A male student identified as “John Doe” has sued Amherst College for allegedly denying him due process and ignoring evidence that he says proved another students Sandra Jones, lied about an alleged rape at the college. This is the second such lawsuit accusing the school of stripping students of due process in the handling of sexual harassment or assault claims. I have previously written about my concerns over the heavy-handed measures that the Obama Administration has forced on universities over the objections of faculty and students alike in such cases.
The controversy stems from February 2012 when the male student escorted his girlfriend’s roommate, Sandra Jones, back to her residence hall. Jones reportedly performed oral sex on him and Doe alleges that he blacked out during the encounter. Two years after the incident, Jones reportedly accused Doe of sexually assaulting her and the school compelled Doe to face a school rape trial. The trial had many of the elements that I criticized earlier, including the absence of any legal representation.
Notably, the former student never appears to have been charged with a criminal offense in the case by local authorities. There is no reference to the alleged victim filing a rape complaint with police.
One piece of evidence was a text message that was said to have been sent after the rape. Doe’s later legal counsel found that the text message did not seek help but rather suggested that the encounter was consensual:
Jones: Ohmygod I jus did something so fuckig stupid
DR: What did you do
Jones: Fucked [Doe]… FUCK
DR: No you didn’t…
Jones: Official story is he puked and I took care of him but yes. Yes I did. FUCK
DR: [Jones] what are you doing????????
Jones: Oh and apparently [ML]s coming over so nothing happened everything’s fine
Counsel says that “ML” was a male friend that Jones invited over on the same night after Doe had left. Counsel further alleges that the later texts include a flirtatious exchange between Jones and ML in which the alleged victim urged the male student to “come over and entertain me.”
If true, the allegations again show the need for representation and due process rights in these proceedings despite the effort of the Obama Administration to strip away such basic protections. Regardless of the merits, these trials lacks the fundamental guarantees of due process that bring legitimacy to the results. The Obama Administration has sought to create highly outcome determinative procedures in such cases. The effort to combat sexual assault at universities and colleges is commendable and I agree with it being a priority. However, stripping away legal protections is not a valid means to that worthy end in my view.
Source: Boston Globe
Every other industry has automated.
Why hasn’t the education industry automated?
Matriculate with an iPhone.
One CD played nationwide for English 101 et al.
Virtual campuses in your family room.
Education could be almost free, no strikes.
Designers and engineers would not be allowed to incorporate
PC or any other form of indoctrination.
Rockwell Automation automates factories around the globe.
Let’s give ’em a call.
American taxpayers have wasted enough money.
Let’s DO this.
forgotwhoiam – the education industry has automated. You are just not keeping up. I taught at a school where all the classes were delivered by computer. Robots are being constructed that would teach in classrooms. I am not in favor of this. Computers have a downside as do robots.
People who don’t know much about the PC anti-male culture on US campuses are starting to see what people who are knowledgeable having been complaining about for decades now. But, these Education Industry people will not relinquish their power willingly.
At what point is a lawsuit against DOE appropriate? It’s their letter that is responsible for a massive violation of civil rights.
It was a really good article.
Here’s the bottom-line quotation from the essay in Slate, which KarenS cited at 6:56 pm:
“We also need to change the culture of discourse around sexual assault on campuses. To stand up for the rights of the accused is not to attack victims or women. Our colleges, like the rest of our society, must be places where you are innocent until proven guilty. The day after graduation, young men and women will be thrown into a world where there is no Gender-Based Misconduct Office. They will have to live by the rules of society at large. Higher education should ready our students for this reality, not shield them from it.”
This seems pretty obvious, but apparently isn’t to a lot of allegedly smart people.
“Give all the power to the many, they will oppress the few. Give all the power to the few, they will oppress the many.”
― Alexander Hamilton
Give all the power to the men, they will oppress the women. Give all the power to the women, they will oppress the men.
BIBO – Bias In, Bias Out.
The American Founders established a restricted-vote republic.
The American Founders required voters to be male, 21 years of age and with property.
The American Founders did not establish one-man one-vote democracy.
The American Founders understood the demands of leadership.
The American Founders were resolute and did not vary in their acceptance of that role.
Their capacity to hold slaves and wives, while citizens were self-reliant without entitlements, was unique.
The modern milquetoast, collectivist liberal American purveyors allow the ineligible in office
and dominion to the wavering feint of heart.
Those who stay will be champions.
He who hesitates is lost.
Anybody know where we are?
The Obama administration is tapped into campus get-out-the-vote organizing networks; now on behalf of H. Clinton. Yes, they would destroy the Constitution in order to attain political power. It’s been done before.
