The college rape kangaroo courts

[RavenSky]

Why is it so hard to acknowledge the sexist discrimination when it comes to under-reaction to campus rape?

 

[Derec]

Why is it so hard to acknowledge the sexist discrimination when it comes to under-reaction to campus rape?

This was a high school, not college and the guys were criminally prosecuted and convicted so I find it hard to find any "under-reaction" here.
I see your Steubenville and raise you UVA rape hoax.

Also, for good measure, this little case:

The feminazis really lost their rag on that one, which is why they hate to be reminded of it.

I wonder if I should call them femi-nihilists instead.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You missed the point. I'm saying it acts like a court, it's a court.

please provide evidence that the university has the authority to put a student in prison for sexual assault (or plagiarism or theft or anything else)

It has the power to punish severely. That's enough wadding and quacking for me.

And my problem here continues to be that you make unsubstantiated assumptions about what/who I do or do not support. If you are having a reading comprehension failure, try asking me instead of attributing bullshit to me. TYVM

You certainly sound like you agree with him.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why is it so hard to acknowledge the sexist discrimination when it comes to under-reaction to campus rape?

View attachment 4084

See us objecting to criminal prosecution of rape? (Other than cases involving overly-broad applications of rape shield laws. Her general background isn't relevant but things like having made past false allegations are relevant and things which impeach her testimony are relevant--both situations that have resulted in errant convictions.)

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Scary. Now not even the "preponderance of evidence" is weak enough for the rape hysteria crowd.

“It certainly seems reasonable that a school for its own purposes might want to use a preponderance of evidence standard, or even a lower standard, perhaps a likelihood standard. … If I was running a [college] I might say, well, even if there is only a 20 or 30 percent chance that it happened, I would want to remove this individual.”

He thinks even a 20% chance that a rape took place should be enough to expel male students. I.e. guilty until proven innocent. The end game of radical feminism. What's scary is that this idiot was on Colorado Board of Education before moving to Congress. Also, his district is way too lefty to ever vote him out.

That's is pretty extreme.

 

[RavenSky]

please provide evidence that the university has the authority to put a student in prison for sexual assault (or plagiarism or theft or anything else)

It has the power to punish severely. That's enough wadding and quacking for me.

I'm sure it is, but you are still wrong.

And my problem here continues to be that you make unsubstantiated assumptions about what/who I do or do not support. If you are having a reading comprehension failure, try asking me instead of attributing bullshit to me. TYVM

You certainly sound like you agree with him.

I don't really care what your misinformed opinion is. As I said, if you want to know you can ask. Stop attributing your fantasies to me. Thank you.

 

[RavenSky]

Why is it so hard to acknowledge the sexist discrimination when it comes to under-reaction to campus rape?

This was a high school, not college and the guys were criminally prosecuted and convicted so I find it hard to find any "under-reaction" here.

I agree that the specific example was high school, but I fully dispute the claim of no "under-reaction"

There was a total under-reaction by the school, the police, and the town in general until the story went national and public-pressure compelled them to try only two of the young men (not even the ring-leaders)

So while I don't agree with going so far in the other direction that a university student could be expelled on a "20% probability" that he or she violated university policy, I will call absolute bullshit on the claim that false rape claims are more prevalent or more of a problem than rape and the under-reaction to it.

 

[laughing dog]

You certainly sound like you agree with him.

On what basis did you draw that conclusion?

 

[ronburgundy]

From the article:

“If a university were to implement a ‘reasonable likelihood’ standard, it is important that they give the student the ability to withdraw so that their record isn’t tainted, nor should a mere reasonable likelihood standard hurt their prospects elsewhere.”

Um, if any school that uses the standard to expel would quite clearly refuse admission to every student that met that standard at any other school.
The idea that is this age every school wouldn't have access to and make use of information about whether a student was expelled is ridiculous.

You know who'd have no trouble getting admitted to another school? The accusser, and since we only talking about cases with no valid evidence or wrong doing, they should be the one's to switch if they so choose. And any honest actual victim that felt at all uncomfortable about staying at their school could do so easily (presuming that changing school is as simple and easy as proponents of the policy claim.

There is no "court" - kangaroo or otherwise - that is or should be involved in the decision to keep a student on campus.

There absolutely should be a court and only an official court deciding whether any public university has legal grounds to expel a student on non-academic grounds.
Any University that expels students because they subjectively feel without any evidence that a student might have done something they don't like ought to be sued into insolvency (I say that as a public University professor).

 

[laughing dog]

And any honest actual victim that felt at all uncomfortable about staying at their school could do so easily (presuming that changing school is as simple and easy as proponents of the policy claim.

Transferring schools is not terribly difficult, especially if one is not picky. And it may be in the honest victim's best interests to transfer if he/she cannot deal with his/her rapist walking around campus, but that does not make it right.

 

[ronburgundy]

And any honest actual victim that felt at all uncomfortable about staying at their school could do so easily (presuming that changing school is as simple and easy as proponents of the policy claim.

Transferring schools is not terribly difficult, especially if one is not picky.

For the accuser its easy. For the accused, it will be extremely difficult, and any claims that other schools won't find out are absurd.

And it may be in the honest victim's best interests to transfer if he/she cannot deal with his/her rapist walking around campus, but that does not make it right.

It is not ideal, but it is not nearly as wrong to allow them to choose the switch if they prefer, than it is to force someone else to switch when there is no evidence they did anything wrong (which is the true of any instance the OP is referring to where it cannot even meet the "more likely than not" standard, which itself is usually only unsupported by anything but an accusation).

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And any honest actual victim that felt at all uncomfortable about staying at their school could do so easily (presuming that changing school is as simple and easy as proponents of the policy claim.

