CAMPUS RAPE=FAKE NEWS?

This Administration just gets worse and worse.

http://www.politico.com/story/...

As a mother who is sending a daughter to college this fall, I am disgusted.

Everyone should be concerned when the government sets up a process totally lacking in a basic right to due process. 

DJT administration = moral Bizarro World

Gilgul said:

Everyone should be concerned when the government sets up a process totally lacking in a basic right to due process. 

Yes, and that has not happened to my knowledge.

Why are most sexual assault/rape cases on college campuses handled within the college?  Why aren't these cases handled by local police?

The retraction/apology:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

LOST said:

Gilgul said:

Everyone should be concerned when the government sets up a process totally lacking in a basic right to due process. 

Yes, and that has not happened to my knowledge.

Yes it happens all the time because to avoid a situation where the accused have due process rights the government pressured universities to set up a system where

yahooyahoo said:

Why are most sexual assault/rape cases on college campuses handled within the college?  Why aren't these cases handled by local police?

everything is done in an internal star chamber. 

It is a total violation of the right to due process.

I'd like to see the police involved.  As a mother of 2 sons, it appears too easy to file a complaint. Along with the ability to file years after the incident.

My daughter just did a project that studied sexual assault on campus.  According to RAINN, only about 20% of on campus sexual assaults are even reported.  I can't imagine that it is "easy" in any sense of the word to report a sexual assult.

As the mother of two daughters who according to statistics have about an 11% chance of being sexually assulted I find this statement ridiculous.

Gilgul said:

everything is done in an internal star chamber. 

It is a total violation of the right to due process.

I guess the Universities are trying to protect all parties and themselves. Would it be preferable for the local police to be called in every instance? 

krugle said:

I'd like to see the police involved.  As a mother of 2 sons, it appears too easy to file a complaint. Along with the ability to file years after the incident.

So you would rather have the alleged perpetrator arrested and prosecuted by the local Public Prosecutor.

I would much rather that than a proceeding that does not provide the accused basic due process rights to representation, an open proceeding, access to evidence and the right to examine the accuser. The system the government promotes now is very much a star chamber.

For those who want to know the prevailing federal requirements set forth by the DOE/OCR for universities in addressing allegations of sexual assault, I encourage you to read the documents at the following websites.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.html

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

I would.

LOST said:

krugle said:

I'd like to see the police involved.  As a mother of 2 sons, it appears too easy to file a complaint. Along with the ability to file years after the incident.

So you would rather have the alleged perpetrator arrested and prosecuted by the local Public Prosecutor.

Yes, I would too. In every other crime, one may request a jury of their peers and physical evidence. 

Please read this on behalf of all the boys and girls you know.  https://qz.com/981400/schools-...

University students can always go to the police rather than the college, and request to file criminal charges. Most prefer not to, for multiple reasons including publicity, high standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, severity of punishment, he-said she-said situations, etc. 

Jasmo said:

University students can always go to the police rather than the college, and request to file criminal charges. Most prefer not to, for multiple reasons including publicity, high standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, severity of punishment, he-said she-said situations, etc. 

The accuser can. The issue is that the accused can do nothing to get the due process rights that every accused should have but have been obliterated by the procedures pushed by the government. 

I am really not sure how I feel about this. Full due process applies to proceedings which can result in criminal penalties, specifically imprisonment. A University cannot imprison anyone. The worst penalty it can impose is expulsion. As a private institution does a University have the right to control who can attend and who cannot without the type of due process afforded a person facing jail?

There are several issues with the way Title IX is used.

Title IX exists to help prevent sex discrimination.

One issue is that Title IX is used to adjudicate criminal events.

Another is often the lack of due process when a sexually criminal event is adjudicated.

Last, because sexual criminal events like rape are given over to an administrative tribunal for resolution we are saying that rape and other college sexual crimes are not a big deal. Sexual crimes are a big deal, rape is a serious felony crime, and as such demand they be adjudicated by the justice system, to be handled by police and prosecutor professionals.

I'm surprised feminists have not come out against using Title IX for college sex crimes. Do they really accept that its acceptable that criminal sexual offenses be downgraded to some administrative tribunal status?

Title IX should specify that any report of sexual crime be immediately turned over to the criminal justice system.

I was trained to be a sexual harassment grievance board member in college. We were trained to counsel the aggrieved as psychology students to help them cope with the experience. There were at least one or two days worth of training. We were also educated on the state laws and the campus policies about sexual harassment and rape. The program was intended to train us to help victims feel protected and understood and to make them aware of their choices. Most of the women who I counseled (they were all women) chose the path of least resistance, which was to do nothing.

The difference between campus rulings through Title IX (which was instituted decades after my experience) was closer to a civil standard for conviction: " a preponderance of evidence," compared to the legal standard through regular police which was the felony standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." 

