Did judge ‘victim blame’ Duke student? Here’s what the NC Appeals Court said.
A state Court of Appeals panel has overturned a judge’s ruling in a Durham case in which a judge lectured a Duke University student on marriage and “old fashioned principles.”
The woman was seeking a no-contact order against a male student she accused of nonconsensual sexual contact and stalking. A no-contact order protects individuals who have been sexually assaulted or stalked by someone they do not have an established relationship with. The News & Observer generally doesn’t name people who say they have been sexually assaulted.
The 15 judges on the N.C. Court of Appeals hear challenges to lower-court rulings in panels of three.
Durham Chief District Court Judge Patricia Evans denied the student’s April request after offering commentary that the student and her attorney later called victim blaming. Evans lost her bid for re-election to attorney Kevin Jones in the May Democratic primary.
“As I sit here, I’m reminded of the reason for marriage and commitment,” Evans said during the April hearing.
“Now those are the old fashioned principles, but there is a rationale behind them because when we do things, because we have the opportunity or you have free choice, you can choose what you’re going to do, but you cannot choose the consequences of those actions,” Evans said, before saying the student had failed to prove a no-contact order was justified.
“We have a young lady here in obvious distress. We have a young man whose life could be changed forever as a result of my decision. So I weigh them both carefully,” Evans said. “And at the end of all the evidence, I have to find that the plaintiff has failed to prove grounds for issuance of a no-contact order.”
After the judge’s remarks, the student started crying and worrying that the male student would be emboldened by the ruling to repeat his behavior. She also said she doesn’t recommend others seek protection through the process, which she called laughable.
“This was classic victim blaming,” said attorney Kerry Sutton, who represented the student at the April hearing. The judge was essentially saying, “That is what you get for having premarital sex,” Sutton said then.
The plaintiff appealed the ruling, contending that Evans failed to make written findings with evidence and supporting conclusions of law.
North Carolina civil procedure requires judges making decisions without a jury to find facts on the issues, declare related conclusions of law, and enter a judgment.
“In the case before us, the trial court made no written findings of fact in its order denying and dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint,” the appellate decision said.
Since there are no findings, the appeals court was “unable to conduct a meaningful appellate review of the order,” the finding states.
“We therefore must vacate and remand the trial court’s order,” the order states.
Now the case goes back to Evans to make findings of facts, which then could again be appealed.
Attorneys representing the Duke students in the case declined to comment on the active case.
Sutton said she is grateful that the Court of Appeals clarified the procedure for people seeking those type of protection orders and the judges deciding upon them.
This story was originally published November 15, 2022 at 4:43 PM with the headline "Did judge ‘victim blame’ Duke student? Here’s what the NC Appeals Court said.."
