• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Sign in to follow this  
Shortforbob

On Ya Betsy

Recommended Posts

Wow is this discussion went off the rails.  The thing that Devos wants to change - and that I actually agree with, is the schools enforcing policies when no law has been broken.  Many schools have created code-of-conduct tribunals and 'honor' courts where accusations like this are tried.  They work with a completely different set of rules than US courts, and in the case of rape and sexual assault they don't abide by 'innocent until proven guilty'.  As a result a lot of young adults indulging in drunk sex (which we at this website are probably all experts at in one way or another) end up being thrown out of school as rapists, but never are accused of an actual crime.

That's a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Because the other cops would tell you not in their jurisdiction and send you right back there - assuming you mean an actual police department. It is not campus POLICE that are the problem, it is campus judge, jury, and executioner that is the problem where the accused has none of the rights he or she would have in a real court.

That sounds a bit weird. Do campus police have powers of arrest, detainment and charging with a criminal offence and criminal prosecution in the usa?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Because the other cops would tell you not in their jurisdiction and send you right back there - assuming you mean an actual police department. It is not campus POLICE that are the problem, it is campus judge, jury, and executioner that is the problem where the accused has none of the rights he or she would have in a real court.

Help me out here. A crime committed on a campus is not in the jurisdiction of the local/county police?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bhyde said:

Help me out here. A crime committed on a campus is not in the jurisdiction of the local/county police?

Campus police ARE the local police department. Many large campuses are essentially a medium sized town.

http://www.umpd.umd.edu/about/

The University of Maryland Police Department is a professional law enforcement organization that employs over 100 dedicated men and women. These individuals provide a complete array of law enforcement and related services to our community of approximately 60,000 members, which includes a student population of approximately 32,700.

Our police officers are State certified in accordance with Article 41, Section 4-201 of the Annotated Code of Maryland and have all the same powers and authority as any other sworn police officer in Maryland; each officer is empowered by State law to make arrests, investigate crimes, and carry firearms. Furthermore, the University of Maryland Police Force is the primary agency responsible for policing property owned, operated, leased by, or under the control of the University of Maryland System.

So that we might be better able to provide effective services to our community as a whole, UMPD has entered into a "Concurrent Jurisdiction Agreement" with Prince George's County Police Department (PGPD) that, in addition to our statutory jurisdiction and authority, distributes enforcement authority to University Police Officers in certain areas of Prince George's County. UMPD and PGPD have a mutual and positive working relationship and provide assistance and expertise to each other as needed. Additionally, State law empowers University Police Officers to enforce laws throughout the State of Maryland in many circumstances.

 

AFAIK reporting a rape to them would result in an investigation just like any other rape. It is the extra-judicial school system that is the issue here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Campus police ARE the local police department. Many large campuses are essentially a medium sized town.

http://www.umpd.umd.edu/about/

 

I have a hunch we've discussed this - my son began studying at College Park a few weeks ago. I have to say I was impressed by the UMD Police when we were there for Orientation. Forthright about what has transpired (the Bowie State student who was murdered at UMD) and their mission being foremost to keep the students safe, not arrest and prosecute. 

That said, if a criminal act takes place, I want LE to take over, not the Admin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

That sounds a bit weird. Do campus police have powers of arrest, detainment and charging with a criminal offence and criminal prosecution in the usa?
 

Yes they do. They are exactly the same as any other cops, their beat happens to contain a college. They aren't the issue.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real issue - DRUNK PEOPLE.

The Naval Academy seems to be proficient at generating sexual assault problems and almost every single one starts out with "I was so drunk I blacked out and the next thing I knew......."  :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Yes they do. They are exactly the same as any other cops, their beat happens to contain a college. They aren't the issue.

 

So they are properly sworn in and authorised state or federal police officers not rent a cops?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shortforbob said:

So they are properly sworn in and authorised state or federal police officers not rent a cops?

Well we are getting into semantics here, but yes they are. Some colleges are too small to have their own cops, but they might have security guards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After re reading the OP article, I'd like to see a copy of these "Obama Rules"

I don't know how it works in the USA, but..I'm assuming that some state or federal campus have actual LAWS about when state police CAN enter a campus. I'm wondering if this move of Betsy's is not perhaps a Trojan Horse?

IE..get rid of Campus authority and allow the federal (or state) policing forces onto campus...?? Call me a conspiracy theorist :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can a school establish religious rules then determine on their own that a student has not met their relifgous standards and expel them?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Because the other cops would tell you not in their jurisdiction and send you right back there - assuming you mean an actual police department. It is not campus POLICE that are the problem, it is campus judge, jury, and executioner that is the problem where the accused has none of the rights he or she would have in a real court.

What rights to a court do you have when you sign a contract stating you accept binding arbitration?

