<p>re: 217 coase, I was speaking specifically about the media in the paragraphs you lifted the sentence from, I apologize if that was unclear to you in that post. I was speaking of what society is ‘told’ and exposed to through the media…not my personal beliefs. Out of context that one sentence does not express a general viewpoint. </p>
<p>Thank you sabaray, poet and i come at things I believe because of our day to day lives. I happen to be in communications, PR and marketing so I tend to analyze things through that filter even when we’re discussing highly emotional charged topics and I have my own personal feelings.</p>
<p>First of all the serial rapist theory needs some more to it when a scene like the UVA gang rape situation exists. So all of those young men going to UVA are serial rapists? Maybe, but maybe there it isn’t just the sicko serial rapist who is dangerous out there, but really anyone under the right circumstances. If it’s true that the frat has been gang raping repeatedly, something is so out of whack there. Yes, absolutely, an investigation is in order, and the others treated as Jackie should be sought and begged to step up to put an end to this house of horrors.</p>
<p>Though, yes, these are young women, they are women. Most of them are legal adults. Same age as those sent to face the wars. Rape is a crime, just as assault is, and the burden of proof should not be changed in the court system, not that I think it will be. Why would someone tell a tale like this if not true? Happens all of the time. I think we all know such situations, the high profile ones in particular. But, even before the days of the Salem witch accusations, false stories have been around. So there has to be evidence. I don’t expect the legal system to budge on this. What we can do is support the victims more in the ordeal they have to undergo to save the next potential victim, and by making this a campaign, take away some of the shame of having been raped. Even if the alleged perps can’t be convicted, they should be somehow sanctioned so that they at least have to watch their step from now on. Yes, it hurts those truly innocent of the accusations, in that they will have to be much more careful never to have such an accusation be hurled against them again, but there is public safety involved in this. </p>
<p>As a friend, as a parent, as a relative I wouldn’t do anything without the victim’s permission. The reason being is with rape their is a huge risk and an emotional toll that has to be considered. Please understand I am not trying to diminish rape. I do have insight into this but I would not like to divulge as to why so I’ll leave it at that. The problem is if there is any doubt by anyone the victim will be raked through the coals. The defense lawyers will bring out the guns and do a character assassination. So the question is: how much pain and suffering can a person withstand and each individual is different at what they can handle. If you have to live in the same community a choice needs to be made because if it does become public and undoubtedly it will can you handle it and can their family. What is the risk of being countersued? All these things need to be considered. </p>
<p>Nope, of course not. One of Lisak’s studies found that on several college campuses, the # of male students who admitted doing something that met the legal definition of rape ranged from 5-15%. None of these men thought of themselves as rapists. Almost all blamed the victim. (Most incarcerated rapists do too. ) </p>
<p>Lets assume that UVA is on the low end of these statistics. Still, that means that, based on UVA’s size, there are over 1,000 rapists of campus. Let be conservative again and assume that half of these are repeat offenders. (Nobody has ever come up with a percentage that low.) Lets assume each commits an average of 5 rapes. That means these 500 serial rapists will rape 2,500 young women during their college careers. Add in 500 other rapes of women by one time rapists. That gives us 3,000 rapes for all of them. Divide this number by 4 and we are talking about 750 rapes a year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think so. I honestly don’t believe that MOST young men would rape a young woman who was passed out or drunk or would roofie women. I do think that there are SOME men who wouldn’t dream of doing such things UNLESS they (a)were almost certain they can get away with it and (b) are put in a situation where they have the opportunity to do it. </p>
<p>For example, it “sounds” as if one of the men who raped Jackie was reluctant to do so. We don’t know why though. Was it because he knew it was wrong, but allowed himself to be pressured into it? Or was it because he realized that Jackie knew him and would be able to identify him? Or was it because raping a stranger seemed liked a prank, but raping someone he knew didn’t? </p>
<p>Colleges with a “pro rape” culture provide (a) and (b)… Realize that not ONE person has EVER been kicked out of UVA for rape. </p>
<p>^^I don’t begrudge women the right to pursue a criminal conviction or not although I don’t think they should avoid the criminal system but I have a hard time when women want to prop up a system separate from our judicial system for the sole purpose of adjudicating a criminal matter to their satisfaction because they are unhappy with the existing system. If they and the universities choose and succeed to do so they cannot ignore the civil rights that all of us have under our laws. I’m not sure why a university adjudicating a complaint of sexual misbehavior should be held to any lower standard in rigor. Kinder, gentler…perhaps a university tribunal is more friendly than a judge and jury, but in terms of due process and rigor it should not be any different than the investigation and scrutiny put in place by our judicial system.</p>
<p>I find it difficult to believe that each class at UVA has that many serial rapists, and proportionally that many in the general population. That means that in our given group of children there will be a number of serial rapists. That also means that in the male population, including our husbands, fathers, family there are that % of serial rapists. </p>
<p>That basically means, that as I;ve said, that the rapists are among us, in our families, are our neighbors, co workers, our spouses. Though I find it difficult to wrap my head around the numbers as you present them, Jonri. </p>
<p>I believe a university official or anyone in any official capacity should be required to report a rape to LE. The victim should get a lot of support and can say as s/he pleases to LE and decide as she pleases in the next phase, but to treat rape confessions any less than reports of cheating even, or say vandalism, is really putting it too low on the table. The concession there to the psyche of the victim is to leave it go, if the victim chooses not to go forward. A school would not let it go if a student says s/he saw a campus vandalism or cheating on and exam. LE would not give it a pass if certain crimes were reported by a witness/victim. </p>
<p>the department of justice and department of education has advised all universities receiving federal funds that they need to adjudicate rape cases based on the standards set for civil cases in the United States courts. </p>