I agree that this is a completely inappropriate application of Title IX, and that Obama is a contributor, but not the only person responsible. Otherwise the next election would fix this, regardless of who came into office. Once colleges got into the business of criminal investigation, with unequal protections for female and male students, everything went astray.
This policy is just wrong.
Karen,
It’s easy to see where they get off track in the letter. The author claims that because Title IX uses a preponderance of the evidence standard in other circumstances it’s appropriate for all circumstances. But these other circumstances primarily relate to lesser issues like a requirement to offer a similar number of funded sports positions, not sexual assault. Ultimately it’s clear the DoE is working with the campus radicals by enacting rules which justify those radicals taking the actions they prefer but cannot justify without risk to themselves.
Obama made some perhaps over powering directives. The college is responsible for carrying them out in such a perverse manner. But for the Obama haters, it’s Obama’s fault. He got on the phone and told them what to do.
Obama is to blame for the radicals he esconsed in positions of authority. Absolving him of responsibility by smearing critics as “haters” is juvenile.
Very seldom does the extreme swing of the pendulum return directly to the balanced center. One extreme typically is followed by another in the opposite direction. This is just a fact of life. If one were to tally up the travesties of justice to the detriment of women and compare it with the travesties to the detriment of guys, the women are still way far behind in receiving justice.
Past inequities cannot be rectified with more iniquity to different people. It is not a “fact of life”, it’s a choice. Good people argue for equity while others make excuses for inequity.
Rick, thank you for the link. And I agree with Mike A that such investigations are best left to the police. They should be required to report them and limit student conduct discipline to those convicted of the crimes, not just accused.
Isaac:
Check out this article:
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/12/college_rape_campus_sexual_assault_is_a_serious_problem_but_the_efforts.html
It details yet another apparently false allegation of rape. In addition, it explains how Title IX comes into play. “The current administration has taken up the cause—the Chronicle of Higher Education describes it as “a marquee issue for the Obama administration”—and praised these young women for spurring political action. “A new generation of student activists is effectively pressing for change,” read a statement this spring announcing new policies to address campus violence. The Department of Education has drafted new rules to address women’s safety, some of which have been enshrined into law by Congress, with more legislation likely on the way. . . Unfortunately, under the worthy mandate of protecting victims of sexual assault, procedures are being put in place at colleges that presume the guilt of the accused. Colleges, encouraged by federal officials, are instituting solutions to sexual violence against women that abrogate the civil rights of men. ”
The federal government has contributed to this overreaction as follows:
“But as Judith Shulevitz noted in the New Republic in October, many schools ban lawyers from speaking to their clients (only notes can be passed). During these proceedings, the two parties are not supposed to question or cross examine each other, a prohibition recommended by the federal government in order to protect the accuser. And by federal requirement, students can be found guilty under the lowest standard of proof: preponderance of the evidence, meaning just a 51 percent certainty is all that’s needed for a finding that can permanently alter the life of the accused.”
So the problem is the federal requirements of Title IX requiring only a 51% certainty, the denial of counsel or disclosure, and the threat of loss of funding that drives this destructive trend.
The article talks more about how a Title IX compliance officer is in charge of the investigation. So the feds are in it up to their ears. I am curious to know what the procedure was before Obama took office. Was this procedure already in place, but occurred more frequently because of the Rolling Stone article drawing more attention to it, as well as pressure from the administration? Or were the rules changed recently? As much as I like to blame Obama when I can’t find my shoes, I need to learn more about WHEN these sexual misconduct rules of Title IX started being applied with such clear prejudice against those accused of campus rape.
Paul
Did Obama send you a letter?
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.pdf
DBQ and Mike Appleton
I agree. This is the crux of the problem. Universities and other such institutions should not be above the law or outside the law. Regardless of precedent or tradition, rape is a crime and should be subject to the law of the land..
I agree 100% with Mike Appleton. A crime such as rape, or any crime for that matter, is the responsibility of the criminal justice system and not a function of the college.
Paul
So, by your understanding Obama is responsible for the blatantly stupid interpretation of ‘stop making it impossible for rape victims to obtain justice’, ‘stop placing the reputation of college ahead of the rights of the victim’, ‘stop placing the importance of male athletes ahead of the victim’, etc.
This is not an issue of Obama’s directives, however flawed. This is an example of mindless, or perhaps intentional, procedure.
