Sounds a lot like a kid who just learned that there were consequences to his actions. It is unfortunate that it took him that long to learn this simple lesson. The jury also wasn’t tasked with deciding his guilt. He already admitted to it.
“as I understand the academic freedom argument, it runs like this-academic freedom means that we give our professors and deans a great deal of latitude in expressing their opinion. To turn around now and say we have to treat them like an employee of a normal business and police their speech runs contrary to theses principles. I am not saying I agree with it, but that is the crux of the argument.”
Understood. That argument actually is faulty, since academic freedom doesn’t give someone a pass to say whatever they want. Anyone - professor or dean or college president- can be sued pursuant to civil code if they libel or defame another party. Then it’s up to the facts presented at trial and the jury’s decision. The argument that speech is somehow being policed is specious since no one is doing any such ‘policing’. Adults in this country are basically responsible for their own speech, and if you go over the line you risk getting sued.
“The first amendment argument relies on the premise that the college has a duty to “protect” the first amendment rights of its students. Under that argument, the actions taken by Oberlin vis the students should be seen as neutral. No one actually believes they are neutral of course, but this is the first time they have been called on it. I am sure that scares a lot of places.”
Understood again. The retort is that the duty to “protect” doesn’t equate to advocacy or facilitation. This is likely where Oberlin went over the line. Agree that they certainly were not neutral.
Would love to know what the bigwigs at UChicago think about this decision. They are huge proponents of freedom of expression on campus for students and respect for academic freedom for all members of the community, but I’m not aware of how they support students who opt to leave campus to demonstrate elsewhere. Have the impression that this type of activity is deemed a personal decision and the student is neither excused from class nor provided with pizza and mittens. Someone is welcome to correct or clarity with specific examples.
‘And I am not sure what you mean about other criteria? The facts here are horrible for the college. The jury got to weigh those. Quite obviously they gave every benefit of the doubt to the plaintiff. Which is their right, unquestionably. What Holmes was saying was that when you have really bad facts like those presented here, sometimes the law stretches to cover the situation and right a wrong. The danger is that the rules that get extended may then be applied to a situation where the equities aren’t quite so one sided and some entity who maybe diesn’t Deserve it will get hammered. Hence “bad facts make bad law”’
Since this was a “facts based” case, other institutions with similar facts should probably worry. Those without probably don’t need to. I don’t buy into the silly point of view that this will send a ‘chill’ through academia (for instance, what is the UChicago response?). This was a defamation suit. No new law being created or established.
I agree with almost everything @Ohiodad51 said. I’m not sure about the pressure on Oberlin to get appellate clarification though.
If I was a college wanting clarification and protection in the future I would not want it coming from this case. This case has terrible facts, and those won’t be reviewed, the appellate courts will assume the facts as determined by the jury are correct. If I was a college president I would want this case to die without setting any binding precedent.
I also stand by what I said a couple of pages ago. From a self preservation point of view, Oberlin needs this to go away. Settle for $20-30m, fire a couple of administrators, and take away any reason for anyone to keep writing news stories about this.
At the end of the YouTube video posted above, a woman approaches the cops and says “I’m from the college and you have two girls in custody…” and then the tape stops.
Clearly, the college was intervening for the arrested students immediately. I mean, the cops hadn’t even cleared the scene yet and a rep from the college was there.
Re: #199 and #200, Oberlin student publication “The Grape” wrote in Dec. 2017 about a “culture of theft.” See link below (hit right arrow to scroll to the article).
https://issuu.com/theoberlingrape/docs/december_1_2017_a7a89147e3b3ea
@#204
I stumbled across that garbage last month.
A revised code of student conduct won’t address these kinds of flaws.
If a person isn’t able to correctly distinguish between right and wrong by age 12 they lack a proper moral compass and are likely to never acquire one save for those few that successfully pass a purification by the most severe of circumstances.
I’ve heard this and similar lacs described as military institutes for social justice warriors. If this is correct there are some true believers in for a very rude awakening because character is implicit in leadership and it appears that it might be in short supply in all aspects of these institutions.
^ Well, if the lac wants the local stores being shoplifted to report to them and not to the authorities, that sounds like the problem runs a tad deeper than students lacking a proper moral compass. How much of this eggregious behavior is enabled by administrators who choose to coddle rather than correct (and who may well have their own conflicted sentiments with such “establishment” figures as police and area business-owners)? The students seem to know they can get the school to advocate for them - that really has to embolden some bad eggs.
1 Like
All aspects.
@JBStillFlying, the article you posted is enlightening. The number of Oberlin students who said they had stolen from downtown businesses not because they couldn’t afford the items but simply because they “felt like it” is astounding and disheartening.
@#208
There is a cultural disconnect between mainstream America and these lostlings.
From that tape of the day of the shoplifting, it’s pretty clear someone called ‘the college’ for that woman to be down to the store before the cop cars even left. I don’t think it was one of the women who called because they were in custody and I doubt they could use the phones. I think another student witnessing the altercation called the school and someone went running down to the store.
Really a Town v. Gown problem. And why? If the students don’t want to shop there, don’t.
