Of course, the ABA is going to recommend getting more lawyers into the process…
Then there will be calls for the colleges to provide the lawyers, since otherwise they may only be affordable to students from wealthy families…
Then that extra cost will add to the complaints about how much cost overhead keeps growing at colleges…
@northwesty that is the beyond a reasonable doubt standard . It needs to stay with criminal courts where people can be deprived of their physical freedom.
In California to get your 100 million dollar verdict you need to just convince 9 out of 12 jurors on your points and it doesn’t have to be the same 9 for each point.
In other states it can be less. For civil trials, almost one-third of states only require a majority for a verdict.
Appeals are decided by majority vote of the judges nothing more
“@northwesty that is the beyond a reasonable doubt standard.”
Nope.
Unanimous/majority is one thing. Reasonable doubt/preponderance is another thing. How many people are on the panel is yet a third thing. There’s lots of possible variations.
The ABA panel recommended no particular standard (beyond “being convinced”) so long as it was a unanimous vote of a panel of at least three people. If it is a one person panel, they recommended a higher standard.
Unanimous vote of a 3 person panel is a lot different than a unanimous vote of 6 or 12 obviously.
Beyond a reasonable doubt and unanimous go hand and hand in court. Requiring an unanimous ruling in a civil matter is just nonsensical and is followed in virtually no other civil proceedings. @northwesty so if the tribunal can not reach an unanimous ruling the tribunal should be considered hung and it should be done over as in court. You are not asking for special privilege for these alleged predators I assume
I’d rather see unis hire more lawyers than more “title 9” officers…actually they could take the whole mess out of the colleges’ hands and I would be happy. It has been an expensive bureaucratic pile of doodoo with the Title IX office staffing, outside advisors, lawyers, and whatnot…all for a very privileged segment of society many members who have a proclivity for pregaming with vodka. It would be interesting to see if there is a correlation with alcohol sales in college towns with the number of Title IX claims in that uni.
Do you have any evidence for that?
Then, why don’t we outsource this to the civil courts? Colleges could wait to expel a student until after he’s lost a civil suit for sexual assault. As northwesty hit in #158, the standard of proof is just one element in ensuring a fair process.
Young female students shouldn’t have to live for a prolonged period in a closed environment with rapists, molesters and harassers. You may want to take a look at the legislative history of title 9
Why should innocent men be kicked off campus before there’s been an opportunity to determine if the allegations weren’t fabricated?
Washington courts made a significant ruling in favor of student rights.
^^
If that’s the Abdullahatif Arishi case from last year what does that have to do with Title IX cases or the way that WSU adjudicates them @roethlisburger???
“Beyond a reasonable doubt and unanimous go hand and hand in court. Requiring an unanimous ruling in a civil matter is just nonsensical.”
Nope. 3 of 3 preponderance is one thing. 9 of 12 preponderance is another. Really can’t say one is necessarily tougher than another. Neither is 12 of 12 reasonable doubt.
And, of course, title ix doesn’t require any particular formula. So every school doesn’t necessarily need to do it the exact same way (so long as it is overall fair).
Only Dear Colleague requires one size fits all.
@roethlisburger “innocent men” is a criminal concept. Title 9 is a civil proceeding.
No one gets kicked off campus immediately before a hearing unless there is a threat of immediate harm or violence and then they should be kicked off. Why do you appear to assume that all men in a title 9 proceeding are not responsible and subject to some fabrication by a female college student
@collegedad13 - Nothing that I said could possible be considered victim blaming. I don’t see what any of this has to do with black men and police.
All of the examples you gave in post 155 are civil matters. IMO rape is a criminal matter and a criminal matter requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. So asking for a higher standard of proof is not some sort of privilege.
Additionally, accused rapists come in all skin colors.
It would be interesting to see if there is a correlation if college town alcohol sales, number of students and Title IX claims wouldn’t it…but in general I think there is very much concensus on alcohol consumption and risk of assault or being accused of assault. It has been discussed much over the past three years. If I have time to find a thread or two I will send to you.
@collegedad13 -They aren’t rapists until they are investigated and convicted. You can’t turn people into criminals simply by pointing a finger at them and yelling criminal.
@Proudpatriot – campus sexual assault is adjudicated under Title IX which is a civil rights law designed to ensure that all students have equal access to an education. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
It might be your opinion that sexual assault is only a criminal matter but that’s not the current state of the law. Title IX gives students additional rights to also file claims under Title IX which entitles them to a campus proceeding. Those rights co-exist with their right to file in the criminal system.
Here are the facts from the case you cited where student rights need to be protected.
"In spring 2014, the WSU student, who was 40, was charged with third-degree rape and molestation of a 15-year-old girl and pleaded not guilty. He said he believed the girl to be at least 16 years old, the legal age of consent. "
"He had his family with him at WSU, he was kicked out of housing, separated from his family, had to return to his country.”
I guess it bothers me when a 40 year old married man is raping and molesting a 15 year old. I guess he didn’t get to put forward his defense that he thought she was 16.
That facts of that case were horrendous but it is not a Title IX case.
Washington State University expelled him, so it involved university disciplinary proceedings. The important point wasn’t the case, but the appeals court went ahead and said students in college disciplinary proceedings have certain rights, including the right to be represented by counsel and the right to cross-examination. Did you take the time to read the article?