<p>“I was giving a different example, following some of the “boys are to blame” comments, yes, not a college campus example, wehre a guy might be accused of something that was unintentional. I said it was for arguments sake. Can you imagine a situation where that could occur?”</p>
<p>POIH said something dumb and over the top, and now the thread is about anything vaguely related. The reason internet message boards will never substitute for real social interactions. Or even for Facebook </p>
<p>“And yes, LF, teachers may be “allowed” to hug an elementary school kid, but many are feeling it necessary to err on the side of caution and do not do so. No one likes their action to be misconstrued and to be falsely accused of something they did not do.”</p>
<p>And real sexual molestation of elementary kids still takes place, and, AFAICT, still under the guise of hugging. It IS too bad that GOOD, affectionate teachers need to feel worried (and clergy, counselors, etc). But for that I blame the minority of monsters, not the folks who have to put in place rules and laws to stop them.</p>
Dunno, BBD. As mentioned above, I haven’t read the whole thread. Hope not, as that thinking is provincial.</p>
<p>and LF- yes, comforting an injured student should should be a reasonable thing to do. We were talking in the context of false accusations and hypotheticals. Another hypothetical might be that an elementary school student has been a victim of abuse elsewhere, and over-reacts to, or misconstrues a well-intentioned gesture of being touched/hugged by an adult authority figure. Again, these are examples, but they are not aas far fetched as one might think.</p>
<p>I remember being very cautious when working with elementary school kids about physical hugging etc. Not overly cautious but very cautious for sure. But better that than a child has a bad experience.</p>
<p>I think with POIH part of the problem here might be some things being lost a bit in translation? POIH you did at one point actually refer to men as beasts, I can’t find it right now to reference and need to get to work but perhaps it was a misstatement. I do think we are in agreement that parents of boys but I would add girls also need to be sure that their kids are raised to be responsible citizens and members of society and have good codes of ethics regarding the other sex.</p>
<p>I personally think we should stick to college, as the entire issue seems to be inflammatory.</p>
<p>There has to be a climate of hostility that interrupts a college person’s ability to take advantage of the blah blah blah programs.</p>
<p>NOT an incident of staring or an arm around a shoulder. Unless those are part of a larger threatening context.</p>
<p>Know what? Anyone can worry as much as he or she wants. Bottom line, to me, is that these documents carefully lay it out. Fret about a boy looking at a girl or grabbing her hand, argue about whose boy might be a beast in disguise or not…the ACTUAL documents are straightforward. You can read them. Or not.</p>
Exactly! Well said, BBD. The sad, sad part is the overly cautious response of many wonderful teachers. The article linked by hmac is tragic, and a perfect example of the worst case scenario of a false accusation of rape by a coed of a fellow student. </p>
<p>I emailed my s that “college letter/policy” thing before he went back to school. He is a good guy with a good head on his shoulders. I woudl hate to think that good guys may have to stop and think "is it possible someone will misunderstand my gesture of afection and accuse me of battery) if he gives someone a hug. Again- an unlikely scenario, but really sad to think that this is even a remote possibility.</p>
<p>What about the case of Caleb Warner? Is this the sort of case you have in mind?</p>
<p>The Rape of Caleb Warner - Page 1 - Mike Adams - Townhall Conservative "</p>
<p>IF the facts are as stated by that source (which IS a lobbyist against the preponderance of evidence standard) then UND made a variety of egregious procedural errors. had they been fair and correct, then Warner would not have been sanctioned, even under preponderance of evidence. </p>
<p>He probably has grounds for a civil case against UND, as reported in one of the local papers. I see nothing subsequent, except references from the right wing media/blogosphere, using this case as a hammer against preponderance of evidence and the eevil feminist mafia. Reason, WSJ, and lots and lots a blogs. hes like the captain Dreyfus of preponderance of evidence, expect instead of being sent to Guyana, hes just kept off UND campuses. The folks advocating for him, if they paid a dime for each blog mention, could afford to send him to a private U at full scholarship. </p>
<p>edit, it looks like UND will be reviewing the case. As, apparently, they should.</p>
<p>"The article linked by hmac is tragic, and a perfect example of the worst case scenario of a false accusation of rape by a coed of a fellow student. "</p>
<p>its an example of incompetence at the University of North Dakota (so much for the problem being leftie campuses like Brown). By its very propagation (an Oped in the WSJ!!!) I think its clear this is atypical. The tragedy of being expelled from UND (the WSJ might want to consider the tragedies of folks who can’t get to state flagships anymore because of budget cuts, who are probably larger in number) bad as it is, is likely to be reversed, either in a UND review, or a civil suit.</p>
