OT - Interesting WSJ Article About Sexual Assault on College Campuses
In light of the whole Brandon Gibbons situation at Michigan and the Rasheed Sulaimon situation at Duke this year, as well as a somewhat similar situation at my graduate institution, I thought this was a pretty interesting read: http://www.wsj.com/articles/in-campus-rape-tribunals-some-men-see-injus…
Basically, campuses across the country have been directed to change their standard for sexual assault from roughly a 75% standard to a 50%+ standard, thus changing the outcome in many of these "gray area cases", where alcohol played a significant part in events, and it's hard to figure out what happened either way. It seems a bit strange to me that colleges have to figure this out independently of what the legal system decides, as I'm not necessarily aware of other crimes where that's the case (e.g. robbery,murder, etc.)
Basically law enforcement has to deal with this issue. Schools are not equipped or well trained in this arena. Lowering your standard of proof of guilt seems like a way for the campus bureaucrats to point at statistics of the issue on how they're cracking down even if they might not be getting the right people.
So why do universities have sworn law enforcement officials then if they cannot handle it? Imagine A2 police having to be the big dog that cleans up DPS' puppy messes?
If I were a taxpayer in A2, I'd be pissed.
If the a university's police department cannot or shouldn't handle it, then either find a qualified force or disband them.
" quick trigger to expel suspected rapists". Seriously?!!! No conviction required huh? Just wait until you find yourself similarly accused of something.
If someone comitted a murder in a dorm, does DPS handle it alone?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
DPS (or more appropriately UMPD), would have primary jurisdiction for any crime that occurs on UM property. They are a fully licensed police department by the State of Michigan. Whether they would abdicate the case to another law enforcement entity would be up to them and any agency they were abdicating to. Likely, given that they rarely investigate murder, they would defer to either AAPD, Washtenaw County Sherrif, Michigan State Police, Michigan Criminal Justice Bureau, or FBI. Certainly the MSP would likely be involved in dealing with the forensic evidence. At the very least its fairly common for AAPD/WCS to work with UMPD as its rare that a UMPD case is solely confined to the UM campus.
April 11th, 2015 at 10:03 PM ^
The police make arrests and their investigation goes as far as finding out who to arrest. When people saw "law enforcement should handle it" they also mean the courts, which universities aren't properly equipped to be.
Ummm I'm have no idea what your point is!
Regardless of who makes an arrest, it goes to the prosecution -- whom is neither affiliated with AAPD or UMDPS.
LE is NOT the courts; LE and courts are part of the justice system but otherwise, LE is to the courts as ham is to hamster. LE is police officers. Period. Those who suggest otherwise are woefully misinformed.
April 11th, 2015 at 11:10 PM ^
When the standard is lowered to, as in the McLeod case, he said vs she said and "he" doesn't get his diploma even though the police didn't think there was enough evidence to charge him, the "he" part of the equation is the one being "assaulted." I hope Duke has to give him his degree and he gets a couple million to start his career.
There is a reason that the standard of guilt in this country is "beyond a reasonable doubt." He said/she said with no corroborating evidence is not enough to deny a kid a diploma or to kick him out of school unless there is a lot more evidence here than the article cites.
It goes beyond that. In a criminal proceeding, the accused has his consitutional safeguards available, including the right to cross examine witnesses, which is something that is terribly important and sorely lacking in this new government-mandated preponderance of the evidence standard.
It is a very bad and, in my opinion, a largely unworkable idea, to place the burden on the school. I also have major concerns as to the level of objectivity as universities attempt to make the case that they are practicing enforcement.
Women have to be protected and "no means no", but when you get a couple of drunk college students together facts sometimes seem to be in short supply. As the article pointed out, it almost makes a case for both parties to sign a release form before doing the dirty deed.
April 11th, 2015 at 10:09 PM ^
B/c proving sexual assault vs proving cheating on an exam are two completely different things. One is a lot harder to do than the other...
I'll let you guess which one that one is...
April 11th, 2015 at 10:42 PM ^
You can prove cheating pretty easily but rape or sexual assault is very hard to prove. The police are very good at figuring stuff like this out.
Actually, they're absolutely terrible at it. http://www.propublica.org/article/police-fail-stop-nfl-darren-sharper-r… for a highly prominent example
Because police are terrible at investigating sexual assault and the courts aren't particularly good at convicting even in open and shut cases it's gone underreported. So there's been an impetus to set up an alternate process that victims can have faith in. Which for the most part has failed. The Daily just had a report this week on one such case where the University did an extremely poor job of informing the victim what she could/should do in the new process. And of course the prominent journalistic fuckups have hurt in public perception.
April 12th, 2015 at 12:41 PM ^
When I was a TA for an entry-level CS class, we caught a couple kids cheating on the first programming assignment. The evidence was clear (same code, same comments, same incorrect elements), and when confronted they all admitted to it. I think they were placed on probation, though I could be wrong. There was no denial, the evidence was clear and easily-accessible, and there were few, if any, extenuating circumstances (one student claimed it was his code and didn't know the others had copied from him).
With sexual assault, I'm sure the school would easily expell someone if they admitted it was true. But unlike a programming assignment or a test, there is usually little physical evidence clearly pointing to one outcome, both parties likely have different (though maybe subjectively "true") takes on the situation, and there are legal elements involved that don't exist for academic impropriety.
Nobody is claiming that a guilty person shouldn't be expelled, only that a university's "shoot first then ask questions" approach isn't the best for any party involved.
