Gophers Football

[TheLeviathan]

 

 Levi, I understand that you don't think the U should take these steps because it doesn't adhere to the letter of the law. But I respectfully and very strongly disagree. Because rape and sexual assault happen and are often times difficult to prove. I don't think it's unreasonable for any school to start addressing the gray areas of these situations.

 

Just to be clear, I'm not opposed to the U punishing these guys.  I'm opposed to the process and that the process is being applied to something as serious as sexual assault.   And part of my issues is that I would argue that they are "addressing the gray areas".  A college tribunal is simply not the place to do that.

 

I'm ok with sexual harassment being determined in this way, but not sexual assault.  To me that's a criminal matter and should only be determined through the courts where the process protects all involved.  (Though, I'd grant, there is definitely room for our judicial system to offer more to victims/accusers than is currently there)

[drjim]

 

I went to school on a dry campus, it didn't stop anything.

And yes, both men and women need to take respinsibiiity for their actions, but this also needs to be treated very carefully. It does get close to victim blaming/shaming as well as 'okaying' the actions of the aggressor when we start suggesting, 'well, he/she shouldn't have been drinking.' 'He/she shouldn't have been wearing that.' 'He/she shouldn't have agreed to be in her/his room alone because of course things will happen.' 'He/she have been 'promiscuous' before so ... ' I went to a school who did this kind of thing. And as recently as last year, their idea of dealing with the problem, after suggesting all of the above, and letting the victims know it was their fault because of their lack of respinsibiiity in the situation, was to put both parties into a room telling them to resolve their differences. Teaching responsibility is one thing, but there also needs to be consequences, and I don't think the consequences should be for victims to have to face their attackers day after day, while being blamed for what happened to them. And that's what schools have done and still do.

This whole issue is being discussed now because the U decided to suspend some of its players for their behavior and part in this. It's not a criminal judgement they are imposing. It's a 'you need to take responsibility for your actions or there will be consequences for actions' judgement they are imposing. And I say, 'Finally!' Maybe it's not ultimately the right way about it, but I think it's a start. And yeah, maybe it's not fair to all of sudden start now, but when will it be fair? Schools and their administrators and boards/regents have for too long brushed this under the rug for the sake of protecting its school's reputation, and that needs to stop. Maybe if they stop brushing it under the rug and treating these situations as if it's okay, actual criminality will be reduced later in life by some of these students who have for years grown up to believe it's okay and take it steps further. Yes, even in this case the university should allow due process, but I don't think it needs to be just about adherence to our legal system. Levi, I understand that you don't think the U should take these steps because it doesn't adhere to the letter of the law. But I respectfully and very strongly disagree. Because rape and sexual assault happen and are often times difficult to prove. I don't think it's unreasonable for any school to start addressing the gray areas of these situations.

 

I respect this response and thought process and agree our goal should be 0 sexual assaults.

 

The problem, though, and the crux of this specific debate, is that there is a significant part of the population that doesn't think what happened that night IS sexual assault or rape. It is especially dicey when the established legal system says it is not (or at least there is no way to prove that it is) but the school review says that it is and enacts harsh punishments, including on some who very likely did not take part.

 

Sadly, perhaps tragically, there is a lot of gray in encounters like this. I had to work professionally for several years working through sexual assaults and despite lots of training I don't feel any better equipped now than I did before.

 

I do think that if we want to stop sexual assault we have to be willing to explore all things that contribute.

[Squirrel]

Just to be clear, I'm not opposed to the U punishing these guys.  I'm opposed to the process and that the process is being applied to something as serious as sexual assault.   And part of my issues is that I would argue that they are "addressing the gray areas".  A college tribunal is simply not the place to do that.

