Alleged rapist denies having sex with accuser

Defense attorneys questioned the plaintiff's motives for filing the suit. An attorney representing the male student accused of rape in a lawsuit by a former University student said yesterday that his client never had sexual intercourse with the plaintiff and that the plaintiff is suing the student, the University and Director of Police Operations Maureen Rush only "for the money." Attorney Arthur Marion said the male student -- who still attends classes at the University -- "totally and completely denies any sexual situation" with the plaintiff, who alleges that the student raped her in his High Rise South room in November 1994. But plaintiff's attorney Jack Feinberg described Marion's claims as a "good story" that is "not factually accurate." "Everyone makes their own allegations, and I understand that," Feinberg said. In separate telephone interviews yesterday with The Daily Pennsylvanian, the two attorneys traded words over the plaintiff's motive in the lawsuits, when the lawsuits were actually filed and what actually happened in the male student's room. The lawsuits also charge Rush and the University with covering up the alleged rape by not reporting the incident to federal and state authorities as required by law. According to court documents, the plaintiff declared her intent to sue the three defendants Nov. 18, 1996, exactly two years after the suit alleges the rape occurred and the last possible day the suit could have been filed under the statute of limitations. While Marion contended that the two-year wait raises doubts about the strength of the plaintiff's case, Feinberg defended the delay, noting that it is "best to see how cases develop before you go to the firing line." Marion also maintained that the male student "never knew" the plaintiff before they met in Murphy's Tavern Nov. 17, 1994, and that the female student "picked him up in the bar that night." The attorney added that although "there may have been some touching," the two did not have sex and "anything that did occur was consensual." Marion also claimed that other friends of both the plaintiff and the alleged rapist were in nearby rooms at the time of the incident. But Feinberg dismissed Marion's charges and asserted that the two students were taking a Spanish class together and were already acquainted. And in response to Marion's accusation that the plaintiff -- who seeks $200,000 in compensatory damages in the suits -- is "in this just for the money," Feinberg said "there is no other remedy" under the law. "Either you go after dollars, or you go after nothing," Feinberg said, citing the cost of medical and psychological care as well as the plaintiff's potential lost income from missing two years of schooling. Still, Marion maintained that the male student "absolutely denies [the plaintiff's] allegations." "To pick this kid out after two years is to me somewhat shocking," Marion said. Contrary to previous Daily Pennsylvanian reports, Feinberg explained that the lawsuit against Rush in Common Pleas Court was not dropped after the suit against the University and the male student was moved to U.S. District Court. Feinberg noted that both suits were both moved from city to federal court March 5 because not all of the parties involved with the lawsuit resided or were incorporated in the state of Pennsylvania. Neil Hamburg -- who spent 11 years as University associate general counsel until resigning in 1995 -- and Hannah Schwarzschild are representing the University in this case. Because of limited resources, Penn's Office of the General Counsel frequently retains outside attorneys to represent the University in lawsuits.