Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

The Blue & Gray Press | October 16, 2018

Scroll to top

Top

Assault Lawsuit Contested

Assault Lawsuit Contested

By JESSICA MASULLI and HEATHER BRADY

The Attorney General’s Office is seeking to dismiss a $10 million lawsuit against the University of Mary Washington that was filed last year on behalf of a former UMW student who was raped in the campus parking deck.

In asking to dismiss the case, the Commonwealth of Virginia, representing UMW, cites two main reasons that the lawsuit has no legal grounds. The Fredericksburg Circuit Court will decide if the case is dismissed on March 28.

First, they cite no “special relationship” between students and the university that would obligate UMW to protect its students.

Second, UMW did not have any knowledge that an attack would occur, according to the Attorney General’s Office.

“The person who committed the assault should be brought to justice,” said the Attorney General’s written response. “But the Commonwealth of Virginia cannot be held liable in this case because it did not violate a legal duty it owed to anyone.”

The original lawsuit was filed against the university on Nov. 30, 2010 alleging negligence in providing a secure environment for students.

The victim was sexually assaulted in the parking deck on Oct. 3, 2008 at 2 a.m.

It is the Bullet’s policy not to name victims of sexual assault.

The victim, who is represented by Attorney Lewis Lowery, is suing UMW, but the defendant is listed as the Commonwealth of Virginia since UMW is a state school.

Lowery is unable to give a quote specifically regarding the case out of concern for tainting the jury pool. UMW Spokesman George Farrar was also unable to comment because the case is still ongoing.

According to the lawsuit, there were three criminal incidents near the university that should have alerted UMW to the possibility of a similar attack:

-On July 1, 2008, a female jogger was allegedly attacked on a street near UMW.
-On July 3, 2008, a pizza delivery man was stabbed and abducted on Charles Street.
-On Aug. 12, 2008, a young female was raped at home in Stafford County.

However, the Attorney General’s Office stated in the request for dismissal that these attacks were far away, at different times of day and under different circumstances.

“It is not plausible, nor possible to allege with a straight face, that the three previous alleged crimes…provided imminent danger of harm on the early morning when she was attacked,” said the Attorney General’s written response.

Citing the Supreme Court of Virginia’s rulings in specific cases, the response states that no “special relationship exists between a public university and a student.”

Lowery said that many statements from the original lawsuit were not recognized in the Attorney General’s response.

“They think I am trying to pull a fast one,” said Lowery. “They’re wrong about that.”

Comments

  1. Wilberto

    If UMW is a state school, and the UMW police are state police, doesn’t the state have a “special relationship” with it’s constituents?

    Some of the things in the lawsuit sound like a stretch, and if there is Va Supreme Court precedent, it doesn’t look too good, but I don’t see how UMW is not obligated to protect it’s students – $20,000 a year worth of obligated to protect its students.

  2. Jillian-Rose

    I agree that UMW should protect its students, but the argument that Lowery is using is kind of bogus. Those three attacks that “that should have alerted UMW to the possibility of a similar attack” were all during the summer (when almost all students are not in school), not on campus, and none of the alleged victims were students. So, it doesn’t really make sense how that should have alerted UMW to the possibility of another attack. The truth is, UMW police and Fredericksburg police should always be on alert for attacks and other crime, which I assume they are, because that is there job. They should not be going after the state for 10 mil., they should be putting effort into finding the bastard that committed the crime in the first place in order to keep him from doing it again.

  3. Hannah

    I find this absolutely infuriating. Of course the school wouldn’t know that the attack would take place. It’s not as if the man is going to call our sadly lacking Campus Security to give them a heads up. That is one of the worst cop-out answers that I have ever heard.

    Secondly, if the school is not obligated to protect it’s students then why the hell do we even have campus security anyway? To catch those pesky vandals?…. Right.