<p>
I would like to know how many convictions there have been, ever, of men for rape in this fact pattern. Well, there have probably been convictions where the boy was black and the girl was white.</p>
<p>Again, the absurdity here is using the same highly loaded term, “rape,” for things that are not the same. Question: if two boys get drunk and have sex, are they *both *rapists? How about two girls?</p>
<p>@Hunt, Good question. And this goes back to earlier post on the question of “Who is raping whom?”</p>
<p>To understand the legal responsibility colleges have for dealing with sexual assault as imposed by the Federal government, take some time to read this lengthy guidance issued last month by the Office for Civil Rights, US Department of Education:</p>
<p>[Dear</a> Colleague Letter from Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Russlynn Ali.-- Pg 1](<a href=“http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.html]Dear”>Dear Colleague Letter from Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Russlynn Ali.-- Pg 1)</p>
<p>That’s a pretty interesting document, tsdad. I will just note that although it talks about “preventing” sexual violence, it is almost entirely focused on enhancing reporting and punishment of sexual violence. I suppose that’s because it’s difficult to insist that colleges do the one thing that would actually reduce the most typical kind of sexual assaults–strictly limit drinking.</p>
<p>Hunt, what schools and our society has done is not limit drinking, but go for zero tolerance for 18-21 and drive underground. I think that is a mistake. We have taken away any adult supervision, any adults who could be held responsible. </p>
<p>I like the approach of the Dartmouth sororities – telling the frats where they know are problems to cut it out.</p>
<p>“Again, the absurdity here is using the same highly loaded term, “rape,” for things that are not the same.”</p>
<p>No, it is not absurd. There is another crime, called “aggravated rape” that covers rape at knife point, etc.</p>
<p>“Rape” implies force. I don’t believe that sex between two drunk people necessarily involves force. I certainly understand the idea that a drunk person can’t legally consent, but I don’t understand the idea that another drunk person has committed a crime that involves intent.</p>
<p>It seems to me that one problematic element here is that in this situation, a criminal act looks very much like extremely common non-criminal acts. (That is, if both are sober, or a little drunk–no crime if the sex is consensual; but if the victim or both are drunk enough, it’s a crime–even if what they say and do is the same in both situations.) This leads to virtually impossible proof problems. When somebody steals your bike, you rarely have to deal with the defense that he claims you gave it to him. In these sex cases, that defense is plausible, and in fact happens all the time.</p>
<p>And here’s a thought question for you: if two people, regardless of gender, get drunk and engage in sexual activities that do not include “penetration,” are both guily of sexual battery, or sexual assault, or attempted sexual assault, or some other crime. If not, why not?</p>
<p>That’s what juries are for. Prosecutors are pretty good about avoiding simple “he said, she said” cases. It’s a crime if one party is incapacitated to the point where consent may not be given. Good thing too - because that is precisely the condition under which those who use date-rape drugs are prosecuted.</p>
<p>Cases involving date-rape drugs–even suspected cases–are a very small percentage even of unreported cases. The great bulk of cases involve incapacitation due to voluntarily ingested alcohol and drugs.</p>
<p>And saying juries can deal with it is OK, but I think there’s a real problem with pretending that the big problem is sexual aggression by men, when a much bigger problem is substance abuse by both sexes.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I agree. Politicians can set up laws to try to regulate behavior to win votes but juries are the check for reasonableness. A good example is the Kerrigan case (brother of skater Nancy Kerrigan was prosecuted for murder for their father who had a subsequent heart attack). Prosecutors wanted the big win but it didn’t make any sense and the returned a not guilty on the murder charge. He was found guilty of assault though but I’m guessing that he will get probation on that one.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The Attorney General of Connecticut prosecuted a rape case where the woman came forward some 25 years after the purported event after a “recovered memories” session. They guy was arrested, etc. even though there was never going to be a conviction. There was no evidence - only her story. The guy was an outstanding citizen and he gave his version of the story. The AG only did it for political points I guess.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I imagine that there are additional crimes when drugs are involved. Kidnapping, poisoning, etc.</p>
<p>It’s an oversimplification of the system to say that juries need to sort it out. The vast majority of crimes of all types don’t ever reach a jury (and the court system could not begin to handle trials in even 50% of charged cases). Most of the time, it’s in the interest of both prosecution and defense not to get to the jury. So in practice, 98% of the time, prosecutors have to sort it out.</p>
<p>I think there are two problems, and I wouldn’t want to rank them. It’s a long time ago, but I remember enough dorm room conversation to know that there were more than a few of my classmates who talked as if they were sexual predators (and talk is cheap - so I expect that the number who acted upon it was much smaller), and planned to use alcohol as part of their predatory behavior. It would not surprise me at all to find out that one of eight (or one out of twelve) male students engaged at least once in rape, attempted rape, forcible sexual assault, or sexual assault during their on-campus years. And may never have done it again after graduation (or after the first time on campus). That doesn’t matter either - the number of serial rapists (etc.) is relatively small, either on or off campus. I DON’T think the numbers represented in the NCJRS report are exaggerated.</p>