 

you guys have lost the plot. This is a private matter with an institution.  It's not "criminal" proceedings...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Raz'r said:

What rights to a court do you have when you sign a contract stating you accept binding arbitration?

 

you guys have lost the plot. This is a private matter with an institution.  It's not "criminal" proceedings...

You've lost the plot, this is not a private matter. Besty DeVos is looking to scrap guidelines handed down by the Obama administration that violate our most basic judicial principles. Good on her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

You've lost the plot, this is not a private matter. Besty DeVos is looking to scrap guidelines handed down by the Obama administration that violate our most basic judicial principles. Good on her.

So when a rape is committed on campus, its never handled as a criminal case in the courts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Raz'r said:

I know. I didn't even know what to write to that one....

 

I doubt that you encourage your daughters to go out  looking like trollops - not that doing so warrants the unwanted attention, but, it certainly does invite it, and if you had sons, I'm quite certain that you would teach them that it's completely inexcusable for them to take advantage of someone who's not in control of their faculties, and that it's never OK for them to force themselves on anyone else.    If you took my comments to mean anything else - that's on you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I doubt that you encourage your daughters to go out  looking like trollops - not that doing so warrants the unwanted attention, but, it certainly does invite it, and if you had sons, I'm quite certain that you would teach them that it's completely inexcusable for them to take advantage of someone who's not in control of their faculties, and that it's never OK for them to force themselves on anyone else.    If you took my comments to mean anything else - that's on you. 

This falls into societal guidelines vs. family advice.
I would never even HINT that a 16 year old girl wearing tight shorts that say "hot stuff" across the ass, a tight shirt, and no bra even slightly deserved to be the victim of a crime. When the daughter of someone I knew appeared dressed like that ready to head out to a party that involved older boys, both her father and I said "NFW, go put on something else" pretty much at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

This falls into societal guidelines vs. family advice.
I would never even HINT that a 16 year old girl wearing tight shorts that say "hot stuff" across the ass, a tight shirt, and no bra even slightly deserved to be the victim of a crime. When the daughter of someone I knew appeared dressed like that ready to head out to a party that involved older boys, both her father and I said "NFW, go put on something else" pretty much at the same time.

Exactly my point.  Why do you think I phrased it as "WE should tell OUR kids"?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

You've lost the plot, this is not a private matter. Besty DeVos is looking to scrap guidelines handed down by the Obama administration that violate our most basic judicial principles. Good on her.

Please find my comment about Betsys action. Hint, not there. Judicial principles, you really don't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Please find my comment about Betsys action. Hint, not there. Judicial principles, you really don't get it.

That's because you lost the plot. You think this is a private matter. It's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

That's because you lost the plot. You think this is a private matter. It's not.

Do private institutions have the right to have codes-of-conduct and methods with which to enforce? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Raz'r said:

Do private institutions have the right to have codes-of-conduct and methods with which to enforce? 

Yeah of course...Want to discuss that start a thread about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you're claiming school administrators are sending boys to JAIL... this thread IS about civil, not criminal, proceedings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, frenchie said:

Unless you're claiming school administrators are sending boys to JAIL... this thread IS about civil, not criminal, proceedings.

With lifelong consequences worse than many jail sentences.

If you had two job applicants equal in all ways but these, whom would you hire?

1. Arrested for public intoxication as a college student.

2. Expelled from college for sexual assault.

Knowingly hiring #2 is just begging to be taken to the cleaners by a clever lawyer if this person ever even looks at someone wrong at work. #1, well we have all been there and only some got caught :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

With lifelong consequences worse than many jail sentences.

If you had two job applicants equal in all ways but these, whom would you hire?

1. Arrested for public intoxication as a college student.

2. Expelled from college for sexual assault.

Knowingly hiring #2 is just begging to be taken to the cleaners by a clever lawyer if this person ever even looks at someone wrong at work. #1, well we have all been there and only some got caught :rolleyes:

and where, on what record, is #2?

#2 shows up as "started at college #1, ended at college #2"

Sorry - no college anywhere has to continue to keep students that break the code of conduct.  And no, the code of conduct is NOT a criminal prosecution with all the protections for the accused that exist.


I don't know why this is such a hard concept for folks.

 

Take sexual assault out of it. Cheating at school isn't illegal. But it damn well will get you kicked out.  Where's the outcry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

and where, on what record, is #2?

#2 shows up as "started at college #1, ended at college #2"

Sorry - no college anywhere has to continue to keep students that break the code of conduct.  And no, the code of conduct is NOT a criminal prosecution with all the protections for the accused that exist.


I don't know why this is such a hard concept for folks.

 

Take sexual assault out of it. Cheating at school isn't illegal. But it damn well will get you kicked out.  Where's the outcry?

To get expelled for cheating, you pretty much have to cheat and there is no directive from the federal government to crack down on cheaters. Besides for that, cheating on a test isn't GOOD, but it isn't exactly raping little girls either.

