News the Chronicle did not print. I found it in UNC's Daily Tar Heel!!

I know nothing of this case, its merits, and so forth. But I should not have to read about it in the UNC newspaper!!!!!!! I note particularly one of the reader comments, which purports to give us an e-mail from a student. Scroll ALL THE WAY down to read this incredible document.

Former Duke CRs chairman files another suit

Fights student judiciary’s last ruling

Updated: 11:28 PM
Email this article | Share on Delicious Share on Digg
The story so far

March 16: Robinette re-elected as chairman of Duke College Republicans.
March 27: Robinette re-elected as chairman of N.C. Federation of College Republicans
April 14:* College Republicans’ executive board amends the impeachment process. Robinette impeached.
April 20: Duke’s student judiciary begins the trial – Robinette vs. Duke College Republicans.
April 20: Duke University administrators said an internal audit of the organization was conducted and no evidence of Robinette misusing funds was found.
April 21: Judiciary rules in favor of College Republicans, saying the organization did not discriminate against Robinette.
April 22: Duke Senate decided not to suspend or de-charter the College Republicans. It also asked all student organizations to draft non-discrimination policies.
End of May: anti-gay graffiti discovered on the East Campus Bridge at Duke University.
June: Bridget Gomez creates Facebook group – “Petition to Duke University to Take Action Against the DCR.”
June: Robinette and some of his supporters receive anonymous death threats.
August: Robinette and seven others file another lawsuit with the Duke student judiciary against the College Republicans.

Duke University’s College Republicans are determined to put last year’s discrimination allegations against the club behind them and start afresh.

But the former chairman of the organization, Justin Robinette, who said in April he was impeached by the club’s executive board for his sexual orientation, is planning to take further action against the club.

Members say he was impeached for poor leadership, fixing elections and neglecting to coordinate events with UNC’s chapter, among other reasons — all of which Robinette says are false.

“All that we’re really asking for is a declaratory judgement,” Robinette said. “The reasons that they gave were false, and something was taken from me that I worked hard for.”

Certain events during the summer, such as the discovery of anti-gay and anti-Robinette graffiti on Duke’s East Campus and anonymous death threats received by Robinette and his supporters, have prompted another complaint against the College Republicans, Robinette said.

He has joined with eight other plaintiffs to file another case in the student judiciary against the club. During the last trial in April, the judiciary did not find sufficient evidence to rule that the organization had discriminated against Robinette.

“I think we stand a much better shot,” said Cliff Satell, former member of the College Republicans and one of the plaintiffs. “We literally had less than 24 hours to prepare last time.”

The student judiciary will be reviewing the new case on Aug. 28 and deciding whether or not they want to take it up again, said Matt Straus, chief justice of the student judiciary.

College Republicans’ chairman Carter Boyle said that he does not think the judiciary will take up the case and that he does not consider his club to be in any trouble.

“The best way to steer through the murky water is to keep focused on what our organization’s ideals are,” Boyle said.

Robinette said he is also seeking to file a case against the College Republicans in civil court on charges of slander or civil conversion, which is wrongfully taking something away from a person.

“I’m considering all options and contemplating my next step,” Robinette said.

The American Civil Liberties Union is in the process of reviewing Robinette’s case to see whether or not the organization will be assisting him if he chooses to go ahead with the civil charges.

Despite the serious allegations against the College Republicans, Duke University administrators have attempted to stay out of the conflict.

They want the student judiciary to resolve the issue to maintain the self-governing tradition of the university, Robinette said.

But many believe that the university should be more involved.

Bridget Gomez, a junior at Duke, created a Facebook group — “Petition to Duke University to Take Action Against the DCR.” The group had 327 members yesterday.

The university’s Vice President for Student Affairs, Larry Moneta, declined to comment on Duke’s plans in dealing with the allegations.

“It’s a new year and I’m looking forward to new students and new opportunities. I don’t really have anything to add,” Moneta wrote in an e-mail.

Satell said the university is not getting involved because administrators are trying to minimize the negative publicity that Duke has received as a result of the recent events.

Duke University police are still investigating the vandalism on East Campus. They could not be reached for comment.

Robinette said he hopes his complaint against the College Republicans will set an example for future students who face discrimination.

