“Richmond’s Brock Turner admitted to school officials, three separate times, that he heard me say stop. Those officials later told a hearing board they thought he was confused when he told them that. No one denied, however, that he penetrated me without my consent. But for Richmond, their Brock Turner having an orgasm was of utmost importance. I was told that it was reasonable for him to penetrate me for a few more minutes if he was going to finish. The University of Richmond and Brock Turner’s father seemed to agree- why let a few minutes of “action” jeopardize the rest of the accused’s life?”
And this from a different student on a different assault at the same school:
" I came forward to inspire change in a process that is systematically designed to fail survivors. I learned a long time ago that a rapist’s privacy is more important than my life. It makes it hard for survivors to come forward; talking about our experiences forces us to stand public trial for the crimes committed against us by men we aren’t legally allowed to name. Telling your story is painting a target sign on your own back in the hopes that your sacrifice might save another victim, even though you know you will be defamed and degraded every step of the way."
There was a report of a similar event from UNC this week, so it’s not unique to UR. I have so much admiration for these young women, but I have so much despair of a culture which gives athletes carte blanche ever changing.
I have read these and it it is very disturbing. I’m upset at the continued problem as well as the specific prevalence on certain campuses. I would love to know if Richmond students feel that their administrators really are turning their back on sexual assaults as I have relatives planning to apply.
The Richmond student newspaper has been covering the story. Here’s one of several articles about the administration’s response. They call one student’s version of events “inaccurate,” but because of privacy concerns, they can’t publish any contrary accounts. We probably won’t hear both sides unless there is a lawsuit.
I don’t like how they called this person “Richmond’s Brock Turner.” It would be very easy to misread this as saying that Brock Turner was involved in other incidents beyond the Stanford one.
Hearing this from the press conference at UNC today sickens me to no end-
“I did everything a rape victim is supposed to do,” Robinson told reporters at a press conference. “I reported it. I allowed the rape kit to be taken. I gave a statement. I cooperated with law enforcement and the Title IX office. But six months later the University has done nothing,” she continued. “I’m taking this public stand not for me, but for the other students on campus who are not protected, despite what the University tells us. I love this University. It’s my home. I plan on graduating. But I expect the University to fulfill its promises to me and to all students.”
Robinson’s attorney, Denise Branch, said that in an email, the UNC Department of Public Safety claimed they didn’t have enough evidence to support criminal charges. Branch said her client went to the hospital the night of the alleged incident and allowed the hospital to examine her and get all the required evidence for a rape kit. Branch stated that the physical exam showed blunt force trauma to Robinson’s genitals as well as bruising to her neck." http://abc11.com/news/unc-student-claims-rape;-football-player-suspended/1509665/
…THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE! The bruises to her neck were not small…
How is this allowed to happen still??
and since when is this (according to Orange County DA Jim Woodall) the standard?
“You never want someone accused unless there’s proof beyond a reasonable doubt- not just proof that something occurred- but proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime occurred.”
Isn’t that what a jury or grand jury is for… to decide if there is enough evidence to go to trial and let the jury decide if its beyond a reasonable doubt?
@runswimyoga: I can’t see any basis for the DA to say there’s insufficient evidence there. This looks like a clear failure of prosecutorial discretion.
By contrast, I am not at all surprised that UNC flubbed its own investigation. Universities are bad at this all around.
Delaney Robinson is in very good hands with Denise Branch as her counsel – she doesn’t mess around. Apparently once the prosecutors said they weren’t going to pursue charges, Branch filed a “self-sworn warrant” on behalf of her client and had a warrant issued for Artis’s arrest. He turned himself in and is out on $5000 bail. Think this might be something particular to North Carolina law – but it seemed to be effective in this case. Maybe someone familiar with North Carolina law can comment on exactly how this works and where they go from here.
LOL @Demosthenes49 as compared to what? The court in Santa Clara County, California?
@HarvestMoon1: I think you mean the Santa Clara Police Department, since courts don’t do any investigating. In which case, yes, compared to them. You may think Turner’s sentence was too low (I do), but he was properly investigated, brought to trial, and convicted.
I was addressing “Universities are bad at this all around” – I think courts are bad at this all around. You can have all the proper investigations, trials and convictions in the world but still end up like we did in Santa Clara. That’s just an inherently bad system. Always something working against the victim.
@HarvestMoon1: Courts may screw up from time to time, but they’re still leaps and bounds better than Universities. Even in the example you gave, the error only happened after everything else worked properly.
@Demosthenes think of how few sexual assault cases are ever prosecuted – the vast, vast majority of them don’t ever get anywhere near a courtroom. Delaney Robinson just had to file a self-sworn warrant to get some movement on her case. Ridiculous. And all those unprocessed rape kits. Let’s not pretend they do a good job processing/investigating sexual assault cases. They just don’t.
With the college tribunals at least they are guaranteed an investigation and often a hearing results from that investigation. It’s something – more than they are getting in our judicial system right now.
@HarvestMoon1: I’ve already said I thought the UNC case was a failure of prosecutorial discretion. As someone who has handled sexual assault cases, they are generally very hard to bring. I’m sure police bias doesn’t help, but to characterize that as the main issue is to not understand how courts work.
Rape kits are mostly a red herring. Most sex assault cases turn on consent, not the fact of sex. Rape kits only prove the latter, not the former, and so aren’t all that useful. To the extent we use them, I agree we should process them more quickly.
College tribunals generate unfair hearings that don’t help anyone. It’s not “something” for the accuser to have a wrong caused to the accused. It’s only justice if it’s done properly.
@Demosthenes49: Rape kits do a lot more than simply show “the fact of sex.” They are a head to toe exam that can show signs of force or trauma --and that is certainly relevant in evaluating the issue of consent.
