![[Academic] Attitudes and Behaviors Study (18+, English-speaking)](https://preview.redd.it/rl58och0bxfh1.png?auto=webp&s=9b2702c9a8d934cb2a1721771e845e5f833cbb47)
Hi everyone,
I am a researcher at the University of Bern (Switzerland) conducting a scientific research study examining how certain traits, life experiences, attitudes and behaviors are related to each another.
Link to the survey: https://ww3.unipark.de/uc/research_study_university_Bern_Switzerland/
Thank you for participating!
On June 17, 2024, a Class of ’22 Carleton alum referred to as Jane Doe filed a legal complaint against Carleton College on several counts related to Doe’s experience of sexual abuse when she was a student. Her abuser, Donald Smith, was a Data Research Associate and Salsa Dance Instructor for Carleton at the time. Doe alleges that Smith used his position as a Carleton employee to perpetrate grooming and abuse, and that the school was negligent in supervising his actions and slow to respond to her complaints. Carleton argues it is not liable for Smith’s misconduct and took action against Smith as soon as the danger he posed could reasonably be recognized.
The suit has moved through various stages of the legal process over the past two years, but on Aug. 20, 2026, Senior U.S. District Judge Donovan W. Frank denied, in part, Carleton’s motion for summary judgment, which would have closed the case.
“Counts 1, 2, 3 and 4 survive summary judgment, but Counts 5 and 6 do not,” the Opinion and Order reads.
This means that Counts 1 (Vicarious Liability Assault and Battery), 2 (Vicarious Liability Sexual Abuse), 3 (Negligent Retention) and 4 (Negligent Supervision) were deemed to have enough evidence to warrant a full trial. The court granted summary judgment in Carleton’s favor on counts 5 (Vicarious Liability Negligence) and 6 (Negligent Hiring), so those counts against the college were dismissed as not viable.
“The Court encourages the parties to consider settlement rather than further litigation. Settling this case is in the best interests of both parties,” the Opinion and Order reads.
The trial was set for Oct. 12, but settlement negotiations have been scheduled for Oct. 13.
A comment to the Carletonian from the Carleton Communications Department provided by Helen Clarke reads, “The wellbeing of our students is a top priority, and allegations of misconduct are [JUMP]taken seriously and acted on swiftly. We have robust and effective processes in place to prevent, report, and respond to sexual misconduct, and these processes were utilized in supporting Ms. Doe. We continue to care for Ms. Doe as a member of our alumni community.”
In a comment to the Carletonian, Tamara Holder, one of Jane Doe’s attorneys, said that Doe is pursuing justice “not only for herself but for everyone in the Carleton community.”
“We remain hopeful that Carleton College will do the right thing,” Holder wrote.
The Opinion and Order, as well as Doe’s initial Complaint, lay out the details and timeline of Smith’s misconduct.
Doe, an international student, first interacted with Smith in Fall Term of her freshman year at a salsa dance workshop hosted by the Social Dance Club. The school approved Smith’s request to teach a Salsa Dance I PE course that winter, and Doe enrolled in the class.
Smith’s grooming of Doe took place over the next several years and included monetary gifts, special attention, inappropriate comments and one-on-one meetings.
In fall of 2021, Doe became Smith’s co-instructor for Salsa I.
According to the Opinion and Order, “He offered to pay her $17.25 per hour for her time…. Smith’s PEAR supervisor was unaware that Smith had a co-instructor for Salsa I…. Smith paid Doe via personal check.”
The two planned lessons in Smith’s house on weekends. During this time, Smith’s behavior reportedly escalated.
Then, according to the Opinion and Order, “at the start of winter break 2021, Doe spent two nights at Smith’s home during the two-day gap between the closure of her dorm and her flight to visit family.” During this time, according to Doe’s account, “Smith poured her a drink, and after she finished it, Doe began to feel ‘weird and ill.’” When she woke up the next morning, Doe recalled finding red marks on her neck that she had no memory of receiving.
The Opinion and Order outlines that, in Winter Term of 2022, Smith again brought Doe to his house and tried to engage her sexually, inappropriately biting and touching her. After this event, Doe spoke with her therapist, who helped her make an appointment with Associate Dean of Students, Trey Williams, on Feb. 9, 2022.
“Doe told Williams that one of her teachers attacked her at his house, that it had been affecting her academically, and that she needed help making it through the term,” the Opinion and Order reads.
Doe did not disclose Smith’s name at this time. After the meeting, Williams submitted a form to the Title IX office, leading former Title IX Coordinator Laura Riehle-Merrill to invite Doe to a meeting. Doe never responded, and no further action was taken at the time.
Next term, Doe began an independent study with Smith as her instructor. As part of the class approval process, Doe and Smith performed a dance for Judith Howard, the Chair of the Theater and Dance Department. According to the Opinion and Order, Howard felt uncomfortable watching the two dance together, and she met with Riehle-Merrill in March, 2022 to talk about Smith.