“It’s not what happens to you,” he said. “It’s what you do about it. That’s what my thought process has been.”

Contact the State & National Editor at stntdesk@unc.edu.


I’m a student over here at the rival institution, the big old bad Duke. For the record, the court ruled last time that the club itself wasn’t responsible for the discrimination. This article is right. In fact, it said “the individuals did discriminate” but they couldn’t find compelling evidence that they did it in the club. But this article is also right in that the individuals on this club’s Executive Board, and only them, changed the impeachment process right before they impeached Mr. Robinette so that only they, and no one else, could vote on the impeachment. And then there were officers who resigned immediately after and testified that they were approached about Mr. Robinette being gay before the meeting.

The complaint, it’s about 60 pages (whew) was forwarded out to the Senate yesterday here at Duke, and let me tell you, some of these emails this poor kid reproduces from Mr. Boyle, they made my stomach turn. Truly disgusting what they did to him. There’s one, in fact, that is like: “we have personal information we’re going to release on you and use against you,” signed by these people!!! Unbelievable, what century is this, Repugs?

Hold your head up, kid, you have a lot to be proud about for who you are and for the people you’re standing up for. You’ll be a better person as a result, you should remember that too. You didn’t start this fight, it was brought to you, and you’re not just drawing blood, you’re bringing justice, remember that. Hold it high, young man!

1:09 AM August 24, 2010, by Mary R.
Flag for moderation

The case really is truly disgusting. This guy Carter sent one email, I’ll reproduce it here:

“I’m not preaching that we bend over and spread our anuuses wide for this fucker. Rather, I urge caution about provoking this 3-incher into tying us up and then calling in a 7 foot, 300 pound black man named Tyrone to fuck us with his anaconda. The last thing any of us wants is some bullshit, legalese application of “the rules” and College Republicans being hurt in a tangible way [emphasis added]. That being said, given Cliff’s role on the “former” board…I don’t think we could find a better choice for someone to attack [DSG Vice-President of Student Affairs Spencer Eldred] relentlessly and if it goes sour, just distance ourselves from Cliff and say he doesn’t represent the views of Duke College Republicans…Just think how pathetic it is that he is stroking it to the fact that he thinks he can own us with the DSG Constitution. We can get him back with the revised resolution”

I can’t believe, one, they would do this and think they can get away with it, and then two, Really???? You would put this in writing to each other? Where’s the political sense, fellas?

1:16 AM August 24, 2010, by trivialpursuit11
Flag for moderation

can someone like scribd the case so we can see it? I’d like to read it

1:19 AM August 24, 2010, by Can someone?
Flag for moderation

Hmm. Isn’t it relatively a big deal that they said he misused funds, but then there was no wrongdoing. He’s right, that’s like a dern good slander case.

1:25 AM August 24, 2010, by FactChecker
Flag for moderation


1:34 AM August 24, 2010, by Here is the lawsuit, which they called a "cause of action:" http://www.mediafire.com/?i9us0nfyvrc1oer
Flag for moderation

Here is the lawsuit, which they called a “cause of action:” http://www.mediafire.com/?i9us0nfyvrc1oer

1:35 AM August 24, 2010, by Here is the lawsuit online
Flag for moderation

Wow, really Duke? How did they nit deal with this?? I’ve never heard a more straight forward harassment case. These death threats are absolutely ridic… Duke better do something this time, whether it’s this student court or the admin grows a pair and takes a stand. I won’t hold my breath, I’m sure duke will yet again pass up this golden opportunity to do the right thing.

1:49 AM August 24, 2010, by WilyCoyote
Flag for moderation
Join the discussion
You Should Know

The Daily Tar Heel reserves the right to remove any comment deemed racially derogatory, inflammatory, or spammatory. Repeat offenders may have their IP address banned from posting future comments. Please be nice.

Formatting Options
  • Links: "my link":http://my.url.com
  • Bold: *something!"
  • Italic: _OMG!_
Powered by Detroit Softworks

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please send comments directly to Duke.Fact.Checker@gmail.com if you want a response. The on-line form is anonymous and we cannot get back to you.

We hope with transfer to a new website in the near future to have open discussion. FC also welcomes Guest FC columns, a complete essay that will be posted just like our own.