^^All of the above. Clearly women define for themselves how they categorize their sexual activities - I’m sure men do too. I’m guessing the vast majority of women can define when they were raped, but I’m guessing everything else might be more individualized. Take the woman in Jonri’s post - she told the police she was raped so presumably whatever happened fit her criteria of rape, whether it fits the state criteria of rape is up to the police and sounds like a grand jury. That same woman could have NOT said she was raped. She could have said she had a bad experience with a guy and she was concerned about his mental state and everything would be different. One is not right and one is not wrong…that’s why we have police and the criminal justice system. By her claiming she was raped, she’s presumably smart enough and adult enough to know what that means for her and that young man going forward.
Well…only momof3boys answered my post # 678 and she only answered the first question.
IMO, while the outcome depends upon testimony and the rape kit, unless he admitted he knew she wasn’t giving consent and that admission is admissible in evidence, I think it’s extremely unlikely he’ll be convicted of anything. I think it is probable that a good defense attorney can create a reasonable doubt, i.e., convince a jury that he had a reasonable belief she cosented because she didn’t verbalize a no or try to fight him off.
As for Bowdoin’s own investigation, its code of conduct for students requires “effective consent” for sexual conduct, which seems to require some affirmative action on her part to indicate consent, not just an absence of objection. So, if the facts are as portrayed in the news article, he can be disciplined by Bowdoin.
I think it illustrates why the DOJ wants a “prepondernce of evidence” standard rather than a “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard in college disciplinary proceedings.
This case is much more like those that confront colleges today than the scenarios in Ms. Young’s article. I don’t think the “feminists” she decries are trying to criminalize her scenarios. I think the feminists ARE trying to criminalize the type of situation at Bowdoin.
I think the young man’s arrest also illustrates jonri’s rule: Don’t have sex with a given person for the first time when either or both of you have been drinking unless prior consent was given when you are both sober because you increase the odds you’ll be accused of rape.
Cathy Young uses examples of events that are not sexual assault to diminish the sexual assault issue. I find her disgusting.
Bearpanther, I like what USF is trying.
TV4caster, I am not an expert on the Men Program. It looks interesting. Using men as bystanders to prevent sexual assaults puts men in a helpful supporting situation. People like to help. Changes the psychology and sociology. I think that’s a good idea.
Jonri, I think you are right about the Bowdoin case. If the accused assaulted the woman… See ya.
Cathy Young? Is that Ekaterina Jung?
@jonri: With respect to #678, a quick (and unexpert, since I am not a Maine lawyer) review of Maine law shows that the most likely applicable statutes are tit. 17-A §§ [url=<a href=“http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/17-A/title17-Asec253.html%5D253%5B/url”>http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/17-A/title17-Asec253.html]253[/url], 255-A, and 260. I haven’t looked into any of the cases, which could obviously affect the analysis quite a bit.
I don’t see a conviction under 253, Gross Sexual Assault. While that statute provides that “A person is guilty of gross sexual assault if that person engages in a sexual act with another person and … The actor has substantially impaired the other person’s power to appraise or control the other person’s sexual acts by furnishing… intoxicants,” and vodka shots definitely count, it also has a carve out for when “the other person voluntarily consumed or allowed administration of the substance with knowledge of its nature.” Probably no conviction there.
255-A is more likely. Under that statute, Unlawful Sexual Contact, a person is guilty if “the actor intentionally subjects another person to any sexual contact and … The other person has not expressly or impliedly acquiesced in the sexual contact.” Seems like there is no express permission here (from the facts you gave, at least, since I didn’t read the links) and I think it’s unlikely there’s proof of implied consent. The text message about being a monster certainly implies consciousness of guilt. Likely a conviction here.
260, Unlawful Sexual Touching, is largely identical to 255-A. It provides that a “person is guilty of unlawful sexual touching if the actor intentionally subjects another person to any sexual touching and … The other person has not expressly or impliedly acquiesced in the sexual touching.” I’d have to dig into the case law a bit to figure out the difference between sexual contact and sexual touching, but since there was penetration involved my guess is the more serious statute applies. Still, if not 255-A then I’d bet on 260.
I don’t find Cathy Young disgusting, I think she’s vocalizing a different perspective and I appreciate being able to read differing views whether or not I agree with the views. I find her perspective just as interesting as I find some of the extremist writers for the activist blogs. Cathy Young is alittle more mainstream media and more libertarian than conservative so that is interesting to me also. I think the problem is that some of today’s younger feminists think we (women) have to scream and howl and believe we’re oppressed to actually consider ourselves feminists.
