USSU president D’Eon to refuse transition after incoming candidate accused of sexual assault

By and in News

At about 2 a.m. on March 22, a post appeared on Facebook claiming that Coden Nikbakht, the sole presidential candidate for the University of Saskatchewan Students’ Union, has used drugs to sexually assault an unspecified number of unnamed women.

In response to the allegations, outgoing USSU president David D’Eon made another Facebook post on March 22, calling on Nikbakht to withdraw his name from the race and stating that he will refuse to transition Nikbakht into the his new role of president, if Nikbakht is elected.

Recently, there have been brave women who [have] come forward with their experiences and stories of [Nikbakht] using drugs to sexually assault them and another individual had been harassed by his immediate circle of friends March 20th 2018,” the first post read. “These people who had come forward will not be named, but they deserve respect and support for coming forward with their stories as it is never an easy thing to do.”

In his corresponding statement, D’Eon also noted that he takes full responsibility for his statement, as it violates section 88, subsection 4, of the USSU bylaws, which states that current executives will be considered in a conflict of interest if they discuss USSU elections. Jessica Quan, vice-president academic affairs, Deena Kapacila, vice-president operations and finance, and Crystal Lau, vice-president student affairs, have all stated to the Sheaf that they support D’Eon in his statement.

I will get some flack for this, as any President has legal responsibilities that I take very seriously, but I will defend that my social responsibilities to this campus trump any concerns I have over the repercussions I will face. I will be filing a complaint against myself, and fully accept any sanctions placed against me,” D’Eon said, in the Facebook post.

The original Facebook post that made the allegations against Nikbakht was created by Betty Pewapsconias, a third-year arts and science student. When reached for comment, she told the Sheaf that she felt the need to speak about what she sees as a vital issue on campus.

“At first, I didn’t know anything about the allegations until I started talking to a couple friends of mine, saying, ‘I don’t know what to do. I’m enraged, I’m disgusted, I’m disturbed, I’m terrified.’ I felt that if I didn’t do anything, potentially no one would do anything… It wasn’t about how I felt anymore, it was about what we were going to do,” Pewapsconias said.

Leigh Thomas, a third-year regional and urban planning student, supported Pewapsconias through the process of making her post, and he noted that members of the campus community should not focus on the women who have come forward to make allegations against Nikbakht; rather, they should focus on Nikbakht himself and hold him accountable.

“I would say for [Nikbakht]: drop out of the race. You don’t deserve to be there. You are not an advocate. You’re not any kind of leader. That’s a statement. I don’t want the people you have assaulted to walk around here feeling unsafe, like they can’t go to the USSU for help… That’s huge. That’s a position of power over students. If you have done that, leave,” Thomas said.

Quan also released a statement shortly after D’Eon, which states that she stands in solidarity with victims of sexual assault.

“A few weeks ago, one of my closest friends came forward to me and told me that [Nikbakht] had raped her in the past… With the consent of my friend, I’m speaking out. [Nikbakht] victimized not just one, but several individuals. We cannot have a predatory perpetrator of sexual violence in a position of power,” Quan said, in her Facebook post.

Caroline Cottrell, general manager of the USSU, declined to comment on the posts from D’Eon and Quan, stating that, as a staff member, she must be neutral in USSU elections.

Thomas stated that he personally knows a survivor involved in these allegations and that he is hurt that he could not do anything to protect someone close to him. He also provided the Sheaf with a message for survivors of sexual assault.

“You’re not alone. Don’t ever feel like you’re alone,” Thomas said. “There’s people like us here that always have that heart to listen, take time to listen. And that we love you. And that we hope you’re taking care of yourselves during this time and doing things that you need to do to help you, because no matter how hard we try, we won’t understand unless we’ve been through it.”

Pewapsconias’s Facebook post also included a link to a video of the USSU election forum in the North Concourse of Place Riel on March 19, which shows the election candidates’ responses to a student wearing a cap with the words “Make American Great Again,” who asked what the candidates plan to do to maintain free speech on campus.

In response to the student’s question on free speech, Nikbakht first asked if the Make America Great Again hat was legitimate Trump merchandise and where the student had purchased it. He then stated that freedom of speech is important.

“There’s a line between freedom of speech and what we would call hate speech… [The USSU does] have policy in place, we feel a certain way about it, but if you as a student feel like those policies aren’t being exercised properly and your voice isn’t being heard then that’s something that I’m going to open my door up for you to welcome you in and to hear those concerns,” Nikbakht said.

Pewapsconias’s post challenges Nikbakht on this response, stating that he did not address the implications of the hat, which is associated with the Trump administration.

