I'd argue the customary interpretation of NY law is more the question. But yes, IF the law really does state in clear terms that it is acceptable to rape anyone who has legally consumed alcohol, then that law should be amended, I would agree with that.
The problem is she "consented". The issue is consent to me (and I would presume the law), isn't a blank check. So I'm uncertain why it was treated that way by the County. I get there was going to be a difficult battle. She said, he said he said he said he said he said he said he said, but isn't this why you investigate things. Get an honest timeline of actions of all parties and go from there.
The school, by effectively making themselves the unofficial principal investigators, then playing the court, may have made the gathering of testimony much more difficult than it might have been had the investigation been accomplished
well and
quickly. I know it is not the most popular opinion on "the left", but there are some deep problems with Title IX. Not really the law itself, but the way schools have taken advantage of its implementation to achieve goals the law was never intended to cater to.
I don’t disagree. But here is where I think it is difficult to draw lines: student A who lives on campus is raped by another student B on campus. The rapist B ( I’m not using alleged because in my hypothetical but all too much like reality, the person A was actually raped by B) lives in the same dormitory and is in at least one other class and study group as A.
It is unreasonable for A to have to be continually exposed to or be confronted by B or B’s supporters/friends in the place where they live and in their classes. It is unreasonable that their GPA, any scholarships or financial aid or tuition paid —or rom and board be compromised because A was the victim of a sexual assault and is continually being exposed to reminders and gossip, retaliation, etc. all of this is additional trauma.
But even an arrest can take some time and there is usually bail and a conviction can take months or longer.
How should the university behave towards B who also faces impact on their GPA, financial aid, scholarship, tuition, etc.? Is the professor who assigned study groups to be made privy to the allegations and separate the two in class and study groups?
It is of course possible that B is innocent and ( though my hypothetical is that they are guilty) that A is either mistaken as to their rapist’s identity or dishonest. It is more likely, in my experience, that B did not consider what happened to be rape but what happened may well have met the legal definition of rape and A was raped. . I don’t think much has changed since my campus days when to a certain kind of person, drunk did not remove ability to consent—drunk removed need for consent.
Or, given the relative young ages of most college students, A was unwilling and in the situation, froze instead of fighting back and B took silence as consent, not recognizing that enthusiasm and active participation should generally be part of the experience for both/all participants.
Both A and B will carry an extremely heavy burden, regardless of whether the case proceeds to arrest and trial or not. Regardless of the verdict.
That is, of course, assuming the DA decides to bring charges. DAs only bring charges if they feel confident of a victory. Substance abuse, prior relationship, etc. can make it more difficult to convince a jury. This is outside of the hands of the university. And it should be.
I would argue that being the victim of rape or sexual assault is a far greater burden than being accused of it. But being accused is no picnic.
What should the university do? What is the university obligated to do?
