“When I met with the commonwealth’s attorney after filing the police report, she compared VCU’s response to the Penn State/Jerry Sandusky cover-up,” stated a VCU employee and ’08 alumna who asked to remain anonymous, in an email to an attorney advisor of the Office of Civil Rights(OCR). “That was difficult for me to hear, because I had believed — and want to believe — that VCU has a stronger ethical backbone than that.”
“When I met with the commonwealth’s attorney after filing the police report, she compared VCU’s response to the Penn State/Jerry Sandusky cover-up,” stated a VCU employee and ’08 alumna who asked to remain anonymous, in an email to an attorney advisor of the Office of Civil Rights(OCR). “That was difficult for me to hear, because I had believed — and want to believe — that VCU has a stronger ethical backbone than that.”
The alumna’s statement reflected the proceedings of VCU’s Office of Institutional Equity (OIE) and Title IX team, which she claims were so haphazard and disorganized, she eventually filed a complaint to the OCR—-a measure which a prompted federal investigation of the university’s compliance practices.
On her second-to-last day of work at VCU, the alumna stated a tenured faculty member raped her.
She had worked under this faculty member for years, and she said the rape was not the first time he had sexually assaulted her.
Less than a week later, she moved out of the state to attend graduate school. No charges were filed after the rape.
After completing graduate school, she returned to Richmond to assume full-time employment with the university under a different department. Soon after, she said her assailant began exhibiting retaliatory behaviors which eventually warranted the services of VCU’s threat assessment team, a specific safety plan, and the Richmond and VCU police departments.
In August of 2013, she met with the threat assessment team for the first time. After recounting the experience of her assault the assessment team, she expressed concern regarding a potential pattern to his behavior; her suspicion that more women may have endured an experience similar to hers; and that still others might be at risk.
She said she also made it clear that she did not want to assume the role of “complainant” within an investigation against him, for fear of making herself an easy target for further retaliation.
Four days later, her case was transferred to VCU’s Office of Institutional Equity, the university branch responsible for impartially exploring claims such as sexual assault.
The transfer occurred without her knowledge or consent. She stated she was not even privy to the existence of the OIE until two weeks later, when the threat assessment case manager called to inform her that a Title IX investigator sought her testimony in a witness capacity to what was now an investigation.
“I will say it over and over,” said the witness. “What I went through with the university was worse than anything my assailant did to me, because these are the people who are supposed to help and care. Encountering their indifference really compounded the trauma of being assaulted,” she stated at the conclusion of a four-hour interview.
She also described the eleven-month process she endured in contributing to the investigation, even after being told by The deputy Title IX coordinator the process should not exceed 60 days.
Her experiences with the OIE/Title IX team eventually caused her to file a complaint to the OCR in December. The complaint drew specific attention to the law practice of Dolores Carrington-Hill, J.D., the Title IX investigator originally assigned to the case. The alumna stated that Carrington-Hill’s lack of experience in working with survivors was detrimental to the process, and ultimately to her health.
But before things got even worse, a second complainant came forward in Sept. 2013 from graduate business student Antoinette Moore. Moore was critical of the OIE’s processes in handling gender discrimination she faced in a marketing class.
“While Ms. Moore and [the anonymous complainant] have the right to make statements or complaints about VCU to the media, the university is not at liberty to discuss cases involving confidential student, employee or investigative records,” stated senior director of University Public Affairs Anne Buckley. Requests for comment from threat assessment and VCUPD were referred to University Public Affairs.
Following the federal review of VCU by the OCR, the leadership of the OIE investigation changed hands. The now six-month-long investigative process culminated on Feb. 18, when a friend of the alumna showed her a poem the faculty member had posted to his class blog.
She described the post as intimidating, retaliatory, and a clear act of emotional violence.
“He intimated [in the post] that he would be more likely to murder or torture someone than rape them. And he proclaimed that in response to my allegations he was going to become more great, and live a rich and powerful life. It was like being assaulted again. But at the same time, it finally resulted in action,” said the employee.
She said she did not see the poem until a day after it was posted, and that it was obviously specific to the allegations and investigation.
The alumna provided the email chains showing her immediate contact with the OIE, college, and police. While the police and college contacted her back immediately, the OIE did not respond for six days.
“I asked Jaqueline Kniska [the new OIE investigator] in the second investigation: if he had punched me in the face in the middle of the compass, would it have taken OIE six days to acknowledge it?” said the alumna. “If you can’t recognize it for what it is and respond with some immediacy, you shouldn’t be charged with handling these investigations, because you’re putting people at risk.”
She was notified on March 4, 13 days after the poem was posted, that the faculty member should no longer be seen on campus and if he made direct or indirect contact to report it to the PD immediately.
Since then, VCU PD have officially banned the faculty member from campus.
VCU President Michael Rao signed the OCR resolution agreement for the alumna’s case on April 23, a week before the May 1 release by the Department of Education of the colleges and universities under federal review for mishandling sexual misconduct cases.
The VCU community was never informed of an ongoing federal review of the university.
The OIE investigation concluded with two reports after Rao signed the resolution agreement. One report was from the new OIE/Title IX leadership, and another from assurance services regarding potential alcohol and drug-related issues with the faculty member.
In July, the alumna learned third-hand that the faculty member was allowed to resign. She believes other, similar testimonies must have contributed to his resignation and ban from campus.
Rao announced in an email to the VCU community on Aug. 4 that the OIE has organizationally shifted from under the Division of Inclusive Excellence to a new office under the Division of Finance and Administration.
Rao also stated in the August email that he is committed to bringing in additional resources to the office, including more investigators with specific expertise in civil rights compliance.
The Title IX leadership team is in transition. The position of Title IX Coordinator is currently vacant.
Editors Note: The original headline of this article miss represented the timeline for the case. The Department of Education and VCU have since resolved all issues related to the cases mentioned in the story above.