“We can hear [Nikbakht] showing his interest with [the] ‘Make America Great Again’ hat at the USSU Forum, and [failing] to acknowledge that the saying does not only support Trump, but it refers to the ‘Great America’ that continues to dehumanize, objectify and terrorize people of colour, women and various minority groups throughout history,” Pewapsconias said, in her Facebook post.

While the post focuses specifically on Nikbakht’s campaign, it also calls out the other USSU executive candidates for their responses to the free speech question, stating that all the candidates gave neutral statements to garner votes, “failed to acknowledge that the ‘Make America Great Again’ movement is rooted in white supremacy” and “missed an opportunity to challenge racism.”

When reached for a response to the allegations, Nikbakht provided no comment.

Jessica Klaassen-Wright / Editor-in-Chief and Tanner Bayne / Culture Editor

Photo: Tanner Bayne / Culture Editor

  • John

    Is there any prove of these allegations? Why are you ruining life of a young man without hard proof?
    The girls were allegedly raped and they did not bother to go to police and file a complaint. It tells me that nothing of what is said really happened.
    Why USSU and Sheaf is publishing rumors and unproven very serious allegations? These articles can end a man’s future and life.
    Be responsible with what you are publishing. We live in civil society. If there is not proof, the man is presumed INNOCENT.

    • Eliza

      Prime example of victim blaming right here. ALSO, for all you know they are proven allegations. And you have no idea what it’s like to try go through our legal system when you have been assaulted. It’s not easy. It’s not fun. It’s not something that is always helpful and women know that and sometimes choose to not pursue legal action or publicize information in fear that people will respond with things like this.

    • John

      You don’t know what “victim blaming” means, get your definitions right.
      I can imagine it is not easy to go through the process, but unsupported allegations, lynching and ruining person’s life is not a civil way. There is a system and process for that kind of situations. The allegations are not proven, what are you talking about? This looks like “some friend of a friend told me…” situation.
      In civil society we have presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The Sheaf and USSU are not in a position to decide who is guilty, who is right, who is wrong, who to believe and so on.

    • Long John

      The ‘civil’ way to deal with this is itself subjective given the systems and processes in place you talk of have historically disadvantaged survivors. So while you may dislike a position taken by the Sheaf on the matter and not believe survivors till you see proof, your position of innocence given your ignorance of the faulty system, also stands equally unsupported and ruins the life of a survivor who has courageously confessed.

      There’s no middle ground – are you going to believe a survivor or an ‘alleged’ perpetrator who has refused to talk?

    • John

      You are asking to believe “survivor” just because she/he says so. This is dangerous. There are plenty of examples, when “survivors” accused “rapists” and in the end the accusations turned out to be false.
      This even should not be a matter of discussion in a civil society. We do not lynch people. We do not take law in our hands.
      If there is proof of rape – I believe survivor, if there is no proof I don’t believe “survivor”.
      I agree it is a difficult situations, but why do you ruin his life just because someone says he did something? Why his life is less valuable or worthy to you, than words of others?

    • Ray

      If you read the article you will note that The Sheaf doesn’t take a position on the case and they are simply reporting on the facts regarding the fallout.

      Are they to simply ignore the fact that the current USSU president is not willing to transfer power, or does that not seem newsworthy to you?

      It appears they did due diligence reaching out to the accused for a comment as well.

    • John

      The Sheaf is obviously biased. They paint supporting free speech as a bad thing.

    • anon

      then why do they report on the completely unrelated point of a man with a MAGA hat asking his about free speech during a question period, and how terrible it was that coden asked if it was a legit hat and then answered respectfully instead of immediately yelling at the man for his view just because of the hat he was wearing never mind the question being completely normal

    • Beulah

      Perhaps it’s because the guy who sells those hats has a somewhat less-than-stellar record with respecting women.

    • Lazz

      People criticized the guy for not addressing the hat. As stupid as that criticism might be, it’s worth noting, if only to ridicule it.

    • Long John

      You once again assume that the law is a legitimate recourse for survivors – what if it isn’t? Or what if the survivor has already tried and it hasn’t worked? What if speaking out like this is the only option the survivor had? While baseless allegations on innocent people is dangerous, stymieing confessions of survivors which might be true is equally dangerous. We unfortunately don’t live in this utopia called a ‘civil’ society if it hasn’t provided justice to survivors over the years.

      If the allegations are indeed untrue, there is a legal framework to pursue defamation charges. And I don’t see why his life would be ruined in this civil society you talk of if he gets adequate compensation for his trouble. Let’s not assume the survivor has come forward unaware of these drastic consequences.

