Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.

BYU - So Upsetting Reading/Watching This

2456789

Replies to: BYU - So Upsetting Reading/Watching This

  • awcntdbawcntdb Registered User Posts: 3,553 Senior Member
    edited April 2016
    The vast majority of the students lie, and that is fine, so it is really more of a Dishonor Code.

    So that means it is like any other school then, i.e., students lie. Therefore, it is not worse than any other school except it actually punishes what it actually learns about.

    What you really want is for BYU to accept behavior it learns about that is against the code and turn the other way. If it did that, then there is no code of any sort. Thus, you really do not have a point - either known, not suspected, infractions of the honor code are enforced or not. Unknown, well, is unknown, even if suspected. Cannot punish on a suspicion.
  • Much2learnMuch2learn Registered User Posts: 4,772 Senior Member
    @awcntdb "What you really want is for BYU to accept behavior it learns about that is against the code and turn the other way."

    No I think they can do whatever they want, but lets not pretend there is honor in uncaught masturbators kicking out honest masturbators. Is that really your position? Get ahold of yourself, man. lol

    Yes, you can punish suspicion. You can make any rules you want to. That is the point of the freedom they have. You can make essentially any rule you want to.
  • momofthreeboysmomofthreeboys Registered User Posts: 16,676 Senior Member
    Otterma, I have no doubt the criminal justice system would grant amnesty to an accuser who was underage and drinking and perhaps even to the one who dropped acid. I do not think BYU has any obligation to "grant amnesty" unilaterally.
  • OttermaOtterma Registered User Posts: 1,526 Senior Member
    Of course BYU doesn't have an obligation to grant amnesty. I just think that it would be pragmatic to do so. If kids are afraid to report a rape, assault, or robbery for fear that the accused will turn the tables on them, then the school is setting up conditions where serious crimes don't get reported and perpetrators may act for years with impunity.
  • momofthreeboysmomofthreeboys Registered User Posts: 16,676 Senior Member
    What does an accused "turning" the table mean. I am not sure what turning the tables has to do with BYU. Drinking, drugs and sex outside of marriage is a totally separate issue than the college or police obligation to investigate the claim of criminal sexual assault. These woman are upset that their behavioral was open to scrutiny at a college that has pretty clear rules around personal behavior. It would only be unfair if they did not hold an accused student to the same standard.
  • Much2learnMuch2learn Registered User Posts: 4,772 Senior Member
    @Momofthreeboys "She is being punished not for the alleged sexual assault but for breaking the rules she knew about before enrolling in BYU."

    Actually, she is being punished because she was dumb enough to tell the truth. No good deed goes unpunished. By revealing herself to be honest, she has shown that she should not be allowed to attend a school comprised primarily of dishonest masturbators. Why not have a surprise dorm inspection with a black light? lol

    @Momofthreeboys "BYU can also investigate the person she accused and may very well have, but again we have biased reporting."

    You and I don't know whether there is biased reporting or not, unless you have a superpower.

    @Momofthreeboys "Many sexual assaults happen because both parties were drinking and underage. One can only ask, would the alleged crime have occurred if both underage students were not drinking? It would be unjust to hold only one party accountable to a stricter measure or to ignore one party's participation in illegal activity separate from any other grievance they have."

    The narrative that you, as a mom of three boys, suggest is that these incidents are really not rapes at all, but just two kids having sex when they are drunk and doing drugs, and that therefore the female, however incapacitated, is equally responsible. The idea is that if the female does not want to have sex, she should not have become drunk or incapacitated, and that in doing so, she has consented to whatever the male does to her.

    In my opinion, this is much the same as the ignorance of the past with comments like "she asked for it" or "then why was she wearing that outfit" or "then why did she go the the party?" Fortunately that is not how most laws are written. The rules are pretty clear in most cases: whoever initiates sex needs to have consent from the other party, and the other party has to have the capacity to consent. A passed out or incapacitated woman is not fair game (except apparently in Oklahoma).

    @Momofthreeboys "...if kids aren't supposed to be drinking and having sex and decide to enroll at a college that says that is a no-no then they alone are responsible for abiding by those rules or accepting or fighting the consequences depending on the circumstances."

    I agree that BYU can be as biased and bigoted as they want to against women, gays, and people of other religions at their private school. This is America, and I support their freedom to enforce any view they want to.