Jonri, I almost said what you said, but I decided to post a more conservative/worse case example (one in which the young man is actually prosecuted or he, himself, pleads guilty and what would happen then.) Alot will hinge on whether this young woman stands behind her original claim of rape.
@dstark, here is the website:
http://projectcallisto.org/#how_it_works
Looks like you can donate to the project to help it expand to other schools. I think being able to report anonymously online will probably increase reporting; as one commenter on the website mentions just having the ability to document the event somewhere is “an important first step.”
Also looks like you can choose the option to automatically send the report if the alleged attacker is mentioned in another complaint.
It seems that colleges would only have access to the information if you actually submit the report, otherwise it just sits in some holding space? I wonder if the unsubmitted reports are eventually deleted after a certain amount of time or if they sit there forever?
For example, if your attacker was UG when you write your complaint, but you decide to hold it back unless someone else accuses him/her. The attacker stays at the same school to get a grad degree and 3 years after you have graduated the attacker’s name is referenced in a new report and the initial complaint from you is also activated. I wonder what happens in such a case. Maybe you have moved on and don’t want to deal with it. The school would have knowledge of your report even if you don’t want to pursue it–I assume they would still use it to make the case this person is a serial attacker?
Cathy Young does exactly what I said she does. She tries to diminish the sexual assault issue.
Used the example of saying no and then saying yes.
Does anybody think saying no to sex and then saying yes to sex 2 hours later is sexual assault?
Do you momofthreeboys? I don’t think so. Nobody thinks so… Not even Cathy Young. 
Cathy Young uses examples of situations that are not sexual assault to explain that real sexual assault isn’t sexual assault. She is paid to make these arguments. I guess she has to eat. I don’t know how she looks at herself in a mirror.
Again, I think that’s unlikely, if the facts in the articles are accurate. The testimony of both, if in agreement, would go something like this:
He picked her up (presumably in some sort of common or living roon) and caried her a few feet into the bedroom. She didn’t protest. She didn’t say no; she didn’t struggle. He put her on his bed. She didn’t say no. She didn’t struggle. He didn’t pin her down. He started penetrating her. She began crying. As soon as she did, he stopped.
He testifies that he thought, due to her lack of protest or struggle, that sex was okay with her. When she started crying, he stopped immediately. That was his first indication that she wasn’t “okay” with having sex. He would have stopped earlier if she’d given any indication that she objected.
When he realized she was NOT okay with it, he felt horrible. He never meant to do anything she didn’t want to do. He made a mistake.
Again, the results of the rape kit will matter…
But, if the testimony goes as above, I personally doubt any jury will find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Again, I am of course presuming that the facts in the articles are accurate–and they may not be. But I picked the Bowdoin case because it’s a real one. Unless the male is one heck of an actor, I don’t think this is a guy who got her drunk in order to rape her. The fact that he DID feel remorse actually cuts the other way for me. I don’t think the guy who is a serial rapist would be sending an email expressing remorse. Nor would he stop the minute the woman started crying.
I think a good defense attorney could also plant a seed of doubt about the woman’s intentiions. He’ll suggest that she really WAS okay with sex initially–that’s why she didn’t protest–and then changed her mind.
Bearpanther, you still need proof, right?
The first person who reports probably isn’t going to win very many cases.
I think what this will do is tell investigators you may have a serial rapist on the loose.
Then a punishment may also be more severe and easier to hand out… Similar to the first case mentioned in the book Missoula.
The Bowdoin case is tough. If the guy is found guilty… His family and friends are going to be at sentencing. Arguing for lenient sentencing. Maybe he should get a lenient sentence if it is the first time. But if somebody else reported a similar crime against the accused…
Adding in numbers
1 - usually and acquaintance
2 - Yes
3 - Yes, sometimes
4 - Yes, as pointed out in the study
5 - check the links
6 - various reasons, shame, fear and doubt, covered as one of the points in the book “Missoula” if you really want to know.
7 - That would be generally correct
8 - Yes, there are reasons
The results of this study mimic the results of about every other published and unpublished college rape study. They do not correlate, though, with northwesty’s favorite numbers. If nothing else, read Data10’s posts.