<p>Agree that is an example of incompetence, but for that poor student, the damage is done (emotionally), even if he is permitted to return to a school in the state (article says he’s been banned from any ND state school for now).</p>
<p>If you want to discuss, POIH, stop calling boys “beasts” and the product of bad mothers, or hurling insults at the collective posters on this thread. IIRC, this is not the first time you’ve taken this position, and the outcome on those threads was ugly.</p>
<p>Go relax - have a massage. Or visit a neighbor. But don’t touch.</p>
<p>thanks for posting the caleb warner link… and although discussed prior, and maybe und reviewed it before the ocr letter etc etc…i still want to say that it is this type of scenario that does scare the parents of wrongfully accused sons…
despite no criminal charges, this kid has lost his college opportunities and hasnt done anything wrong…in fact the accuser has been charged. some one previously noted that the colleges have a vested interest in the whole scenario… and if we have a bunch of people on that college who are of the opinion of some of the posters here, that regardless of circumstances or facts…the boy is always to blame… then i think the ocr letter is just going cause more and more of these situations as an over reaction in some cases, or review board bias in other cases.</p>
<p>btw i was amazed to read that poih is a man… do you think you are a beast that cant control his own urges??</p>
<p>i totally agree in a clear cut case… but i have a problem with the “boy is always at fault” with cases that are not as clear cut…ie BOTH drunk, morning after regret, spiteful act following being dumped or rejected, etc</p>
<p>Just one more note on the Lack case: it’s not entirely accurate to say that there was only one version of the story (his) that one could believe or disbelieve. The young woman’s story–that she couldn’t remember what happened–could also be believed or disbelieved. It could be that whoever ultimately decided that he should be given only a mild punishment (the suspension was lifted) didn’t believe her statements that she didn’t remember anything.</p>
<p>In any situation like this, a finder of fact is entitled to believe that one party is telling the truth and the other is lying. When you have a very lenient standard of proof, this (in my opinion) significantly raises the risk of a bad decision by the fact-finder–this is why, for example, I’ve mentioned several times cases in the past where race enters into who is believed.</p>
<p>I feel compelled to point out that that Sarah Klein said that she consumed 10 vodka shots before leaving her dorm, and then went to some kind of athletic party–don’t recall the details–and only then went to a frat, where she proceeded to a) vomit and possibly pass out, and b) have sex with a brother other than the one she was dating. (Whether or not she was coerced in a weakened state.)</p>
<p>My son’s house has people at the door during parties whose sole job is to repel underage drinkers who are already obviously drunk. If they enter the house, and consume a single Keystone Light–an extremely minor amount of alcohol when compared to 10 SHOTS OF VODKA!!!–and subsequently find themselves engaged with the local police, the police will charge the house with serving minors (which is quite likely a just charge), and certain posters on CC will use this as an example of how frats are the source of all evil on campus.</p>
<p>I am actually not a big fan of frats, despite the fact that my S belongs to one, and has benefited from that association, and despite the fact that I have known wonderful guys at another house at another school. But I do feel that they get a bad rap sometimes.</p>
<p>One common difficulty in criminal law is whether to punish people based on how they perceived the situation, how a reasonable person would have perceived the situation, or the actual facts of the situation (even if unperceived). In a case like the Lack case, the ten shots absolutely make it more likely that the woman was, in fact, too drunk to form consent. Lack’s claim, though, was that she behaved in a way that he perceived to be consent, and that (according to his lawyers, no doubt) a reasonable person would have perceived to be consent. You’d really have to know more of the facts to know whether his arguments could have been persuasive to a reasonable factfinder. But you can ponder whether he should have a defense if he convinces you that he thought she consented, even if somebody brighter than he might have thought differently.</p>
<p>Sure. Just think about foreign objects and an incapacitated person. Just think about involuntary physical reactions and a restrained person. Those are, of course, pretty wild scenarios. But of course, if he is assumed to be incapable of consent if drunk, then it gets even easier.</p>
<p>Is it likely? No. Is it common? No. Is it possible? Yes.</p>
<p>We can assume that virtually everything that can happen has happened at some time, and some place. It’s a big country.</p>
<p>Extreme cases makes for bad law. We work with what we believe will work best for the majority of people the majority of the time, and we work to improve law as we know more (sometimes). And, yes, there are tens of thousands of poor, innocent people in jails and prisons across the country.</p>
</p>