Sexual assault survivors are more than the sum of their narratives


This past summer, USC has been rocked by a number of scandals.

Allegations that a former Keck School of Medicine dean smoked meth, mingled with criminals and even hosted parties in his office during his tenure made national news. But the numerous sexual assault scandals involving USC students are arguably even more concerning, especially as the University attempts to sweep them under the rug.

At the end of July, the L.A. District Attorney’s Office announced it would no longer be pursuing charges against Armaan Premjee, a rising junior enrolled at USC who was charged with raping another USC student in a dorm room in Fluor Tower back in April. The following week, Matt Boermeester, a former USC football player who kicked the game-winning field goal of the 2017 Rose Bowl, was removed from the team after being suspended in February for a student code of conduct violation amid a Title IX investigation.

While circumstances in Boermeester’s case remain relatively murky, as the former kicker’s alleged victim and girlfriend has since come forward to deny claims that he physically assaulted her, the University’s treatment of Premjee, allowing him to return for the Fall 2017 semester, is troubling — especially as the U.S. Department of Education and Office of Civil Rights have become mired in controversy regarding campus sexual assault policy.

For some context, Judge Michael Pastor ruled there was not sufficient evidence to continue working on the case against Premjee at the end of last month after Premjee’s lawyer said he provided footage of Premjee’s alleged victim appearing to give consent when the two were standing outside a bar.

“There is no indication of any withdrawal of consent,” Pastor wrote in his ruling. “There is a very strong indication that the alleged victim in this case was the initiator of any conduct between the defendant and the alleged victim.”

This, of course, ignores that by law, consent can be withdrawn at any time, and there is no evidence that the alleged victim didn’t change her mind later that evening behind closed doors. Consent is both morally and legally not a one-time exchange. And in stating that the alleged victim initiated the encounter, Pastor is suggesting that consent can be given when individuals are intoxicated, which is, again, a morally and legally unacceptable stance.

USC can’t be held responsible for decisions made in county courts, but it speaks volumes that Premjee is still enrolled as a student, and that the University was unwilling to confirm to the Daily Trojan whether there is still an ongoing investigation of Premjee taking place within USC’s Title IX office. However, the University has since confirmed to The New York Times that an investigation is still underway, and Premjee could be expelled if USC’s Title IX office concludes that he is guilty.

USC’s treatment of Premjee’s case comes amid national debate over campus sexual assault survivors’ rights, and how to balance these with the rights of accused students. While Education Secretary Betsy DeVos met with sexual assault survivors and groups representing them last month, she also met with groups dedicated to dismissing, discrediting and even harassing survivors. These groups notoriously work to portray women as liars and men as the victims of an unfair system designed to strip them of their rights.

After these meetings, DeVos, who declined to make a statement about whether she would maintain Obama-era guidelines that support survivors at her January hearing, reportedly began considering rolling back a key part of these guidelines earlier this year.

Specifically, this guideline lowered the standard of evidence for survivors, and has always been controversial. But while false reporting does happen, the National Sexual Violence Resource Center estimates that these cases are not only rare, but are also as detrimental to real survivors as they are to falsely accused students by increasing doubt surrounding real cases.  Additionally, as Premjee’s case demonstrates so chillingly, the preponderance of evidence guideline was introduced for a reason — survivors lacking evidence that unquestionably proves their experiences are easily dismissed in the absence of the guideline. 

Crimes of a sexual nature don’t translate neatly into the prototypical “innocent until proven guilty” mold of our criminal justice system. However, the misogyny-laced national dialogue surrounding sexual assault has bred troubling ignorance about consent and an unhealthy obsession with requiring victims to have perfect narratives.

Post-traumatic stress disorder and fear of facing disbelief — due to how the survivor was dressed, how they were behaving in the moments leading up to the assault, their sexual histories and even the nature of their relationship with the alleged assailant — and a number of other factors that simply don’t exist in other crimes, all discourage survivors from coming forward immediately, if ever at all. These time lapses by nature weaken the evidence in the case. Lowering the standard of evidence for survivors isn’t some misandrist ploy to target the accused. Rather, it’s meant to support students who could otherwise be denied justice.