    However, as long as BYU shows itself to be misogynistic and bigoted, I do not like public schools like UCLA and Michigan State implying approval of that behavior and giving it apparent legitimacy by playing football or basketball, or participating in any activity with them. How can these schools, for example, claim to be LGBT friendly, but still be agreeing to play schools where LGBT students are not welcome?

    Additionally, under Title IX, bias against women (or men) may cause them to lose access to government funds.
  • northwestynorthwesty Registered User Posts: 3,417 Senior Member
    I suspect that BYU has a sliding scale of punishments for Honor Code offenses. The star hoops player was not expelled consensual pre-marital sex for example. He was kicked off the team for part of one season. He accepted the punishment, stayed in school, became a team captain and ultimately graduated from BYU.

    I suspect the punishment for being drunk one time is going to be way less than the punishment for committing rape.

    The female in question was suspended, not expelled. But she had had other prior incidents. CNN does not mention, but the NY Times does mention, that the female had a prior sexual encounter with the same perp. The female claims the prior encounter was coerced. So there's clearly more to this story than CNN is reporting.

    I think the reporting of this story is lousy and biased. The glaring omission of the treatment of the perp is a big tell. Hard to write this angle if the story also includes the fact (as is my guess) that BYU expelled the perp in a Salt Lake City minute.
  • Much2learnMuch2learn Registered User Posts: 4,772 Senior Member
    edited May 2016
    @northwesty "I think the reporting of this story is lousy and biased."

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/20/brigham-young-sexual-assault-victims-protests-honor-code

    Per this article: "According to police documents viewed by the Salt Lake Tribune, Barney claims the perpetrator, 39-year-old Nasiru Seidu, lied about his age, name, and marital status, and that he raped her while she cried out and screamed ‘no’. The Tribune said the police confirmed those details during a staged phone call between Barney and Seidu after she filed the report.

    A Utah County sheriff’s deputy, who was friends with the accused, then sent Barney’s police case file to BYU and, two months after her attack, she was summoned to the honor code office for a disciplinary hearing."

    If this is true then:
    1. It says that police used a staged phone call to confirm her version of events, so apparently the perp admitted to the rape.
    2. A sheriff's office, apparently angry that a woman would report his rape friend, sent the police case file to BYU.

    Of course nothing was done to the officer for this. He is a guy.

    http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/prosecutor-frustrated-by-byu-honor-code-investigation-into-reported-rape/article_31114d4c-4cb3-575b-9d37-e0b7815cd2c3.html

    "“However, he and one of his friends, a deputy with the Utah County Sheriff’s Office, were charged in February 2016 with a third-degree felony charge of retaliating against a witness. The suspect, after bailing out, reportedly gave the deputy the case file, which the deputy then turned in to the BYU Honor Code Office, with both knowing an investigation into Barney would follow, reports state.

    [The deputy] stated that he knew that the victim in the case could receive disciplinary action based on the information contained within the report and that [the suspect] gave him the copy of the report,” the police report states.

    That case was dismissed with prejudice on Feb. 24, just a few days after charges were filed. Johnson said an internal investigation at the sheriff's office was conducted and the deputy was reprimanded, though he is currently on active duty."

    The Deputy admitted he did this and still the Good Old Boy network protected him. A Deputy acting on behalf of someone under arrest for rape acts in retribution for the victim reporting the rape and is comfortable admitting to it. Then the charges are brought and immediately dropped with prejudice because he is a man. Lucky he had a "get-out-of-jail-free" penis. That sounds like it is getting very close to a Federal Civil Rights case that Attorney General Loretta Lynch needs to take a look at. Is this Saudi Arabia or Utah? Is there a difference? That is shameful.

    @momofthreeboys " And again we have a young woman who declined criminal investigation and "tried" to resolve her issues with only the college knowing full well she violated the rules to begin with."