Since the standard for "conviction" under Title IX is closer to that in civil cases, and the consequences to the accused is not a felony charge, but permanent expulsion from a college, or in some cases temporary expulsion, the accusers prefer it, and the accused feel they did not have the same protections under the law. They didn't because the consequences were determined by the college that had voluntarily accepted them. No jail time. No name on the sexual predator list. Just a hiatus from college.

I am a man. I have known women who have been sexually assaulted and raped. I think the legal system has been designed for more definitive certainty in the resolution of these events than is reasonable - beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a standard that won't often be met in rape and sexual assault cases, which often devolve to two peoples' stories.

If "we" as a society, are to trust women to not make false claims about rape and sexual assault, we can use the "preponderance of evidence" standard to decide what has happened on college campuses (and elsewhere.)

If we don't accept this standard, then we are saying that most women who have the courage to say something that happened to them was wrong are untrustworthy.

False accusations are not likely to make it through the awkward system to any "nice guys." 

I'm not worried about my son. I'm more worried about my daughter. And I don't mind a process that is tilted in her favor.

Where is the LIKE button on this site?   

Thank you jersey boy!

jersey_boy said:

I was trained to be a sexual harassment grievance board member in college. We were trained to counsel the aggrieved as psychology students to help them cope with the experience. There were at least one or two days worth of training. We were also educated on the state laws and the campus policies about sexual harassment and rape. The program was intended to train us to help victims feel protected and understood and to make them aware of their choices. Most of the women who I counseled (they were all women) chose the path of least resistance, which was to do nothing.

The difference between campus rulings through Title IX (which was instituted decades after my experience) was closer to a civil standard for conviction: " a preponderance of evidence," compared to the legal standard through regular police which was the felony standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." 

Since the standard for "conviction" under Title IX is closer to that in civil cases, and the consequences to the accused is not a felony charge, but permanent expulsion from a college, or in some cases temporary expulsion, the accusers prefer it, and the accused feel they did not have the same protections under the law. They didn't because the consequences were determined by the college that had voluntarily accepted them. No jail time. No name on the sexual predator list. Just a hiatus from college.

I am a man. I have known women who have been sexually assaulted and raped. I think the legal system has been designed for more definitive certainty in the resolution of these events than is reasonable - beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a standard that won't often be met in rape and sexual assault cases, which often devolve to two peoples' stories.

If "we" as a society, are to trust women to not make false claims about rape and sexual assault, we can use the "preponderance of evidence" standard to decide what has happened on college campuses (and elsewhere.)

If we don't accept this standard, then we are saying that most women who have the courage to say something that happened to them was wrong are untrustworthy.

False accusations are not likely to make it through the awkward system to any "nice guys." 

I'm not worried about my son. I'm more worried about my daughter. And I don't mind a process that is tilted in her favor.

jersey_boy said:



I am a man. I have known women who have been sexually assaulted and raped. I think the legal system has been designed for more definitive certainty in the resolution of these events than is reasonable - beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a standard that won't often be met in rape and sexual assault cases, which often devolve to two peoples' stories.

If "we" as a society, are to trust women to not make false claims about rape and sexual assault, we can use the "preponderance of evidence" standard to decide what has happened on college campuses (and elsewhere.)

If we don't accept this standard, then we are saying that most women who have the courage to say something that happened to them was wrong are untrustworthy.

False accusations are not likely to make it through the awkward system to any "nice guys." 

I'm not worried about my son. I'm more worried about my daughter. And I don't mind a process that is tilted in her favor.

I am trying to think this through. At this point I would accept "preponderance of the evidence" as the standard for suspending or expelling a student but definitely not for sending someone to jail and labeling him for life as a felon and sex offender. For that a jury of twelve should be unanimously convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt".

jersey_boy said:

I was trained to be a sexual harassment grievance board member in college. We were trained to counsel the aggrieved as psychology students to help them cope with the experience. There were at least one or two days worth of training. We were also educated on the state laws and the campus policies about sexual harassment and rape. The program was intended to train us to help victims feel protected and understood and to make them aware of their choices. Most of the women who I counseled (they were all women) chose the path of least resistance, which was to do nothing.

The difference between campus rulings through Title IX (which was instituted decades after my experience) was closer to a civil standard for conviction: " a preponderance of evidence," compared to the legal standard through regular police which was the felony standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." 

Since the standard for "conviction" under Title IX is closer to that in civil cases, and the consequences to the accused is not a felony charge, but permanent expulsion from a college, or in some cases temporary expulsion, the accusers prefer it, and the accused feel they did not have the same protections under the law. They didn't because the consequences were determined by the college that had voluntarily accepted them. No jail time. No name on the sexual predator list. Just a hiatus from college.

I am a man. I have known women who have been sexually assaulted and raped. I think the legal system has been designed for more definitive certainty in the resolution of these events than is reasonable - beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a standard that won't often be met in rape and sexual assault cases, which often devolve to two peoples' stories.

If "we" as a society, are to trust women to not make false claims about rape and sexual assault, we can use the "preponderance of evidence" standard to decide what has happened on college campuses (and elsewhere.)