Now to get kicked out for sexual assault, all you need to be is alone with a girl. There is no way to prove a negative, i.e good luck proving you didn't do it unless you have 24/7/365 video and then you'll get busted for that :rolleyes:

* don't expect sexual assaults or rumors of same to remain secret in the age of Google either. A big issue that existed back in the day, and maybe now, is allowing students to quietly transfer WITHOUT informing the new school why. Sexual predators get a new hunting ground, just like a priest would :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

To get expelled for cheating, you pretty much have to cheat and there is no directive from the federal government to crack down on cheaters. Besides for that, cheating on a test isn't GOOD, but it isn't exactly raping little girls either.

Now to get kicked out for sexual assault, all you need to be is alone with a girl. There is no way to prove a negative, i.e good luck proving you didn't do it unless you have 24/7/365 video and then you'll get busted for that :rolleyes:

there are plenty of things in the code-of-conduct where you can't "prove a negative"

as to the feds, I didn't comment on the rule, or the rule change. Personally, I think colleges have their codes and should let it be at that. Not sure why the Feds would be involved. 

that DOESNT mean i think that they should change their codes-of-conduct. Some asshole does something against my daughter that isn't prosecutable? I'm fine with him getting booted from school. Old Assholes were once Young assholes. Just cause their young doesn't make them innocent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

there are plenty of things in the code-of-conduct where you can't "prove a negative"

as to the feds, I didn't comment on the rule, or the rule change. Personally, I think colleges have their codes and should let it be at that. Not sure why the Feds would be involved. 

that DOESNT mean i think that they should change their codes-of-conduct. Some asshole does something against my daughter that isn't prosecutable? I'm fine with him getting booted from school. Old Assholes were once Young assholes. Just cause their young doesn't make them innocent. 

If my daughter were assaulted, I would want the asshole in jail, not off at another school assaulting more girls. YMMV

Remember this is mainly people over 18. How much do you think a school should do to police adult sexual behaviour? Maybe it would be better for schools to have a category of being expelled for being rude with a note no actual laws were broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

If my daughter were assaulted, I would want the asshole in jail, not off at another school assaulting more girls. YMMV

Remember this is mainly people over 18. How much do you think a school should do to police adult sexual behaviour? Maybe it would be better for schools to have a category of being expelled for being rude with a note no actual laws were broken.

so - lobby the school to change their code-of-conduct.

As to the expelling - they don't have a note. You have a transcript with some grades and credits. You transfer the credits you can to the new school. Done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Campus police ARE the local police department. Many large campuses are essentially a medium sized town.

http://www.umpd.umd.edu/about/

The University of Maryland Police Department is a professional law enforcement organization that employs over 100 dedicated men and women. These individuals provide a complete array of law enforcement and related services to our community of approximately 60,000 members, which includes a student population of approximately 32,700.

Our police officers are State certified in accordance with Article 41, Section 4-201 of the Annotated Code of Maryland and have all the same powers and authority as any other sworn police officer in Maryland; each officer is empowered by State law to make arrests, investigate crimes, and carry firearms. Furthermore, the University of Maryland Police Force is the primary agency responsible for policing property owned, operated, leased by, or under the control of the University of Maryland System.

So that we might be better able to provide effective services to our community as a whole, UMPD has entered into a "Concurrent Jurisdiction Agreement" with Prince George's County Police Department (PGPD) that, in addition to our statutory jurisdiction and authority, distributes enforcement authority to University Police Officers in certain areas of Prince George's County. UMPD and PGPD have a mutual and positive working relationship and provide assistance and expertise to each other as needed. Additionally, State law empowers University Police Officers to enforce laws throughout the State of Maryland in many circumstances.

 

AFAIK reporting a rape to them would result in an investigation just like any other rape. It is the extra-judicial school system that is the issue here.

Thanks. I had no idea. I'm reevaluating where I commit crimes now. Good info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

so - lobby the school to change their code-of-conduct.

As to the expelling - they don't have a note. You have a transcript with some grades and credits. You transfer the credits you can to the new school. Done.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/11/03/sexual-harassment-policy-that-nearly-ruined-life/hY3XrZrOdXjvX2SSvuciPN/story.html

>>>>>>

The committee summoned me to appear and styled the meeting as a form of mediation. Its chairman, a professor with no prior experience handling dispute resolution, told me that I could have a faculty adviser present but no lawyer, and instructed me to avoid my accuser, who, by that point, I had neither seen nor spoken to in weeks. The committee imposed an “expectation of confidentiality” on me so as to prevent any form of “retaliation” against my accuser.I would say more about what the accusation itself entailed if indeed I had such information. Under the informal complaint process, specific accusations are not disclosed to the accused, no fact-finding takes place, and no record is taken of the alleged misconduct. For the committee to issue an informal complaint, an accuser need only bring an accusation that, if substantiated, would constitute a violation of university policy concerning sexual misconduct. The informal “process” begins and ends at the point of accusation; the truth of the claim is immaterial.