 

I'm ok with sexual harassment being determined in this way, but not sexual assault.  To me that's a criminal matter and should only be determined through the courts where the process protects all involved.  (Though, I'd grant, there is definitely room for our judicial system to offer more to victims/accusers than is currently there)

Well, I disagree. Sexual assault is sometimes very difficult to prove and how cases are prosecuted and defended make it even worse. As I edited above, I don't think it unreasonable for a school to expect it's students to represent them better. Yeah, that also is a slippery slope and can go too far, but doing nothing because it might go too far is also unacceptable.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Well, I disagree. Sexual assault is sometimes very difficult to prove and how cases are prosecuted and defended make it even worse. As I edited above, I don't think it unreasonable for a school to expect it's students to represent them better. Yeah, that also is a slippery slope and can go too far, but doing nothing because it might go too far is also unacceptable.

 

Crimes are supposed to be difficult to prove.  It's what our system is based on and I find that absolutely essential.  The "how" part is where we can do some good though, I agree there.  We can do more about how prosecutors, police officers, and judges treat the process.

 

On this issue - If the school had punished them for lewd behavior and sexual harassment - I'm 100% on board.  Leveling it up to sexual assault is where you lose me.  This isn't the process to make that determination.

Edited December 20, 2016 by TheLeviathan

[nicksaviking]

 

We'd "solve" a lot of societal issues by banning booze.

 

It just also comes with a host of issues which makes it a bad recommendation.  However, a dry campus and dry frat/sorority houses might go a long, long way.

 

 

Most colleges do ban booze even while the legal system may have no power to back them which means the school is solely responsible for enforcement.

 

So colleges making their own rules and enforcing their own infractions regarding booze is OK but making their own rules and enforcing their own infractions over sexual misbehavior is not?

 

That's completely contradictory.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Most colleges do ban booze even while the legal system may have no power to back them which means the school is solely responsible for enforcement.

 

So colleges making their own rules and enforcing their own infractions regarding booze is OK but making their own rules and enforcing their own infractions over sexual misbehavior is not?

 

That's completely contradictory.

 

You don't think there is a difference between sexual assault and having a dry policy?

 

Perhaps we've arrived at the crux of the disagreement.

[Squirrel]

 

You don't think there is a difference between sexual assault and having a dry policy?

 

Perhaps we've arrived at the crux of the disagreement.

I don't think having a dry policy helps. I went to school on a dry campus, it didn't help, nor would I consider the campus 'dry' as everyone found ways. All it did was to conceal and make 'secret' student activities while the RAs looked the other way because 'kids will be kids.' And this when the legal drinking age in MN was 19.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I don't think having a dry policy helps. I went to school on a dry campus, it didn't help, nor would I consider the campus 'dry' as everyone found ways. All it did was to conceal and make 'secret' student activities while the RAs looked the other way because 'kids will be kids.' And this when the legal drinking age in MN was 19.

 

I don't disagree, I suggested some sort of combat against drinking might help, but I largely think the drinking and assaults would just move locales and not so much stop the behavior.  Again I think more of a cultural/messaging tact is in order.

 

I really like the "yes means yes" as a vehicle for education and messaging.  Not so much as a vehicle for deciding sexual assault on a campus tribunal.

[nicksaviking]

 

You don't think there is a difference between sexual assault and having a dry policy?

 

Perhaps we've arrived at the crux of the disagreement.

 

I really can't believe that is a position anybody would logically take. Schools can make rules about alcohol but not sexual assault, frankly I'm pretty disturbed that this is a position anyone would get behind.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I really can't believe that is a position anybody would logically take. Schools can make rules about alcohol but not sexual assault, frankly I'm pretty disturbed that this is a position anyone would get behind.

 

My employer makes policies about sexual harassment but not murder.  Are you suggesting they should?

 

[nicksaviking]

 

My employer makes policies about sexual harassment but not murder.  Are you suggesting they should?

 

If your workplace has a history of murder problems that is difficult for authorities to enforce but is causing your work environment to become unsafe. Then yes, yes they should.

[TheLeviathan]

 

If your workplace has a history of murder problems that is difficult for authorities to enforce but is causing your work environment to become unsafe. Then yes, yes they should.

 

I would argue the problem then is the "difficulties for authorities" and not a need for a second murder policy at your work.  You're addressing hte wrong problem.