    Why are you deceptively asserting that this is biased reporting and that she declined a criminal investigation? The alleged rapist is out on bail. I see where the bias is here.
  • hebegebehebegebe Registered User Posts: 2,653 Senior Member
    @Much2learn,

    You seem unhinged here. You are unable to distinguish between the honor code violations (a BYU matter) and possible problems with the Utah County police force's handling of the alleged rape.
  • momofthreeboysmomofthreeboys Registered User Posts: 16,676 Senior Member
    I am not sure how you can read misogynistic and bigoted into this scenario at BYU, but it seems people are confusing the college looking into breaking the vow made by all students with the sexual abuse claim. If people do not break the vow they took they have nothing to worry about or be absolved from if they report something that falls within the purvey of a Title IX investigation when the college looks into the details behind the claim. All colleges and universities should have a moral obligation to look at every detail leading up to a claim of sexual assault between two students. It's interesting to me that some people cannot see the difference between that and "she asked for it" because neither men nor women are supposed to drink, take drugs or have sex at BYU. I think it's a slippery slope for a college to say they will automatically look the other way with regard to student compliance when the story involves claims of sexual abuse but not look the other way in any other circumstance e.g. a student reporting another student for drinking or (consensual sex) or dropping acid or smoking pot.... If at some point BYU chooses to take a course of action to look the other way when some students break the rules, that again is their decision and they will need to be clear what circumstances someone is free to break the rules with impunity.

    You may not like the religion of BYU (or Liberty or any other university where students vow to abstain from certain activities), but students freely choose to abide by the rules and are free to leave and attend another university if desired and colleges enforcing those vows are not "bigoted or misgynistic" if they apply equally to men and women. As much as I would never have chosen to attend a university like that I cannot say that the university is unreasonable in it's actions.
  • Much2learnMuch2learn Registered User Posts: 4,772 Senior Member
    edited May 2016
    @hebegebe

    I get tired of the unsubstantiated assertions that it probably wasn't really a rape with no evidence provided. Furthermore, the University and Police working to attack the victim is beyond disturbing.

    Apparently we now expect so little of University administrators and police that none of this raises an eyebrow for anyone else. "Yes, they are corrupt, what else is new?" and "Of course a rape victim with be taken down if she tries to report a white man, she should keep her mouth shut" seems to be attitude.

    I guess I am the only one who finds that really disturbing.
  • awcntdbawcntdb Registered User Posts: 3,553 Senior Member
    edited May 2016
    Of course a rape victim

    You keep saying rape victim as if rape has been proven. No, rape has been alleged. In any case, any rape is completely separate from BYU honor code violations or illegal activity, which may have preceded the alleged rape. An alleged rape does not wipe out any violations or illegal the alleged victim did prior. Why is that so hard to understand?

    EDIT: It could turn out that they find that there was no rape, but extensive honor code violations on the female's part. That is one possible outcome.
  • hebegebehebegebe Registered User Posts: 2,653 Senior Member
    @Much2learn,

    I have a daughter who is a junior in high school. I am very concerned about possible sexual assault in college. We will be having long discussions with her before she goes off to college in 2017.

    I also have a younger son, so I am also aware that it is possible for a woman to look back what what both thought was consensual at the time and change her mind, at which point the man has no defense.

    Given that, can we please use the term "alleged rape" until guilt has been established.
  • momofthreeboysmomofthreeboys Registered User Posts: 16,676 Senior Member
    @Muchtolearn there were several "cases" in the original post's CNN link. I was referring specifically to the young woman who declined to pursue a criminal complaint, but also was upset that the college was looking at potential vow violations. I'm pretty sure there's a good chance the criminal system would have given her a pass on the drug charge in order to pursue a rape charge but BYU is not giving her a pass on the vow violations. It was the first story "Brook" and CNN reported "Ten days later, she decided not to move forward with any charges." The criminal complaint is not at issue here nor is the issue of whether or not she was raped nor whether she wants justice or not...none of that is at issue. I used the term "biased" only because we have no knowledge whatsoever about how the college handled it's Title IX obligations with regard to the alleged rape (if it was another student which is not clear in the CNN article) and CNN wrote an article from one perspective given the current media fascination with colleges and universities and rapes - the issue is only how the college is handling investigations into students (the women in this case) violations of the vows they took when they agreed to attend this college. The women are upset that they are still being held to those vows separate from their assault allegations and upset that the college is investigating those alleged vow violations. The only issue is should the college look the other way at any vow violations when a student claims they were a victim of sexual assault. There is some precedence for it at other religious institutions. I really don't know how to make it any clearer for you. Not a single poster here has asserted that assaults may have not occurred ...go back and read the thread.
This discussion has been closed.