When I demanded that fact-finding be done so that I could clear my name, I was told, “There’s nothing to clear your name of.” When I then requested that a formal complaint be lodged against me — a process that does involve investigation into the facts — I was told that such a course of action was impossible for me to initiate

>>>>>

Days after the initial meeting with the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, I received a phone call from the Rhodes Trust informing me that they had received an anonymous tip that I had been accused by a fellow student of sexual misconduct. Next came a call from my summer employer, who, having received a similar anonymous tip, rescinded my offer of full-time employment upon graduation.

Months later, long after I had already withdrawn my Rhodes candidacy, the New York Times somehow also learned of the “confidential” complaint made against me, and that the Rhodes Trust had been aware of it. The paper then published a lengthy article revising the narrative of my pursuit of the scholarship and suggesting that I had intentionally misled media into believing a feel-good sports story that never was. The Times later printed a retraction, but the damage was already done; I was publicly humiliated. The memory of being told by the Committee that I had “nothing to clear my name of” was searing.

>>>>>>>>>

In closing, the reader might note that I have yet to even address the question of whether I was innocent of the accusation. I was. But it does not come up at any point above for the same reason that it never came up in any of the actions taken against me — because by the nature of the proceedings that follow from these new policies, it simply does not matter.

The denial of due process rights under these new procedures renders them dangerous and liable to severe abuse, and they are unworthy of the distinguished universities that have adopted them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/11/03/sexual-harassment-policy-that-nearly-ruined-life/hY3XrZrOdXjvX2SSvuciPN/story.html

>>>>>>

The committee summoned me to appear and styled the meeting as a form of mediation. Its chairman, a professor with no prior experience handling dispute resolution, told me that I could have a faculty adviser present but no lawyer, and instructed me to avoid my accuser, who, by that point, I had neither seen nor spoken to in weeks. The committee imposed an “expectation of confidentiality” on me so as to prevent any form of “retaliation” against my accuser.I would say more about what the accusation itself entailed if indeed I had such information. Under the informal complaint process, specific accusations are not disclosed to the accused, no fact-finding takes place, and no record is taken of the alleged misconduct. For the committee to issue an informal complaint, an accuser need only bring an accusation that, if substantiated, would constitute a violation of university policy concerning sexual misconduct. The informal “process” begins and ends at the point of accusation; the truth of the claim is immaterial.

When I demanded that fact-finding be done so that I could clear my name, I was told, “There’s nothing to clear your name of.” When I then requested that a formal complaint be lodged against me — a process that does involve investigation into the facts — I was told that such a course of action was impossible for me to initiate

>>>>>

Days after the initial meeting with the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, I received a phone call from the Rhodes Trust informing me that they had received an anonymous tip that I had been accused by a fellow student of sexual misconduct. Next came a call from my summer employer, who, having received a similar anonymous tip, rescinded my offer of full-time employment upon graduation.

Months later, long after I had already withdrawn my Rhodes candidacy, the New York Times somehow also learned of the “confidential” complaint made against me, and that the Rhodes Trust had been aware of it. The paper then published a lengthy article revising the narrative of my pursuit of the scholarship and suggesting that I had intentionally misled media into believing a feel-good sports story that never was. The Times later printed a retraction, but the damage was already done; I was publicly humiliated. The memory of being told by the Committee that I had “nothing to clear my name of” was searing.

>>>>>>>>>

In closing, the reader might note that I have yet to even address the question of whether I was innocent of the accusation. I was. But it does not come up at any point above for the same reason that it never came up in any of the actions taken against me — because by the nature of the proceedings that follow from these new policies, it simply does not matter.

The denial of due process rights under these new procedures renders them dangerous and liable to severe abuse, and they are unworthy of the distinguished universities that have adopted them.

The problem here isn't the university  -  like they said  -  nothing to clear his name of. 

The problem is whoever started calling everyone and telling them he'd been accused.  And the Times, for covering it, and for how they covered it.

 

 

btw  -  non-paywalled version:

http://hlrecord.org/2014/11/a-sexual-harassment-policy-that-nearly-ruined-my-life/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/11/03/sexual-harassment-policy-that-nearly-ruined-life/hY3XrZrOdXjvX2SSvuciPN/story.html

>>>>>>

The committee summoned me to appear and styled the meeting as a form of mediation. Its chairman, a professor with no prior experience handling dispute resolution, told me that I could have a faculty adviser present but no lawyer, and instructed me to avoid my accuser, who, by that point, I had neither seen nor spoken to in weeks. The committee imposed an “expectation of confidentiality” on me so as to prevent any form of “retaliation” against my accuser.I would say more about what the accusation itself entailed if indeed I had such information. Under the informal complaint process, specific accusations are not disclosed to the accused, no fact-finding takes place, and no record is taken of the alleged misconduct. For the committee to issue an informal complaint, an accuser need only bring an accusation that, if substantiated, would constitute a violation of university policy concerning sexual misconduct. The informal “process” begins and ends at the point of accusation; the truth of the claim is immaterial.

