<p>“I believe UND’s latest position on CW dates to Feb (and earlier) and the OCR letter came out in April-?”</p>
<p>The school used the “preponderance of evidence” standard in this case. Now all schools will have to.</p>
<p><a href=“http://townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/2011/07/19/the_rape_of_caleb_warner/page/full/[/url]”>http://townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/2011/07/19/the_rape_of_caleb_warner/page/full/</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would agree. I find it astonishing that they haven’t, actually. It would perhaps be understandable if they were privy to information that the police did not have, but that seems unlikely in this case. Instead, it smacks of a bureaucracy covering its ass, at the expense of a student who has essentially been stripped of any standing as a member of their community as a result of their adopting a low standard of “proof.” That’s the way it appears from this distance, anyway.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One would hope not.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That line of behavior certainly ties the hands of the administration. It would be very difficult for it not to create a negative impression of the possibility that the accused was innocent.</p>
<p>^What gets me is that the web is so filled with the outraged and inflammatory commentary that it’s hard to find something that looks like the real facts. There may be- it has to be said- there may be more than what we have read. And/or UND could have some extraordiarily inflexible Code. Or, who knows what.</p>
<p>I know I’m repeating myself, but the problem I have here is trying to treat different things as if they are they same. Sure, you can label a rape accusation as a civil matter of sexual discrimination, but the fact remains that in most respects it is a serious crime, and the consequences are serious for the accused. It is partly because of the serious consequences of criminal convictions that we have the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard in criminal cases. So I just don’t like the idea that a person can be officially labelled a rapist by the college disciplinary system based only on a preponderance of the evidence. The consequences are too great. For me, it’s that simple, and no convoluted definitions of what is technically “civil” can change that.</p>
<p>I would feel the same way, by the way, if a college had a rule against theft or plagiarism that resulted in serious consequences, like expulsion. Serious matters of that nature should not be adjudicated on a preponderance of the evidence standard.</p>
<p>^^There are generations of men (and a few women) who have been suspended or expelled for theft, plagiarism, and getting into fights who probably wish their cases had been adjudicated by a guilt beyond a reasonable doubt standard. But, let’s not kid ourselves, what you and Parent57 are proposing is no less a revision than the OCR letter.</p>
<p>johnwesley, I may be wrong, but I think most colleges use a “clear and convincing evidence” standard for serious disciplinary proceedings. While it’s not as protective as “beyond a reasonable doubt,” I think it’s appropriate for serious consequences that still aren’t as serious as imprisonment and felon status. The OCR letter is telling colleges that use “clear and convincing” for plagiarism, theft, etc., that they must use a different, more lenient standard for one particular–and even more serious–crime. That’s my concern.</p>
<p>If there are colleges that are using a “preponderance of the evidence” standard for theft, plagiarism, etc.–well, in my opinion, they shouldn’t. Indeed, at some colleges the decisions on whether to “convict” somebody of a disciplinary violation is based on a majority vote of a committee. So to allow a person to be expelled–and identified as a rapist–based on, say, three out of five people thinking that on balance, there is a little more evidence of guilt than not–is not good practice.</p>
<p>Hunt, just dig around CC for tales of kids who weren’t allowed “clear and convincing” for beer cans found outside their dorm room doors, the “smell” of dope, an unjust accusation of cheating, whatever. One kid (said she) lent her cell and it was used to harass another- guess who got the punishment? Plagiarism can also lead to expulsion, depending on the school; sure, outright copying can be proven, but lesser forms of plagiarism are harder to be sure of (borrowing the bulk of an idea w/o attributing or improper attributing.)</p>
<p>I agree with your concern. But, the OCR letters are about how the college takes action regarding discrimination (which includes the sexual aspects.) No more than that. Some of it is because a college is, in theory, a community on its own, separate from the general public. Some colleges are going to have fiercer Codes of Conduct. Some will have a different view of college behavior standards. Can’t you blame the college, if it yields too quick a judgment? If they fail to properly weigh, does it matter if they use preponderance or clear and convincing? Really? </p>
<p>I also believe the schools that were scolded for using c and c had used that principle to ignore the accusers. And, remember, we don’t have stats on how many accuseds get expelled, suspended, sent for mediation or counseling or how many cases are chalked up to consensual. Can someone find that data?</p>
<p>
Well, sure. I just think the letters are taking the wrong approach.</p>
<p>I think it matters a lot whether a decision-maker uses a clear and convincing vs. a preponderance of the evidence standard. It’s a matter of what you do when there’s a close call–when the evidence is equivocal or spotty, when you aren’t sure exactly which way you should go. With clear and convincing, all such cases should lead to a not guilty verdict, whereas with a preponderance standard, some will and some won’t. I find that unacceptable for an accusation of rape, with dire consequences for the accused.</p>
<p>Again, I think the same for other violations with serious consequences. If it’s a case of how loud the stereo was, and whether the student gets a reprimand for noise, then it’s not such a big deal.</p>
<p>Let me put it this way: how many innocent boys are you willing to see expelled and labelled as rapists in order to increase the number of guilty boys who are punished? If you use a preponderance standard, there will be more innocent boys punished than if you use a clear and convincing standard. How many more is hard to say, but there will be more.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How many guilty boys are being punished now? </p>
<p>How many innocent girls are being denied justice now?</p>
<p>We don’t know how many innocents will be sacrificed.
