Special Examiner’s Investigation

[This article is part of the nine-part series, “The Death of Campus Due Process,” which examines the policies used by colleges and universities to investigate allegations of sexual assault.

The series examines the civil case, “John Doe v. Brandeis University.” The case concerns the college’s investigation into whether a former Brandeis student committed sexual assault against his ex-boyfriend during their relationship. 

These articles might not make sense if they are read out of order. Here is the table of contents for this series. I highly encourage readers to take their time reading these posts, as many are long and detailed. I also recommend reading the hyperlinked primary-source documents to learn more about the case.]

Sanghavi’s special examiner report, which was sent to a Brandeis University administrator, is labeled, “PRIVLEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION,” and was likely not intended for public release. The report was disclosed because of a subsequent lawsuit John Doe filed against Brandeis University alleging that the college conducted its investigation illegally and unfairly.

The 25-page document provides a rare glimpse into the generally secret process used by some universities to investigate sexual assault allegations.

Primary Source: Special Examiner’s Report

Sanghavi investigated 11 separate sexual misconduct allegations J.C. made against John Doe. This series will focus on four of the allegations, but if you want to read the full report, you are more than welcome to do so by clicking the link above.

There were no witnesses to any of the events that formed the basis of J.C.’s allegations against Doe, which meant that determining what happened during these interactions rested almost entirely on the testimony of J.C. and Doe.

Movie Incident

John Doe and J.C. began studying at Brandeis University as freshmen in Aug. 2011. At the time, John was 17 and J.C. was 18.

J.C. and Doe became very friendly within the first few weeks of school. One person interviewed by the special examiner recalled that it was “cute” that J.C. and Doe became best friends so quickly. Although J.C. was “out” as gay at the beginning of the 2011-2012 academic year, Doe was not.

According an amended complaint Doe would later file as part of a lawsuit against Brandeis, “when the two discussed the fact that John was sexually attracted to J.C., but was torn about whether to act on it, J.C. responded that he would never make the first move on a straight guy. That was a clear signal to John that he would have to initiate any sexual activity.”

This prompted what John described as the “first move” that lead to John and J.C.’s romantic relationship.

According to the special examiner’s report, J.C., Doe and a friend watched the movie “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” in the friend’s room in Sept. 2011.

J.C. and Doe were sitting on the friend’s bed and the friend was sitting in a chair next to the bed. According to J.C., during the movie, Doe placed J.C.’s hand on top of Doe’s erect penis and J.C. ‘froze.’ J.C. reported that he did not want the friend to know what was going on, so he didn’t say anything and let his hand go limp. J.C. said Doe then moved J.C.’s hand back and forth on Doe’s groin, massaging Doe’s penis.

Doe recalled watching Mr. and Mr. Smith with J.C. and remembered that Doe put J.C.’s hand on Doe’s penis during the movie. Doe said J. C. did not object. Doe recalled that he moved his hand off J.C.’s hand after approximately five seconds, but that despite this, J.C. kept his hand on Doe’s penis for the duration of the movie.

According to J.C., the day after the movie incident, he and Doe had a conversation about what had happened during the movie incident. J.C. told the special examiner Doe said he believed he was straight, but wanted to experiment with men. J.C. said that he was not interested in being in a sexual relationship with Doe as J.C. did not want to “deal with the mess” of dating someone in the closet. According to J.C., Doe said that he respected this and agreed to be friends.

According to Doe, however, the day after the movie incident, J.C. performed oral sex on Doe. J.C. said he did not remember performing oral sex on Doe the day after the movie incident.

Decision to begin dating

After the movie incident, J.C. and Doe began “quietly hooking up,” according to Doe, but did not immediately begin dating.

According to J.C., he was unsure whether he wanted to begin dating someone who was not out of the closet.

Gay people and other members of the LGBTQ community refer to “coming out” as the process of sharing the fact that they are gay, bisexual, lesbian, transgender, or nonbinary with friends, family, and others. “Staying in the closet” refers to withholding this information from friends, family, or others for any reason. The decision of whether, when, and how to come out is a deeply personal decision for every LGBTQ person to make, as coming out carries the risk of negative, hostile, or confused reactions by the people who matter most in their lives.