If we don't accept this standard, then we are saying that most women who have the courage to say something that happened to them was wrong are untrustworthy.

False accusations are not likely to make it through the awkward system to any "nice guys." 

I'm not worried about my son. I'm more worried about my daughter. And I don't mind a process that is tilted in her favor.

A process that is tilted in any person's favor, is not a fair process.

TomR

Is the standard justice or fairness?

They're not the same.

Tom_R said:

A process that is tilted in any person's favor, is not a fair process.

TomR

Justice is the result of a fair process, free of corruption.

TomR

jersey_boy said:

I was trained to be a sexual harassment grievance board member in college. We were trained to counsel the aggrieved as psychology students to help them cope with the experience. There were at least one or two days worth of training. We were also educated on the state laws and the campus policies about sexual harassment and rape. The program was intended to train us to help victims feel protected and understood and to make them aware of their choices. Most of the women who I counseled (they were all women) chose the path of least resistance, which was to do nothing.

The difference between campus rulings through Title IX (which was instituted decades after my experience) was closer to a civil standard for conviction: " a preponderance of evidence," compared to the legal standard through regular police which was the felony standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." 

Since the standard for "conviction" under Title IX is closer to that in civil cases, and the consequences to the accused is not a felony charge, but permanent expulsion from a college, or in some cases temporary expulsion, the accusers prefer it, and the accused feel they did not have the same protections under the law. They didn't because the consequences were determined by the college that had voluntarily accepted them. No jail time. No name on the sexual predator list. Just a hiatus from college.

I am a man. I have known women who have been sexually assaulted and raped. I think the legal system has been designed for more definitive certainty in the resolution of these events than is reasonable - beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a standard that won't often be met in rape and sexual assault cases, which often devolve to two peoples' stories.

If "we" as a society, are to trust women to not make false claims about rape and sexual assault, we can use the "preponderance of evidence" standard to decide what has happened on college campuses (and elsewhere.)

If we don't accept this standard, then we are saying that most women who have the courage to say something that happened to them was wrong are untrustworthy.

False accusations are not likely to make it through the awkward system to any "nice guys." 

I'm not worried about my son. I'm more worried about my daughter. And I don't mind a process that is tilted in her favor.

Impressive, one or two days of training. Would anyone be similarly impressed if you had a civil court case with the judge telling you he had one or two days of legal training? What about if a to-be psychologist is seeing a patient and the patient is told "don't worry, I'll take good care of you, after all had I had a day or two of training."

It seems to me the college that "trained" you was trying to do things on the cheap.

You made my point in stating the IX sexual assault hearings are simply  preponderance of evidence, denigrated to a civil matter and as you put it "Just a hiatus from college." In other words, let us not consider sexual assault to be a serious criminal matter.

I prefer these matters to be handled by professionals. Investigated by professionals, charged by professionals and if need be resolved in criminal court. All steps that can be openly reviewed.

You wrote 'If "we" as a society, are to trust women to not make false claims'. But guess what? Some are. There are those who are mentally ill. Mental illness is not restricted to males. Can I assume that you being a psychology student would be aware of that?

You wrote 'And I don't mind a process that is tilted in her favor.' As a father, I can see that. However, justice is never served by tilting the scales.

You wrote 'False accusations are not likely to make it through the awkward system to any "nice guys."' But they do.

Telling the parent of an innocent that we feel women do not lie, that we therefore its OK to tilt the scales in the woman's favor and besides false accusations are not likely to make it through, does not really cut it.

BG9,

The training was for counseling anyone in the college community about the process. It was not the whole process. The board was made up of Faculty, Dining Hall Personnel, buildings and grounds personnel, and students. The intent was to have a familiar face in each demographic for anyone to approach who had a concern. Naturally, the students on the board turned over every few years, so the training was repeated regularly and updated.

If anyone decided to pursue a legal case or a case within the campus policies it became a matter managed by law enforcement or the campus disciplinary body respectively. 

No, a college student with two days of training did not decide outcomes for anyone. Additionally, the accuser was the one who decided which avenue to pursue and was the one who decided whether their complaint was "not a serious criminal matter." My role was to be an ombudsman for someone who was upset and didn't know what the rules were. And it is important to state (as this whole thread is a reply to the statement that 90% of the cases were two drunk people and one instigated the complaint out of regret) that most of the women who had complaints did NOT pursue any action. In my experience, sexual assault and rape is largely under reported, and many estimates confirm that, although data about what was not done is alway difficult to collect.

To all who chimed in about my statement of the process being tilted in a woman's favor, perhaps I should have said tilted to become more even. Otherwise it is tilted against accusers, who in fact are not actually always women.

Does everyone who is arguing against Title IX think civil cases based on a preponderance of evidence are also not fair? We accept the outcome of those without the certainty of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Those cases too are vulnerable to false claims and mentally ill accusers, but no one loses their rights or is jailed, so the courts try to settle matters fairly. Title IX is the same, only on college campuses.