“There is a pattern within the staff at Abertay of defending Waiton. I have not attended any of his classes as I do not feel safe around him, and I find his teaching severely lacks balanced perspectives. I am not the only student doing this!”
This reflects the wider reaction of students from Abertay University after a 5-month investigation into a controversial lecture given by Justice for Innocent Men Scotland (JIMS).
Local newspaper The Courier has lodged a complaint with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO). Despite receiving more than 300 complaints and pieces of feedback, the investigation reported that the JIMS lecture was “appropriate in the context of this module”.
None of the complaints were upheld.
Marsha Sturgeon, Director of JIMS, was invited to speak by Dr Stuart Waiton, Senior Lecturer in Sociology and Criminology at Abertay University, in October 2025. You can read about here.
An Abertay criminology student revealed that Dr Stuart Waiton mentioned the backlash from the JIMS Lecture in his classes this week:
“He said that everyone was overreacting about the JIMS lecture and that he did not agree with everything they say on social media, but did agree with their core message”
The lecture, titled “Victim Feminism and Trauma-Informed Approach”, argued that “new corroboration rules have shifted justice away from evidence and toward ideology”. Marsha made claims about the “feminist lobbying that now shapes policing and prosecution culture” and claimed that there are “innocent men in prison, families broken, communities destroyed” due to “wrongful convictions”.
The main issues raised by the complaints included concerns about the lack of prior warning about the lecture content, JIMS views, the university’s decision to host them, and the potential impact on its reputation.
Students also highlighted concerns about safety on campus and the university’s process for approving external speakers.
The Jute Journal spoke to two of Dr Stuart Waiton’s current criminology students (who have been anonymised as Student A and Student B), international activist Ellie Wilson, and a group of Abertay University students.
Student A had submitted a complaint prior to the JIMS incident that:
“During an in-person lecture, Waiton said the N word, in full, three times. He prefaced this by saying “I’m afraid”, which shows he was aware he should not have said this, and then followed by saying he “finds it offensive” that he cannot say this and tried to justify it. Abertay responded by dismissing it as part of an academic discussion from Waiton.”
Following widespread outrage, it was revealed that 86% of complaints came from external individuals or organisations, 14% from Abertay students, and less than 1% from staff members.
One complaint came from a student who attended the class on 28 October, while the class representative passed on anonymous feedback from two others. Feedback was also received from the Abertay Students’ Association, including 89 pieces of feedback collated following an open meeting.
In response, Student A said that:
“The investigation downplays the harm caused by citing the small percentage of students that complained following the incident. I imagine this is an attempt to suggest that the incident was not really of concern among students. This percentage does not reflect the wider context.”
“There have been numerous complaints, protests, and petitions against Waiton over the years. It also does not account for students who may have avoided complaining due to loss of hope with the way things have shown to be handled.”
One of the report’s recommendations is:
“The University should consider providing guidance to academic staff on the use of external speakers and how any potentially controversial speakers or subjects should be handled. This should include consideration of how to incorporate external viewpoints in the curriculum in a balanced way that reflects a range of perspectives on sensitive subjects.”
Critics, including students and advocacy groups, argue that it would have been beneficial to have a speaker from an opposing viewpoint to truly expose students to a ‘range of perspectives’. In line with this, Ellie Wilson responded:
“I will be writing to Liz Bacon personally to seek a meeting to understand how this was allowed to happen and what will be done to ensure students at Abertay are kept safe from sexual or gender based violence, and will be supported in coming forward if this does happen. I will also offer to come into Abertay and speak to students about my experience of the justice system.”
When asked about Dr Stuart Waiton’s teaching style, Student B responded that:
“His core teaching, like the powerpoints and readings, is not biased, but he does sometimes go on very biased tangents about his opinions, mostly about rape trials and how he believes they need a jury.”
The report confirmed that Dr Stuart Waiton had no formal connection to JIMS. However, he was spotted at the JIMS protest in Edinburgh in June 2025, where he said:
“The criminal justice system seems really politicised; it seems to be influenced heavily by a kind of victim feminism in terms of academics, and then, of course, you have the attempt to get rid of the jury.”
Student A states that the report:
“Completely negates Waiton’s direct involvement with JIMS; he has promoted it in his classes to students. He is an active participant in their events, and he has also been seen participating in their protests. He has collaborated with them in writing academic papers. This is not someone who has a neutral position!”
University Students Joel, Matteo and Harry said:
“That’s terrible. How did that even happen? The fact that a member of staff set it up, they need to rethink who they hire and how they hire them.”
Furthermore, with the investigation being conducted by Abertay’s own senior management, concerns have been raised about a risk of bias, as Student A mentions:
“The Senior Management Team (and the supporting people to the investigation) are internal to Abertay, and they are responsible for upholding the [university’s] reputation, yet they were also the ones judging complaints.”
“There is a high risk of internal bias here, and there is a pattern within the staff at Abertay of defending Waiton. It’s visible in every complaint response, emails from the principal and the incident response.”
Another recommendation from the report is that:
“The University should consider providing guidance to academic staff on the circumstances in which trigger warnings should be given to students and on the format these warnings should take.”
Critics argue that, in this context, simply providing a trigger warning may not be sufficient, as students are more likely than any other section of the population to experience sexual violence, and research shows that the vast majority of rape survivors never receive justice for what they’ve endured. As Ellie Wilson stated:
“Set within this context, the JIMS talk at Abertay was highly irresponsible and could further deter those who’ve experienced sexual violence from coming forward. It’s so important students have their voices heard, and the university clearly understands that hosting extremist, misogynistic, and victim-blaming groups like this is unacceptable”
The report also recommends that:
“The University should set out and publish its position on freedom of expression.”
Student A mentioned that:
“The report, like previous responses, dismisses the incident and relates it to ‘freedom of speech’ and exposure to differing views. This completely dismisses the harm that is caused by the group and Waiton. There is a clear difference between academic freedom and allowing harmful ideologies to be presented to students.”
On 29 October 2025, Abertay University released a statement, saying:
“The JIMS speaker session reported in the press was not approved by the senior management team, and the group’s views do not reflect those of Abertay University.”
However, in the latest investigation report, it is stated:
“In response to our questions, it was confirmed that there is no process for approval of external speakers participating in classes, this is left to the professional judgment of each module tutor.”
These contradicting statements have raised questions about how the approval process for external members will be regulated, to avoid an incident like this in the future.
With a complaint now lodged with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO), and with over 300 complaints and feedback from Abertay students, staff and the general public, the matter has now escalated beyond Abertay’s internal investigation.
You can read the full investigation report, here.