Transferring schools is not terribly difficult, especially if one is not picky. And it may be in the honest victim's best interests to transfer if he/she cannot deal with his/her rapist walking around campus, but that does not make it right.

And why do you think any other school would admit him???

 

[laughing dog]

Transferring schools is not terribly difficult, especially if one is not picky.

For the accuser its easy. For the accused, it will be extremely difficult, and any claims that other schools won't find out are absurd.

I find your assumption that the accusation would be necessarily public to be absurd.

It is not ideal, but it is not nearly as wrong to allow them to choose the switch if they prefer, than it is to force someone else to switch when there is no evidence they did anything wrong (which is the true of any instance the OP is referring to where it cannot even meet the "more likely than not" standard, which itself is usually only unsupported by anything but an accusation).

I think it much more wrong for a victim of an actual crime to have to either meet the perpetrator on a regular basis and relive the trauma or move than the innocent person moving, but that is just me.

 

[laughing dog]

Transferring schools is not terribly difficult, especially if one is not picky. And it may be in the honest victim's best interests to transfer if he/she cannot deal with his/her rapist walking around campus, but that does not make it right.

And why do you think any other school would admit him???

Why wouldn't a school accept an actual rape victim (the actual context of that exchange)? However, I do not assume that the accusation or circumstances behind the transfer to necessarily become public. Factor in the competition for actual bodies to come to campus, and I find it much more likely someone could transfer than not.

 

[ronburgundy]

However, I do not assume that the accusation or circumstances behind the transfer to necessarily become public. Factor in the competition for actual bodies to come to campus, and I find it much more likely someone could transfer than not.

That is absurdly naive. He wouldn't be "transferring". He would be someone formally expelled against his will, kicked out of the courses he was taking, thus requiring an "incomplete", "withdrawal", etc.. There would be a paper work trail that would be easy to hack no matter the b.s. cover-up that the school might try to do as part of a "plea-bargin" type arrangement. In addition, the same folks pushing for such policies would create public data bases to track and "out" these accused to prevent them from admission anywhere else. They are willing to fight to have such people expelled and harmed by it. OF course they would also work to prevent them from simply going somewhere else.
Also, any school worth going to is not desperate for bodies to fill seats. They turn students away. Why the hell would a school that already has proved its cowardice and disregard for due process by having such a policy, want to take on the ire of the people it is already cowering to by accepting accused rapist transfers?

 

[laughing dog]

However, I do not assume that the accusation or circumstances behind the transfer to necessarily become public. Factor in the competition for actual bodies to come to campus, and I find it much more likely someone could transfer than not.

That is absurdly naive...... blah blah blah.

Not necessarily. If a student is "expelled", it is up to the policy and practice of the school to communicate the "expulsion" or reasons. An expulsion may not even be recorded, just that the student no longer attends the institution. Or it is possible that the reason for the separation is "violation of the student conduct code" with no further explanation given to anyone. This has nothing to do with naivete. On the contrary, it is based on observation.

Also, any school worth going to is not desperate for bodies to fill seats. They turn students away. Why the hell would a school that already has proved its cowardice and disregard for due process by having such a policy, want to take on the ire of the people it is already cowering to by accepting accused rapist transfers?

Your response is based on questionable assumptions. First, this assumes the accepting school knows the reason for the requested transfer - a questionable assumption. Second, it assumes the accepting school has the same policy on this issue as the expelling school - another questionable assumption.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I am still not fully sure as to what degree the colleges preside over rape accusations.
However while rapes do exist and there are some false accusations, any accusation must be treated as a criminal matter through the courts.
It's not clear why this is not done as it seems a pretty common sense decision.

 

[ronburgundy]

I am still not fully sure as to what degree the colleges preside over rape accusations.
However while rapes do exist and there are some false accusations, any accusation must be treated as a criminal matter through the courts.
It's not clear why this is not done as it seems a pretty common sense decision.

Rape cases with actual evidence are handled through the courts. The policies in question are about cases where there is no evidence and thus no justified basis to punish the accused. Proponents of the proposed policies want to punish these students anyway, and putting political pressure on colleges to do so is their only leverage.

 

[ronburgundy]

That is absurdly naive...... blah blah blah.

Not necessarily. If a student is "expelled", it is up to the policy and practice of the school to communicate the "expulsion" or reasons. An expulsion may not even be recorded, just that the student no longer attends the institution. Or it is possible that the reason for the separation is "violation of the student conduct code" with no further explanation given to anyone. This has nothing to do with naivete. On the contrary, it is based on observation.

Also, any school worth going to is not desperate for bodies to fill seats. They turn students away. Why the hell would a school that already has proved its cowardice and disregard for due process by having such a policy, want to take on the ire of the people it is already cowering to by accepting accused rapist transfers?

Your response is based on questionable assumptions. First, this assumes the accepting school knows the reason for the requested transfer - a questionable assumption. Second, it assumes the accepting school has the same policy on this issue as the expelling school - another questionable assumption.

Your understanding of how information travels and discovered against the will of the parties involved is a couple decades out of date. Do you know how to set the clock on your VCR?

 

[ronburgundy]

] I think it much more wrong for a victim of an actual crime to have to either meet the perpetrator on a regular basis and relive the trauma or move than the innocent person moving, but that is just me.

The accuser does not "have to" do anything. They have a choice. If seeing the accused does cause them trauma, they can choose to move. You are in favor of forcing a result onto the innocent, rather than allowing the accuser to have the option of staying or moving. Decent people think that forcing something on someone is bad. Try to be at least superficially coherent in what you pretend to care about.