McMaster denies sexual misconduct allegations levelled in civil suit
The university’s statement of defence argues the former student’s action should be dismissed
WARNING: This story contains mention of sexual assault, which may be upsetting to some readers.
McMaster University denies most of the allegations made by a former student who alleges professors subjected her to sexual advances, sexual harassment and sexual assault, according to the university’s statement of defence filed in response to her civil suit.
And it says she is not entitled to any of the $770,000 in damages she is suing for.
McMaster’s statement of defence, filed April 1 in response to the former graduate student’s Jan. 13 statement of claim, states the university denies all of the allegations against the university and four of five Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour (PNB) professors named in the former student’s civil suit. Of the four, one female professor is alleged to have harassed and intimidated her, one male professor is alleged to have sexually harassed and intimidated her, another male professor is alleged to have harassed and intimidated her and another, who was the then-chair of the PNB department, is alleged to have known about some allegations but not acted properly on them.
The fifth PNB professor, Scott
Watter, is alleged to have sexually assaulted, sexually harassed and intimidated the complainant. The document says McMaster is still investigating her claims.
Watter was criminally charged in June 2020 with sexual assault and sexual assault causing bodily harm for allegations involving a female student in 2017. His case is slated to go to trial in August. The plaintiff in the civil suit and complainant in the criminal case are different people.
Neither Watter nor his lawyer, Jeff Manishen, responded to a request for comment by deadline. In June, Manishen said the professor “will be defending this matter fully and vigorously.”
“We look forward to challenging these allegations at trial,” Manishen said. “In the meantime, it’s important to keep in mind that Dr. Watter is presumed in law to be innocent of the charges.”
Watter has been on paid leave from the university since Feb. 13, 2020.
The statement of defence argues most of the allegations are statute-barred by the “two-year basic limitation period in Section 4 of the Limitations Act, 2002.” The section states: “Unless this Act provides otherwise, a proceeding shall not be commenced in respect of a claim after the second anniversary of the day on which the claim was discovered.”
The statement of defence goes on to say that when the plaintiff graduated in 2018, McMaster “no longer had any duty of care” toward her.
“McMaster does not have, and has never had, any fiduciary duty to (the plaintiff),” the document reads.
The Spectator is not naming the plaintiff in the civil case as she is an alleged survivor of sexual assault and the suit requests she not be identified. The Spectator is not naming the other professors who are not facing criminal charges.
None of the faculty members responded to requests for comment. McMaster said it had nothing to add. The lawyers for the plaintiff did not respond to a request for comment.
None of the allegations have been tested in court.
Allegations against Scott Watter and female professor
Among the allegations against Watter, the former PNB student alleges he sexually assaulted her.
“Among other things, Dr. Watter, for example, stroked her hair, placed his hand on her upper thigh and tried to hold her hand,” the statement of claim alleges.
She alleges he made “sexual advances” toward her, “including comments that he was sexually attracted to her; asking what she was willing to do as a ‘Catholic girl’; asking if she was looking for a ‘daddy’; asking about her romantic and sexual relationships; informing her that he was into ‘daddy-daughter/student-teacher’ sexual scenarios.”
The above are the allegations McMaster says it is still investigating.
The plaintiff, in her statement of claim, also alleges a female professor, who was her supervisor, harassed and intimidated her.
McMaster denies this. The professor “did not participate in, nor condone, any alleged misconduct by Dr. Watter,” the statement of defence reads. “Specifically, (the professor) has never discussed ‘threesomes’ with (the former student) and has no knowledge of such alleged discussions between (the former student) and Dr. Watter.”
The statement of defence states that on Jan. 31, 2020, the plaintiff disclosed allegations against Watter to the female professor. During their conversation, she “alluded to an incident in Dr. Watter’s office in 2017, but admitted that she ‘could never accurately recall the details’ because of her level of intoxication.”
“(The plaintiff) also alleged that Dr. Watter had made inappropriate sexual comments to her on Jan. 4, 2020,” the statement of defence states.
The professor said she had “no knowledge of any of Dr. Watter’s alleged misconduct.”
Allegations against other male professors
In its defence of another faculty member alleged by the plaintiff to have sexually harassed and intimidated her — including that he gave her alcohol at an event despite knowing she was drunk, flirted with her and later asked her to meet up — McMaster says he “did not harass or intimidate” her.
The statement of defence alleges she flirted with him at a 2013 Halloween party, she held his arm and he does not recall giving her alcohol.
“While (the professor) was not interested in pursuing a romantic relationship with (the former student), he tolerated the behaviour because he did not want to embarrass her,” the statement of defence reads.
Afterwards, he “behaved in a friendly, and not in a harassing or intimidating, manner” toward her. In the weeks following the party, they exchanged emails and texts and met in person several times. The text message conversations were “friendly and non-harassing,” the statement of defence reads.