<p>If you are driving in your car and a cop suspects you of dui, you must take a breathalyzer or face losing your license for a certain period of time in all states I am aware of. At first, this was fought in court, because it’s a forced search. You can’t refuse to testify against yourself. There is no fifth amendment. If you refuse the breathalizer, it’s an admission of guilt, for the purpose of driving.</p>
<p>People were outraged, AND they lowered the legal BAC. The horror. </p>
<p>All that said, the fact remains, even in the case where young women go to the police, get the rape kit done, file a police report, if it is a favored party, these investigations are being mishandled, put off, ignored. By the cops and by the schools.</p>
<p>This needs to change for young women to feel reasonable safe reporting. </p>
<p>But the assumption by women cannot be that every case will result in expulsion. I can agree that universities will weigh expulsion more due to the DOE letter but women cannot assume that expulsion will always be the decision and right now it “feels” like that is what women want regardless of investigative outcomes. I can only say “feels” like because of what information is in the media.</p>
<p>Cpt, it happens all the time? That is not too specific. Do you think women who are willing to go through the rape kit are lying more thah 50 percent of the time?</p>
<p>I really can’t respond to that very well, momofthree. </p>
<p>I don’t think it will result in expulsion every time. It will be based on preponderance of the evidence. </p>
<p>Like with any civil case.</p>
<p>My problem with the argument about 18 and 19 year old rape victims on this and many other threads is the shock, just shock, that these women didn’t go immediately to the police but turned to the authority figures on campus for guidance. Really? Why is this shocking? </p>
<p>They went to campus safety, or a dean. </p>
<p>The ones who went to the police, if the rapist was favored, were ignored, mishandled or not really investigated, told not to press charges etc…</p>
<p>Interestingly, we find that the first choice of UVA for an investigator was a member of the offending fraternity, now a prosecutor and judge. </p>
<p>You couldn’t make UP a better example of the “system” you say women should use.</p>
<p>Yes, they should use the system. But, the system needs to be fixed, or maybe un-fixed is a better way to put it.</p>
<p>I bookmarked this during the summer and it’s a pretty good primer on how things are actually playing out. There is much to grapple with. My hope is some of the work that will come out of the lawsuits is a more nuanced definitions of what constitutes criminal sexual behavior so that women can make good choices about whether to pursue campus adjudication or to file criminal charges and then be able to live with their choices. Personally I doubt we’ll see a slew of expulsions, probably more suspensions that will or won’t be reflected on the transcript so that universities meet the DOE guidelines, satisfy an accusers desire not to see the person they accused and save themselves from expensive lawsuits. </p>
<p>This is a false dilemna. Women should choose both. </p>
<p>Also, if your daughter is raped, get her legal advice as well as counseling. She needs an attorney because the process in both cases is hostile to the accuser in the case of rape charges in a way it is not in others. </p>
<p>And although I find that appalling and evidence of gross institutional negligence, I am still not convinced that lowering the standard of proof to 50.5%/49.5% is wise in what is a criminal matter, even though the court is not a criminal one. I am not convinced that the standard of evidence previously in place–clear and convincing evidence–would not have resulted in expulsions if it had been applied in good faith.</p>
<p>Expelling someone from a college is not a criminal matter. I don’t see why the standard of proof for other civil cases shouldn’t apply in college tribunals.</p>
<p>Consolation, I’m getting confused with the negatives in “I am not convinced that the standard of evidence previously in place–clear and convincing evidence–would not have resulted in expulsions if it had been applied in good faith.” Am I to conclude that you think that the clear and convincing evidence standard would have resulted in some expulsions for sexual assault at U Va, if it had been applied in good faith?</p>
<p>Of course the U Va rapists are just following the lead of their revered founder.</p>
Thank you for including Aunt Sue so people realize that female predators exist and that committing assault, fraud, stealing, lying, murdering is not strictly confined to the male sex.</p>
<p>It’s not victim blaming when people point out that a victim should call 911. It is the sensible thing to do during or after an emergency. You hear news stories of toddlers or young children calling 911. So, yes, I have a neutral response to a story where the alleged victim doesn’t call 911 and instead calls her friends and engages in a debate whether to call LE or not. Then she claims her friends talked her out of going to the police. **When you are a victim of a situation you cannot control, the only thing you can control is how you respond to the situation. **</p>
<p>In this case, presuming the horrific event took place, she should have called 911. It doesn’t matter whether statistic says LE will allegedly sweep it under the rug 90% of the time or whatever numbers you throw out there but at least, you did something to fight back. The first step is to call 911 so evidence can be collected.</p>
<p>Consolation, I think colleges would have more confidence in expulsion in cases where there was concomitant criminal charges and professional evidence gathering. BUT colleges would also probably have to back pedal under the same threat of civil litigation by the expelled student if the accused was found not guilty. Therein is the conundrum of colleges and universities and criminal behavior. It is important to understand that the DOE ruling does not say that colleges must expel students. Colleges must investigate and they must punish if there is a fraction of the a chance that the accuser is telling the truth, but what that punishment is will be left up to the universities just as it is left up to the college in incidents of cheating, fighting, drug and alcohol violations etc. Parents need to understand the fine distinction between what colleges and universities are required to do and the fact that not all colleges and universities act the same manner (with regard to cheating, fighting, drug and alcohol and accusations of sexual misconduct.) Colleges that have zero tolerance for any behavior in violation of their ethics/honor codes must be clear in their definitions for all the same reasons.</p>
<p>There is no percentage applied to ‘clear and convincing’ evidence, however commonly in legal terms it means that the evidence must be found to be credible; the facts the must be distinctly remembered; the testimony must be precise and the witness must be lacking in confusion. A comparable situation must be the revocation of a physician’s license, etc. It is a higher standard than preponderance of evidence.</p>