The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
School of Hard Knocks: Campus Discipline
zagdrob
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Moving the discussion here from the Democratic Primary thread...
A discussion has arisen about the proper role of schools when crimes like sexual assault occur on campus. As there are many cases of universities covering up rapes for a variety of reasons, such as (but certainly not limited to) Florida State covering up for Jameis Winston or Penn State covering up Jerry Sandusky raping children for years, this has spurred quite a bit of debate.
Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have argued that on-campus crimes need to be treated as the serious criminal matters that they are, in a fair and transparent matter. Hillary has also said campuses should have a role.
As the discussion is certainly worth continuing, I'm moving it here so we can continue it without crapping all over the Democratic Primary thread.
Please, let's stick to the actual roles Universities should have in investigating crimes or disciplining students, and avoid the whole MRA derail that often comes when there is any discussion of sexual assault.
A discussion has arisen about the proper role of schools when crimes like sexual assault occur on campus. As there are many cases of universities covering up rapes for a variety of reasons, such as (but certainly not limited to) Florida State covering up for Jameis Winston or Penn State covering up Jerry Sandusky raping children for years, this has spurred quite a bit of debate.
Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have argued that on-campus crimes need to be treated as the serious criminal matters that they are, in a fair and transparent matter. Hillary has also said campuses should have a role.
As the discussion is certainly worth continuing, I'm moving it here so we can continue it without crapping all over the Democratic Primary thread.
Please, let's stick to the actual roles Universities should have in investigating crimes or disciplining students, and avoid the whole MRA derail that often comes when there is any discussion of sexual assault.
0
Posts
Then the student should go to real law enforcement. Which is an option that currently exists and an option which--as I've said many times now--Hillary explicitly supports.
Perhaps there should be greater legal responsibility for campuses to share evidence and greater protection for whistleblower. That is something that--as I've said many times now--Hillary explicitly supports.
The position that you keep attacking, the idea that campuses should get dibs on the crime just because they own the property, isn't one that anyone at all is supporting.
And as far as retaliation goes, that's not something that goes away even if you totally cut the campus out. That is a totally separate question than who should be handling rape cases.
So, apparently you didn't read up on that particular case.
One, it did, in fact, go to the criminal justice system. The DA refused to prosecute.
Two, the internal UO investigation found that yes, those players did in fact rape the victim.
Three, the UO administration manipulated the punishment, as the accused were star basketball players. In response, Doe sued the school.
Four, after being sued, UO then took her counseling records without a court order, claiming they could do so legally due to an interaction between HIPAA and FERPA.
Allowing them to get involved is giving them dibs. At that point they can ruin any witness testimony, evidence or anything else. It's simply another layer to fuck things up that has absolutely no reason to do anything but whats in its very best interests both financially and socially.
If that means totally squashing any rape cases with their profitable sports teams or high profile students, that's exactly what they will do. As has been proven many times.
Conversely because they have absolutely no legal culpability with their behavior, they can also ruin a students future based on the loosest of accusations with no recourse for the student and no harm done to the school.
It's shitty both ways. It's like a serrated double edged sword with no positives.
These are all very different perspectives and, sane or not, color why people want the system to go one way or the other. From my perspective, I don't see any downsides to making it easier to report and making the process more transparent than it is now, even if that isn't the absolute best possible way to do thibgs.
I think colleges absolutely have a responsibility to set and enforce policies for student behavior on campus. The policies should be transparent and fair, but they have an obligation to ensure the safety of their students on campus. There is no reason those policies can't hold students to a higher or different standard than criminal proceedings.
I also think that colleges should have an obligation to involve law enforcement in criminal matters that happen on campus. While they may have sworn law enforcement that is involved in the initial investigation due to their relationship to the student body, schools should under no circumstances sweep crimes under the rug.
Except that survivors routinely state that forcing schools to report to law enforcement would only serve to discourage victims from reporting at all.
Higher standard how? Either you raped someone or you didn't. We are beginning to see a backlash of lawsuits from expelled/punished students because it turns out that colleges really dont care. They'll screw over victims when it benefits thier sports team, etc, and they'll screw over students for life without due process or a clear process of appeal because it is easier and better for business to simply get the matter done and out of sight.
This isn't your typical corporation, this is the portal to being a successful citizen in America. Colleges have proven untrustworthy on this issue, and it's too important to let them keep fucking it up.
Ok. And? That sucks and all but it's a non issues in this context. It means you work to change that, It doesn't mean you bypass the criminal justice system for either party. That's not fair to the victims or the accused.
Due process is a right.
So basically it's a problem with no solution?
We can let schools handle it and leave the decision on escalation to them...and with frightening regularity watch them sweep it under the rugs. I like to think most schools are going to act in good faith, but there are countless reasons - star athletes, campus safety numbers, prominent alumni, etc for them not to.
Or we can make the schools escalate it to proper law enforcement. This makes it a criminal matter, but as you're pointing out it will discourage a lot of reporting.
On top of that, people are arguing in favor of (regardless of the case) neutering the school's ability to take action in disciplinary matters. Not just sexual assault either - they are basically arguing to tie the school's hands on essentially any discipline whatsoever. Everyone brings up rape, but what about vandalism, theft, or assault? Should the school be powerless to act until the person is prosecuted?