During these discussions, many of which the statement of defence claims she initiated, the professor “never made sexually suggestive or aggressive comments” to the former student “nor did he engage in any other harassing or intimidating conduct.”
“McMaster explicitly denies that (the professor) used a sexually aggressive tone with (the former student) or stared at her breasts,” the statement of defence reads.
The document goes on to state how McMaster “took reasonable steps to protect students,” including the plaintiff. It suggests other students had complained about the same professor.
Specifically, the statement of defence says that in June 2014, the then-chair of PNB told a representative with McMaster’s Human Rights and Equity Services office (HRES) that “students had approached him regarding the conduct of one of the department’s professors, and that he wanted to better understand his obligations.” The former chair also said he “learned a professor was dating a graduate student who was not under his direct supervision,” though the statement of defence does not make clear if this was the same professor.
A year later in July 2015, the chair told the HRES representative he recently received “further information” about the professor’s “behaviour.” He referred the professor to the HRES office and hoped the office could help him “understand McMaster’s policies, including appropriate boundaries between faculty members and students.”
The chair believed the professor “needed assistance distinguishing between professional and personal interactions, so that he could remain professional and polite at work.”
Days later, the professor met with the HRES representative, the document claims. The two went over McMaster’s policies, Ontario laws and “appropriate boundaries between students and faculty members.”
Specifically, the HRES representative explained to the professor “that even consensual relationships could be problematic due to the power imbalance between students and faculty members, and that individuals in positions of power must take additional steps to ensure that their behaviour is welcome.”
The professor said “he would make any necessary behavioural changes.”
McMaster denies allegations against a third male professor, whom the plaintiff alleges harassed and intimidated her, once referring to her outfit and asking if she was trying to “impress” another professor.
How McMaster dealt with allegations
The statement of defence sheds light on how McMaster handles sexual violence complaints.
The document confirms it received allegations of sexual harassment and sexual violence against Watter in February 2020. Included in the allegations were those from the plaintiff relating to alleged events in January 2017 and January 2020.
McMaster then hired a lawyer with Rubin Thomlinson LLP to investigate the claims. The same lawyer conducted a “climate review” of the PNB department launched in July 2020. An executive summary report released in December 2020 reveals the review uncovered “systemic and cultural issues” within the department and “a degree of complacency that has let inappropriate behaviours go unchecked.” The university also conducted parallel investigations into seven individuals, including Watter, the female professor and one of the male professors named in the lawsuit. In February, McMaster said four probes were complete but it would not speak to the findings.
As for the Watter investigation, the statement of defence alleges the plaintiff told McMaster she did not want to participate.
The statement of defence claims that at some point after the investigation began, McMaster’s Sexual Violence Prevention and Response Office “understood” the plaintiff “changed her mind about participating in the investigation.” On Aug. 26, 2020, the lawyer reached out but the plaintiff again declined to participate.
On Sept. 24, 2020, the lawyer sent the plaintiff a summary of her own allegations against Watter. The plaintiff reviewed them and provided written comments, according to the documents.
It appears from the statement of defence that the comments were then shared with Watter.
The statement of defence says that on March 23, 2021, the lawyer asked the plaintiff to respond to “Watter’s evidence where it contradicted her own evidence.” The next day, the plaintiff responded to say “she was unaware that her information would be shared with Dr. Watter. (She) claimed that she believed her comments would only be used to corroborate other alleged victims’ evidence.”
The plaintiff then told the lawyer she did not want to receive any further information about the investigation, the document claims.
McMaster argues the plaintiff is not entitled to damages.
The statement of defence says the university and PNB’s thenchair “acted reasonably,” that the three professors “never discriminated against, harassed or intimidated” her, and that it investigated her complaints against Watter as soon as she raised them.
“If Dr. Watter engaged in any inappropriate behaviour toward (the plaintiff), he did so outside the scope of his duties as a McMaster employee,” the statement of defence reads. “McMaster is not liable, whether vicariously or otherwise, for such alleged misconduct by Dr. Watter.”
It ends: “McMaster requests that this action be dismissed with costs payable to McMaster.”
Resources for survivors :
SACHA (Sexual Assault Centre, Hamilton and Area): 24-hour support line 905-525-4162; sacha.ca.
SAVIS (Sexual Assault and Violence Intervention Services of Halton): 905-875-1555. Sexual Assault/Domestic Violence Care Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences: 905-521-2100 ext. 73557. McMaster University’s Sexual Violence Prevention and Response Office: svpro@mcmaster.ca; svpro.mcmaster.ca. McMaster’s student-run Women and Gender Equity Network (WGEN): wgen@msu.mcmaster.ca; msumcmaster.ca/service/wgen.