Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

Woman files lawsuits against UMass, four men linked to 2012 rape

Pierpont Residence Hall  (Jessica Chaiken/Daily Collegian)
Pierpont Residence Hall
(Jessica Chaiken/Daily Collegian)

A woman who was gang-raped in 2012 in her University of Massachusetts dorm has filed two civil lawsuits Tuesday linked to her rape, one against the University and the other against three men convicted in the rape and another man facing trial in the coming months.

Reports of the woman’s accusations of rape in 2012 against Adam Liccardi, Caleb Womack, Justin King and Emmanuel Bile Jr. shook the campus community, prompting the University to alter its housing policies. The gang-rape also spurred a fierce outcry for greater awareness of sexual violence and rape culture at UMass that echoed discussions taking place across the nation.

Tried separately, three of the men – Liccardi, King and Bile – have since been convicted in criminal trials on several counts of aggravated rape and rape, and are now serving state prison sentences. Womack is expected to face trial in the coming months.

The woman testified in all three cases held. According to court documents obtained by the Collegian, the woman, identified in the Hampshire Superior Court filings only by her initials, is named the plaintiff in both suits. The Collegian does not disclose the names of victims of sexual assault.

The civil lawsuit seeks unspecified damages against the four men on counts of sexual assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment. The  lawsuit  comes just over a month after the conviction of Liccardi – the third man to face trial in criminal court for the 2012 rape. He was found guilty of two counts of aggravated rape and one count of rape by a jury on Sept. 2.

The civil lawsuit against the University also seeks unspecified damages of “an amount reasonable according to the evidence as the Court deems appropriate” from UMass. According to the court filings, the suit also alleges the University failed to uphold her rights under Title IX.

The filings also show that the plaintiff is seeking a trial by jury in both lawsuits.

In the suit against the University, the plaintiff is also seeking damages from two UMass employees who she alleges acted “negligently and carelessly,” and failed to uphold their duty to ensure her safety. The filings say a “dangerous condition” was created as a “direct and proximate result” of the alleged negligence by the University.

The suit names John Doe, a security monitor assigned to Pierpont Hall on the night of the rape in 2012, as well as Jane Doe, a resident assistant within the dormitory, as co-defendants in the suit against the school.

The lawsuit filed against the University claims the school failed to fulfill reasonable duties to ensure the woman’s safety and was negligent in training both the security monitor and the resident assistant.

“This has been an extraordinarily difficult and painful time for the victim of this crime, and the University worked closed with the District Attorney’s office to support prosecution of the case,” UMass spokesman Ed Blaguszewski said in a statement. “The University has no comment on the lawsuits.”

Blaguszewski later explained in a brief phone interview that it is University policy to refuse to comment further on active legal proceedings.

The suit against the University restates facts upheld in criminal court over the past year, including that the four men accused were not UMass students and were signed into a dormitory by an unidentified dormitory resident who did not know the defendants. The suit details that the men came to campus on Oct. 12, 2012 after the woman said she did not want to see them and then “repeatedly” raped her.

The suit claims that the dorm’s security monitor acted negligently by failing “to properly register and screen the four underage males,” and therefore, according to the documents, allowed the crime to occur.

The suit also alleges that the on-duty resident assistant that night failed to “properly monitor the residential hall,” “allowing” the four underage males to consume alcohol and marijuana – which they brought into the building – in the woman’s dorm room.

“As a direct and proximate result of Jane Doe’s negligence, a dangerous condition was created wherein the plaintiff was caused to be sexually assaulted and to otherwise sustain foreseeable bodily and emotional injuries and suffer great pain of body and mind,” the suit states.

The woman also alleges that UMass, which receives federal Title IX funding, “acted with deliberate indifference to known acts of harassment in its programs and/or activities as an educational institution.” She claims this negligence created severe harassment, and restricted her access to educational benefits.

The suit further claims UMass “had prior knowledge of high incidences of alcohol and drug related sexual assaults and sexual misconduct on campus.” The suit alleges the four men brought a large bottle of vodka into the dorm, and the woman has previously testified in the trials of Bile, King and Liccardi that she was rendered incapacitated due to alcohol consumption and was then raped.

UMass has been the subject of an open federal Title IX investigation dating back to 2011.

The plaintiff is represented by attorneys Earlon Seeley and Patrick McHugh, who are based out of Springfield. A call to their office was not returned as of Wednesday night.

Mark Chiarelli can be reached at [email protected] and followed on Twitter @Mark_Chiarelli.


View Comments (1)
More to Discover

Comments (1)

All Massachusetts Daily Collegian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • D

    Dr. Ed CuttingOct 16, 2015 at 8:11 am

    “…she was rendered incapacitated due to alcohol consumption and was then raped.”
    She didn’t make a voluntary choice to drink herself blotto? They jammed a tube down her throat and pumped the ETOH into her stomach against her will? Or worse, she wasn’t mature enough to know what Vodka was, and (in addition to being illegal for her to consume), that drinking a lot of it would CAUSE her to become incapacitated?
    Come on now!
    She was an 18(?)-year-old ADULT at the time – when I was 18, I was operating an American flagged vessel in International Waters — I know people who were in places like Iraq (with a M-16) at that age.
    It’s not UMass’ fault that she got drunk — although, it actually is.
    She’s suing the security receptionist for not keeping the alcohol (which she voluntarily drank) out of the building and she’s suing (her?) RA for not busting her for having the same in her room.
    Seriously, she’s suing “RA Jane Doe” for not finding the alcohol that she wasn’t supposed to have in her room, claiming that had the RA busted her, she wouldn’t have been able to get drunk and hence wouldn’t have and thus wouldn’t have been raped. And legally, she’ right — in defining her room as “dry”, UMass has a duty to ensure that it IS “dry” and is responsible for any harm that occurs because it isn’t.
    And this is the problem with having “dry” rooms – when the intrepid residents get the ETOH past you and into said “dry” rooms, you become liable for negligence in not having prevented them from doing so. That’s why a ban on alcohol is so incredibly stupid — and yes, I said that when it was being proposed.

    Now we can (and should) have sympathy for the victim, and if what I have been told is true, if UMass really did that to her the *next* evening, well she deserves not only a *lot* of sympathy but a whole lot of UMass money as well, but I digress.

    I’m reminded of a Chris Farley/SNL skit where he brags about the large settlement he got after being injured as a result of urinating on the third rail in a subway tunnel, and the classic line is “what is a ‘no trespassing’ sign supposed to mean when I was as drunk as I was?” And she voluntarily got drunk in the presence of the men who subsequently harmed her.