All UVa frats on suspension

Parents Forum
3461

<p>Nope, marie. It means people should actually read T9, not just use a public forum to unload whatever. And that I’ve noticed that some, when asked to provide the link or the wording or explain how they drew a conclusion, go back to, in essence, “Yeah, well Jackie…” </p>

<p>Folks can worry all they want. (There is some reason for concern.) But the statements and claims should be based on some attempt - IMO- to understand the basics of T9 in the first place. Not just some wild a** claims or fearful speculation or misrepresentation. Again, imo.</p>

3462

<p>Thank you for the translation. </p>

3463

<p><a href=“An open letter to President Bollinger and the board of trustees - Columbia Spectator”>http://columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2014/10/02/open-letter-president-bollinger-and-board-trustees&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“Frustrated by Columbia&apos;s inaction, student reports sexual assault to police - Columbia Spectator”>http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2014/05/16/frustrated-columbias-inaction-student-reports-sexual-assault-police&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

3464

<p>Seems that some posters are living in a rigid, legal land, which does not exist and are confusing the right of schools to go to the police versus the legal ramifications for doing so.</p>

<p>No one, including me, is saying schools do not have the right / option to go to the police or cannot go to the police… Re-read my posts if you think I ever said that because I have not. </p>

<p>What we are saying is vis a vis the confidentiality granted the accuser the right of the school is subservient to the school’s right to report. And it is subvervient enough so that Title IX had to explicitly spell out the grounds under which a school gets an exception to report against the wishes of the accuser. Legally, that is a very, very weak position to be in, and it really requires a high hurdle to go against the accuser’s wishes. </p>

<p>Thus, most schools would not want to use this option, as the accuser’s support is vital to any investigation.</p>

<p>Jackie is proving this in droves by being uncooperative. So guess what? Even if the police are investigating, no alleged rapists will be caught or punished. So, nothing gained at all. Jackie is reinforcing why schools should think long and hard about going against the wishes of the accuser.</p>

3465

<p>I know which posters you mean, awc. But I’d rather return to T9 and what it does say than talk of your supposed “defaults” to lack of action or the assumption that “most colleges would not want to use this option,” etc. Also, I think you may need to clarify- did you mean the right of the school to report is subservient to the confidentiality needs? If so, I’d like some reference. It’s not my take. There are explanations of how the school has to explain their work may be limited by her confidentiality. But also the need to inform the accuser when it is not possible to maintain the privacy. [Some privacy remains intact- eg, the accused can only see her Ferpa records where they discuss the accusation, not the balance of confidential info.]</p>

<p>And, T9 includes a number of actions (I get tired of saying this) that should take place regardless of whether the accuser asks for confidentiality or an ultimate hearing. In some respects, I’m less black/white than you are. </p>

3466

<p>In my view, LF, you are hanging on to Title IX, as some objective law to be followed. Nope. It is really subjectively written administrative law at this point and gives legal outs and qualifications the size of Mack trucks. The outcome is already written on the wall. Those who keep pointing to Title IX as some clear, objective law to be followed will be sorely dissappointed, as it is no such thing.</p>

<p>However, this is what exactly what happens when administrative law tries to legislate where people instinctively do not live and function. And trying to have a college adjudicate crime is one of these examples - colleges do not do and will never be in the crime-solving business. But, under Title IX, they sure can pretend though and just make a complete mess of things.</p>

3467

<p>Awctndb, would you provide documetation and a page number of the document to support your third paragraph?</p>

<p>Post 3463.</p>

3468

<p>Dstark if you want to get on the call the police bandwagon - it’s mandatory reporting that would take care of that. I’m in favor of that because it separates out the pattently criminal, felonious behavior. It puts the investigation in the court of the criminal system and it leaves the colleges to do their class shuffling, dorm changing, mediating for the minor complaints that don’t impact the rest of the campus. </p>

<p>I suspect UVa asked for police assistance specifically because Jackie gave up her confidentiality when she told her story to a major news outlet. I highly doubt UVa would have called the police had Jackie not publicly made claims. Now it is is to UVas benefit to have the police investigate Jackie’s claims and report back to the college. </p>

