Newly proposed D.C. legislation would require colleges to put a permanent and prominent notation on the academic transcripts of students who are convicted of sexual assault or who try to withdraw from school while under investigation for sexual misconduct — a “Scarlet Letter” that would follow them to new schools and graduate programs or into the workforce.
The rest.
Branding on the forehead. Is that an option? Cretins.
ReplyDeleteI'll call Walt. You and I can hold them down. I know Walt likes to his own branding.
Delete"Under investigation"? that's problematic.
ReplyDeleteI'm all for holding rapists accountable, but I really think the whole process -- from accusation/arrest to adjudication to keeping of the permanent record -- is best left to the formal judicial system. It's a very, very long way from perfect, and rapists will not always be held responsible, but it's better equipped to handle the process than any college or university I've heard of. A formal criminal record (and the associated records in law enforcement/court record-keeping systems) also seems like a far more likely-to-be-reliable system of tracing a serial rapist as he moves around (and, sadly, it's often necessary for a pattern to develop, and be documented, before a rapist can be stopped. One instance of misunderstanding/miscommunication may be plausible, or at least hard to refute; multiple instances become increasingly hard to explain away, if only because the rapist *should* be learning from prior experience).
ReplyDeleteSo I guess I'm in sympathy with the goals of this proposed legislation, but not the proposition itself.
I wonder if a jurisdiction could pass a law requiring university officials to report certain kinds of crimes to the police, a la mandated reporting for crimes against juveniles (and other vulnerable groups). That might have some unintended consequences (parallel to college students dying of alcohol poisoning because their friends were afraid to call for help lest they run afoul of their institution's disciplinary system), but it would make more sense that this idea, I think.
the whole process -- from accusation/arrest to adjudication to keeping of the permanent record -- is best left to the formal judicial system
ReplyDeleteThis.
I wonder how many people proposing this sort of thing actual recognize the double standards standard they are setting up?
Seriously, if sexual assault is so pervasive a problem that they need to do an end-run around strictures of the existing justice system to deal with, then why do they feel that only people related to colleges are entitled to this boon? Surely the women and girls in other parts of society are also entitled? What do these people have against suburban housewives, and high-school students in the ghettos, anyway?
The comments of the linked article (and of articles linked to it) share your thinking. Some have given cites to evidence that college students are LESS likely to be sexually assaulted than the general population. I would like to see the problem attacked in all venues, and it would seem that aiming the firehose where the flames are highest might be a good approach.
DeleteWe complain here about administrators and colleagues who are unable or unwilling to do the jobs they are hired to do. Why do you trust them to be competent at jobs that are outside their skillset?
DeleteI don't.
DeleteThe criminal justice system keeps its paws out of academic affairs, and even civil courts seldom meddle. I think we should return the favor. Render unto Caesar, and all that.
Maybe I'm being cryptic. I think criminal matters belong in criminal courts and its associated machinery, and that people outside academia deserve as much protection from criminal activity as do those within it (particularly if it is true that campus is relatively safe).
DeleteI am of many minds about this proposed legislation.
ReplyDelete1) I've been previously led to believe that accusations of rape are proven true in 95% of reported cases, and that reports seriously underestimate the number of actual occurences. This has made me feel quite liberated, when I receive a report of sexual misconduct, to simply pass that info to the proper authorites to let the system do its thing, without considering any malfeasance on the part of the accuser.
I would like the number of false accusations to be 0%, but not before the number of actual cases is 0%. I can dream.
2) I am 20 years old again -- a junior. I have been accused of a crime, but as far as I know I've done nothing. I do not know the full extent of the accusation or any evidence against me, and the "system" has no compulsion to share that info with me till my "trial". My fate will rest on a preponderance of evidence standard, and my accuser has been provided legal counsel. I face the real possibility of losing this thing and suffering life-altering consequences. I cannot do well in classes AND prepare a defense, so the sane thing for me to do is to withdraw from classes, but fuck me, I'll face the same consequences just for doing THAT! I am glad that the tracks through this town have such poor fencing along them, because I may have to step in front of a train.
3) A student has just told me she has received nonconsensual sexual contact. I never used to worry when a detail or two in a story didn't add up, but over the past few years, there's been a surge in accusations that have not panned out, accompanied by a surge in alleged perps who have offed themselves most dramatically. The "guilty till proved innocent" system is apparently quite easy to game. I might be killing somebody by reporting the incident, and I might be killing somebody by NOT reporting the incident. My liver mourns my liquor cabinet so frequently emptied. Is THIS protecting the rights of alleged victims, REALLY?
I think it's worth commenting on the use of the word "convicted". It propagated to the title of this post, but the WaPo chose it first and I hold them accountable.
ReplyDeleteTo me, "convicted" most often implies a finding of guilty beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal court with due process and rules of evidence. In the proposed legislation (link, notation is to be placed on the transcript of "each student who has been suspended for, has been permanently dismissed for, or withdraws from the institution while under investigation for a violation of the institution's code . . . governing sexual misconduct . . ." This is not a conviction in the sense I described above. Title IX and/or the DOE's "Dear Colleague" letter (I think it's one from 2011) apparently says that the appropriate standard of proof for removing a suspect from the school is preponderance of evidence. And of course, the standard of proof to launch an investigation is merely an accusation, as it should be.