<p>As the parent of two daughters, and as the survivor of several sexual assaults ( before I had children), once on the grounds of my jr high school, I am heartened by efforts to allow victims of sexual assault to resume their studies without fear.</p>
<p>I am aware of false accusations of rape- & that is a concerm,but that number is very, very small, much smaller than the numbers of sexual assaults that are not reported.
Not being able to get justice for assault & harassment is a much bigger concern for me.</p>
<p>That’s a pretty good article, although as usual you can’t really figure out what the statistics mean. We’ve discussed this before, and I share the concerns expressed by the ACLU people at the very end of the article.</p>
<p>I think we should be more concerned about how this society views women, even in 2012. How someone can rape their child, & because they are not physically in jail,they can still maintain their top security clearance @ a govt contractor.
How unless the victim is left for dead or elderly and disabled, she is viewed as complicit in some way.
This lack of respect for women is pervasive & insidious, from politicians deciding on women’s right to health care to the American Academy of Pediatrics saying its OK for immigrant parents to perform genital mutilation on their daughters.</p>
<p>How about being able to go through a collegiate career without fear of being strung up on false rape charges, expelled due to contradictory accounts that wouldn’t have held up in court, and having your life ruined because a partner later regretted sleeping with you? I think that the rights of the accused have been unconstitutionally stripped away in kangaroo courts run by fearfully misandrist administrators.</p>
<p>I think we should be concernd about how society views women and about the need to protect the rights of the accused. As I’ve expounded (at length) on prior threads, I think relaxing the standard of proof while increasing the consequences is not the way to deal with either of these concerns.</p>
<p>I read the article, and I’ll limit my comment only to the first portion, about Kristina P. First, the article says she was raped, though the article indicates the man was not in court,never admitted to being a rapist. That seemed unfairly slanted to me.
Next, the legal system chose not to take up her case. Later, when she “finally” told an administrator, the school took action. Obviously, I cannot answer if the rape occurred, but I feel that this one was a poor example to demonstrate a need for lower degrees of proof. Based on the lack of proof described in her case, and deliberate legal inactions, I think it better shows the very need for more definitive proof than some are calling for. I am not convinced(by the article) that she was raped, but I am convinced a young man was punished for it.</p>
<p>How many schools have honor courts or codes?
If a student is attending a school where they agree to abide by the code, can’t they be expelled if they break one of the rules even if it isn’t a jail able offense?</p>
<p>The big case in the news right now is the expulsion of students years ago from Harvard for being gay, but other schools currently have forbidden gay behavior.</p>
<p>Some schools violating the dress code repeatedly will get you expelled.</p>
<p>But if having sex is against the honor code or whatever, shouldn’t both that had sex be expelled or otherwise punished? Or proof being presented that the individual was in fact raped and sex was not consensual?</p>
<p>I think you can write the honor code in a way that allows for consensual sex yet leaves room for sanctions against assault.
In an honor court, both people would have to testify & present evidence according to my understanding.</p>
<p>The problem here is that the unlawful behavior is very, very similar to common lawful behavior, creating a tremendous proof problem (that is, proving that there was no consent). To me, that makes this a very bad candidate for a standard of proof that simply says that if it’s slightly more likely than not that the sex was nonconsensual, that the accused will be suspended or otherwise punished. Again, the problem of rape and sexual assault is real–I just don’t think this is the solution.</p>
<p>If any of you have ever had ocassion to observe an Honor Court on an undergraduate campus, you know that some of them have a “Lord of the Flies” nature about them wherein the judges feel that they have absolute and unquestioned (and unrestrained) discretion. That’s a recipe for abuse, which has been proven time and again, including the incident at UVirginia a few years ago.</p>
<p>I’m with Hunt on this. We shouldn’t allow for special exceptions to our criminal laws. If a student assaults a schoolmate, that perpretrator should be fully prosecuted by the State/County attorney, with appropriate regard for the accused’s constitutional rights.</p>
<p>There are good people, academics, scientists, with a record of ability to evaluate evidence before them, and I tend to believe them. If Williams College says that 44 women at the college were raped last year (penetration without consent), and they expelled four students for same, I tend to believe that they wouldn’t release such data unless they actually believed it. Expelling the four students may have saved them a lifetime criminal record as sex offenders. </p>
<p>Hundreds of civil lawsuits are launched successfully against colleges each year (as well as against others) for rape/sexual assault. In civil lawsuits, the standard of proof is MUCH lower than that followed by most institutions in enforcing Title IX protections. On the whole, I think the colleges are in a far better position to deal with these situations than the legal system is.</p>
<p>In addition, the colleges know they can be sued by “either side”. A student suspended or expelled for a sex offense can bring suit, and would only have to show by a preponderance of evidence that he had been wronged. The relative paucity of such suits speaks volumes.</p>
<p>Sometimes it is easier to get the campus authorities to prosecute than the public authorities.</p>
<p>It is interesting EK that your local newspaper ran this article, as my local newspaper ran a similar article the same date (and not a McClatchey paper).</p>
<p>mini, are you suggesting that colleges aren’t really applying the preponderance of the evidence standard, but some more stringent standard? If so, I guess I think it’s a good thing, although it forces them to be dishonest about what standard they are actually applying.</p>
<p>I not only think so - I am SURE so. Otherwise, for example, if the college (my alma mater) says publicly there were 44 rapes last year, but only disciplines four students, those four students must have been awfully busy.</p>
<p>They are extremely risk averse. They are not going to discipline a student on a sex charge unless they feel pretty sure that they will prevail in any civil action. Not only prevail, but have enough evidence that they won’t even have to defend themselves. (My alma mater has some of the best legal minds in the country available to them, and I feel positive they have checked this out VERY carefully.)</p>
<p>And yes - they are dishonest (if that’s how you wish to characterize it). For years, decades, they have been sweeping sexual assaults under the rug, and twice-victimizing women.</p>
<p>It is interesting EK that your local newspaper ran this article, as my local newspaper ran a similar article the same date (and not a McClatchey paper).*</p>
<p>I’m actually in Seattle, but I read it in the Bellingham paper. Local papers often do pick up AP stories, especially when local events are being discussed.</p>