I agree that police bias is a factor and many departments acknowledge that problem. But change comes slow as we can see by the alleged statement of “don’t sweat it” made to the accused in the Delaney Robinson case.
I disagree with your generalization that the tribunals generate unfair hearings and I do think they have provided many sexual assault victims with a forum to hear their case. Something that is very hard to achieve in our judicial system.
@HarvestMoon1: Cases like the UNC case, where there was bruising on her neck that would provide evidence for the lack of consent, are the exception. Most rape cases deal with acquaintances and commonly involve alcohol. These cases come down to consent. Rape kits tend to be less useful in those cases because the presence of fluids is not contested and trauma, to the extent it’s there, is consistent with both stories.
The point of tribunals is not to give accusers a forum. The point of a tribunal is to determine the guilt of the accused. Universities suffer from massive institutional and systemic shortcomings that categorically prevent them from being good at investigating or adjudicating sexual assault. The current judicial system has its issues, to be sure, but the solution is not to create extra-judicial kangaroo courts.
You appear to be parroting Wendy Murphy at this point – and even she is on record stating our legal system is atrociously bad at providing any sort of justice for sexual assault victims.
Rape kits do formally document trauma/force which can have a direct bearing on consent. And in both stranger and acquaintance rape the kit results are important to maintain the integrity of the CODIS system. In stranger cases you may be able to identify the rapist and in acquaintance cases you may determine if there were previous offenses. Not processing these kits is basically saying what happened is not important enough to follow through and do the testing. Simply unacceptable.
The college tribunal system consists of much more than just a hearing that determines the guilt or innocense of the accused. And it’s purpose is pretty clearly set forth in the DCL. The system’s purpose is to make sure that sexual assault/harassment does not interfere with a students’ right to receive an education. If you don’t like the way the hearings are being conducted then make suggestions on how to improve the process. Although from what I can see they are not conducted much differently than college hearings dealing with battery, drugs or other offenses they adjudicate. All of which have comparable possible penalties.
Safe to assume Orange County (NC) DA Jim Woodall and ADA Jeff Nieman fully in the tank protecting UNC athletes/athletic department. No (zero) convictions to date for UNC staff for over two decades of widespread fake and no show classes for athletes. Per UNC’s own Wainstein Report - teachers paid for hundreds of independent studies for athletes they never taught and graded no work for, forged signatures on grade changes, false statements to SACS, NCAA, DPS, falsification and destruction of state official records, witness intimidation and tampering, …
The courts are rapidly addressing the short comings of college “trials.” This is an expensive method of ensuring that colleges are not working outside legal bounds. More states are requiring colleges to work more closely with local police. This is as it should be. Most people here know that I am firmly on the side that colleges shouldn’t be doing this at all and if we need to “fix” something like more cases getting to a court and jury our efforts should be directed to this but that will also require changing accusers attitudes about the judicial system.
@HarvestMoon1: I’m not familiar with Wendy Murphy, but a bit of quick googling suggests she’s on the opposite side of this issue from me. She wants more involvement of schools in sex case investigations. I want less.
Regarding rape kits, I think we may be talking past each other. I agree that rape kits document signs of physical trauma. I also agree that they are useful in stranger rape cases for identifying people. What I said was that most cases are acquaintance cases (not stranger cases) and these cases usually turn on consent. Rape kits are generally of little value in determining consent because rape usually does not involve much physical trauma (beyond that associated with sex generally). So, while rape kits definitely have their uses, blaming them for the difficulty in prosecuting rape cases really misses the point.
There is no way to improve the process at universities because universities have inherent problems. They don’t have subpoena power and therefore cannot compel evidence or witnesses. They serve a dual role as investigator/adjudicator and therefore have internal partiality. They have financial conflicts of interest in avoiding OCR investigations. They have no rigorous training program in either investigations or adjudications–not surprising because the people we train to do those things are called “police” and “courts.” They have no good oversight because the scope of review in an actual court is usually narrow.
I think it’s disgraceful that rape kits went untested however, the as pointed out the “unknown assailant” rape is a much smaller percentage of total accusations at rape. It is pointed out time and again that most accusers know the person they are accusing. And to echo Demmosthenes, rape exams will only benefit the accuser in cases of forceful assault.There will never be any excuse or justification for rape or for the failure to investigate it, however there is simply no way you can convict someone today in the absence of proof or evidence and there will not be an increase in successful prosecutions without the understanding in the public that like murder there are degrees of sexual assault…not everything is rape in the sense of the word that is generally understood.
Even if a massive re-education of the public to occur where the types of activities that today’s feminists are “calling” rape: unwanted touching, two people naked in bed, but one does not consent to sex, two drunk people with questionable memories and a multitude of ingrained value beliefs we have, I highly doubt we would ever as a society get to a point where we jail people and throw away the key with zero evidence and zero collaborating testimony or eye-witnesses. None of which has to do and yet everything to do with why colleges are failing miserably at trying to figure this out.
The UNC guy turned himself in on two misdemeanor charges so we will find out how strong the prosecution case really is. Investigators are still trying to determine if there are any applicable felony charges pending the toxicology report on the accuser who is basing her claim on incapacitation. In North Carolina incapacitation is defined as a state beyond intoxication, impaired judgment, or drunkenness. So perhaps the evidence and corroboration in this case will be her BAC and the rape kit will corroborate the force. A magistrate issued an arrest warrant .The warrant says sex occured while she was “mentally incapacitated and physically helpless.” It is unknown how the self-sworn summons approach will impact the ongoing investigation. She did everything she is supposed to, now it’s the judicial system’s obligation to determine what degree if any criminal actually happened.