<p>[The</a> New York Times reports:](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/18/education/18yale.html]The”>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/18/education/18yale.html)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Times article might be gated, but if you Google “Lanpher Yale” you can find plenty of references to it.</p>
<p>“And what are national fraternities and non-bad eggs doing to root out the bad eggs that are giving everyone a bad reputation? Which fraternity chapter has had its charter pulled because of rape?”</p>
<p>Seriously? You don’t think Phi Psi at UVA is on thin ice with national Phi Psi right now?</p>
<p>But if Phi Psi national says “get thee away from me,” then you can’t ask them to provide any kind of oversight, as then they will just be random guys. </p>
<p>WHAT oversight? </p>
<p>Consolation and mom2and, I think you and I are in agreement. I do not think that the bare accusation of rape, with no other evidence, is enough for suspension or any disciplinary action at all. We can argue whether “preponderance of the evidence” or “clear and convincing evidence” should be the standard, but that’s on the margins because right now, neither of those standards is being applied.</p>
<p>Mom2and, you write that the cases where there is evidence “are not the cases in dispute.” But they <em>are</em> the cases in dispute, because right now they are the cases where the accused rapist is not punished. </p>
<p>This is as bad as the Alabama sorrority situation last year. All fraternity men everywhere should be calling for all fraternity men who know anything of rape in their house to go forward to the administration of their university. They should be providing guidance on how to file a police report, frankly. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Can you give me a list of fraternity chapters whose chapters were pulled because of rapes? Or of hideous misogynistic behavior like the Yale case? I think that list would have no items on it. Phi Psi may be on thin ice, but as far as I can tell no fraternity chapters ever fall through that thin ice.</p>
<p>Fraternity chapters fall through thin ice all the time and have charters pulled, but the reasons aren’t generally revealed to the public. </p>
<p>“Did you go upstairs voluntarily?”</p>
<p>I absolutely 100% agree that going upstairs voluntarily is not consent, but it would seem to me it’s part of getting the entire context - much as “did you hand over your purse to the robber so he could rummage through and get a chapstick,” or “did he rip your purse off your shoulder.” Neither is consenting to have your wallet stolen, of course. </p>
<p>@momofthreeboys.</p>
<p>Please tell me what you think about the cases where the girls DID report to the police and no investigation took place. We have more than three of them cited on this thread.</p>
<p>Please tell me what you think THOSE girls should have done differently, since you have so many opinions as to how this is all about reporting.</p>
<p>Also, what responsibility to student safety do YOU think a university has if they receive various reports that rapes are happening at x,y,or z fraternity? Do you think they have a responsibility to actually investigate? or do you think they should just tell the already raped girls what their options are for pursuing this? </p>
<p>Do you, or do you not believe, that a university in which newly arrived freshman are known to be entering buildings where they will be raped, or where they have a high likelihood of being raped, has a responsibility to these girls? Do you think it is enough to simply warn the girls? or do you think they should look into what is going on in these university affiliated institutions, where girls are being raped at a higher than normal rate on a college campus?</p>
<p>Do you truly believe that the reason we have such a rape problem on college campuses is because 18 year old, newly arrived freshman girls are the ones who aren’t handling the crime the way they should be? </p>
<p>Because, at this point, that is what the majority of your posts sound like. “If only the girls would be a better witness and get to the emergency room and give a coherent report of their rape to the police, this would solve the problem.” As if the fact that this problem exists is their responsibility.</p>
<p>I’m starting to think you really actually think this, that it’s not just a stance you are taking for the sake of argument.</p>
<p>CF I should have clarified that I meant in dispute on these threads, not in dispute in general. Yes, those are cases in which men are not being punished and would have been if proper investigation and support of witnesses was done, even if the standard was clear and convincing. </p>
<p>I personally think they should HAVE to involve / tell the police. But then you get back to - oh, does that hinder some women who want to report and have the situation dealt with, but don’t want to involve the police. </p>
<p>My heart breaks for a 18 yo girl who has undergone this horrific thing and now has to be subjected to rape kits, inquisition by the police, etc. Absolutely breaks. But I don’t know any other way around it other than to involve law enforcement and push forth in court. </p>
<p>There are ways to guide a young women through the process. Advocates can be provided. Counselors to take the girl to the hospital to get a rape kit. Counselors to go to the police and gently point out to the police that their questions are not useful.</p>