Doe recalled that he was conflicted about whether he wanted to come out because he was considering pursuing a future career in politics, and he feared that coming out might negatively affect his future chances as a political candidate.

J.C. said he felt coerced into starting a dating relationship with Doe because Doe said that he only would come out if J.C. promised to be in a relationship with Doe. According to J.C., this put him in an awkward position. J.C. and Doe had multiple conversations about this. According to J.C., Doe was very persistent, and J.C. finally said that he might consider being Doe’s boyfriend if Doe came out.

On or around Oct. 17, 2011, Doe told his parents and his best friends from his home town that he had a boyfriend. Both J.C. and Doe agreed that they began dating after this.

Dating Relationship

Oct. 2011 through July 2013

On or around Oct. 18, 2011, J.C. and Doe began dating. Several friends commented that J.C. and Doe got along well, with one stating that they were happy and “cuddly” with each other and had high opinions of one another.

Bathroom Incidents

According to J.C., almost every time that he used a communal restroom in a residence hall when Doe was present, Doe maneuvered himself to watch J.C. at the urinal. J.C. said he told Doe to stop every time and repositioned himself, so Doe couldn’t see J.C.’s penis, but that Doe would say something like, “I’ve seen your dick before. What’s the big deal?”

Doe reported that when he and J.C. were in the bathroom together, Doe would crane his head over in an obvious way and tell J.C. that Doe could see J.C.’s penis. According to Doe, J.C. responded by saying something like, “That’s fantastic. It’s not like you haven’t seen it before.”

Doe said he did not recall J.C. trying to reposition himself so that Doe couldn’t see J.C.’s penis. Doe also said J.C. never expressed any discomfort with Doe’s actions in the bathroom.

Doe said that looking at J.C.’s penis was a joke, because it was a humorous situation that Doe and J.C. were in a same-sex relationship and could use the bathroom together.

When informed of this explanation, J.C. responded that Doe refused to accept that J.C. was uncomfortable with Doe’s bathroom behavior, and Doe tried to sanitize his behavior by explaining that he was joking. J.C. said that although Doe joked about looking at J.C.’s penis, J.C. did not engage in such joking banter, but rather objected to Doe’s behavior.

J.C. also reported that sometimes when he was in a stall, Doe knocked on the door and asked to enter. J.C. said that in these situations, he refused to allow Doe to enter and that Doe then became upset and asked what was wrong with J.C.

Doe recalled that he and J.C. did sometimes go into a single-person stall together. He did not remember J.C. ever refusing to allow Doe to enter if Doe knocked.

J.C. said that at a certain point in their relationship, he knew that telling Doe to stop looking at his penis in the bathroom would be pointless because Doe continued his behavior despite J.C.’s multiple objections.

Sexual Contact While Sleeping

According to J.C., he woke up approximately 12 times in the middle of the night because Doe was humping him. J.C. said Doe’s hands were on J.C.’s body during these incidents, sometimes on his penis.

J.C. said he asked Doe to stop, but Doe did not. J.C. said he had to physically remove Doe’s arms from him.

According to J.C., on a few of these occasions, he asked Doe later in the morning not to engage in that behavior again, and that Doe responded by saying something like, “I’m just horny” or “Don’t you have any sex drive?” J.C. said these incidents occurred during the first half to two-thirds of his relationship with Doe.

According to Doe, however, he never woke J.C. up in the middle of the night with sexual activity. Doe said that in the morning, he sometimes woke J.C. by kissing him. Doe and Sanghavi discussed these kisses during two separate interviews.

During the first interview, Doe said if he kissed J.C. in the morning, sometimes J.C. said that he wanted to go back to sleep. Doe recalled that when J.C. said this, Doe sometimes replied, “Seriously?” and continued kissing J.C., unless J.C. indicated again that he really did want to go back to bed.

During another interview, Doe twice said that when he woke J.C. up by kissing him, J.C. “never” said that he wanted to go ack to bed.