    • Lazz

      How can you justify social conviction as legitimate recourse when you don’t even consider legal conviction as legitimate recourse?! Honestly, you people…

      The double standard as well. “I’m allowed to accuse this man of rape, and he’ll be punished for it with no legal investigation, but if he wishes to dispute these claims he’ll have to go through a legal framework to pursue defamation charges.” Unbelievable.

    • Hundir

      “Assume the law is a legitimate recourse for survivors”

      You understand that you’re creating a false dichotomy of either we believe survivors without question or we alienate them from coming forward. Those are not the only options. They are not equally dangerous.

      For one, you may pursue criminal charges. Fairly onerous and fairly painful depending on how emotionally stable you are, so it’s understandable to want to avoid it.

      We can try civil court. Lower standard of proof, less publicized, chance for actual monetary compensation.

      You could go through a private mediation process where you work something out between the parties. Greater control, but can be hard to face the person.

      You could also publicly accuse the person by proxy without coming forward in hopes that the court of public opinion will do something about it. No risk and possibly high payout.

      I think it’s fairly easy to see which one of these options is the most attractive to actual victims. Unfortunately, it’s also the least fair to the person accused and the most prone to false claims.

      False claims happen. It is absolutely moronic to live by a policy of believing accusers without question, especially when they haven’t even come forward publically. Ideas like that lead to people like Jemma Beale.

      These accusations ruin lives and the response to this accusation is already not within proportion to what is being alleged. We don’t even know what the allegations are and what the alleged story is, but we’re all expected to believe that it happened? What exactly happened? When? How? We have nothing. No facts to go by.

      What reasonable person would conclude that this guy did what he is alleged to have done?

      I agree that it’s tough for victims of rape and sexual assault to come forward, but that does not outweigh the need to presume that one is innocent until proven guilty. Even in a quasi-judicial institution like a university, where justice is far from being served on matters such as this, you cannot convict someone of a crime without evidence and not investigate the claims. It’s absolute madness. Imagine you were accused of theft by an anonymous person who not only refuses to come forward, but also refuses to specify when and what you have stolen. Is it reasonable to assume that the theft occurred? Are we reasonable to convict without knowledge of what was stolen and when? I don’t think so.

      The public reaction and the article are quite loathsome. The claims need to be at the very least investigated. If the accusers don’t want to come forward publicly, that’s fine, but they need to be investigated and they need to provide details to some independent party of what happened to them and when. It would be a massive travesty to ruin someone’s life without even knowing what happened.

    • Taylar

      Proof and statistics on false claims please.

    • Long John

      Hundir – The options you have laid out are STILL within the legal/mediation realm, that has constantly worked to muzzle survivors, so I don’t see why any of those options you have suggested aren’t onerous as well. A lot of mediators, police officers, advocates etc. will argue that it was the survivor’s fault for being at the wrong place in the process.

      If you don’t want to falsely believe accusations until you see proof, that’s your call – but you still choose to falsely believe that the available methods of legal enquiry and mediation is viable for survivors. There’s no denying the chance of false claims, but it hasn’t happened that often (unless you can demonstrate some statistical proofs instead of one-off cases). Are you suggesting that a majority of cases where multiple survivors come forward with accusations against a single perpetrator, is mostly false? The public outcry of support for the alleged survivor is a broader response to a broken justice system that far too often sides with the perpetrator because they’re initially deemed innocent in the eyes of the law and eventually get away with it, especially when they reach positions of power. So while the ‘innocent until proved guilty’ paradigm has worked for other crimes, it has been woefully inadequate for sexual assault.

      Also, public responses to controversial issues will always be chaotic and polarised depending on your association (or the lack of it) with sexual violence. While the public or the Sheaf may not know all details yet, we can’t say the same things about the USSU executive – they are fully aware of the consequences of violating their contractual obligations, and have still chosen to act in personal capacity – maybe their convictions came after some prior investigations/knowledge on their own?

      I admit it’s a sorry situation for everyone involved. Nobody is asking the public to believe anything, but they’re taking their chances on throwing an innocent under the bus (which has historically been far less likely) for showing solidarity with a bold testimony of an alleged survivor (which far too often goes unheard).

    • Hundir

      Well, first of all, no, mediation is not necessarily a legal process unless it’s ordered by a judge. Mediation cases are not publically available.

      Second, when you’re asking for the force of the law to be applied to a particular crime, you have to prove that the crime has happened beyond a reasonable doubt. If you want punishment and accountability, you go through the criminal process which means you don’t get to dictate the rules and you don’t get to redraw boundaries just because you’re dissatisfied with social factors surrounding the crime and you don’t get to do this for a very good reason. We don’t punish the innocent.