<p>There are real problems with the ways police investigate rape, and they need to be addressed. In the meantime, leaving it all up to the 18 year old girl who was raped on your campus or in a fraternity house you say is a party of YOUR fraternity system, means you have got some responsibility here. I don’t care how it gets spun. </p>
<p>Schools know this. This is why they keep getting busted for Clery violations. They do everything to make no report. </p>
<p>They are not just not supportive. They are actively working AGAINST reporting and investigations.</p>
<p>this is what the 86 investigations are about. They are not about some lighthearted, oh let’s take a look at how University A is handling it’s rape problem.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that is wrong. I think anyone who contacts any police department about something that is illegal should at a minimum be entitled to an investigation - if it’s only taking a statement from the victim and questioning the accused before making a determination on the merits of a given case. Probably why I would recommend retaining a lawyer. I was not aware that the actual police could decline to investigate - that was news to me. </p>
<p>I think a college or university under current regulations has an obligation not to rely solely on the police so that means the investigation is on the college whether or not the police are involved. I don’t like it because I don’t think universities and colleges should be involved in adjudication of criminal business and they are showing time and time again that they do a lousy job… but it’s the way things are right now thanks to the DOE. If sexual misconduct includes assault, I like Michigan’s policy that says mediation cannot be used. So yes, I think under the current DOE guidelines colleges have an obligation to investigate (and report through Cleary) any charges of sexual assaul . If in fact we find that women did report to UVa that they were assaulted AND UVa was obligated to investigate per the DOE guidelines at that ime then there needs to be huge changes at UVa. I’m not sure I know what the obligations were in 2012. </p>
<p>To some extent, yes, I don’t believe most 18 year old women know what they should do if they find themselves a victim or sexual assault and I wish they did. There’s not alot of education aimed at high school girls and boys (other than relating to how not to get pregnant) about being sexually safe and what to do if you feel a crime has occurred. I’m not sure that many parents drill down to that level with their kids/young adults.</p>
<p>The guidance was changed in 2011 when DOE sent the letters to every university. </p>
<p>It’s actually why most cases are FROM after 2011. And, you know? That’s pretty scary. Because the cases read like 1954.</p>
<p>CF, apparently you didn’t read my entire post or could not follow the logic. I am saying that yes, for the safety of freshmen women, until the frats are forced to clean it up, these women should be told at orientation, essentially, that the men in some of the fraternities are total pigs, and should not be trusted. I did NOT go on to say what you in your apparent impatience extrapolated, which is that that should be fair warning and absolve the university of their obvious liability. My post made quite the opposite point. The sentence immediately following the one that you cherry-picked, in fact, pointed out that a girl might think that because nobody told her otherwise. That is one of the problems. I do not see rape in a frat house as the victim’s fault at all, but it is the fault of not only the rapists but the univerity which does not respond, and part of that response is to alert incoming freshmen that they need to watch out for bad people. When you comment on online posts, you should read the entire post, not pull out a fraction and go off on your own tangent which you then state as the other person’s intent. </p>
<p>“I am saying that yes, for the safety of freshmen women, until the frats are forced to clean it up, these women should be told at orientation, essentially, that the men in some of the fraternities are total pigs, and should not be trusted.”</p>
<p>Should they be told that some of the men on their campus who aren’t in fraternities are total pigs, too, and shouldn’t be trusted? </p>
<p>One would think that with all this publicity, campus women will see frat houses as about as places to be avoided. </p>
<p>Yes.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I am not excluding that as a good idea. If you read the whole RS article, though, it is understood that in the culture or UVa, some freshman females feel particularly flattered to be invited as a date to a fraternity party. </p>
<p>I’m not a lawyer, but I’m guessing if a college tells freshman that frat houses are dangerous places to avoid because people get raped there, but allows the frat houses to remain open, and then a freshman is raped in a frat house, the college has just invited the plaintiff’s bar to a lawsuit party. A woman raped in a frat house in such a situation would have lawyers banging down her door.</p>
<p>I’m also guessing that the plaintiff’s bar would be happy to take the case of a frat house that said it was defamed-- nobody from their house had been sanctioned for sexual assault, either because no one had committed sexual assault or because any assaults had gone unreported or uninvestigated, so the frat house would say the university had no basis for their defamatory claim.</p>