He was placed on probation, and fulfilled the terms.
The accuser, however, appears to have believed that Montague had committed a sexual assault—based on what she was told by Yale officials. So the Title IX office came up with a plan to file charges independently.
According to the Spangler Reports (the twice-yearly document about sexual misconduct cases Yale files as part of its OCR settlement), the Title IX officer can file only in “extremely rare cases,” and only when “there is serious risk to the safety of individuals or the community.” , “Except in rare cases involving an acute threat to community safety, coordinators defer to complainants’ wishes.” There clearly was no acute threat to community safety” from Montague.
Once Yale chose to file charges, Montague presumably had no chance: his exoneration would undermine what appears to have been the whole purpose of filing charges against him in the first place—to prove that the university was tough on sexual assault.
According to the complaint, they misled the accuser into (a) believing that she couldn’t keep her identity confidential; and (b) that Montague had a past history of sexual misconduct towards women. But according to the complaint, the matter wasn’t sexual.
The incident was from his freshman year, in public, when after a night of drinking he “rolled up a paper plate from the pizza parlor and put it down the front of [a graduating senior’s] tank top.” There was no sexual discussion or skin-to-skin contact, but Yale brought up Montague on charges of sexual harassment—oddly, since no one seems to have claimed that the incident was gender-related, or was anything more than petty drunken misconduct.During intercourse, she said that as she kissed Montague, touching his body consensually, she also “put her hands up, pressed them against the front of Mr.Montague’s shoulders and pushed him, but not very forcefully.” She also claimed that she told Montague she wanted to hook up but not have sex, but that he gave no indication that he heard her, as they were beginning intercourse. In any event, after the disputed intercourse, the accuser returned to Montague’s room later that evening; they spent the night in his bed but she told him she didn’t want to have sex. A few days later, she said she hadn’t been comfortable having sex, and they stopped seeing each other.The accuser appears to have been prompted to prepare an opening statement at the “hearing” Yale permits; Montague wasn’t told before the hearing he could do so.He couldn’t directly cross-examine his accuser; was represented by his coach (who couldn’t speak); and had no right to exculpatory evidence.The heart of the complaint is this: “Montague found himself thrust into the confusing, terrifying, and lonely process through which those accused of sexual misconduct are maneuvered, and into the midst of Yale’s ongoing battle to establish itself as an institution that takes accusations of sexual misconduct seriously.Unfortunately for Montague, he was a prime candidate to serve as Yale’s poster boy for tough enforcement of its : popular, well-liked and respected amongst his peers at Yale, and known throughout the country as one of Yale’s most promising men’s basketball stars.As expected, Jack Montague, the former captain of the Yale basketball team, has filed a lawsuit against Yale, citing Title IX and breach of contract concerns resulting from his expulsion for sexual assault.This case—much like the Amherst case, also handled by Montague’s lawyer, Max Stern—has the potential to be significant, though for a different reason than Amherst.The accuser said she’d testify in a hearing, to “protect other women” from what appears to have been a non-existent threat.To bring a case against Montague under these circumstances, Yale had to violate its own procedures.