When Sanghavi pointed out the inconsistency between this comment and Doe’s earlier account, Doe said that later in the morning, around 10:00 AM, J.C. would never say that he wanted to go back to bed, but that if Doe tried to wake him up earlier, at about 8 AM, J.C. might have said that he wanted to go back to bed.  

Performing Oral Sex on J.C.

According to J.C., approximately three to four times during his relationship with Doe, Doe offered to give J.C. ‘head’ and J.C. declined the offer, but Doe then put J.C.’s penis in Doe’s mouth. J.C. said that he was flaccid during these incidents, that he told Doe to stop, and that Doe gave up after a short time. J.C. recalled that if he objected to this sexual activity, Doe was annoyed and angrily went to bed.

J.C. said the last time one of these incidents happened was in May 2013, when Doe visited J.C. at his father’s house in North Adams, Massachusetts.

According to J.C., he asked Doe after Doe tried to perform oral sex without J.C.’s consent whether Doe realized this was sexual assault.

Based on interviews with J.C., Doe became very upset, got out of bed and lay on the floor, said that he loved J.C. too much to assault him, and commented that he could not believe that J.C. was accusing him of assault. J.C said that Doe convinced J.C. that he was wrong. J.C. asked that Doe forget about the conversation and apologized to Doe. According to J.C., the logical part of his brain was not sorry for raising the issue, but he wondered how he could accuse someone who he loved of such a horrible thing.

Doe denied that he ever performed oral sex on J.C. without his consent. Doe said he sometimes asked J.C. whether Doe could give J.C. “head.” According to Doe, if J.C. answered “No,” Doe replied “Seriously?” and moved away from J.C.

If J.C. indicated again that he was not interested, then Doe did not continue. Doe recalled that he would be annoyed if J.C. did not want Doe to perform oral sex, and would turn over.

In his amended complaint, Doe said that not once during the 21 months Doe and J.C. were together did J.C. complain to Doe that he was performing any sexual act without J.C.’s consent or was invading J.C.’s privacy.

During the first interview in which Sanghavi discussed the North Adams’ trip with Doe, he said that he remembered the trip being “normal.” Doe said J.C. did not accuse him of sexual assault during this trip. During this interview, Doe did not discuss lying on the floor.

In a follow-up interview, when Sanghavi specifically asked about lying on the floor, Doe initially said that he did not remember if he slept on the floor, then said that he thought he slept on the ground due to heat, not an argument.

Breakup

In July 2013, J.C. broke up with Doe over the phone. J.C. and others J.C. spoke with after the breakup said that he felt Doe called too often, did not stand up enough for his beliefs, and was not strong-willed or forceful enough. J.C. and Doe’s friends were surprised by the breakup.

Initial disclosure of sexual misconduct

In the fall of 2013 and the spring of 2014, J.C. was part of new student orientation at Brandeis, which included sexual assault training. J.C. said this training forced him to start thinking about what he viewed as sexual harassment within his former relationship with Doe.

J.C. said that thinking about these events overwhelmed him and kept him awake at night. J.C. said he considered ending his education at Brandeis. After thinking the matter through, J.C. decided he would continue his studies at the university.

On or around January 10 or 11, 2014, J.C. told two of his friends that he had been the victim of nonconsensual sexual activity because of Doe’s actions. Due to redactions in the special examiner’s report, it isn’t clear which statements can be attributed to each of J.C.’s friends.

Specifically, J.C. told both friends that Doe had sexually assaulted him. J.C. told one friend that Doe had not, however, raped him. J.C. differentiated rape from sexual assault by stating that rape involved penetration.

A friend who talked to J.C. said he was sobbing that the she had never seen him “anything but happy” before. J.C. told a friend that he was disgusted by Doe. The friend described J.C. as crying for a long time. 

J.C. also called his sister around this same time and said that he had been assaulted by Doe. J.C. called late at night, which according to his sister was unusual, and before he began to speak, he began sobbing and had difficulty breathing.

On January 14, 2014, J.C. filed his initial community standards report with Brandies University, which initiated the special examiner’s process.

The incidents described in this article are some of the main allegations J.C. made accusing Doe of sexual misconduct. It would now be up to Sanghavi to weigh the evidence and determine if Doe was responsible for violating the terms of the Brandeis student handbook.