At this point, I think the same core issue concerns both of us- the grey areas.</p>
<p>Legal def, clear and convincing: my italics
A standard applied by a jury or by a judge in a nonjury trial to measure the probability of the truthfulness of particular facts alleged during a civil lawsuit.</p>
<p>Clear and convincing proof means that the evidence presented by a party during the trial is more highly probable to be true than not and the jury or judge has a firm belief or conviction in it. A greater degree of believability must be met than the common standard of proof in civil actions, preponderance of the evidence, which requires that the facts more likely than not prove the issue for which they are asserted.</p>
<h2>The standard of clear and convincing proof…is applied only in particular cases, primarily those involving an equitable remedy, such as reformation of a deed or contract for mistake.</h2>
<p>So, “more highly probable” versus “more likely than not” - neither is great. I could argue that both are subjective. </p>
<p>We all know what can go on at colleges. My concern is for some poor kid who misreads his freedoms and gets in a mess he doesn’t have the maturity to deal with. Early in the thread, there was insistence that “not my son.” Any kid can get far beyond good judgment. It’s our responsibility to have our eyes wide open and our kids’, too- sons and daughters.</p>
<p>
Some are, some aren’t.</p>
<p>
Some are, some aren’t. Again, though, how many innocent people are you prepared to punish in order to punish more of the guilty ones?</p>
<p>lookingforward, clear and convincing is somewhere between “beyond a reasonable doubt” and “by a preponderance of the evidence.” There can be subjectivity (and miscarriages of justice) no matter what standard you use. But personally, I hold the presumption of innocence sacred, and I think you have to use an elevated standard of proof if you are really goint to presume that somebody is innocent unless proven guilty.</p>
<p>It’s an age-old religious tenet, too- in the form of forgiving those who harm you. Easier said than done. Nonetheless- you’d presume the accused innocent and what? Leave him to possibly continue? Remember, the first step is if there is a climate of hostility or hostile environment or however they put it- ie, affecting the accuser’s access to the education and etc. </p>
<p>I am not saying presume guilt. But, we separate fighting kids, we send them to separate corners, we allow restraining orders on very little proof. We make many, many decisions in our lives based on perceived potential of harm, ahead of the ideal, “presumed innocent.” </p>
<p>Interesting argument. I don’t mean to continue it so long. I think I’ll back off for a while.</p>
<p>How about this?:</p>
<p>The University Court will hear the evidence. If the Court determines that the boy is guilty “by the preponderance of the evidence”, the consequences are a note in his record plus, say, 100 hours of Community Service.</p>
<p>If the Court determines that the boy is guilty by “clear and convincing evidence”, the consequences are the above plus suspension until the girl graduates.</p>
<p>If the Court determines that the boy is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the boy is expelled.</p>
<p>Okay, I can’t take it any more! I’ve been lurking for months but had to come back and post on this thread!!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>7 years ago, my son, who is a WONDERFUL young man, raised by, if I do say so myself, great parents, hangs out with good kids, NEVER has been in ANY trouble EVER - was falsely accused by a girl at his high school. She said that he, “forced himself on her.” </p>
<p>Here are the specifics - He was home watching his little brother while my husband and I were out. They were both upstairs, he in his room, little brother in playroom next door. He fell asleep watching TV. Girl comes over, and little brother lets her in, saying big bro is upstairs in his room. She goes up there, goes into the room and crawls in bed with him. My son freaked out! Told her she needed to go. Basically kicked her out. My younger son was next door and heard the conversation, saw her leave the room, and saw her walk out the door. My older son came out and said, “What The Heck!” to younger son. They both laughed about it and thought it was done. Whole incident lasted maybe 5-10 minutes.</p>