I think it's goosey (not that you are) that schools should have no power over their student body. Or they are arguing that sexual assault is so different from other crimes / accusations that it needs to be treated through an entirely different process...which, I guess there could be arguments to that effect, but I don't see them being made.
So is freedom of association.
Beyond that I'm not partial to public colleges being able to set up a bunch of extra-judicial fiefdoms. If they want to wrap criminal behavior into a code of conduct psudeo-contract that's fine, but that contract should be subject to outside adjudication rather than some solely some internal kangaroo court. A secondary shadow criminal justice system with no protections for the defendant and arbitrary burdens of proof is not something we need to empower the state to have.
Private schools can do what ever the fuck they want obviously, even if its stupid backwards shit like expelling students for looking at porn or w/e.
I agree pretty much 100%.
We could probably argue around the edges, but if outside arbitration / mediation is available is part of the process, I'm with you.
That's a hard sidestep. Accusation shouldn't be equivalent to guilty, and victims should be able to rely on the law to protect them. Handing both parties to a system that does not care and has massive incentives to simply find the option that best benefits themselves and do so without due process or a clear process of appeal is quite frankly horrifying.
Seems like both criminal justice and school punishments should be able to coexist nicely with each other? You know, just like every other facet of our society where people might be held to several standards simultaneously by multiple sources of authority.
I understand and agree that their process should be more open and done in a more impartial manner, but there is absolutely no reason they should have zero ability to set their own behavioral system, state entity or not.
Absolutely. It only becomes troublesome in the context of a crime. Trying to handle that internally isn't good for either party.
Good point.
Seems unlikely that a victim would want criminal prosecution but would balk at a school investigation in addition to that, so that probably doesn't conflict.
I think you are confused because the argument is that sexual assault should be treated as a separate matter-just not from the side you think. California for instance just reversed the burden of proof onto the accused in college disciplinary hearings, but exclusively those involving sexual misconduct.
As far as I know, schools are not pushing to apply this standard to any of the other crimes you list. Or even non-crimes, like cheating.
I don't see the problem with handling rape accusations the exact same way, as rape is a felony. Get the police involved. The university gets involved as much as the police want them involved.
Absolutely no reason for the university to do any investigation on their own, as it's a criminal case.
We've already seen the bullshit when rampant rumors turn out to be complete falsehoods, like Rolling Stone & University of Virginia or mattress girl.
Rape is a felony, treat it like one, bump it up to the cops.
That's the exact opposite of what I'm saying, which is that schools should be able to discipline students without requiring it to be a criminal matter.
Hell, when I was attending college a guy was suspended for a year for making a death threat. It was a crime! It was also in person and there was absolutely no way he'd get convicted, but he absolutely was terrorizing other students and should not have been allowed to attend the university. It seems ludicrous to force students to press criminal charges against somebody for action to be taken.
That was in the context of the 4 bullet points I posted earlier.
Unless you're suggesting the school should investigate something expressly against the wishes of the victim? That doesn't make a lot of sense.
Affirmative consent is not "reversing the burden of proof". In fact, it's actually bringing rape in line with other charges, as demonstrating consent as a defense would be on the defense in every other crime out there.
I was mobile posting and missed it, apologies.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Universities are ill equipped to act as a political unit. They should not attempt to enforce the law in parallel to actual law enforcement, especially since its pretty obvious they are bad at it.
Just as an aside, the idea of a campus sexual assault "crisis" is kinda annoying. College aged women are substantially less likely to be raped on campus than women who don't attend college (1.2 times more likely to be raped if you're a non-student woman). Women who attend college are more likely to be affluent and white, however. Its a "crisis" because of ideology and prejudice
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Your employer will probably check to see if you violated any of those contracts and employee code of conduct rules though. Even if nothing happens with the criminal case.
Having sex is not a crime. Therefor the accuser(prosecutor) needs to show both the occurrence of the sex AND the lack of consent, rather than just the former to prove a rape claim.
The affirmative consent standard the schools are applying removes the second part of that. The accuser just needs to prove sex(a non-criminal act) occurred. It's telling that they did not amend the penal code the same way, it is as they knew it wouldn't withstand scrutiny.
Colleges should be barred entirely from investigating sexual assault (and all other crimes), and tie any on-campus consequences for rapists to a conviction.
if there's a problem with reporting it to law enforcement we should fix that but I don't trust a college administration even a little bit (and I don't trust cops very much so that says something)
colleges are great for providing support structures for victims though
Being given a gift isn't a crime either. And yet if you were to use that as a defense against a charge of theft, the expectation would be on the defense to prove that the item was given freely.
Or to put it another way, it's not having sex that isn't a crime - it's having consentual sex that isn't a crime.
I am sold a video game from a friend. That friend then reports the game as stolen to the police. The police arrest me for theft. My defense is I had permission to take it, but if I don't have proof, ie a bill of sale, this defense doesn't fly.
No one is saying you have to, but I would argue it's the victims prerogative who they decide to trust.
We should absolutely fix the problem with reporting to law enforcement though. Don't think anyone disagrees there.
The defense doesn't have a burden of affirmative proof of anything in a criminal case. Defendants are assumed not guilty by default. The burden would be entirely on the prosecution to prove that the item was not given freely.
I'd add the caveat that colleges should be required to basically do whatever law enforcement wants in assisting with an investigation otherwise we're in agreement