When I demanded that fact-finding be done so that I could clear my name, I was told, “There’s nothing to clear your name of.” When I then requested that a formal complaint be lodged against me — a process that does involve investigation into the facts — I was told that such a course of action was impossible for me to initiate

>>>>>

Days after the initial meeting with the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, I received a phone call from the Rhodes Trust informing me that they had received an anonymous tip that I had been accused by a fellow student of sexual misconduct. Next came a call from my summer employer, who, having received a similar anonymous tip, rescinded my offer of full-time employment upon graduation.

Months later, long after I had already withdrawn my Rhodes candidacy, the New York Times somehow also learned of the “confidential” complaint made against me, and that the Rhodes Trust had been aware of it. The paper then published a lengthy article revising the narrative of my pursuit of the scholarship and suggesting that I had intentionally misled media into believing a feel-good sports story that never was. The Times later printed a retraction, but the damage was already done; I was publicly humiliated. The memory of being told by the Committee that I had “nothing to clear my name of” was searing.

>>>>>>>>>

In closing, the reader might note that I have yet to even address the question of whether I was innocent of the accusation. I was. But it does not come up at any point above for the same reason that it never came up in any of the actions taken against me — because by the nature of the proceedings that follow from these new policies, it simply does not matter.

The denial of due process rights under these new procedures renders them dangerous and liable to severe abuse, and they are unworthy of the distinguished universities that have adopted them.

Sounds like he is lobbying the schools to change their procedures.

I highly doubt that I will attend said school, so i will leave it to them and their customers on how they wish to handle code-of-conduct issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, frenchie said:

The problem here isn't the university  -  like they said  -  nothing to clear his name of. 

The problem is whoever started calling everyone and telling them he'd been accused.  And the Times, for covering it, and for how they covered it.

 

 

btw  -  non-paywalled version:

http://hlrecord.org/2014/11/a-sexual-harassment-policy-that-nearly-ruined-my-life/

That wasn't my take. What I got was we was on record for mediation for sexual assault/violation/whatever with absolutely no way to have a "didn't do it" as part of said record. If the ex-girlfriend is vindictive enough to start the whole fake assault thing, she obviously is willing to spread the news far and wide. What can he do then? If he says it isn't true he is lying and will be found out and good luck explaining this bizarre "not guilty but not innocent" catch-22.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kent_island_sailor said:

That wasn't my take. What I got was we was on record for mediation for sexual assault/violation/whatever with absolutely no way to have a "didn't do it" as part of said record. If the ex-girlfriend is vindictive enough to start the whole fake assault thing, she obviously is willing to spread the news far and wide. What can he do then? If he says it isn't true he is lying and will be found out and good luck explaining this bizarre "not guilty but not innocent" catch-22.

nothing to do with the school. Vindictive ex-girlfriends can mess you up, school or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Raz'r said:

so overturn them already. But it's not about that (it may have started there but has drifted massively) - it's about Faux-rage of lost white male privilege. Suck it up snowflake. Obama's rules can be overturned and Codes-of-conduct will still exist.

Bullshit.. You're the first to mention white male privilege.  This is about a perversion of due process perpetrated on any school that accepts federal dollars and is therefore compelled to adopt the Obama administration's procedures. It's about Betsy DeVos's intention to scrap those rules. It's definitely not, as you suggest, a private matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Bullshit.. You're the first to mention white male privilege.  This is about a perversion of due process perpetrated on any school that accepts federal dollars and is therefore compelled to adopt the Obama administration's procedures. It's about Betsy DeVos's intention to scrap those rules. It's definitely not, as you suggest, a private matter.

umm, didn't I say "scrap the rules already" already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

nothing to do with the school. Vindictive ex-girlfriends can mess you up, school or not.

Nothing to do with the school when their approach to dealing with this situation doesn't allow for any fact-finding?  

Yeah, OK. Lemme know how that works for you if one of your daughter's room-mates gets mad and accuses her of something that's handled in a similar manner to this arbitration committee, and you're not permitted to advocate for your daughter's position. After all - she's 18, you're just the Dad, and can't even ask for her grades, paying the bill or not.  I can see how you'd be OK with that. 

Keep spinning Flash - before long you'll have a whole skein of yarn you can knit into a story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Nothing to do with the school when their approach to dealing with this situation doesn't allow for any fact-finding?  