      If you want to seek a civil remedy, by all means. You may get damages and you may still get the satisfaction of proving that someone did you wrong. But again, you need to be willing to put your claim to the test.

      Other means of pursuing a claim are simply social fictions of perceived justice. You can protest, you can try to shame, you can make public statements all you want. But you should not surprised that in the public square, arguments don’t always win on merit. Whatever the perceived justice is when it comes to public outrage, that is all it is: perceived.

      Why would anyone change their mind about the events if we aren’t even honest enough to engage in fact-finding missions. People who think it’s reasonable to never question accusers will automatically assume the stories are true. People who think it’s reasonable to presume innocence en lieu of actual evidence will refuse to believe the accused unless they provide evidence. Nobody is changing their mind until evidence is presented.

      What you’re arguing for is manifestly unjust and it helped nobody. Let’s allow people to accuse with no risk. Let’s assume people are automatically guilty. What is the incentive to find out the truth? We’re just creating truth out of thin air, based on words of one or few.

      You ask: “Are you suggesting that a majority of cases where multiple survivors come forward with accusations against a single perpetrator, is mostly false?”

      No. What I’m suggesting is that if we don’t even know who these people are, how many of them really are there, and what happened, the default assumption should be that we do not have enough evidence. This isn’t a case of mass reports of the same crime by multiple sources. We have no idea who these people are, when these events were alleged to happen, and what actually took place. Therefore, we don’t know if there are any common threads or if the facts actually check out.

      You can find articles on the amounts of false accusations and actual cases of false convictions online quite easily. Off the top of my head, the percentage is around 2-10% like with most crimes.

      What you’re saying is that not only do you not care about those who get falsely accused, but that you actually endorse those false accusations because they allegedly help victims come forward for want of fear. That is the position you must take to be logically consistent and it’s a pretty disgusting position to take.

    • Sara Sestak

      I challenge you provide your plentiful examples.

    • Lazz

      Ruined the dude’s life, with no evidence provided. There’s one example.

    • Beulah

      Aw… you’re one of Chuck Johnson’s devotees? How adorable!

    • Lazz


    • Beulah


    • Taylar

      One example! Good job! That might have statistical significance literally never!

    • Lazz

      It’s evidence that this kind of thing can happen, and that’s the risk you take when you blindly “listen and believe.” The chance that an innocent person might be considered guilty due to such a misinformation campaign is not worth the blind belief in anyone who claims to be a victim.

      Innocent until proven guilty.

    • Literally Never

      “One example! Good job! That might have statistical significance literally never!”

      People make the same argument in defence of capital punishment. Ah, so what if we kill an innocent guy, it’s worth it because we mostly kill bad guys, right?

      It’s a great policy until you’re the one who ends up behind bars and on the electric stool.

      It’s also not just one guy. The number is somewhere between 2-10%.

      False allegations are real, they’ve received coverage, they have put people in prison, and they have ruined lives. To say that it’s not an injustice is a lapse in logic and empathy. And the argument is the same for capital punishment. Doesn’t matter how good it makes you feel inside or how you think it will stop crimes from occurring, you’re playing with fire and you’re saying it’s okay to burn others.

      What is the principle here? We want to encourage victims to come forward? We already do. What else do we want to do? We want to keep them completely anonymous and free from scrutiny? And to what effect? Because we assume that this is the reason victims don’t come forward? What about cases where the victim is afraid of the perpetrator because they know one another? How is that going to help? Oh they’re anonymous so I suppose that lifts all fear of retaliation, huh.

      It’s nonsense. Think of what we’re talking about here. We’re talking about assuming that a person has committed that crime simply because they’ve been accused of it. Is that a reasonable position to take? Really? Okay then, let’s do it. Let’s go ahead and say what we really want. We think the marginal chance that victims of sexual assault will come forward because we automatically presume guilt is worth more than the injustice of ruining people’s lives and possibly sending them to jail when they have done nothing wrong.

      Oh, and let’s talk about how much sexual assault encompasses. Unwanted touching, kissing, unwanted body contact, etc. Much of sexual assault falls flat of rape or sexual violation, yet we seem to endorse the idea that yes, I should be able to accuse another person of sexual assault without coming forward or disclosing pretty much any details of what really happened. Not only that, but my anonymous accusation should have the weight of a legal conviction simply by mere utterance because we’ve decided that it’s true by default and that there is no chance that I may be remembering something incorrectly, maybe be exaggerating, or I may be straight up lying to get back at my ex. Or let’s talk about drunk sex and “regrettable” sexual encounters. Because, clearly, nothing ever gets lost in translation when two drunk people decide to rub privates together because they’re incapable of long-term rational decision making. People make mistakes all the time. People mislead people all the time. To say that it’s more important to make victims feel like they won’t be criticised or questioned than it is to actually find out what happened and hear both sides, it is just absurd. Some of the worst periods in human history, some of the most oppressive political regimes have operated under rules that put defendants on the defensive as if the presumption is that everyone is doing something wrong at all times and must defend it against all inquiry.