Also, there may be more to this story. Perhaps the girl gave the guy a hummer while he was passed out drunk. Perhaps she admitted having consensual sex with the guy. Perhaps the guy spread it around that he got a hummer from the girl and that two years later, she might have grown up. Regardless, this stupidity has nothing to do with Obama. It has to do with the college. It could just as easily been the defense of the football team in a ‘group sex’ accusation by a girl who had too much to drink. Remember those. The team is going to the state championships and they were just sowing wild oats. The girl takes it in the end and travesty at the other end of the spectrum is done.
Lessoning the burden on the accuser, and the issue of evidence has been the main problem for women who have been violated sexually by the so called future of America, athletes, and other scum. Very seldom does the extreme swing of the pendulum return directly to the balanced center. One extreme typically is followed by another in the opposite direction. This is just a fact of life. If one were to tally up the travesties of justice to the detriment of women and compare it with the travesties to the detriment of guys, the women are still way far behind in receiving justice.
There seems to be a tendency to forget the past and the capabilities of those that administer our institutions and justice system. They are not perfect and many of them are not that bright. This is a case in point.
Obama made some perhaps over powering directives. The college is responsible for carrying them out in such a perverse manner. But for the Obama haters, it’s Obama’s fault. He got on the phone and told them what to do.
issac – Obama sent all the schools a letter.
In my opinion, universities have no business even investigating allegations of criminal conduct, let alone prosecuting them. This is, and ought to be, the exclusive function of the justice system.
Did Obama dictate how the college should perform its investigation and resolve its cases?
In fact he did. His administration issued a directive generally referred to as the “Dear Colleague letter” which claimed Title IX grants the DoE the power to mandate campus sexual assault resolution procedures. This letter directed (among other things) universities use a preponderance of the evidence standard when determining responsibility for sexual assaults.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.pdf
I guess the ‘big brush’ works here as well.
Your arguments incorporate the big brush strategy.
Just curious and obviously ignorant but how exactly did Obama strip this guy of his rights? Did Obama dictate how the college should perform its investigation and resolve its cases? Or did Obama simply demand that rapes on campus not be swept under the rug to protect the reputation of the particular institution?
The college responded to an incident two years old. The college ignored an email that illustrated that the girl f*#ked the guy, by her own words. The guy was dead drunk. Perhaps the rape charge is going in the wrong direction. Exactly how deep into the particulars was Obama?
It seems that those admonishing Obama for everything that is wrong with the justice system in America have one extremely wide brush. Of course that is what the Republicans have been doing for 6+ years and there are enough idiots in America to make it work for them. I guess the ‘big brush’ works here as well.
issac – the Obama administration has been pushing colleges to lessen the burden on the accuser in rape cases. Lessen to the point there isn’t any evidence. So, yes, Obama, Holder, Duncan, etc are all responsible along with the colleges who have caved in.
Isaac says “Secondly, what aren’t the so called leaders of the college”, and that touches on the right question.
Who are our leaders today? By what right does the President of Amherst command her $260,000 and yet lead so poorly?
http://chronicle.com/article/Executive-Compensation-at/143541#id=103717_164465
University Presidents should be standing up en masse to the Dear Colleague letter. And they are not. Craven, cowardly, they reinforce what they know are obscene laws.
In the spirit of Elonis vs United States, and referencing reason magazine, all of our college presidents, and in fact, any school district official anywhere (and any elected official) who supports zero tolerance, should be fed into a wood chipper, feet first. (http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/19/government-stifles-speech)
These are overpaid cowardly hacks. They are not leaders and they should be canned. We all deserve far better.
Paul:
I just learned that the infamous 1:5 figure of rapes at universities was actually based on a questionnaire that included any sex that occurs while inebriated without qualifying that the sex was unwanted. There were several additional concerns with the study, including that it was a non-representative sample:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/no-1-in-5-women-have-not-been-raped-on-college-campuses/article/2551980
You can follow the links to the actual study questions.
Here is a great op-ed on empowering women to protect themselves:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/06/17/women-have-ones-with-power-to-stop-campus-rape-lets-empower-them-not-ask-men-to-save-them.html
I do not know why this message is considered either controversial or blaming the victim. When I went to college, my roommate explained the “rules to attend a frat party” our first night – go in a group of girls and keep track of each other, do NOT agree to look at anyone’s fish tank in his room, do NOT drink the punch, and do NOT travel on a certain path at night, especially if you’ve been drinking. It’s the common sense, empowering sort of advice any parent should give their daughter – be aware of your environment, avoid dangerous situations, and keep track of your friends. It’s not specifically a problem with universities. It’s just something to be aware of anytime that young people are together, especially with alcohol. Because not everyone is super nice.
Karen – the figures look better when you stack the deck in advance. And that advice goes for boys just as well. You have no idea whose bed you can end up in if you have been drinking too much.