<p>Later in the week he heard that she had started telling people at school that he “forced himself on her.” I heard from a mom who called saying, “I heard this, but I know your son and know that there is no way, but you need to know what she’s saying.” </p>
<p>We talked about it with son and he said, just to let it die down, that he didn’t want to cause any more drama - well, she wouldn’t let it die, telling more and more people, crying in the lunchroom, etc. It was terrible for him. People he knew kept saying, “don’t worry, we know she’s a psycho.” but, it’s pretty disturbing to just be trying to get through a school day and someone is doing this to you.</p>
<p>Finally my son came to us and asked for our help. My husband’s response was to call her parents, set up a time, and get in the car with my son and drive over to the girls house to have a sit down with her and her parents.</p>
<p>She fessed up when her father confronted her with the story. Her parents made her call everyone she had told the lie to and admit that she had lied. </p>
<p>Thank GOD he was not in college and had this happen, and have the girl report him. Or, that she didn’t go to authorities where he would have been tied up in the legal system.</p>
<p>He’s graduated from college now, and gainfully employed, so we don’t need to worry about this ruling that applies to college. But he knows what can happen when you spurn a girl/woman and she’s a nut case. What a shame that someone can and will try to ruin someone with false accusations. And, trust me, it happens!!</p>
<p>ag54, I’m sorry your family went through this, and glad that your son had a witness–although I’m sure the hang 'em high contingent would have dismissed it because they were brothers–and that your S wasn’t caught in a system that was stacked against him. The conduct of the girl’s parents was very admirable.</p>
<p>I have a friend whose daughter heard the sexual abuse story of another girl at a sleep over. The next day, she went to school and started telling people that she had been sexually abused “by the father of one of her best friends.” My friend received a call from the principal of the middle school, and she explained that her D had just heard this story from another girl, and that she was sure it was untrue. When her D got home, she talked to her about it, and explained that since everyone knew who her best friends were, she was leveling serious charges against real people. The next day her D went to school and said no, it wasn’t one of the fathers, it was a person she met in the adjacent city. (Where, btw, she had never been alone.)</p>
<p>This girl went on to make further false abuse claims in HS. She was believed by many–including the elite LAC to which she gained admission–and lives were altered as a result.</p>
<p>Trust me, it happens.</p>
<p>Here’s an article by Gonzalo Lira telling about his experience being falsely accused of sexual harassment at Dartmouth: </p>
<p>[Gonzalo</a> Lira: What I Learned At Dartmouth](<a href=“http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-i-learned-at-dartmouth.html]Gonzalo”>http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-i-learned-at-dartmouth.html)</p>
<p>These stories (all of which must be accepted with hesitation, because they tell only one side of the story) do point up one factor which (in my mind) is another reason not to use a lenient standard of proof: there are external factors that may make one person more likely to be believed than another, such as race, sex, economic status, etc., that have nothi8ng to do with the actual evidence. And if you have a standard that simply turns on which party you believe more than the other–even if it’s only a little bit more–those things are more likely to create a miscarriage of justice. Certainly, that works both ways, and a poor black woman might have trouble convincing a factfinder that she was assaulted by a rich white man, but the presumption of innocence flows in one direction.</p>
<p>^The Dartmouth story also shows that the preponderance of evidence standard of proof was in place as long ago as twenty years ago.</p>
<p>
So what? If it’s a bad standard now, it was bad then, too. I suppose if you didn’t like that standard, you could have chosen not to go to Dartmouth. But now you don’t have that choice, because all the schools are being required to employ that standard.</p>
<p>Frankly, it boggles the mind that the blogger cited above should have been suspended at D, it the story he relates is accurate.</p>
<p>Yet there are posters in this and similar threads who clearly would have felt completely comfortable doing so.</p>