These kinds of incidents always beg for more context.
An article from the Lawrence Journal-World provides some background:
On July 1, 2014, Yeasin was charged in Johnson County with criminal restraint, battery and criminal deprivation of property after allegedly refusing to let his ex-girlfriend out of his car and taking her phone during a fight in Olathe.
He sounds like a real charmer. To be clear, he wasn't expelled simply because he said mean things about her on Twitter. He was expelled because he repeatedly violated the terms of a no-contact order and created a hostile environment for her. I'm not sure whether the University had the jurisdiction to expel him, but his behavior was indefensible.
Whenever I feel like people are overreacting in a case like this, I always ask myself a similar question: What if that were MY daughter?
It's not as simple as you attempt to portray it. The tweets WERE the supposed violations of the protective order, which read: “any physical, verbal, electronic or written communication with (his ex-girlfriend), her family, her friends or her associates.” She was blocked from his Twitter feed. The only way she saw it was friends showed it to her. HE wasn't communicating with her, or with her associates
These kinds of incidents always beg for more context.
An article from the Lawrence Journal-World provides some background:
On July 1, 2014, Yeasin was charged in Johnson County with criminal restraint, battery and criminal deprivation of property after allegedly refusing to let his ex-girlfriend out of his car and taking her phone during a fight in Olathe.
He sounds like a real charmer. To be clear, he wasn't expelled simply because he said mean things about her on Twitter. He was expelled because he repeatedly violated the terms of a no-contact order and created a hostile environment for her. I'm not sure whether the University had the jurisdiction to expel him, but his behavior was indefensible.
Whenever I feel like people are overreacting in a case like this, I always ask myself a similar question: What if that were MY daughter?
Well, its not quite as simple as you try to portray it. The tweets WERE the violations of the protection order, which read. “any physical, verbal, electronic or written communication with (his ex-girlfriend), her family, her friends or her associates.”
She was blocked by him from seeing his feed, and the only way she saw it was friends showing it to her. He was not communicating with her, or her associates.
She suffered the abject horror of GASP! having someone laugh at her. The precious flower must be protected at all costs,
He was expelled in November 2013, but was charged with the incident you referred to in July 2014, so I' don't see how that could have been the basis of his expulsion.
I'm not sure how investigator Brooks can make the legal determination that speaking ABOUT someone on electronic media is the same as speaking or communicating DIRECTLY TO that person. Seems like quite a stretch to me. His attorney correctly argues that exact point.
The biggest issue is the "hostile environment" malarkey. Anyone can say about anyone else, over any issue, large, small, or perceived, that said individual is "creating a hostile environment" for them. Girl turned me down for a date? You got yourself a hostile environment right there, and she must be expelled.
To top it off, it occurred off campus.