Yeah, OK. Lemme know how that works for you if one of your daughter's room-mates gets mad and accuses her of something that's handled in a similar manner to this arbitration committee, and you're not permitted to advocate for your daughter's position. After all - she's 18, you're just the Dad, and can't even ask for her grades, paying the bill or not.  I can see how you'd be OK with that. 

Keep spinning Flash - before long you'll have a whole skein of yarn you can knit into a story. 

So, what are you advocating. No code of conduct? And what gives you the power to tell a private institution this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

So, what are you advocating. No code of conduct? And what gives you the power to tell a private institution this?

When it comes to an accusation of physical/sexual assault?  I would suggest that that is beyond the purview of any code of conduct, and advocate that the situation should be immediately referred to the proper authorities.   The story Kent shared has some sinister implications for the accuser as well - let's suppose that the accused is a "staff favorite" and the accuser was treated in a manner similarly to the accused in Kent's story.  Do you think that that treatment would encourage reporting an attack, or make the accuser hesitant?   Yeah - for this discussion, that's an "imagine" moment, but, its one that's plausible and worthy of consideration. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

When it comes to an accusation of physical/sexual assault?  I would suggest that that is beyond the purview of any code of conduct, and advocate that the situation should be immediately referred to the proper authorities.   The story Kent shared has some sinister implications for the accuser as well - let's suppose that the accused is a "staff favorite" and the accuser was treated in a manner similarly to the accused in Kent's story.  Do you think that that treatment would encourage reporting an attack, or make the accuser hesitant?   Yeah - for this discussion, that's an "imagine" moment, but, its one that's plausible and worthy of consideration. 

 

you realize there are negative sexual behaviors that aren't at all illegal, right? and that schools, rightly, frown heavily upon?  To the point of putting that in the code of conduct? Did you even skim the Amherst one? It was MOSTLY about legal, but pretty awful nonetheless behaviors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

you realize there are negative sexual behaviors that aren't at all illegal, right? and that schools, rightly, frown heavily upon?  To the point of putting that in the code of conduct? Did you even skim the Amherst one? It was MOSTLY about legal, but pretty awful nonetheless behaviors.

This issue is nationwide, not at Amherst alone.

Try imagining your daughter coming from college after a month because she made unwanted lesbian advances towards her roommate. Imagine you both know she did no such thing, but there is no mechanism to defend yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

This issue is nationwide, not at Amherst alone.

Try imagining your daughter coming from college after a month because she made unwanted lesbian advances towards her roommate. Imagine you both know she did no such thing, but there is no mechanism to defend yourself.

Yep - that's the way it goes. We have the same rules here at the office. I watch my Ps & Qs pretty damn closely. No touching, no innuendo. I drove a young lass home once after a 4th of July party and realized 1/2 way there that it was a STUPID idea. Should have called her a Lyft.

So - since you think that Universities shouldn't have rules against hostile sexual environments 'cause some dude might get wrongly accused, I guess you think private companies shouldn't have rules against hostile work environments as well? Let's be consistent, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

This issue is nationwide, not at Amherst alone.

Try imagining your daughter coming from college after a month because she made unwanted lesbian advances towards her roommate. Imagine you both know she did no such thing, but there is no mechanism to defend yourself.

Imagine the same daughter coming from college after a month because she was assaulted at a party by a boy and nobody believed her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/09/2017 at 8:49 PM, kent_island_sailor said:

All that said, pussy-grabber Trump and his minions are the LAST people that should be messing with this.

Okay, you are forgiven. Just don't let it happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Spatial Ed said:

Imagine the same daughter coming from college after a month because she was assaulted at a party by a boy and nobody believed her.

Neither one is a good thing obviously, it is not an either-or choice ;) Kind of why the wider world has courts and laws and things :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spatial Ed said:

Imagine the same daughter coming from college after a month because she was assaulted at a party by a boy and nobody believed her.

And if she was assaulted by an athlete at a major university she might as well change her identity and go into witness protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Neither one is a good thing obviously, it is not an either-or choice ;) Kind of why the wider world has courts and laws and things :rolleyes:

Except, they don't. Any employer of size will have similar workplace rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

And if she was assaulted by an athlete at a major university she might as well change her identity and go into witness protection.

Unfortunately true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Yep - that's the way it goes. We have the same rules here at the office. I watch my Ps & Qs pretty damn closely. No touching, no innuendo. I drove a young lass home once after a 4th of July party and realized 1/2 way there that it was a STUPID idea. Should have called her a Lyft.

So - since you think that Universities shouldn't have rules against hostile sexual environments 'cause some dude might get wrongly accused, I guess you think private companies shouldn't have rules against hostile work environments as well? Let's be consistent, eh?

