<p>It happened in 2009 and with a different coach which doesn’t mean anything except that attitudes toward this behavior are improving. I believe this student was currently working on a masters degree and he was a freshman when this occured </p>
<p>The woman refused to continue with the police and but the college ultimately expelled him in 2013. It was not reported 4 years ago why the woman did not continue her police charge.</p>
<p>Regarding the U of M football rapist, I would not be in the least but surprised that he would pass a polygraph, since it is quite possible that he really believes that he didn’t rape her, all evidence to the contrary. </p>
<p>Why would she not proceed with the charge? Having been viciously threatened by the team mate gave her a taste of what was to come, perhaps? Who knows what other pressure was brought to bear on her.</p>
<p>Yes, and in 2009 if she did not follow through with the police the college probably felt there was nothing they needed to do which is why I do believe things are “better”…not there yet, but better.</p>
<p>I’m not sure whose blog is the “WashtenawWatchdog” so can’t comment on their reporting or how legitimate a source, but here’s the link from the Detroit newspaper.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.freep.com/article/20140225/NEWS06/302250086/gibbons-federal-investigation-university-michigan-rape”>http://www.freep.com/article/20140225/NEWS06/302250086/gibbons-federal-investigation-university-michigan-rape</a></p>
<p>And the Michigan Daily accounting which notes that policies were changed in 2011 (this particular incident took place in 2009)</p>
<p><a href=“Former kicker Brendan Gibbons permanently separated from University for sexual misconduct”>http://www.michigandaily.com/sports/former-kicker-brendan-gibbons-expelled-sexual-misconduct</a> </p>
<p>3mom “It was not reported 4 years ago why the woman did not continue her police charge.”</p>
<ol>
<li> No offense, but that does not make any sense. Why are you trying to blame the victim here? The lack of charges is the DA’s fault, not the victim. You must know that. </li>
</ol>
<p>Legal Process 101
This is a criminal case. Criminal charges are brought by the District Attorney. He/she is the only person who can make that decision unless the DA can’t decide and calls a Grand Jury to make the decision for them. A victim has no control or responsibility in the matter. 18 year old college freshmen do not get to charge people with crimes. If victims had to press charges, no one would ever be prosecuted for murder. </p>
<p>The DA has her statement, has a rape kit and evidence, and some witnesses. He even has Taylor Lewan as a hostile witness admitting that she was raped. In all probability, the local DA does not want to file this charge against a Michigan football player because he is an elected official. </p>
<ol>
<li>It should be problematic for everyone that the article reports that when threatening the victim, Taylor Lewan, a 315 lb, 6’8" lineman said he would rape her “again” if she did not drop the charges. He is not denying that she was raped, he is clearly saying that she WAS raped. In case you have never seen this guy he is positively huge. This young women was a 100 pound, 18 year old freshman. It has to be intimidating. </li>
</ol>
<p>Why has Lewan still not been charged for this? It is at least assault, and I am pretty sure that threatening a witness to convince them not to talk to authorities about a felony is witness tampering, which is also a felony.</p>
<ol>
<li>I have seen more concerns about the importance of due process in this thread than I thought possible. I want to know why these victims are regularly deprived of due process? Why was Brendan Gibbons not charged and tried?Why was Taylor Lewan not charged and tried? </li>
</ol>
<p>It is the victims that have been deprived of due process in these cases. Why do so few people seem to care about that? I doubt that the statute of limitations is up for this case, so when are we going to see due process? </p>
<p>This type of case should be decided publicly in front of a jury, and not be decided in a back room by a DA who is more concerned about their career, or who gets a call from the University or a donor. If the DA is too gutless to file the charge, he can call a grand jury to make the decision. He did not do that either. I am waiting for the outrage from the due process aficionados on this board. I won’t hold my breath. </p>
<p>Did you read the articles? If not, here’s the short end: This happened in 2009 at that time the university did not do anything because the accuser did not follow through with the police. In the Daily article it explains how the university’s policies have changed. You brought up a case in 2009 and I’m simply pointing out that things have changed since 2009. The case never made it to trial because the young women REFUSED to continue working with the police, plain and simple. Nothing untoward by police or prosecutor, she did not want to continue with the charges and because it was 2009 UofM did not continue with anything internally because it was being handled by the police. NOW the university policy, under Title IX is to continue an investigation EVEN IF the accuser decides to drop the criminal charges, in 2009 that was not necessarily the policy. I’m not sure what due process the accuser was deprived of since she decided to drop the charges back then. </p>
<p>I’d like to bring back the thought experiment I posted a number of pages back, and make some comments based on some of the subsequent discussion:
I think most people recognized that if you only had these limited facts, you couldn’t really make a decision on what happened. I think it would be unusual to have no more facts than these, but I think that there may be quite a few cases in which there isn’t a lot more evidence about whether there was consent or not–because there were no other witnesses to the sexual encounter. I think a lot of people assume that the fact that a woman brought a complaint is, by itself, some evidence that there was not consent. I think that’s problematic.</p>
<p>I’m a lawyer, and I can’t help approaching this whole issue in terms of how you can actually develop a system with results that you can feel confidence in. As I said earlier, I don’t like criminals escaping punishment, but I am even more concerned with innocent people being punished. Our criminal justice system was crafted by people who took that position, which is why we have so many protections for the accused. I think college tribunals should have protections as well, and the challenge is to craft them at the right level. It’s not easy.</p>
<p>And just for good measure, how would your response to my thought experiment change if one of the following additional facts was in evidence?
- This is the third complaint of this nature brought against Accused by different women. The previous two complaints resulted in no punishment due to insufficient evidence.
