Student files federal lawsuit after being expelled from UMass over Super Bowl disturbance
A University of Massachusetts Amherst student who was expelled two days after he was arrested in rowdy post-Super Bowl disturbances on campus is challenging his expulsion in federal court.
Cullen Roe argues in a complaint filed in US District Court in Springfield that the university and its officials made an “arbitrary, unfair, intimidating, wrongful and unlawful decision to summarily expel a student who poses no imminent threat to anyone.’’
The lawsuit argues, among other things, that the university violated Roe’s rights under state and federal law. The suit also asked a judge to order the university to lift the expulsion, pay Roe compensatory damages, and pay his attorney’s fees.
UMass spokesman Ed Blaguszewski said that any time a student is arrested, the information is forwarded to the dean of students and the case is reviewed to see if it warrants any sanctions.
He said the cases from the post-Super Bowl disturbance “have gone before the dean and she has reviewed the cases and taken appropriate action.’’
But he had no specific comment on Roe’s case. “We do not comment on pending litigation at the university and we do not comment on any specific results of any disciplinary action at the university,’’ he said.
Roe’s lawsuit said a crowd of about 1,500 people gathered on the campus after the game “and allegedly fought, climbed trees, threw bottles, rocks, and ice, attempted to tip over cars, lit fireworks, and started at least one fire.’’
But Roe is not alleged to have done any of that, the suit said.
Instead, the suit said, a plainclothes officer in the crowd alleged that he saw Roe run toward uniformed police, yell a profanity at them, and challenge them to “bring it on.’’
The officer identified himself and arrested Roe for failure to disperse and disorderly conduct.
“It is undisputed that Plaintiff made no effort to resist his arrest and was fully compliant as he was escorted to a nearby police van,’’ the suit said.
The game, which the Patriots lost, was on Feb. 5; Roe was expelled on Feb. 7.
The suit said university officials expelled Roe under a provision that allows “interim restrictions’’ before formal disciplinary hearings take place, for students who are “imminent threats.’’
The suit said the university had never given Roe an explanation, in writing or in person, of how Roe was a threat to “anyone or anything’’ at the university.
The suit said officials had informed Roe that the case had been referred for a disciplinary hearing, but his father had written a letter expressing concern that even if Roe is eventually reinstated he would be “disadvantaged academically’’ because of the number of classes he has been forced to miss.
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com