[nicksaviking]

 

I would argue the problem then is the "difficulties for authorities" and not a need for a second murder policy at your work.  You're addressing hte wrong problem.

 

They did address this problem, it's called Title IX and the added way, way too late VAWA or Violence Against Women Act. They also addressed the issue of how to protect the accused with FERPA or Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

They did address this problem, it's called Title IX and the added way, way too late VAWA or Violence Against Women Act. They also addressed the issue of how to protect the accused with FERPA or Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.

 

Appears to be not enough then if it's still a problem.  

[nicksaviking]

 

Appears to be not enough then if it's still a problem.  

 

Not good enough? How because we still have sexual assaults? Now you're just being stubborn if you're trying to imply that there is actually some solution that would forever eradicate them.

 

What exactly are you wanting the U to do? They are compelled by Title IX and the VAWA to investigate the situation, they are further compelled by FERPA to protect the identities of the accused. I don't even know what you are taking issue with anymore, because again if it's the rights of the accused, your beef is with the Star Tribune for illegally publishing information that was supposed to be protected by FERPA, not the U.

 

Even the players dropped their protest once they saw the report and understood the school followed protocol.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Not good enough? How because we still have sexual assaults? 

 

No, because you deemed the system unable to handle the problem even after that.  

 

Look, my employer doesn't need a policy about murder because the criminal justice system handles it.  Colleges shouldn't need a "sexual assault" policy because they let the criminal justice system handle it.  If, as you contended, the criminal justice system can't - then that is the source of the problem.  That's what should be addressed.

 

Individual institutions should not be enforcing criminal law through tribunals.  They should address policy matters like harassment or poor conduct and turn criminal matters over to that system.  That's why we have it.

[TheLeviathan]

Or maybe colleges have become such a useless institution on every level that we should just shut them down.  

 

I'm kind of partial to that.  Start over.

[nicksaviking]

 

No, because you deemed the system unable to handle the problem even after that.  

 

Look, my employer doesn't need a policy about murder because the criminal justice system handles it.  Colleges shouldn't need a "sexual assault" policy because they let the criminal justice system handle it.  If, as you contended, the criminal justice system can't - then that is the source of the problem.  That's what should be addressed.

 

Individual institutions should not be enforcing criminal law through tribunals.  They should address policy matters like harassment or poor conduct and turn criminal matters over to that system.  That's why we have it.

 

They aren't enforcing criminal law, and if that's what you're going with you haven't followed any of these proceedings. You know they aren't and you're only trying to twist a point.

 

I'm also not saying the criminal justice system is broken in this situation, that's your claim. If a victim of sexual assault doesn't want to press charges or comes to an arrangement with the accused the law can't and won't do anything. But you're here trying to claim that simply because no charges are pressed, the school should let suspected rapists wander around their campus full of young adults who could be victims.

 

Universities have issues, but kicking people out for suspected sexual assault is not one of them.

[TheLeviathan]

 

They aren't enforcing criminal law, and if that's what you're going with you haven't followed any of these proceedings. You know they aren't and you're only trying to twist a point.

 

I'm also not saying the criminal justice system is broken in this situation, that's your claim. If a victim of sexual assault doesn't want to press charges or comes to an arrangement with the accused the law can't and won't do anything. But you're here trying to claim that simply because no charges are pressed, the school should let suspected rapists wander around their campus full of young adults who could be victims.

 

Universities have issues, but kicking people out for suspected sexual assault is not one of them.

 

No, they're making a decision about a criminal act through a non-criminal proceeding.   And so far you've said they need to do that because the criminal proceeding isn't pursued or failed.  That's like you being charged with murder, you are declared innocent in a court of law, and then a group of bureacrats in your office hold a two month investigation, declare you a murderer, and fire you.

 

Tell me that doesn't sound preposterous. 

[nicksaviking]

 

No, they're making a decision about a criminal act through a non-criminal proceeding.   And so far you've said they need to do that because the criminal proceeding isn't pursued or failed.  That's like you being charged with murder, you are declared innocent in a court of law, and then a group of bureacrats in your office hold a two month investigation, declare you a murderer, and fire you.