      It’s just gross and stupid.

    • Lazz

      Alleged “perpetrator”

      I think you misplaced your scare quotes.

    • Mark

      Its disgusting that students are forced to pay for the USSU and the farce it has become. It is a blight upon the University’s public reputation, especially when completely and utterly unprofessional nonsense like this comes forth. The victims have the resources of law enforcement to which to make the allegations if there are allegations to be made.

    • Beulah

      Yeah, you’ve already said this.

    • Sara Sestak

      TFW someone accuses another person of not knowing the definition of a term but more obviously has not even Googled it himself

  • j

    There needs to be an inquiry, and I hope there is some degree of justice found here. Clearly there needs to be an investigation of these allegations. Coden has made some serious mistakes in the way he has addressed indigenous people. I don’t hate Coden, and I hope that the allegations are found to be faulty, but should they be proven legitimate there is no question in my mind that the university should not only strip Coden of his victory, but publicly apologize for allowing such a person to run for presidency unvetted. What a mess.

    • j

      A dark day for the USSU no matter the outcome.

    • Mark

      The USSU doesn’t decide who gets to run or serve. That’s for the electors to decide.

    • Beulah

      You don’t get to decide either, Chachi. Your Disqus trail gives you away.

      Go do your dirty work somewhere else, you pathetic concern troll.

    • Mark

      I beg your pardon? Is there something wrong with you?

    • Beulah

      Dos Vedanya, trollski.

    • Mark

      Tired of all the alt-left crap that has festered on that campus over the years. Usask is turning into the UC Berkeley of Canada.

    • Beulah


      Same old material. You’d never even heard of the UofS before yesterday.

      If you’re going to troll, mix in some variety. Your lack of originality gives you away.

    • It Aint Easy Being Cheesy

      Based on your post history, I don’t see what separates you from any other troll. You’re really contributing to the conversation with comments like:

      “You seem bright and well-educated.

      Let me know if you’d like me to school you, son.”

      “Were you born with an intellectual disability or did you suffer head trauma at some point in your life?”


      Get some fresh material.”

      “You seem bright.”

      Other than being a professional shit-poster, do you have anything to add that isn’t a poor attempt at insults and humour? I know, attempts at witty one-liners are easier than independent thought, but you should try the latter at some point, it might help.

    • Beulah

      Get back to me when you can write grammatical sentences on a consistent basis.

    • Lazz

      And just like that, you’ve conceded the argument.

    • Beulah

      And just like that, you’ve demonstrated that you don’t know what constitutes an argument.

      Protip: you might fare better if you actually pursued an education rather than trolling about it.

    • Lazz

      Oh I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware that attacking someone’s occasional misuse of grammar was a valid form of argument. Carry on.

    • Beulah

      I’m not conducting an argument with you. It wouldn’t be worth my time.

      Get back to me when you have your GED.

    • Disqus

      It’s funny that defending the silly things you say is apparently not worth your time, yet shit-posting on random college news articles is.

      It’s, … [sinks back in sudden realization]…. i-it’s almost like you can’t defend your silly points and result to juvenile insults instead…

      Food for thought…although seems like thought isn’t your forte.

    • Beulah

      I have to give you a few points for style, kiddo, although the larger point seems to have sailed right by you while you were composing your quite decent reply.


    • It Aint Easy Being Cheesy

      If that’s not a guilty plea to a charge of trolling, I don’t know what is. That actually made me laugh out loud, which is fairly rare.

      “Get back to me when you can write grammatical sentences on a consistent basis.”

      Well isn’t that cute. I’m really curious about the grammatical inconsistency of my sentences, please do enlighten me. While you take on the Lord’s work of shit-posting on comment threads, let’s take a trip down to your post history where we can see examples of incredible penmanship and grammatical prowess. Surely someone as educated and intelligent as yourself would follow his/her own rules, right?

      “It is a truth universally acknowledged that any story whose title claims that one party has “shredded” the other is not worth reading.”

      Oh noooooooo! Is that a misplaced modifier? What a shame you struggle to tie together adverbs and adjectives with nouns. Must be a devastating mistake given how grammatically flawless you are.

      “I know that it’s difficult for you, but please: try to focus.”