You would have hated doing my job - I used to travel on contracts and frequently it was engineering (just me) and training (one of two women). So I spent pretty much all my time for two-three weeks at a stretch with one of the two trainers. A *lot* more time alone than a car ride!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

You would have hated doing my job - I used to travel on contracts and frequently it was engineering (just me) and training (one of two women). So I spent pretty much all my time for two-three weeks at a stretch with one of the two trainers. A *lot* more time alone than a car ride!

I've got a good Idea..Sharia :D

Are you guys really that frightened of being alone with women? kinda ironical as most women are not afraid of being alone with a bloke...and it's got nothing to do with any handbook protocol protection:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

I have better due-process protection than these colleges.

That's the thing. They don't need ANY due process, other than what they write down as their process. They are a private entity and can do what they want. Don't like it? Don't send your kids there. Simple really. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

I've got a good Idea..Sharia :D

Are you guys really that frightened of being alone with women? kinda ironical as most women are not afraid of being alone with a bloke...and it's got nothing to do with any handbook protocol protection:rolleyes:

I'm not afraid of women. But I make a habit of not spending 1:1 alone time with young cuties outside of the work environment. Not smart. Wife would also frown on that practice. Work travel? That's fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Yep - that's the way it goes. We have the same rules here at the office. I watch my Ps & Qs pretty damn closely. No touching, no innuendo. I drove a young lass home once after a 4th of July party and realized 1/2 way there that it was a STUPID idea. Should have called her a Lyft.

So - since you think that Universities shouldn't have rules against hostile sexual environments 'cause some dude might get wrongly accused, I guess you think private companies shouldn't have rules against hostile work environments as well? Let's be consistent, eh?

No one has suggested that universities shouldn't have rules against hostile environments? At issue is whether the current government mandated rules are flawed and should be scrapped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Yep - that's the way it goes. We have the same rules here at the office. I watch my Ps & Qs pretty damn closely. No touching, no innuendo. I drove a young lass home once after a 4th of July party and realized 1/2 way there that it was a STUPID idea. Should have called her a Lyft.

So - since you think that Universities shouldn't have rules against hostile sexual environments 'cause some dude might get wrongly accused, I guess you think private companies shouldn't have rules against hostile work environments as well? Let's be consistent, eh?

You're intentionally conflating things to be contrary - The universities absolutely should have rules about such conduct - but when the conduct extends to an area such as sexual assault?  I don't think that the administrative arbitration committee is the proper place for such issues to be aired.  I know that you understand the difference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dog said:

No one has suggested that universities shouldn't have rules against hostile environments? At issue is whether the current government mandated rules are flawed and should be scrapped.

have you found anyone here saying they shouldn't be scrapped?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

You're intentionally conflating things to be contrary - The universities absolutely should have rules about such conduct - but when the conduct extends to an area such as sexual assault?  I don't think that the administrative arbitration committee is the proper place for such issues to be aired.  I know that you understand the difference. 

then we have to disagree - and I think you're disagreeing with precedent in universities & corporations far and wide.

 

My company's code of conduct (in a PDF and I can't copy) states that sexual advances are not allowed, and offers an anonymous tip line and company investigation. Then Mediation is the answer. No appeal. No courts, no innocent b4 guilty assumption.

 

Why would universities be different?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

You're intentionally conflating things to be contrary - The universities absolutely should have rules about such conduct - but when the conduct extends to an area such as sexual assault?  I don't think that the administrative arbitration committee is the proper place for such issues to be aired.  I know that you understand the difference. 

No - I don't. Enlighten me. Why can't a university do what corporations across america do. Daily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

No - I don't. Enlighten me. Why can't a university do what corporations across america do. Daily.

Sure - you don't understand the difference between someone shouting "show me your tits" at a tailgate, and someone pulling a train on a young woman who's too drunk to say no, or a young woman who wakes up the next morning embarrassed by what she did last night and filing a complaint as a way of "protecting her reputation", and the appropriate venue for each of those actions to be addressed.    

Suggesting that the issue is that anyone has said that "universities can't do what corporations do daily" is a red herring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Sure - you don't understand the difference between someone shouting "show me your tits" at a tailgate, and someone pulling a train on a young woman who's too drunk to say no, or a young woman who wakes up the next morning embarrassed by what she did last night and filing a complaint as a way of "protecting her reputation", and the appropriate venue for each of those actions to be addressed.    

Suggesting that the issue is that anyone has said that "universities can't do what corporations do daily" is a red herring. 

Imagine!

Sexual assault goes all the way from an unwanted grope, or kiss, all the way up to your train. 

What you seem to willfully ignore, over and over, is that the student has a contract with the university. The student has to pay their fees, pass their classes, conform to the code of conduct, and as a result, after they fulfill the terms of their contract, the university will grant them a degree.

Don't do one of the 3, and the university can decide to stop taking the students money and take away the degree option. You know the sign at just about any business "we reserve the right to deny service to anyone" - yet you seem to believe that universities cannot do that. Why?