From the Slate article. Required reading:
“Reported sexual assaults have been rising on campus in recent years, at a time when other campus crime is declining. (The nation as a whole has experienced a dramatic drop in all violent crime over the past few decades, including sexual assault, which is down more than 60 percent since 1995.) The rise of reporting on campus sexual assault is generally described by security experts as a function of a greater willingness on the part of women to make complaints, not an increase in incidence.”
“To assess accurately the victimization risk for women throughout a college career, longitudinal research following a cohort of female students across time is needed.” The one-fifth to one-quarter assertion would mean that young American college women are raped at a rate similar to women in Congo, where rape has been used as a weapon of war.”
Actually, the Cathy Youngs of the world…and especially Cathy Young herself…are responsible in part for the Callisto project. She wrote an article for The Daily Beast which argues that the Emily Sulkowitz/ Paul Nungesser case really wasn’t rape.
She suggests in the article that the 3 people who filed claims against Paul colluded. She portrays one of them as Emily’s “friend” who was trying to help “convict” Paul and the other as a vindictive ex-girlfriend.
Jezebel is on the other end of the spectrum from Cathy Young and, it too, has an agenda. However, it printed an open, anonymous letter from the “friend,” who was very upset when Cathy Young contacted her. You see, the “friend” has never publicly identified herself. She doesn’t want to and she doesn’t know how Cathy got her name. However, Paul is probably the source.
Her story was that when she and Paul, who was an acquaintance, were at a party of an organization they both belonged to, she went upstairs for a minute to another room. Paul followed her up the stairs and into the room, grabbed her, and turned out the lights. She tried to treat it as a joke. He wouldn’t let go. She struggled and fought him. She managed to extract herself from his grip, and ran out of the room.
She was BTW, a varsity athlete, and she fought hard. She was shaken. Her boyfriend was at the party, and saw how upset she was. She told him what had happened. Two good friends were there too and overheard the conversation.
When whatever happened to Emily happened, one of unidentified woman’s friends told her Paul had actually raped someone now and that she HAD to report what happened. So she did.
There was a hearing, which was repeatedly delayed at Paul’s request. Paul hired an attorney. She got some help from her sister, who was, I think, a law student at the time, but didn’t come with her to the hearing. The hearing finally took place. By now, the woman had graduated. She came back to Columbia and testified. Her boyfriend also testified, saying that she had told him about the incident when it happened. I think one of her friends did as well.
Paul was found responsible. He appealed and was granted a new hearing. This time, the woman did not attend. She had just started a new job, and Columbia was doing dumb things like calling her in the middle of the day and expecting her to review her testimony with the caller while she was at work and leaving messages for her like “Yes, this is X from Columbia, please ask __ to call me about the scheduling of her sexual assault case.” Soon, her office–where she had been working less than a month—was buzzing with rumors that she’d been raped. She found that hard to deal with. She also didn’t feel, that with only a month or less on the job, that she could ask for a day off to testify. Since she didn’t show up for the hearing, the charges against Paul were dismissed.
Cathy Young then published an article, which basically says that it was entirely too convenient that the woman who complained only did so after Emily was “raped.” The young woman says she knew who Emly was, but they were NOT friends and Emily never asked her to file the complaint. (BTW, there is a male who alleges that Paul also raped him.)
The young woman still doesn’t want to be “outed.” She says that’s in part because of what happened at Columbia’s graduation. Paul’s supporters made up flyers with Emily’s picture and “Pretty Little Liar” in bold print across them and they were posted everywhere around campus. She says she admires Emily’s courage, but she doesn’t want the first thing anyone finds when they google her own name to be articles about the incident, including Ms. Young’s which attacks her character.
But because of what Ms. Young did to this young woman, somebody suggested that there be some way that a complaint like hers against Paul could be filed so that there would be proof that the alleged assault wasn’t made up after the fact. I think it’s an excellent idea.
It would be interesting to compare how many women report to a college or university if the college/university requires reporting to the police, vs. complaints to a police department in statistically similar places where the universities don’t require reporting. I wonder sometimes if the women know that their complaint probably doesn’t meet the “test” for criminal behavior, but they just want the guy off the campus and out of their view so they choose to report to the uni. Requiring mandatory reporting would ‘clean up’ noisy data and would require colleges to figure out they will “deal with” complaints that do not meet the criminal test. This would clean up college reporting and perhaps help clean up justice system reporting. Plus with the Clery law there is a funnel for collecting this data in place.
