Higher Education

OU hire tied to student civil-rights violations

August 1, 2024

Ray Carter

Officials at the University of Oklahoma recently announced that Honey Ussery will now serve as associate vice president and institutional equity officer for the university’s Office of Institutional Equity, pending final approval by the OU Board of Regents.

What officials did not mention is that Ussery was accused of violating a student’s civil rights during her investigation of alleged sexual impropriety when she held a similar position at the University of Mississippi—and the student at the center of that lawsuit prevailed in court on his claims of due-process rights violations.

The Mississippi lawsuit centered on a Dec. 2, 2016, sexual encounter between Plaintiff Andrew Doe and Bethany Roe. (The court allowed both students to be identified by pseudonyms rather than their real names.)

The two University of Mississippi undergraduates attended a social function on that date, and both became intoxicated before going to the male’s residence and having sex. Doe maintained the encounter was consensual. Roe’s friends called law enforcement and reported the incident as a sexual assault.

Honey Ussery, the University of Mississippi’s Title IX Coordinator, conducted the Title IX investigation and submitted a report to the University’s Office of Conflict Resolution and Student Conduct. Doe was expelled from the university, although his penalty was later reduced to a suspension.

On March 5, 2018, Doe filed a lawsuit alleging discrimination claims under federal Title IX law, due-process violations, and a state-law claim for breach of contract.

Ussery’s conduct was key to several claims made by Doe.

In an amended complaint filed May 16, 2018, Doe’s legal representative highlighted numerous alleged flaws and irregularities in Ussery’s work on the Title IX investigation.

“Defendant Ussery’s written report did not address or summarize the statements made by Bethany Roe to her physician or the police despite these statements containing highly exculpatory information,” the complaint stated. “The report did not evidence any attempt by Ussery to interview the responding officers, persons who attended the pre-game party with Roe and Andrew Doe, or persons the couple spent time with at the party. Furthermore, the cab driver who took Roe and Doe to the fraternity party and back to Doe’s apartment was not interviewed and there was no assessment of any text messages or phone calls between Doe, Roe, the cab driver, or Roe’s roommate. The written report simply summarized statements attributed to Roe’s friends who were not present at the date party with Doe and Roe that evening, nor present when Doe and Roe engaged in mutually consensual sexual activity.”

The complaint also noted, “No recorded, handwritten or typed statements (sworn or unsworn) from any of the witnesses were included with Defendant Ussery’s report, nor was a statement from Andrew Doe. The report did not address nor contain Roe’s medical records which clearly indicated Roe did not believe she was raped. Similarly, copies of relevant and exculpatory text messages were not included.”

The complaint alleged that Ussery and another University of Mississippi official “both knew that Bethany Roe had initially advised medical personnel and law enforcement that the sexual activity between herself and Andrew Doe was mutually consensual, yet they proceeded with disciplinary proceedings against Doe.”

The complaint noted that in a 2017 interview with Mississippi Public Broadcasting, Ussery “stated that she believes the only time she’s seen a false accusation of sexual assault has been in cases where there has been no ‘respondent’ actually named” and that she had “also stated that she has never seen a case involving ‘regret sex.’”

The complaint also argued training materials produced by Ussery’s office effectively treated males as presumed guilty in sexual-misconduct cases.

On Jan. 16, 2019, U.S. District Judge Daniel P. Jordan rejected the University of Mississippi’s motion to dismiss some charges, citing the issues raised by Doe.

In his order, Jordan wrote, “Taken as a whole, the Court concludes that Doe has stated a plausible claim. This is a consent-based case in which the victim did not appear before the hearing panel, yet there seems to have been an assumption under Ussery’s training materials that an assault occurred. As a result, there is a question whether the panel was trained to ignore some of the alleged deficiencies in the investigation and official report the panel considered. Coupled with the alleged deficiencies in the investigation, it is plausible that the scales were tipped against Doe to such a degree that further procedural safeguards may have lessened the risk of an erroneous deprivation.”

Jordan noted exculpatory evidence was not included in the University of Mississippi’s investigative summary of the alleged sexual misconduct.

“Starting with the police reports from the night of the fraternity party, Roe seemed to have some ability to understand what was happening: she knew she had returned to Doe’s apartment after the party, that they went into a bedroom, and that they had intercourse,” Jordan wrote. “... But a few days later, Roe came to the police department with her parents and told police officers that she ‘did not remember having sex with [Doe.]’ ... Roe later intimated to Ussery that her drink may have been spiked at the pre-game party and claimed to not remember anything after she left the fraternity party.”

On Sept. 5, 2023, Jordan issued an order granting Doe’s request for summary judgment, agreeing that the University of Mississippi had violated Doe’s due-process rights.

While Jordan found that Ussery did include documents—provided as attachments to her report submitted to the University Judicial Council—that contained information on Roe’s conflicting statements about the alleged assault, Jordan noted that Ussery’s “report itself did not contain the inconsistencies, and a reasonable jury could conclude that they were buried in the 13 pages of attachments.”

Jordan found the University of Mississippi case was similar to Walsh v. Hodge, a 2020 case in which the Fifth Circuit ruled university officials violated a professor’s rights by denying an opportunity to cross-examine an accuser.

“There is no objective evidence; Roe’s account was filtered through Ussery; Roe gave conflicting statements about what happened; and her credibility was never tested by her live testimony, cross-examination, or even her own written statement,” Jordan wrote. “At a minimum, Doe should have been allowed to submit written questions, a procedure that would reduce some burdens on Roe. And because there are no factual disputes, the Court finds as a matter of law that Doe is entitled to judgment on his procedural-due-process claim.”

Jordan ordered the University of Mississippi to remove any indication of a disciplinary finding against Doe from his student records, wholly and permanently expunge the entire Title IX proceeding from Doe’s academic record, and permanently seal the proceedings to protect against subsequent disclosure.

The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs reached out to the University of Oklahoma and asked if officials were aware of the Mississippi case and the associated questions raised about Ussery’s professionalism.

The university issued a short statement in response.

“The University of Oklahoma takes seriously its obligation to select the best available candidates as employees, and its Institutional Equity Officer is no exception,” the OU statement said. “We are confident that our process here was appropriate. It resulted in the selection of a person who is seasoned and talented in an important role that inherently involves conflict and deals with some of the most difficult and highly charged issues that occur on college campuses.”

An announcement of Ussery’s hiring remains posted on the website of the University of Oklahoma. In it, President Joseph Harroz Jr. said, “Honey’s professional background, particularly the relevance of her experience at one of our SEC counterparts, will undoubtedly elevate the university’s commitment to creating and maintaining a welcoming and safe community.”

A July 26 article in the OU Daily, citing a mass email issued by Harroz, quoted the OU president as saying that university officials “look forward to working” with Ussery “to build lasting change at OU.”

[For more stories about higher education in Oklahoma, visit AimHigherOK.com.]