https://www.chicagomaroon.com/article/2018/6/2/delta-upsilon-faces-allegations-drugging-female-st/
Gotta love a system based on self-policing.
"When contacted by phone, third-year Peter Simotas, the president of DU at UChicago, would not comment on the allegations and referred The Maroon back to the international organization.
When asked why the chapter didn’t report the allegations to the international organization, Simotas said, ‘I’m going to go now’ and hung up the phone."
What a look!
^^ That question by the Maroon was so loaded it was oozing out the sides. There’s no response other than to hang up. Regardless of culpability or knowledge of the situation.
This is a new low for the Maroon. The allegations are way too serious to warrant a game of “Whisper Down the Lane” or “Gotcha” and that’s not how decent journalism works anyway. Either they should adhere to minimum standards - a coherent explanation of the charges, credible witnesses and facts that are actually cross-checked and verified would be a good start - or they should retract the article, apologize and resign for incompetence and/or malfeasance.
By the way: 1) “Testing positive for Xanax” is very easy even if the drug has been in your system for several days. So a “positive test” isn’t an indication of anything other than that someone took Xanax at some point - not an uncommon occurrence at a university. 2) This story sounds like a copy-cat of a similar set of incidents at Rutgers from last fall; incidentally, those were much better reported.
“That question by the Maroon was so loaded it was oozing out the sides. There’s no response other than to hang up.”
I think many frats would give an unequivocal, “That is not true,” if they were innocent.
@Muchtolearn: imbedded in the question was the opposite assumption so it was an attempt to trick them into (more?) hot water. BTW, here is the update:
‘Delta Upsilon’s executive director told us last week the fraternity “has yet to receive reports of misconduct from alleged victims, witnesses, the university or authorities.” He said, “No disciplinary action has been taken at this time.”’
If this is a nothingburger the Maroon is going to look pretty stupid.
Where was this? My Google-fu is weak, so I couldn’t find anything to that effect.
Never mind - found it in the Maroon’s newsletter.
Here’s the full update.
The frat’s statement specifically talks about DU as an organization. It says nothing about whether specific members of DU have been contacted by any of the above parties in any form other than a formal report.
Here’s what someone told the Maroon last week, in their original article (https://www.chicagomaroon.com/article/2018/6/2/delta-upsilon-faces-allegations-drugging-female-st/):
So people in DU are definitely aware of these claims - with or without a formal report/investigation.
The Maroon is reporting the allegations as allegations, not gospel truth. A student newspaper is not a court of law, and researchers estimate 92-98% of rape allegations (different crime but similar context) are true.
Source: https://www.vox.com/2015/6/1/8687479/lie-rape-statistics)
@DunBoyer just imagine if you were falsely accused of rape and that was reported by the Maroon. Even if it happenss only at a 5% rate (as the article suggests) it would ruin your college life if not your entire life. These allegations need to be tried in the Justice system not the paper. They are just too serious.
@CU123 " just imagine if you were falsely accused of rape and that was reported by the Maroon. Even if it happenss only at a 5% rate (as the article suggests) it would ruin your college life if not your entire life. These allegations need to be tried in the Justice system not the paper. They are just too serious."
I agree with you. It’s a frightening world in which to raise a boy these days. I worry for this generation of boys - for every true allegation that ruins lives, I’m sure there are multiple false allegations that destroy many more
@DunBoyer if the Maroon would raise their reporting standards to the level of Vox this thread would have gone in a different direction.
“So people in DU are definitely aware of these claims - with or without a formal report/investigation.”
Oh? Based on an unverified third party accounting that came in AFTER the presses were rolling on this “news”? That’s called a tip, not a reportable source. No one needs gospel truth. Some basic fact-checking would be sufficient.
“The frat’s statement specifically talks about DU as an organization. It says nothing about whether specific members of DU have been contacted by any of the above parties in any form other than a formal report.”
True - in other words, the Maroon knows nothing. Either they have no ability to crack the story open or they are persisting in something w/o any truth to it and exposing themselves to a potential libel suit down the road (they did, after all, publish the name of the frat. We know how that worked out for Rolling Stone and that incident actually had a specific “victim”).
Is the Maroon in the business of treating potential criminal activity on the same level as campus gossip about courses, new majors or administrative changes? If a bartender at Jimmy’s were drugging and assaulting its customers would there be the same unsubstantiated vagueries? Thought not.
It needn’t be pointed out - again - that “testing positive for Xanax” is missing a few connecting dots. A sizable number on campus probably tests positive for Xanax.
Meaning no disrespect, reporting allegations about an incident at a fraternity is very different from singling out an individual using their name or identifying information. It is fairly difficult to recognize DU members at a glance, to say nothing of harassing the entire fraternity. And a person with no inside knowledge can’t tell who the alleged perpetrator(s) are on the basis of this article.