<p>In our state, a study by the Attorney General suggested that for every registered sex offender, there are between 110-125 other sex offenders in the community.</p>
<p>Speaking of the Jury system, how many of us really trust the system? I have been in the jury selection process while living in CA. Most of these candidates were not educated and held no jobs. Folks who are holding jobs mostly will do anything to get out of the jury duty. That is why we get what we get in the infamous OJ Simpson case.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That’s the system that we have today.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The problem is that some prosecutors believe that it’s more important
to win than to seek justice and they have the resources of the state
behind them. It is basically the amount of money you can raise for
legal defense that gives you a bargaining chip against prosecutors
with the “win at all costs” mentality.</p>
<p>Take a look at the results of the Innocence Project and you can see
what can happen to those without access to good legal representation.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>You must have run in vastly different circles; I don’t know anyone
who has ever even talked this way.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Well, you haven’t put forth the study and it’s pretty easy to see
all sorts of problems with such a study. The Criminal Justice system
often seems very concerned for the well-being, propagation of and
enrichment of the Criminal Justice system.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Would you rather err on the side of putting away an innocent person or err on the
side of not putting away a guilty person?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ironically, the frat where the precipitating incident occurred is known as the low-key “nice guy” frat, not a place where there are known problems. There ARE frats that have the reputation for bad behavior, but many girls continue to flock to them because they are “A-side” athlete-heavy houses with perceived social status. Hopefully this policy will result in more girls growing a backbone.</p>
<p>The sororities are saying that they will withdraw their presence if someone claims that some kind of assault took place unless the house immediately initiates an adjudication process against the brother. This is, of course, completely one-sided: does a fraternity ban all members of a sorority from their house when a sorority member pours a drink on a brother, unless the incident is investigated by the sorority? I suppose that they could put in place such a policy. It might be better if all of the greek and non-greek organizations–male, female, and coed–came together and established a unified code of conduct when guests in each other’s houses, with a similar consequence if incidents are not addressed.</p>
<p>Better yet, cut back on the binge drinking–plenty of which goes on in dorms across the nation, as well as greek houses.</p>
<p>“That’s the system that we have today.”</p>
<p>But that’s my point – it isn’t. In the system we have today, juries do not get to sort it out. If you just looked at the law on the books, you’d think juries have a big role to play. They play no role whatsoever in the vast majority of rape cases.</p>
<p>“The problem is that some prosecutors believe that it’s more important
to win than to seek justice and they have the resources of the state
behind them. It is basically the amount of money you can raise for
legal defense that gives you a bargaining chip against prosecutors
with the “win at all costs” mentality.”</p>
<p>Yes, that is A problem in some jurisdictions, but a lot of what we’re talking about here is the opposite – prosecutors not pursuing rape cases because they are so difficult to prove that even a phone-it-in cheap lawyer could get an acquittal. How do we deter those kinds of rapes when it’s so difficult to punish offenders?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>If you’re innocent and you have the $$$ to take it to a trial, then the juries do get to sort it out unless the prosecution realizes this and drops the charges.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That’s a general crime problem.</p>
<p>The only answer I see personally is to make yourself less likely to be a victim.</p>
<p>
Me neither–but perhaps we are the ones with an unrealistic view of the typical college boy.</p>
<p>Another thing that makes me uncomfortable about this is the role–at least historically–of race in rape allegations. *To Kill A Mockingbird *was fiction, but it wasn’t fantasy.</p>
<p>And another thing–while I agree that very few of these gray area cases will ever be prosecuted, much less make it to a jury, colleges are being pushed to take disciplinary action even if there is no legal prosecution, and they are being pushed to use a preponderance of the evidence standard in deciding sexual harassment cases–and of course, they don’t typically use the jury system and other protections of the legal system. For a student to be disciplined by his college for sexual assault or harassment can have dire consequences for him, even if it doesn’t include jail time.</p>
<p>BCEagle & Hunt - When in college, you NEVER heard guys talking about how it’s so much easier to get laid if you get her drunk first? Really?!?? Or joked that “Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker”?</p>
<p>Tell me another one.</p>