Circling back to the case involving Armaan Premjee, we’re seeing just how much institutions value narratives over the humanity of survivors. The footage provided by Premjee’s lawyer may prove the alleged victim’s narrative is flawed, but the only reason we sweepingly equate flawed narratives to vengeful, lying women is that our society operates within a rape culture.

This rape culture tells us that women who appear to flirt with their assailants, who wear revealing outfits, who have previously consented to sex, are all fundamentally dishonest; this rape culture tells us that they can’t be trusted, that they should be dismissed and punished because they don’t fit the mold of the perfect victim that is ultimately a patriarchal construct.

If the University chooses to allow Premjee to continue to attend USC, at the very least, it has an obligation to be transparent about this decision. On a federal level and at USC, raising the standard of evidence for survivors within a system that’s already stacked against them and giving the accused the benefit of the doubt over survivors, mark an unforgivable step backward.

Kylie Cheung is a sophomore majoring in journalism and political science. She is also the editorial director of the Daily Trojan. Her column,“You Do Uterus,” typically runs Thursdays.

  • bff426

    Let’s clarify a few things regarding the “murky” Boermeester situation. He wasn’t removed from the team in July, he was expelled from school. Zoe Katz, his girlfriend and the “victim” didn’t “since come forward”, she has Ffrom the very beginning denied that anything took place at all. The school placed a gag order on her. She tweeted early on that she was the alleged victim and that nothing happened, and was threatened with expulsion herself. She has only gone public now because the kangaroo court has ruled.

    There never was any abuse. It was a case of a men’s tennis player looking out a window, thinking they saw something. He went downstairs, and Zoe and Matt were fine. He then went back to his room and told his roommate, another tennis player. Who also went downstairs and saw Zoe and Matt, who were fine. A few days later he went home. He mentioned what happened to his father. Well, his father was the tennis coach at USC. He is considered a person of responsibility. He has to report anything and everything he hears, from what ever the source.

    It was never, ever documented in any way. The male tennis player who thought he saw something out the window refused to cooperate with the investigation. Zoe Katz denied that Matt abusedd her then or ever. There were even video cameras covering the area, and they showed nothing. Although the University delayed and delayed showing them the video, and only allow them to view it, not get a copy of it.

    What was shown is what a star chamber looks like. I suggest you read the court filings, and the decision of the judge in granting the stay of expulsion. If you think the procedures that the University of Southern California followed is any kind of justice then I pity you. One of the fundamental rights is the ability to question and cross-examine an accuser. In this case, there was no accuser. The accuser was the University. How do you cross-examine the investigator for the University, who writes up their report, totally dismissing the “victims” account by saying that she was a battered woman under his control. With no evidence. You fight that.

  • S Perl

    We women ask for equal rights and equal pay but shirk away from equal responsibility and have no qualms being called “victims” or “survivors” when it suits us. In the case of Armaan Premjee, it is very clear that the girl not only initiated the hook up but also demanded consent from Premjee every step of the way. If you have not read the transcripts or sat through the 3 day hearing where the judge looked through every piece of documentation, you would not be making these false allegations. It is evident that your perception is very gender biased…. the girl texted him the next day “Dude, I hear we F*****”, is that really patriarchal construct? A girl gets drunk, gets a guy to her room and gives him full consent…but can’t remember anything the next morning…and he takes the full blame for this? His life has been hell for the past few months and people like you continue to torture him. For true equality, we women need to take responsibility for our actions and believe in true equality. If women can be victims, so can men. I don’t agree that men are superior in their emotional handling of rape allegations when women are the aggressors.

  • John Grabowicz

    Kylie Cheung brutally raped me without my affirmative consent. Please expel my rapist! Thank you.

  • nik

    Well, if there is no proof that the woman was raped then the young man should still be allowed to study rather than having his life screwed up based on accusations.