- Accused is a senior; Accuser is a freshman; the incident happened in the first week of the first semester.
- Accused is unattractive; accuser is attractive.
- Accuser testifies: “I would never have consented to having sex with Accuser, because he is unattractive.”
- Accuser testifies: “I would never have consented to having sex with Accuser, because I was a virgin and believe sex before marriage is a sin.”
- Accuser testifies: “I would never have consented to having sex with Accuser, because of his race.” [Note: if you’re from the South, you know that this argument sent a lot of black men to prison.]</p>
<p>You are still trying to blame the victim. </p>
<p>It does not matter whether she continues to "work with authorities. Murder victims do not work with authorities. Murderers are still charged.</p>
<p>Charging ipeople with crime id the sole responsibility of the DA, no matter how much you want to blame the victim, that is the process.</p>
<p>In the case of murder a dead body is evidence. In the case of a living victim, the evidence needs to cooperate in order to have a successful prosecution. </p>
<p>He raped her.
Oh, that’s awful. Where is she?
She wants to drop it.
Oh, okay.</p>
<p>This is not hard. </p>
<p>Much2learn, do you believe that a rape victim should be forced to testify against an accused rapist if she doesn’t want to do so? Because most rape cases can only be made if the victim testifies–otherwise there will not be enough evidence to convict. It would be possible to call the victim as a witness even if she didn’t want to testify–but that’s not what prosecutors typically do.</p>
<p>The problem with the double talk on this thread is the subtext.</p>
<p>Either you want it to be easier for young women to report rape or you do not. Either you want a solution to the campus rape problem or you do not. The continued implication that somehow the girls are responsible for the problems with rape adjudication, rape reporting and lack of criminal enforcement is that it ignores the reality of rape reporting. I’m glad I was never raped. I’m glad for all of you that you were never raped. But the reality of rape reporting is that it is so invasive it is emotionally almost abusive in it’s nature. Girls have to do it, but not because of something they did or did not do. They have to do it because they were raped. </p>
<p>Pointing to the fact that things have gotten better while simultaneously complaining about the actions that have had to be taken to make this situation better is beyond hypocritical. Nothing got better until the DOJ began to get involved, and the DOJ began to get involved because they were asked to get involved by the rape survivors themselves. You can’t have it both ways. Either you believe the problem is with women not reporting, which, by the way, once again places the crime of rape right on the shoulders of the survivors, or you don’t.</p>
<p>If you do, then you support the efforts of the DOJ. If you do not? If you just want to say, when it is convenient for your argument, that the reason nothing was done in the past was becasuse of the reporting problem, and the problem now is the reporting problem, you are simply saying, as many on this thread seem to believe, that rape is a problem for women to deal with. Raped women are the problem, not the rapists themselves.</p>
<p>Personally, I don’t think rape reporting is a solution to anything. I would prefer rape prevention. That involves not going to the guy’s room, being aware and alert at all times, and carrying MACE. Unfortunately, it also involves personal responsibility which people frequently confuse with victim blaming for some reason.</p>
<p>I guess my problem is that I do think there needs to be robust reporting, because otherwise you will never root out the serial predators. But if you can only get more reporting by seriously limiting the protections for accused people, I have a big problem with that. In my thought experiment, I don’t fault Accuser for reporting–because she feels there was no consent, and Accused may be a serial predator. So I want cases like that to be reported. But I don’t want Accused to be seriously punished when there is such a major proof issue–especially if this is the first complaint against him.</p>
<p>To give an analogy with a less serious crime: money and valuables seem to disappear when Joe visits our apartment. Nobody can prove he took anything, though. How many times does this have to happen before you stop inviting Joe around? What has to happen before you call the police and have him arrested for theft?</p>
<p>Well, I agree with you @Hunt, but if schools don’t keep strong records and encourage reporting, it won’t do a thing. </p>
<p>@actingmt I think you have to understand the history of victim blaming to understand the conversation about victim blaming. But, historically, this has been and continues to be an issue. </p>
<p>The strongest preventions at this point, besides making sure you are aware of the behaviors of predators and the fact that they target new freshman, is bystander intervention training. This is where students are taught the four or five points in which both men and women can intervene to prevent optimal circumstances for these rapes. </p>
<p>Since the advent of bystander prevention, rapes on campus have begun to decrease. This is simply because the overwhelming majority of men are pretty disgusted by rape. Once they understand ways to intervene, they do so willingly and very effectively, as do the young women.</p>
<p>And if I report the missing items to the police and explain about Joe, but then after that I refuse to cooperate with the police, can I rightly blame the police, or society, if nothing happens to Joe? In that example, I may not be at fault as a victim of theft, but I could be blamed for lack of prosecution- not taking appropriate action to try to get him convicted/punished.</p>
<p>It’s hard for me to say that a DA is off the hook for continuing a prosecution when the reason the victim stops cooperating is a credible physical threat. This is like a mafia situation. If the witnesses won’t testify because of threats, then you haven’t done a good enough job of protecting the witnesses. </p>
<p>Hanna has a good point for other scenarios, but it doesn’t apply to the scenario Hunt presented, or my comment on his scenario.</p>
<p>Well, the victim would have to tell the prosecutor about the threat at the time. Did she? I don’t know.</p>
<p>Yes, the 19 year old rape victim, off away from home for the first time, now threatened, would have to tell the prosecutor of the threat. It’s her fault nothing was done. clearly</p>
<p>From there, it is easy to see why the problem of rapists on college campus is the fault of the non reporting, non prosecuting girls. The girls, it would seem, are the problem.</p>
<p>Geez, I’m not blaming her but authorities cannot be expected to do anything without the information, either.</p>