Presumed guilty: Duke revisited

Last week FIRE’s Greg Lukianoff posted the video below on InstaPundit with a link to this post introducing it. The video is also posted on YouTube with this introduction:

In 2006, the nation was rocked by allegations that three Duke lacrosse players had raped a woman named Crystal Mangum at an off-campus party. As Mangum’s story began to unravel, the focus of the case shifted from the supposed criminal behavior of the students to the fact that a large number of Duke faculty members wasted no time in presuming that the students were guilty of something, as well as Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong’s now-infamous disregard of basic due process and the presumption of innocence.

Yet today, colleges, at the prompting of the federal Departments of Education and Justice, are determined to show the very same disregard for due process that led to an unjust disaster in the Duke lacrosse case. In this video, Professor KC Johnson, who literally wrote the book (along with Stuart Taylor) about the Duke case, explains what happened in 2006 and how the government and colleges are failing to learn the lessons of the past.

Here is the video.

Lukianoff recommends FIRE’s Guide To Due Process and Campus Justice. The ever more timely book by Taylor and Johnson is Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case.