea at one point is not the same as saying yes to tea when you are passed out.

i am NOT saying that the university did the correct thing. I don't have any knowledge of what they based their decision to expel upon.

And nor does anyone here, as far as I can tell.

https://dailytrojan.com/2018/03/29/oed-finds-student-responsible-for-policy-violations/

They don't have to release any information as to why they found him responsible. They also don't have to allow him to have his attorney present nor allow any recording of the procedure. Basically your fate lies in the hands of a single person in charge of the OED. As far as I am aware, there is no appeals process either. His only recourse at this point is to sue the school and that is iffy from a legal standpoint. He would have to show a clear pattern that they are prejudiced against the accused, which means he would have to track down other people that they expelled and hope they were clearly innocent like he was.

I wonder why he was expelled anyway?

That information is presented anywhere.

"Second, as I've pointed out before, the idea that we're seeing an epidemic of false accusations is not supported by evidence."

I am seeing a strong movement to demand that accusations be enough to get people suspended, expelled and fired though. The Canadian Federation of Students has been pushing a campaign to improve campus sexual assault policies. Their plan specifically includes things they don't want any policy to have, including any " SANCTIONS FOR VEXATIOUS, MALICIOUS OR FALSE COMPLAINTS". They sigh an example section from Dalhousie University's sexual assault policy that they believe is wrong and should be removed:
"A complaint made in bad faith shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action against the complainant, which shall be commenced in accordance with applicable disciplinary processes. A bad faith complaint is a complaint that is made with a conscious design to mislead or deceive, or with a malicious or fraudulent intent. "

More insidiously, strong movements across Canada are training the workplace on what sexual violence is. The first 3 levels of sexual violence ALL involve no physical contact and are entirely verbal. When people are manipulating language to make actions seem worse than they are, you are acting in bad faith and I think it should be called out.

" If a woman (or a man) comes forward with a claim of sexual assault, they are entitled to be taken seriously."

Agreed, but lots of people are very much arguing that lives should be destroyed then and there, just to be safe and/or to balance things out finally so men can be victimized too so they know how it feels. We'll even right songs to laugh at them when they complain.

IMO, the real issue here is one of deflection. Trump and his cronies
No disagreement there. I both vehemently disagree with virtually everything Trump says or does. At the same time, still don't like how far the condemn the accused pushes are looking to go.

She was passionately in favor of her own ideas about capitalism, reason, science, and her own individual rights as opposed to a functioning society, philosophical debate, actual science and other peoples rights.

It is strange how people mention her as inspiration offhandedly, basically that is like saying "you know there is this rather clever idea in Mein Kampf" because her whole work is pointed in the direction of "being an asshole is good for you" (which is really pretty obvious, is it not?). A functional society should be able to contain or expel assholes. Ayn being taken seriously is a warning sign.

Good point. I know France recycles their expellants down to the low percentages. We should have that in North America

Where did these white people get that idea about "nigga" being a term of endearment?
Black people.
This is what you get for fostering a double standard. Telling a black child to hit white children if they use a word, but not hit a black child if they do....who's the racist?
When the black child says nigga, expel them, then maybe you'll get somewhere.

This dude probably thinks he's fighting against racism by being pretty damn racist. All he said was "white"..."black"....."black"...."white"...."white". I get his anger, but you cannot fight injustice by suggesting injustice, you cannot fight racism by dividing people by race for separate treatment.

Rule of thumb, if those you find to be disgusting sub humans would be wrong to use your words with black and white reversed, you're being a racist.
If you become what you despise in your fight, you lost.
Those who fight monsters must be ever vigilant against becoming one.

It was looking hopeful at the end of last year but he managed to squirm his way out of it again. The few good people in the ANC tried to get him out with a vote of no confidence but he bribed his way out of it. Then he and expelled them for trying to get rid of him so he got full control of the ANC again. DA is slowly growing but it will be many years still before they will be big enough. They only grew with 3% in the last provincial elections on 2016 while the new EFF that is spewing kill the white man at every meeting got 8.2% of the total votes.

Water normally has some dissolved air in it, which is expelled and trapped when it's frozen leading to the white spots in the ice. To make clear ice you need to avoid the dissolved air being trapped in the ice.

One way to do this is to boil the water before freezing, which reduces the amount of dissolved gases.

What I think is happening here is that freezing only part of the water, and relatively slowly, lets the dissolved gases remain in the liquid part of the water.