And this too:
"But most studies don’t compare the victimization rates of students to nonstudents of the same age. One recent paper that does make that comparison, “Violence Against College Women” by Callie Marie Rennison and Lynn Addington, compares the crime experienced by college students and their peers who are not in college, using data from the National Crime Victimization Survey. What the researchers found was the opposite of what Gillibrand says about the dangers of campuses: “Non-student females are victims of violence at rates 1.7 times greater than are college females,” the authors wrote, and this greater victimization holds true for sex crimes: “Even if the definition of violence were limited to sexual assaults, these crimes are more pervasive for young adult women who are not in college.”
Jonri: Just wondering where you got that much detail on the victim you discuss in #712. I had read some of her story, but not in such detail. I didn’t realize she commented after the commencement.
here’s the link to this section: http://www.pressherald.com/2015/05/26/bail-for-bowdoin-college-student-accused-of-on-campus-rape-increased-to-5000/
I think it’s interesting that the young woman claims she did not say “yes” but no where does she say she said “no”…that’s probably going to be alittle difficult for the grand jury to comprehend. That’s abit of a “newish” political concept so probably unfamiliar to many as a legal prosecution other than the scene in When Harry Met Sally. The young woman, according to news articles, told the police the young man “raped” her.
I hope beyond hope that that young man does not kill himself. I’m beginning to think a bunch of our young people are seriously screwed up and have no clue what they are doing sexually - males and females.
This is the source of most of what I wrote, but there’s more detail in Jezebel. http://jezebel.com/i-am-not-a-pretty-little-liar-1705996719 For example, she doesn’t say she’s a varsity athlete, but Jezebel does. http://jezebel.com/how-to-make-an-accused-rapist-look-good-1682583526
I know I read another article… I think Emily was the source? …that had some other info, but I can’t remember where I saw it.
re post #709 by dstark:
I think the Callisto reports are just the first step in opening an investigation into whatever is alleged to have happened. Further proof (witnesses, texts, physical evidence etc) would probably also be needed for any discipline or “conviction.”
I think what the creators of Callisto are trying to overcome are the many instances of women feeling unable to tell anyone for weeks, months, even years after an assault. If you aren’t up to facing a dean or a nurse or the police, at least you can sit down in the hours afterward and write down a few sentences, which are then recorded with a time stamp to give protection from the accusations of making it all up (as jonri mentions above).
It also could be protective in the end to the accused, as long as initial reports are not allowed to be edited, but rather added onto as things are remembered or new evidence comes to light. I think of the man accused by Lena Sclove at Brown, who details in his letter to the OCR the many iterations of her story of how he assaulted her:
http://s3.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/documents/1194999/letter-to-office-for-civil-rights-usdoe-6-11-14.pdf
Eight versions of her story that get progressively more violent—version 1 (an email to Kopin 6 days later) simply accuses Kopin of “manipulation” --pretending to care for her after she was triggered by memory of harassment by a different man–to have sex with her. Her therapist tells her 100% that she was raped because he talked her into sex.
Version 3 (an official campus complaint form) he puts his hand on her neck while kissing her twice, once pushing her against a telephone pole and once on the couch—he stopped when asked.
Version 5 (Student Conduct Board hearing 2 months later) she first accuses him of choking her and squeezing her neck;
version 6 (8 months after the attack) at a press conference she claims to have been brutally raped and “strangled twice”, becoming bedridden from the resulting injury; she also claims there is another student who has been “choked and raped” by Kopin, but the other student herself disputes that, claiming he was so proper as to ask her if he could kiss her–it made her laugh. Her statement to that effect was not allowed into evidence.
version 8 (the one now taken as gospel and repeated by Sen Gillibrand) is that Kopin brutally raped Sclove while almost choking her to death, that he is a violent serial offender who should be in jail.
If Sclove had entered the first version as emailed to Kopin into Callisto, she could have added on these escalating accusations, I suppose. I don’t know if it would have bolstered her believability to do so (there is a long way between verbal manipulation (without threats) and nearly strangling someone to death while raping them).
It helps his case, I think, to be able to say–my story has not changed from day one, and hers has changed/been embellished 7 times.
Unless this is just to be read as trauma revealing itself, and version 8 was always the correct one, it just took her time to get there?
I would have a problem with the system if it allowed her to wholly erase version 1 and replace it with 2, and so on.
I find it interesting that the reporting system @bearpanther mentioned seems quite parallel to emerging best practices in reporting of academic misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, cheating, and such).