A focus on the risks to the perps also overlooks the benefits of generalized reports, stripped of personally identifiable information. Letting people know about an incident can help other students be aware of a continuing risk. The university itself sends “security alerts” to the student body about some incidents on campus, for much the same reason. One very recent and utterly terrifying case involved a student falling asleep in their dorm room and waking up to someone sexually assaulting them. The university sent a campus-wide e-mail, with information about the incident (including the dorm involved), within hours of that report. It didn’t produce a campaign of harassment against the entire dorm.
DU seemingly knew about the allegations reported in the Maroon, but suspended social events only after they learned the Maroon was investigating. If the Maroon had kept quiet, it’s possible they would still be throwing parties. The statistics suggest there is at worst an 8% chance the Maroon is slandering DU’s good name (lol), and a 92% chance they warned other students about a serious risk at the fraternity’s events.
So while reports with personally identifiable information about an individual would open up a massive can of worms, I’m not feeling a lot of righteous outrage over the Maroon’s approach in this case.
“Meaning no disrespect, reporting allegations about an incident at a fraternity is very different from singling out an individual using their name or identifying information. It is fairly difficult to recognize DU members at a glance, to say nothing of harassing the entire fraternity. And a person with no inside knowledge can’t tell who the alleged perpetrator(s) are on the basis of this article.”
Willing to say that to the members of Phi Kappa Psi at UVA?
“A focus on the risks to the perps also overlooks the benefits of generalized reports, stripped of personally identifiable information.”
- Um, the frat has been named. That's identifiable.
“Letting people know about an incident can help other students be aware of a continuing risk. The university itself sends “security alerts” to the student body about some incidents on campus, for much the same reason. One very recent and utterly terrifying case involved a student falling asleep in their dorm room and waking up to someone sexually assaulting them. The university sent a campus-wide e-mail, with information about the incident (including the dorm involved), within hours of that report.”
- Sure - that makes sense. If there's an actual victim who has reported the incident to the university. Has that happened here?
“DU seemingly knew about the allegations reported in the Maroon, but suspended social events only after this article was published.”
- well yes. If you were accused of the same, how many would want to come to your parties? Even if you were innocent.
“If the Maroon had kept quiet, it’s possible they would still be throwing parties.”
- No response to this other than that you are suggesting the Maroon's intent is to shut down parties at the frat. The underlying motive might be for a variety of reasons, including plain old malice. Is that the purpose of the Maroon?
“The statistics suggest there is at worst an 8% chance the Maroon is slandering DU’s good name (lol), and a 92% chance they warned other students about a serious risk at the fraternity’s events.”
- Weren't these "rumors" already widely spread around the campus? What "good", exactly, has the Maroon done in this, other than to validate its role as a potential smear-monger?
Does an effect of publishing an article need to have anything to do with the primary motivation?
The Maroon informed the public in the way editors deemed most appropriate, and that seems to have had an effect on DU’s behavior.
They reported the allegations as allegations, not gospel truth. I’d pay good money to be a fly on the wall if DU sues, alleging libel.
“Does an effect of publishing an article need to have anything to do with the primary motivation?”
Not if there are enough facts. In this case there doesn’t seem to be any. Publishing a lie is a serious matter. Most good journals - including those run by presumably bright undergrads - try to avoid going down that path.
“The Maroon informed the public in the way editors deemed most appropriate, and that seems to have had an effect on DU’s behavior.”
- Publishing anything - whether it be a lie or not - is going to impact behavior. That's why responsible editors make responsible decisions. The point of view on this thread is that they were and did anything but.
“I’d pay good money to be a fly on the wall if DU sues, alleging libel.”
- You wouldn't need to. It would be public news, although not sure that the Maroon itself would be on the story.
@DunBoyer not quite, how about someone prints that there is a rapist in your House, without identifying anyone, you would unfairly come under suspicion and I suspect you wouldn’t like it.
Funny you should bring up that hypothetical, because it closely resembles the recent experience of a group I’m part of. A former student assaulted at least half a dozen people. The College took nearly two years to do anything with a great deal of evidence from multiple reports, and several people were harmed during that time. The group at large had no clue anything was wrong for most of that time span. Eventually, one survivor warned anyone who regularly interacted with said group - giving as many details as they could offer without sparking a confrontation or harassment by the perpetrator. Which is to say, relatively few.
I don’t know what suspicions people may or may not have harbored about me in the months before the perpetrator was named, and frankly I could care less. Knowing a sexual assault had happened, and we never had a clue, helped the group take some concrete steps to prevent such issues going forward and made individual members far more vigilant about this particular risk. I regret only two things. First, that anyone was assaulted at all, and second, that what little information we had for months didn’t come out earlier.
Specific Maroon articles don’t have the force of the law behind them, or even the imprimatur of university officials, and we shouldn’t pretend they do. Lower stakes mean a lower standard of evidence. Publishing this was probably not the easiest decision the paper has faced, but not publishing carried its own set of risks. I tend to favor publication, because not being sexually assaulted is a tad more vital to most people’s well-being than not being the subject of rumors - even when the allegations are as ugly as they are in this case.