There was an RA who said she was a witness in the store at the time. She’s in the 17 min. youtube posted earlier. The one who was crying and who called 911. Her statement to the police was that Allyn Gibson assaulted the Black kid. Interestingly, that was the information printed on one of the flyers in the next day or so. She may well have called the Class Dean (as the woman at the end of that other recording identified herself).
Maybe the students are told to call the school if anything happens and they need help. It would never have occurred to me to call the school if I had been arrested in town when I was in college, even when I was a freshman and lived in a dorm.
The male student was asking for his mother.
Oberlin and other such schools located in small towns that are predominantly white have a difficult time attracting people of color to come study at their colleges. It’s understandable that students may not feel comfortable in an area where they are such a minority. This is particularly the case for those students who may have lived in communities where they had friends, family, neighbors of colors.
These schools do what they can to give such students support. I don’t fault the school for that. What happened here is that the school did not stop and take a long hard look at the situation and started a town/gown problem. From the comments exchanged between the storekeeper and the police officer, there likely was friction already and the shoplifting incident exacerbated it.
My take on this case is that advocates for minorities at the school went too far, and couldn’t see the facts for the social justice goals they wanted to reach. Black kid being harassed by white business. Perhaps there were murmurs if feeling like they were being watched more carefully, that they stood out in the town and that they were not welcome. The problem here is that the young man did steal something from the store. Whoever from the school witnessed what happened next, which was the store employee tacking the black student, came to the conclusion that the student was being wrongfully targeted and accused. I have no idea how the other two students were involved in the case. Apparently, they were more involved than merely seeing a friend being attacked and coming to his rescue. All three students involved in the altercation pleaded guilty and admitted wrongdoing. They did do with counsel representing them, courtesy of the school and supporters of the school.
It all went too far on the part of the school. Now they are paying dearly for this. Even if there is a settlement, it’s likely to high one, given where the numbers are right now.
I attended a small, nurturing LAC, but the few kids we knew who could depend on their “grownups” to bail them out of trouble were considered spoiled by most everyone else. And the college certainly wouldn’t have stretched out a hand LOL. They supported the students in many ways, but not in underwriting criminal activity. Interestingly, those spoiled kids weren’t necessarily “rich”. But they did have a sense of entitlement. I saw this again in grad school when someone was credibly accused of cheating. Wow - did that family lawyer up but quick. Probably had someone on call just for the purpose.
I wonder to what extent Oberlin enables a sense of entitlement among its student body by acting like the indulgent “grownup” when someone runs afoul of the law. And if that kid was asking for his mother, it’s possible that she’s part of the problem as well. My own parents would have been mortified and I’m pretty sure that would have been my final semester at private college. The LAST thing I would have done is cried for my mommy.
Oberlin Ohio is about 15% black. Oberlin College is well under 10% black. The problem does not lie with the demographics of the town.
@cptofthehouse - the point about a minority student possibly feeling out of place makes sense. However, as @Sue22 has pointed out already, the area around the college is a little more than 15% black (higher than the national average though not by much). More importantly, the faculty and administration seem exceptionally diverse both ethnically and racially, the students seem to have each others’ backs despite the small minority population, students of color are given special consideration and support to help them on campus and, of course, they are attending a pretty selective LAC and were presumably chosen for their brains, leadership potential, and other attributes that one would think could help them rise above any personal discomfort from “feeling out of place.” And feeling a bit out of place is not a unique experience to certain demographics - everyone in college should be feeling that about SOMETHING. It suggests that the student isn’t content with the comfortable but is stretching and challenging him/herself. No one is forcing anyone to attend Oberlin.
If the school is working to quash all feelings of discomfort, then they are helicoptering in a particularly destructive manner.
After reading up on the testimonies, it really bothered me that the Dean of Students, Raimondo, has weaponized the student. The fact that she can “unleashed the students” is very disturbing. I am about to send my daughter to college to learn, and not be a potential pawn.
@#212 & @#214
That whole crying for your mommy thing isn’t going to enhance your street credibility one bit (a particularly necessary resource if you actually do end up attending “grad school”).
Don’t know their personal demographics but there are many minority majority communities where opportunities for extensive contact with those who are of a dissimilar race are quite limited.
My derision at the quality of the detainee behavior is based on having personally witnessed many hardcore junior high aged kids latched up, trying to kick the rear window out of a squad car after having given multiple adults a fairly competitive contest in trying to apprehend and restraint them. The whining and crying depicted in the video is antithetical to the comportment and generally philosophical nature of those groups regarded as oppressed (of all stripes).
I’ve been following this for a while and continue to be chagrined at the lack of attention that the at least 4th assailant receives. Was he a local? A non student? A different race? Someone’s son? Inquiring minds want to know.
The video testimony of the witnesses in describing an alternative universe reality of the 4 assailants striking a recumbent store clerk is humorous. In predation, packs act with unity exhibiting no compassion or remorse.
Were the witnesses mistaken about a 4th assailant? Did the Gibson’s mention this person? Admit to being ignorant as to the presence of a 4th who simply must have fled the scene. And the students didn’t seem to be all that inclined to cooperate with the investigation or volunteer accurate information.