      Oh, my my. Are we using colons after sentence fragments? That’s a bit careless, don’t you think? After all, if we remove the portion after the colon, it seems the sentence no longer makes sense. Well, that just can’t stand. I demand that you refrain from commenting on any article until you learn proper use of colons. As an aside, while you’re at it, perhaps consider staying away from one-word sentences. We wouldn’t want anyone to charge you with not writing grammatical sentences, would we?

      You’re a pathetic child. I’m almost convinced you’re just a troll, but if you’re not, you’re simply a sad and loathsome human being, which is basically the same either way.

      Your comment history is nothing but vapid insults and attempts at wit. All of which fall flat. You’re not intelligent. You’re not funny. You’re not interesting. You’re just pathetic. I would almost feel bad for you if it wasn’t for the fact that you ooze such contemptible arrogance that I can hardly muster any pity.

      You add nothing to the conversation. In fact, you pollute the conversation with pointless insults and baiting. I won’t psychoanalyze you too much, but it’s clear you want attention. It’s clear you want people to think you’re smart, yet you show no desire to actually work for it.

      So keep trolling, keep baiting, and keep insulting. It only exposes you for the moron you are. Keep it up, we’re all very entertained by your lack of self-awareness.

      Let me leave you with your own most cherished insults to strangers on the internet: “You seem well-adjusted,” “you seem bright.”

    • Sara Sestak

      Interesting, I’m tired of alt-right supremacists being deluded enough to think that any institution of academics and highly educated people would not take the position of equal rights for the marginalized. Or you know, morality and empathy.

  • Mr. K Dilkington

    Here is a link to the video showing the free speech question:

    Kind of a strange article — rape allegations followed by complaints over free speech and a Donald Trump hat. I’m not saying the latter isn’t worth reporting on, but it feels like it should be a separate article.

    • Lazz

      Is there a higher quality recording anywhere else? I can’t hear a word being said because of the echo.

  • John

    “Refuse transition”, when did he own it to be in a place of refusing to transition? USSU is not his private club. As far as we know D’Eon is not a president anymore. He must transition the power otherwise he is an usurper and must be kicked out.
    I voted and I demand my vote to be heard. How dare D’Eon just undermine my and thousands of others votes?

    • Beulah

      Get a new hobby, Chachi. There’s not much of a future in juvenile rabble-rousing.

    • Lazz

      The guy seems to think he’s some kind of dictator.

      How virtuous of him. /s

    • Sara Sestak

      He’s taking a strong stance against an alleged rapist with multiple accusations made against him by women who have absolutely no reason to make up these allegations.

      Virtuous indeed :)

    • Lazz

      A L L E G E D

      A C C U S A T I O N S


      And who says they can’t have reasons? Maybe they don’t like the guy’s politics. Who knows? Certainly not you or I.

    • Guest

      You really don’t see a reason these allegations could be fabricated? TBH, The allegations read as extremely questionable and are most likely fabricated. You must be trolling here Sara. No one could possible be this indoctrinated and blind.

    • Taylar

      Unless you can provide the actual reasons you speak of, seeing as none are mentioned in the article (except… the hat?) your comment is null and void :)

    • Lazz

      “Absolutely no reason to make up these allegations.”
      Huh, I’ve never encountered a mind reader before. Interesting.

    • Onwards&Upwards

      Transistioning in Student Soc’s , in my experience, normally refers to training your replacement. I do not think D’eon is trying for extended term limits, Chairman Xi style. Previous emails and other work related assets will be passed on to whomever comes into office next. Most of the time a ; summary of work done over the year, specific recommendations for events/ policy, and other information would also be passed on. That is the information i am assuming D’Eon will decline to share

    • Sara Sestak

      The article explicitly explained why he is refusing and he is taking full responsibility for the negative repercussions of that. Your comment suggests you did not read the article.

  • Alex

    If I were to allege that David D’Eon sexually assaulted a
    female friend of mine some time ago, and give neither her name nor details
    to substantiate the alleged crime, should David D’Eon step down also? Not
    saying he did, but this seems to be the argument here.

    • Beulah

      The standard in the court of public opinion is rather different than the standard in a court of law.

      Go ahead and make an accusation. The fact that you have to make a hypothetical of it says all that need be said.

    • Alex

      I won’t be making any allegations. I am just pointing out that this is the situation and argument here.

    • Lazz

      “Listen and believe” I believe is the relevant feminist mantra.

      Stop asking for evidence, or else you’re a bigot. /s

    • Dave

      Yes he should. And then the Sheaf should run a full length article about your allegation.

  • Mark

    Absolutely disgusting that University Administration forces students to pay for this farce of an organization. As for the allegations made, the police are where such allegations should be referred. The maker of the allegations should also familiarize himself with the consequences of libel.

