Marcellus Wiley allegedly forced himself on his victim in her freshman dorm room, an attack that would later drive her victim to attempt suicide, court docs claim.
Not a defense of Wiley - nor a rejection of the potential victim’s claim. I don’t know more than anyone else here. But the journalism here doesn’t really seem objective. It seems like it really started with the intention to publicly convict Wiley.
It jumps right from “accusation was made” to “wasn’t expelled.” Author doesn’t go from “accusation” to “lack or investigation.” but immediately jumps to “wasn’t expelled.”
It passes right by a mention of the potential victim being on mandatory leave. Why was she on leave? That’s a pretty important piece of information that seems irresponsible to leave out.
Then it claims that the potential victim was forced to share multiple classes. That’s not how courses work at that level. Nobody is ever forced to share classes with another student. He would have returned to school as a junior with her being a sophomore. Most of the crossover in course work would have been Gen Ed. with maybe a few core classes that can be moved around here and there (as evidenced by him taking some as a junior while she was taking it as a sophmore). This line of phrasing seems to be intentional framing of the details.
Not a defense of Wiley - nor a rejection of the potential victim’s claim. I don’t know more than anyone else here. But the journalism here doesn’t really seem objective. It seems like it really started with the intention to publicly convict Wiley.
It jumps right from “accusation was made” to “wasn’t expelled.” Author doesn’t go from “accusation” to “lack or investigation.” but immediately jumps to “wasn’t expelled.”
It passes right by a mention of the potential victim being on mandatory leave. Why was she on leave? That’s a pretty important piece of information that seems irresponsible to leave out.
Then it claims that the potential victim was forced to share multiple classes. That’s not how courses work at that level. Nobody is ever forced to share classes with another student. He would have returned to school as a junior with her being a sophomore. Most of the crossover in course work would have been Gen Ed. with maybe a few core classes that can be moved around here and there (as evidenced by him taking some as a junior while she was taking it as a sophmore). This line of phrasing seems to be intentional framing of the details.
I was thinking the same thing. This should be labeled an opinion piece, because it’s clearly not even close to being objective.