<p>I’m firmly on record as saying that Mattress Dragger is a whackadoodle and a bully. “Ms. Sulkowicz did not press criminal charges, a lengthy process that she said would be too draining.” Hopefully some lawyer will support pro bono a civil suit for the young man 2 seconds after Columbia grants him his diploma and I hope he wins alot of money. Confidentiality? Not if the accuser sets out to achieve 15 minutes of fame. </p>

3469

<p>Re the article in RS</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/12/22/rolling-stone-farms-out-review-of-u-va-rape-story-to-columbia-journalism-school/”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/12/22/rolling-stone-farms-out-review-of-u-va-rape-story-to-columbia-journalism-school/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>“We have asked the Columbia Journalism School to conduct an independent review – headed by Dean Steve Coll and Dean of Academic Affairs Sheila Coronel – of the editorial process that led to the publication of this story. As soon as they are finished, we will publish their report.”</p>

3470

<p>@awcntdb and @lookingforward Now that vacation is over I don’t have the time to carefully read every post and especially all the links, but I have a question. </p>

<p>Can this argument about TitleIX and confidentially be summed up like this?</p>

<p>Schools are expected to keep accusations confidential unless there is an overriding concern for the overall safety of the campus. This is sort of like the Doctor-patient confidentiality laws. Docs can go against a patient’s wishes if they present a threat to themselves or to others. </p>

<p>Is that a semi-fair assessment of what you are saying Title IX states?</p>

3471

<p>Well, haha, awc. Lots of folks believe laws are discretionary. And many, too many, fall into, “I think it, so it must be true.” And it’s sister, “I read it somewhere, so it IS true.” Or rest their cases on some reference to some anecdote. </p>

<p>Mom3, agree that at some points mandatory makes sense. But right now, the college still…you know what. I think the main objection to T9, from some quarters, may be that the college needs to take some action on behalf of its community. There’s worry they’ll be wrong. There’s concern they are acting as a criminal justice surrogate, which I don’t see. I see it as pursuit via its Code of Conduct (yes, as influenced by OCR.) That doesn’t preclude police. And nor does some idea police are mean or inept preclude. I said, I’d want my kid to report, even if only for getting it on record with police.</p>

3472

<p>I can’t go with mandatory reporting. It is too black and white. The cases vary too much. We have to weigh the rights of the accuser, the accused and the rights of society .</p>

<p>These he said she said cases…if the cases are going to be difficult for a victim to win in a civil court…the victim is not going to win in criminal court. </p>

<p>Momofthreeboys, I like documentation. :)</p>

3473

<p>“These he said she said cases…if the cases are going to be difficult for a victim to win in a civil court…the victim is not going to win in criminal court.”</p>

<p>So, we need a college court because we want her to win somewhere? Ugh. Hopefully, I’m misunderstanding.</p>

3474

<p>Also, re the vandalism against the frat house:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.whsv.com/home/headlines/UVa-Seeking-Felony-Charges-for-Vandalism-of-Fraternity-286579771.html”>http://www.whsv.com/home/headlines/UVa-Seeking-Felony-Charges-for-Vandalism-of-Fraternity-286579771.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>The comment within the article that “The student activist who led the vandalism attack said he does not have any regrets.” comes from this article:</p>

<p><a href=“Rolling Stone University of Virginia rape story sparked unpunished rampage - Washington Times”>Rolling Stone University of Virginia rape story sparked unpunished rampage - Washington Times;

<p>Yes, I know the slant of the WashTimes and there is a lot of political blah blah in the article, but there are quotes from students like:</p>

<p>“Everyone knows this is a house that does not respect women. They are part of the problem, and I do not feel bad. We have an objective set of laws that empowers the police to kill black men with impunity and protects white rapists at U.Va. from prosecution. The laws are only legitimate when they work. This is not a particularly radical campus, but we’re mad.”
…</p>