There are 2 sides to every coin. People seem to forget that.
And then there are cases like this one....
http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2014/05/lawsuit_claims_u-…
Thanks for that link. Whatever happened to those academic liberals of old who were - first and foremost - card-carrying members of the ACLU?
Should be noted the guy in that case says he hadn't had anything to drink and she had. How much seems like a major point of contention.
The lesson here is: don't hook up with drinking people, especially if you're sober and you can't at least claim a double standard for men and women.
And if you're the guy like in Drew's case, make sure you do a thorough background check on the girl and whether her not her sleeping habits jive with her mother's worldview... or you're getting accused of rape.
Smh.
April 12th, 2015 at 12:36 PM ^
Absolutely. Schools lack the legal tools to effectively investigate these claims; if the local police department fails to do so, it isn't a university's duty to compensate. Nobody is saying guilty parties shouldn't be punished, and it is well-known that sexual assaults are not handled well by society at large, but schools have competing duties to everyone involved, and it is nigh-impossible for them to properly serve everyone fairly as the primary adjudicator.
Here's an egregious case at UM in case anyone was wondering how Michigan would handle such issues
The sad thing is when you actually take action, you catch a bunch of heat and negative press.
Unfortunately, this leds to schools to take no action because it is better to cover it up (see Appling and Payne staying 4 years and not being expelled).
April 12th, 2015 at 12:23 AM ^
or non-revenue producing student athletes.
I think lumping in Big Money Athlete experience with everyday Muggle experience only clouds the issue. If you want to deal with the tremendously influential JoePa who wants to sweep it under the rug regardless of the system, then you have to deal with the tremendously influential JoePa who wants to sweep it under the rug regardless of the system.
Clearly we haven't learned any lessons from Duke Lacrosse or the Rolling Stone incidents
April 11th, 2015 at 11:06 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
You can't be serious. One in three women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime, and the vast majority of these cases happen during college. Most rapes go completely unreported. You really want to be on this side of the fence, where you're worried about what happens to "innocent" men on college campuses? How about what happens to innocent women? Most investigations by proxy side with the man and treat the woman like a liar. Shame on you.
It has ZERO to do with being on the side of some fence. It's about punishing wrong\-doers.
The answer is somewhere in the middle...
...we've got to find a way to make it so that all cases of assult are reoported while tempering the SJWs who go all Nancy Grace on someone before they've had their day in court.
I believe that you believe that men are being persecuted by "social justice warriors."
I believe you clearly don't know how to read.
April 12th, 2015 at 11:21 AM ^
Your comments are incredibly ignorant and self-righteous.
Regardless of how potent rape allegations are, that shouldn't have us as a society water down the definitions of guilt. This is an issue that has yet to be solved because of all the shades of grey that complicate most of these cases.
Lol now it's 1 in 3 women? Where do these fucking statistics come from...
1 in 3 is rape + domestic violence + stalking. So sayeth CDC.
Domestic volience, which is wrong all you SJWs -- I'm not saying it's right., is NOT always rape. Stalking doesn't always end in rape either.
Which is why I clarified! They're all sexually motivated violent crime motivated by fucked up power dynamics though.
The 1 in 3 number is actually from a WHO report from 2013 and that number is a combination of sexual and physical assault. And by its own admision, the report isn't accurate but a best guess result with significant population and statistical issues and based on surveys of existing publications. It is also a worldwide estimate with the estimate for affluent places like the US at 23.2%.
April 12th, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
So for the U.S. we should say 1 in 4. It doesn't make sense to use the global average; you're not equally likely to be raped in Denmark as you are in Somalia.
Why let facts get in the way of a good story.
Do you have a raw reference for these statistics you are quoting with actual reference to what is categorized as sexual assault wrt to these numbers?
This is just a bit of a pet peeve of mine. There are a lot of "statistics" reported and repeated wrt to sexual assault and rape both in the media, via advocacy organizations, and online that have little to no basis in actual fact. As an example, I present this Washington Post article about the various issues in using the oft used "1 in 5" reference: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/12/17/one-in-f…
April 12th, 2015 at 10:09 AM ^
"Innocent" until proven guilty is such an annoying little principle, isn't it Sommy?
I have no doubt the majority of rapes go unreported. Prosecuting rape is difficult, and traumatic for the victim. It's not fair, and that sucks. And that's an understatement.
But you don't right that wrong by instituting a policy where an unsubstantiated accusation (he said/she said) will result in the expulsion of the man without due process. If you disagree with that, then shame on you.
And your stats? Since not all women go to college, yet the "vast majority" of assults happen during college, that would mean the college rate would have to be roughly 50% at least, to achieve 33% overall. One half of all women during college? Where are you getting these stats, and what's your definition of assult? Not trying to downplay the seriousness of the issue, but let's keep it real.
April 12th, 2015 at 12:38 AM ^
Zero? Infinite? Negative? Large numbers? Small numbers?
While I do agree that some rapes go unreported, we cannot know how many actually do. Nor should we do anything but actually encourage people to actually report.
We can't base policy and certainly not law on ephemerals. Policy and Law need to be based on actual facts.
Actually we can. We've studied this issue. Because women will say things in private that they won't say to the criminal justice system. And DoJ has compiled that research here. (PDF)
2011 was the most recent year they had data for and 27% of people who said they were victims of rape had reported that to the poilce. Admittedly, that looks like it may be an outlier and the more usual rate is closer to 50%. Either way, yikes.