    • Mr. K Dilkington

      A quick primer on what is and isn’t libel in Canada:

    • Guest

      Pass “right to learn” legislation for all Canadian students. Would solve a lot of problems.

    • Pantses

      Two Words: Patti McDougall. I don’t THNK she is volunteering???? Where are student’s parents?????

  • Beulah

    It’s look like the Russian bots are even interested in this story. Must be the mention of the MAGA hat that got them to tag along.


  • Mr.

    “In response to allegations on Facebook, President D’Eon is heroically sacrificing his esteemed reputation in order to save the USSU from being infiltrated by a Trump supporting sexual predator.” When opportunities arise, only the bold take advantage of them. Well done, sir.

    • Sara Sestak

      Agreed! I admire him so much right now!

  • RY

    I wish this had come to light before I voted for the guy. I’m pretty unhappy to have voted for a guy who has any sexual assault allegations hanging on his head. But both the allegations against him and the interference by Mr. D’eon concern me. I’m not involved in the circle of student politics, but I feel that there is more to this story than immediately apparent to us uninformed. What consequences could he face if he was elected? Could a non-confidence vote or by-election be held? And what repercussions could the current president face if he refuses to give up his seat, as well as his statements?

    The other thing, inferring about/criticizing his failure to outright condemn the Trump administration in this article seems to be misplaced. The first part of the article is fine, but I’d say the last bit on the MAGA hat just kind of gives this whole article a rough feel of trying to tie some unrelated things together to present an opinionated narrative. This would be appropriate if this was an opinion article, but right now I’m just gonna chalk it up to poor writing.

  • Lazz

    So now a post on Facebook is evidence enough to socially convict a person and slander him with allegations that are purported as true. Fucking brilliant.

    Also who the hell cares about the hat.

  • Erika

    So my question in this matter is as to why this guy is being convicted via facebook and the local school newspaper instead of being brought to authorities who should be handling this in a legal matter?

    • Michelle

      This article encapsulates everything wrong with modern reactionary journalism.
      Regardless of whether the guy is guilty of these allegations or not, he deserves the right to a fair trial before his life is effectively ruined, just as the rest of us do!
      This is selfish, egotistical dogpiling; a product of the clickbait generation.
      If the guy is guilty, then sure, he deserves this, but we don’t know if he is or not. That’s the whole point of the criminal justice system.
      It’s not up to the columnists of a student newspaper to make the decision, but they seem to have taken on this authority anyway.
      Guilty or innocent, deserved or undeserved, either way the guy is fucked now. Good job Sheaf! Hard-hitting journalism as always!

    • Erika

      Michelle, I could not agree more. Very well said.

  • Blueberries92

    If the person providing these rape allegations, and all the women who have had similar experiences with the new president would come forward, I think this would lend a lot more credibility to the movement. There needs to be risk on both ends for this to be credible, the person throwing the allegations currently does not have any skin in the game.

    There is no victim statement, there is only hearsay. If the victim would come forward with her story I would support her, but I cannot support hearsay.

    • Sara Sestak

      Because our culture and justice systems are so biased against sexual assault victims, remaining anonymous is the only way to guarantee the safety of these women. Are you personally willing to put yourself in harm’s way against hordes of misogynists to protect them?

    • Lazz

      You spinning this mythical tale of “hordes of misogynists” certainly won’t encourage any other potential victims from saying their piece.

    • Taylar

      Really? Many of them are right here in the comments section lol

      Pro tip: Taking a firm stance against victims and then *suddenly* acting like you care is going to mean no one will take you seriously :)

    • Lazz

      Are you dense? I haven’t taken any stance against victims. As far as any of us know, there are no victims or perpetrators, only alleged victims and alleged perpetrators. That’s an important distinction. They haven’t come forward with any evidence, so their claims are not to be blindly believed.

    • Bob


  • Kyle

    The writer of the sheaf should get charged with defamation. This is just hearsay right now. A name should not be published without evidence. Even if this guy is innocent his life is ruined. It should not be up to the writer if someone is innocent or guilty. Reactionary journalism at it s finest

    • Sara Sestak

      How about you don’t defend someone with multiple sexual assault and rape allegations, especially when there is absolutely no reason for a bunch of women to make up any of these allegations? Lol. Are you a conspiracy theorist?

      Misogyny at its finest.

    • guest

      You see absolutely no reason why she would make this up? How about the fact that they have significant political disagreements (as clearly outlined in this article) with the newly elected president?

      I have no clue whether the allegation is true or not, and neither does anyone else here, but you pretending that there’s zero potential for ulterior motives here (and that anyone who suggests otherwise must hate women) is just stupid.