<p>“I texted one of my friends and I was like, ‘Let’s throw bottles at the Phi Psi house tonight,’ and she said, ‘Yes!’ I think that the article made it clear that victims at the university have no legitimate channels to take action, and I think vandalism is a completely legitimate form of action when like, legitimate authority is corrupt. I think it was justified,” he said in an interview with The Times.</p>

<p>Asked whether he believed the ends generally justified the means, he casually replied, “Sure.” He also said he is not opposed to “armed revolution” as a means to end what he termed “systemic oppression.”
…</p>

<p>"Many students on campus seemed apathetic to seeing the attackers brought to justice. One young woman who answered the front door of her sorority told The Times that she did not feel the fraternity attack was the right story to cover.</p>

<p>“I think the next important story is continuing to focus on the problem of sexual assault of young women on campuses, whether Jackie’s story is true or not,” she said.</p>

<p>Asked whether she felt it was important to consider the rights of the fraternity members and the violence inspired by the falsities published by Rolling Stone, she paused and said, “Well, I guess that’s true.”</p>

<p>…</p>

<p>Ah, to be in college again.</p>

3475

<p>Marie, lol. Really? That is what you came up with? Lol</p>

3476

<p>Yup. That’s how my brain works. I was hoping I was wrong, though. :-* I tend to boil things down to the basics because the rest of it just confuses everyone and becomes a long drawn out whole lot of nothing, like mattress girl.</p>

3477

<p>So, we need a college court because we want her to win somewhere?
Not if you think about it. And read up. </p>

<p>Know what, Fang? we can keep quoting and others can keep misunderstanding. Or, in some cases, bending. </p>

<p>The school doesn’t even have to decide the complaints are “true,” to take it to LE. They have to have enough level of concern (per all the other things we’ve been excerpting here.) </p>

3478

<p>

</p>

<p>The only honest answer is when I am drinking, at some point, the answer becomes yes. Same as it does for the female with whom I am drinking. </p>

<p>Alcohol interrupts the rational thinking centers of the brain and relatively accentuates / heightens pleasure sensation. Not a darn thing males and females who are drinking can do about that. Not one thing. </p>

<p>When drinking, there is a point where females cannot stop themselves, just like males cannot stop themselves, so it goes both ways - the rational “I must / should stop” part of the brain U.S. is not operative at the point, in both sexes.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It is easy to create different and new rules for intoxicated males and females, but creating a new category of crime will only mean that you make what will happen anyway a crime, but will not stop it one iota. Nothing being discussed in this thread is going to stop drunk sex between intoxicated males and females in college, unless the drunkedness is curtailed. Why? See part 1 answer above. </p>

<p>The problem with this legislation push is alcohol also impedes both short and long-term memory recall, so at some point when drinking neither the male and female have a clue which legislation they are to be following. Pretty much, all laws only work for rational, thinking parties - expecting laws to govern behavior between drunk parties is a fool’s errand. Therefore, turn a blind eye to college drinking and all the legislation passed is futile to stopping drunk sex. You can now call drunk sex flat-out rape and a crime, but will not stop it a bit. </p>

<p>Simply, if alcohol is still in the mix, science has all legislation beat before they are even implemented.</p>

3479

<p><a href=“Frustrated by Columbia&apos;s inaction, student reports sexual assault to police - Columbia Spectator”>http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2014/05/16/frustrated-columbias-inaction-student-reports-sexual-assault-police&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>According to this article, “mattress girl” went to police. Her name is Emma Sulkowicz. As far as I can tell the police report is a fact and a “truth”</p>

3480

<p>I am all read up LF. And, I still have found nothing that makes me think a college tribunal is appropriate in a criminal case. The lesser offenses are fine but we need to stop calling them rape and if they are really dumb like unwanted butt-grabbing for me personally, it’s a waste of time and effort to have a trial anywhere but fine, whatever. And, I know mattress girl went to the police, but she had no case. Sometimes, you have no case and you need to move on. That is tough to do with a mattress in tow.</p>