Some of Riehle-Merrill’s notes from the meeting include “Judith feels this is grooming” and “Teacher ‘gets off on this,’” according to the Opinion and Order.
After that meeting, Howard met with Smith and Doe separately, and revised the independent study syllabus. No connections appear to have been drawn between this event and Doe’s earlier disclosures.
Later in April, “Doe told Carolyn Livingston Carlson that she was attacked by a Carleton employee earlier in the year and asked for help,” according to the Opinion and Order.
Again, Doe did not reveal Smith’s name and, again, Riehle-Merrill reached out to Doe, but she did not respond.
In the same month, Doe’s boyfriend at the time became worried about her relationship with Smith. He reached out to Riehle-Merrill about his concerns and disclosed that “the individual was a Carleton employee who held two roles,” but he did not specifically name Smith, according to Order and Opinion.
On May 9, 2022, Doe reported Smith by name to the Title IX Office. Riehle-Merrill took action immediately, and Smith was fired on May 13.
A major point disputed in the suit is whether Carleton had a responsibility to uncover the events before May 9.
The Carleton Communications Department’s comment provided by Helen Clarke reads, “Jane Doe’s allegations of serious misconduct by a now-former employee of the College prompted Carleton to take immediate action to terminate his employment, involve law enforcement and bar him from our campus. Carleton personnel provided support and assistance to Jane Doe, which she described at the time as ‘extremely effective.’”
The court did rule that Doe’s accusation of Negligent Supervision was adequately evidenced to warrant trial. This does not mean that the accusation would necessarily be proven at trial.
“The Court finds that there is a genuine issue of fact on foreseeability… Carleton had some information about Smith’s abuse from Doe herself and Howard. Whether that information made Smith’s conduct foreseeable is a close question that should be resolved by a jury,” according to the Opinion and Order.
Currently, Nathan Riel-Elness is the Title IX Coordinator at Carleton. He was not in this role at Carleton when Doe filed the complaint, and he told the Carletonian he could not comment on the case.
Riel-Elness did say that if a Carleton student today felt that they had an uncomfortable interaction with a member of the faculty or staff (or if a student suspected a friend was being treated inappropriately by a Carleton employee), they should file a Community Concern Form (CCF) or reach out to the Title IX office or the Dean of Students office directly.
If a student does that, Riel-Elness will reach out to the student and ask to schedule a time to meet to discuss what options are available.
“So we can talk about the formal process, our informal options or our supportive measures — that could be things like adjusting housing, assignments, work schedules, or if we need to make an adjustment to class assignments… no contact orders, things like that,” Riel-Elness said. “Then we’ll also talk about your ability to report off-campus to law enforcement, make sure that you can get connected to legal advocates and other resources.”
After that meeting, a student could decide to file a formal report through the Title IX office. (Riel-Elness is able to file a formal report even if a student does not ask him to, but he stated that he would do so only in very rare circumstances where someone posed an imminent danger to campus.)
“Anytime we do have a formal complaint or something is moving through the process, a no-contact order is automatically put in place,” Riel-Elness said.
A formal report would trigger an investigation by a 3rd-party investigator, who would compile evidence for a formal hearing. The committee would review the evidence and decide what to do long term.
“Every circumstance is going to be different. All of our sanctions have the ability to go from just written warnings… to disciplinary probation, up through suspension and expulsion,” Riel-Elness said.
Everyone involved in the process must follow a no-retaliation policy enforced by the Community Standards Office. Riel-Elness said he hopes this makes it easier for students to voice concerns about faculty and staff, although he acknowledges speaking up can still be very difficult.
He also acknowledged that, because of the confidentiality standards surrounding Title IX investigations, it can often look to students like nothing is being done about any given report, even when there is much going on behind the scenes.
Riel-Elness said that the college has no formal policies regulating interactions between students and faculty/staff. He said, for example, that some professors invite students over for dinner at their homes, and that this is allowed depending on several factors. If a student feels uncomfortable, the school handles that on a case-by-case basis.
“There are times when [an action by a member of faculty or staff] might not rise to the level of a policy violation, but it was just not a great experience. So we want to support people to either help them have that conversation or ask if I can have that conversation with [a member of faculty or staff]. Just like, ‘hey, just so you know, this is how you’re coming across. Let’s talk about a way to improve that language’ or things like that,” Riel-Elness said.
He qualified this by adding that the Policy Against Sexual Misconduct outlines examples of inappropriate behavior, and the school follows applicable state/federal laws, policy and guidance. Faculty and staff also complete mandatory Title IX training, and Riel-Elness said the school has several policies regulating how faculty, staff and students can interact with minors on campus.