    • Taylar

      You mean… the hat? Lol

    • Bob

      You are part of the problem Sara. Please sign up for a STEM field or get off campus and save us all the annoyance and expense.

    • Taylar

      Nah. :)

    • Kyle

      I’m not defending anyone. So I guess there has never been false accusations before motivated by people that don’t share the same views. I’m not saying this is the case here, but everyone deserves a fair trail before they get their name destroyed. And if that makes me misogynistic in your eyes so be it. I’m a realist not an idealist

    • Starberrywishes

      All humans are capable of lying, what proof do you have that she didn’t lie?

    • Guest

      Oh yeah, there is absolutely no reason for anyone to lie about anything, ever. Especially when they aren’t named and have absolutely nothing to lose by lying. That’s for sure not suspicious at all.

      And what can you tell me about these allegations? When did this happen? What happened? Who are these people and how did this happen? Can you tell me any of that? No, you can’t, because you don’t know. Yet you cling onto your ideology over simple reason and rationality.

      You understand that the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim. Like, this isn’t negotiable. You don’t get to anonymously point fingers at people and run away.

      You also act like false accusations don’t happen. Are you sure? Would you like to become “woke” by looking up some cases of false sexual assault convictions, because they exist, you can’t just wish them away.

  • GJ

    Actual evidence would be better than a Facebook post…. also innocent until proven guilty seems to only apply to people a group likes.
    I don’t know this guy, nor do I know if allegations are true. Not my job.

    To those saying Trump supporter. So what? That means nothing. If you were a Hillary supporter you’re far worse, Bernie? Bankruptcy and an idiot, if you want to go down that path.

    Trump dominated in the US and is president for likely 7 more years. If you don’t like that you can’t attack someone because they supported him. As for this USSU predident, see if he is guilty before trying to ruin his life. Especially the cancerous feminists need to check themselves first before accusing.

  • Beulah

    The trolls from south of the border are having a field day with this, all because “MAGA” appears in the story. The Sheaf should find a different commenting service; Disqus is notorious for this kind of bullshit.

    • Alfred

      Oh look, you’ve found something in common with your troll friends from down south! I’m sure you’ll bond with them just fine. After all, nothing brings people together like some good ol’ fashioned mental illness.

    • Beulah

      You’re adorable.

  • Beulah

    I can’t stand when people make fake troll accounts with the express purpose of stirring up racial animus.

    • Beulaa

      I can’t stand when people troll with their regular accounts while pretending to be intellectual. Are you still flagging comments you don’t agree with or have we gotten past the point of pretending we’re not trolling, huh?

      I can’t imagine anyone shit-posting with the sole purpose of stirring the pot….

      That kind of person would never reply to other people by only saying: “You seem bright.”

      Oh, how our wonderful North American education seems to fail those who so desperately need it. Brings a tear to my eye.

      I look forward to more of your attempts at witty replies. It is truly, truly the best part of this thread.

    • Beulah

      I never claimed not to be trolling. I’m just better at it than you, Sparky.

  • Starberrywishes

    There’s no evidence and why are they publishing names without evidence? Trump hats don’t represent white supremacy.

  • Georgie Stepple

    “Claimed…Unspecified…Unnamed” -This is Canada, innocent until proven guilty not torn to shreds over simple allegations. If they find after he is president that criminal charges are filed then he can be removed but honestly let the guy live life.

  • lol

    Nicklebakt (whoever the fuck this guy is) speaks like someone with brain damage and princess D’Eon gets to live out his own political martydom fantasy. What a joke. Just throw all these mongoloids in jail.

  • lol

    The allegations are false but it doesn’t change the fact that Nicklebakt is drooling moron status for trying to unseat D’Eon and his cadres.

  • Pantses

    As a U of S employee this is very unnerving. Sexual assault is a criminal offence, not a personality trait. I have three friends whose daughters are U of S students. Please sort things out. Maybe it’s time for an outside third party.

  • Pantses

    Staff are counting the days to retirement…….U of S is a hot mess. With a side of rape? Like it’s a personality trait. Verb? Oh, wait: A Criminal Code of Canada, offence. What-ev-er…..Where does one put than on their LinkedIn profile? Employers are always searching for quality staff…..Where is the “Leadership Team”????

  • Pantses

    I’m old. Retired from the U of S (now 52). Born and raised in Saskatoon. Married my high-school sweetheart. Never heard of sexual assault. Do people in University age-group now go from Dairy Queen, to sexual assault? I don’t understand. What happened to people having self-respect? It’s very empowering. And relaxing. No angst.