In the context of allegations that are true in 92-98% of cases, the presumption of innocence applies to legal proceedings (for good reason). Newspapers still report on allegations before a verdict is reached all the time.
I know characterizing students as a giant hive mind is trendy, but we aren’t completely blind to the difference between a documented fact and a claim.
@DunBoyer what facts do you personally have about this case that make you morally certain that these rumors should be published? Are you saying that there’s a lot more to the story than what’s been written? If so what’s the holdback?
Or are you just pretty sure that the boys of DU would do this sort of thing because that’s the sort they are?
It would be helpful to get some insight into your willingness for such vague accusatory information to be officially published w/o a credible complaint having been opened (that we know of).
There are two competing interests in this case: informing potential targets of these allegations, and preserving DU’s reputation.
Report this story when everyone involved is innocent, and DU needs to cancel a mixer and face a few months of scrutiny. Unless something keeps this story in the news, DU brothers won’t be pariahs any more than the Fiji brothers whose ill-advised party made national news are pariahs. The Maroon hasn’t named any names, and people don’t just wake up in the morning thinking “time to smear someone innocent.” Unless these allegations lead to formal charges, most people on campus will move on.
Keep quiet when a brother is guilty, and people will continue going to DU events - where someone who’s tried drugging multiple students will presumably be in attendance. The majority of sexual assaults are carried out by a small number of repeat offenders. If one assault, or attempted assault, has taken place, there’s a good chance another will follow.
My personal opinion is that almost no amount of damage to the reputation of a fraternity should outweigh a significant risk that someone will be sexually assaulted. I might not have said this a few years ago, but I’m tired of people I care about being hurt as a result of sexual assaults that might have been prevented - not by the survivors, but by the institutional actors that are supposed to keep them safe.
The Maroon is not going to publish information that could identify its sources, so stories like this are rarely cut-and-dry for outside observers. The overall statistics tell us very few people make false accusations of this nature. People I know have had very concerning experiences with some DU brothers, which might be one-off incidents or might be part of a larger pattern. In the absence of information to the contrary, I’m assuming these allegations are credible, because I’m not a judge and this isn’t a courtroom.
I don’t think either of us is going to convince the other, so I’m going to leave it at that.
Here’s a little thought experiment: A certain fraternity on campus has developed something of a sketchy reputation. Various women have found themselves doing things they didn’t like doing at parties there. Some think they may have been drugged, but no one ever got a drug test. A few people have complained to the university’s sex police, but their stories were not clear enough to take any action. Some other women think that it’s fun and edgy there, sexy and a little dangerous. They have gone and willingly participated in hijinks. But they understand it’s not for everyone. The latter group is smaller than the former group. And still other women just automatically avoid anything to do with fraternities, without distinguishing among them.
As a result, the fraternity has had trouble attracting older women to its parties, besides the small group of core partisans. So it concentrates on getting freshman women to attend, women who are not yet plugged in to the gossip network.
Your daughter is a sophomore at this university. She has heard the rumors. But she likes parties. She wonders, should she go to a party at this frat? What do you tell her? Do you tell her those rumors are unsubstantiated, and she has a civic duty to disregard them? That she shouldn’t condemn a group of men she doesn’t know personally solely on the basis of their association with a club about which she has heard some vague bad things?
Your daughter is a brand-new freshman at this university. She is anxious to know what college parties are like, and to meet guys who are more interesting than the guys in her high school class. Do you hope someone lets her in on the rumors? Why not the student newspaper? Because the New York Times wouldn’t do that?
@JBStillFlying “It’s a frightening world in which to raise a boy these days. I worry for this generation of boys - for every true allegation that ruins lives, I’m sure there are multiple false allegations that destroy many more.”
I would think that is a FAR more frightening world to raise a GIRL nowadays. Many of these individuals face harassment.and one in five women have experienced some sort of sexual assault during their lifetime.
Your statement is just statistically not accurate.Only 2% of sexual assault allegations are determined to be false… the same as other felonies. That means a whopping 98%`of them are true. And that is among cases that are actually reported… 40 percent of cases aren’t even reported due to fears of retribution or harassment from the perpetrator.
Let’s think about this logically for a moment. For what possible reason would someone have the strong urge to report a false allegation that they would have to face harassment, interrogation by law enforcement officials, hearings and court cases that often don’t’ go anywhere (think: Brock Turner), and disbelief by the mass public that such a “perfect individual” actually committed such a crime. (Think: Bill Cosby, Morgan Freeman)They face enormous hurdles even to get to the point of investigation. It would be highly unlikely and statements like that help perpetrate the myth that there are all these false allegations and people trying to get you out there. and to not believe the people that actually experience assault… which statistically just is simply not true.