 

Tell me that doesn't sound preposterous. 

 

It is not like that, these guys weren't declared innocent in a court of law. The court of law didn't weigh in on the situation because the accuser didn't press charges.

 

What it IS like is a school going through a thorough review process and deciding that these guys should not be allowed to go to school there, which is a denial of service of the same magnitude as when they deny admission to folks who carry the far lesser offense of having bad grades in high school.

[Craig Arko]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there many instances where a criminal case is dismissed (due to lack of preponderance of evidence, perhaps) but the corresponding civil suit is found for the plaintiff?

 

Such that the found criminally innocent person is still liable for damages to the alleged victim (or surviving family, as the case may be)?

 

I seem to recall that was the resolution of the OJ trials.

[TheLeviathan]

 

It is not like that, these guys weren't declared innocent in a court of law. The court of law didn't weigh in on the situation because the accuser didn't press charges.

 

What it IS like is a school going through a thorough review process and deciding that these guys should not be allowed to go to school there, which is a denial of service of the same magnitude as when they deny admission to folks who carry the far lesser offense of having bad grades in high school.

 

For a criminal matter, the accuser should go through criminal court for justice.  That's precisely my point.  We've created some sort of quasi-court because the real one doesn't work the way we want it to.

 

So, again to remain analogous, the family of my murder victim declines to press charges but instead goes to my employer and asks them to hold a tribunal so I get fired.  A group of managers gets together, holds investigations, declares me a murderer, and fires me.  This is apparently what you want.

 

If you have a problem with the way criminal court handles sexual assault (strictly the issue I'm not comfortable with) - you should either be reforming the criminal court or encouraging civil lawsuits.  Getting justice through a college tribunal is an absolutely terrible idea for a whole host of reasons I've already laid out.  (And many more that I haven't, like for example, how disproportionately screwed over black males will be by this)

[Craig Arko]

http://m.startribune.com/u-professors-criticize-bowl-boycott-threat-and-gopher-coach/407636856/?section=%2F

[Mr. Brooks]

Crimes are supposed to be difficult to prove. It's what our system is based on and I find that absolutely essential. The "how" part is where we can do some good though, I agree there. We can do more about how prosecutors, police officers, and judges treat the process.

 

On this issue - If the school had punished them for lewd behavior and sexual harassment - I'm 100% on board. Leveling it up to sexual assault is where you lose me. This isn't the process to make that determination.

The school isn't charging them with a crime though. It is a policy violation. It doesn't have to be as difficult to prove as a crime.

[Mr. Brooks]

My employer makes policies about sexual harassment but not murder. Are you suggesting they should?

When we start having an epidemic of unprosecuted murders at workplaces, then this will be an apt analogy.

[TheLeviathan]

The school isn't charging them with a crime though. It is a policy violation. It doesn't have to be as difficult to prove as a crime.

All of that is true. It doesn't change my stance though. I think any suspected assault should be handled through the police and courts as a crime. An accounting firm doesn't hold their own trial for embezzlement, they bring in law enforcement when there is a crime.

[TheLeviathan]

When we start having an epidemic of unprosecuted murders at workplaces, then this will be an apt analogy.

Then we should address the "unprosecuted" part, not setup some quasi court.

[Mr. Brooks]

Then we should address the "unprosecuted" part, not setup some quasi court.

The schools decided to step in and handle what they could in their end. They couldn't just sit around and wait any longer for the criminal justice system to come around.

 

I agree that more needs to be done on the criminal side. I just disagree that it has to be either/or.

[TheLeviathan]

Your first paragraph makes the colleges sound like Batman.

 

And that's sort of my point. (Even as a total nerd for Batman)

[Mr. Brooks]

Your first paragraph makes the colleges sound like Batman.

 

And that's sort of my point. (Even as a total nerd for Batman)

My point is that your solution is a societal one. It's not something the Universities can have much control over.

Maybe when more is done on society and law enforcement's part, then the universities can walk some of these policies back a bit.