The whole nation has moved beyond this. The university is just another corporation.  The student and the university have a contract. You, as a student, must follow that contract if you hope to get your degree. 

Simple really.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Raz'r said:

have you found anyone here saying they shouldn't be scrapped?

I found people (you) who won't address the subject and keep wanting  to change it. Do you think the Obama era rules should be scrapped?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dog said:

I found people (you) who won't address the subject and keep wanting  to change it. Do you think the Obama era rules should be scrapped?

i've answered that question several times now. I'm sorry your alzheimers has reached an advanced stage.

 

edit: adding in the fact tat schools don't have to follow Title IX rules, if they don't take federal cash.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

i've answered that question several times now. I'm sorry your alzheimers has reached an advanced stage.

 

edit: adding in the fact tat schools don't have to follow Title IX rules, if they don't take federal cash.....

No, I don't believe you have weighed in on whether the Obama rules should be scrapped. You just blabber on about codes of conduct, white male privilege, contracts and superfluous bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Raz'r said:

My company's code of conduct (in a PDF and I can't copy) states that sexual advances are not allowed, and offers an anonymous tip line and company investigation. Then Mediation is the answer. No appeal. No courts, no innocent b4 guilty assumption.

Why are we now discussing "sexual advances"?  That is a different animal from sexual assault.  One may be a precursor to the other, but they are not equivalent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Why are we now discussing "sexual advances"?  That is a different animal from sexual assault.  One may be a precursor to the other, but they are not equivalent.

The Dog-crew makes the claim that an unwanted kiss can get a poor horny boy kicked out of school, forever damaged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relating college and workplace behaviour is beyond silly. One of the reasons people go to college is to have sex and possibly a spouse. Anyone remember the "Mrs Degree" :rolleyes:

My work at least totally gave up on the no dating thing and we have a fair number of married couples that met at work. They do have to not be in each other's chain of command though, so if the boss is dating one of his/her people, someone has to move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

The Dog-crew makes the claim that an unwanted kiss can get a poor horny boy kicked out of school, forever damaged.

Fair enough.  I must've missed that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

The Dog-crew makes the claim that an unwanted kiss can get a poor horny boy kicked out of school, forever damaged.

Wrong.... Under the rules the subject of this thread it's unsubstantiated accusations that can get one expelled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Relating college and workplace behaviour is beyond silly. One of the reasons people go to college is to have sex and possibly a spouse. Anyone remember the "Mrs Degree" :rolleyes:

My work at least totally gave up on the no dating thing and we have a fair number of married couples that met at work. They do have to not be in each other's chain of command though, so if the boss is dating one of his/her people, someone has to move.

and yet, any college i've ever looked at has a code of conduct that stresses a safe environment, which invariably includes safe from unwanted sexual advances.  If you can't keep your dick in your pants, maybe you should try to find a nice school that doesn't seem to punish that. Maybe the Air Force Academy is for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know where the hell you went to college, but "keep dick in pants" was NOT the goal of ANYONE that I ever knew in college*

 

* that had a dick

OTOH I never would have associated with anyone that was prone to force themselves on others in any way, so maybe I don't know all the shit that went on. We did know enough to tell any girl to go to a frat party in a group and remain semi-sober.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2017 at 7:26 AM, Spatial Ed said:

So when a rape is committed on campus, its never handled as a criminal case in the courts?

Don't be a fucking idiot.  Wait.  Too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

Why are we now discussing "sexual advances"?  That is a different animal from sexual assault.  One may be a precursor to the other, but they are not equivalent.

 

Actually that's part of the problem.  If this was tried in a court with due process, I'd agree.  But tried in an appointed kangaroo court of students or administrators with no burden of proof...... that's exactly why Devos is doing the right thing here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

 

Actually that's part of the problem.  If this was tried in a court with due process, I'd agree.  But tried in an appointed kangaroo court of students or administrators with no burden of proof...... that's exactly why Devos is doing the right thing here.

why? the university isn't a criminal court, and the penalties aren't criminal. they are holding internal administrative hearings on rules they have for continued attendance at the university. What's wrong with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Raz'r said:

 I drove a young lass home once after a 4th of July party and realized 1/2 way there that it was a STUPID idea. Should have called her a Lyft.

Calling a young girl a lyft could scar her for life. Worse than calling her a hoe. I bet it didn't take her half the trip to work out that getting in the car with you was a bad idea- not because of the fear of unwanted approaches, but because you are such a boring, sanctimonious Dick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Are you guys really that frightened of being alone with women? 

Only the ones that don't put out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

why? the university isn't a criminal court, and the penalties aren't criminal. they are holding internal administrative hearings on rules they have for continued attendance at the university. What's wrong with that?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeleef/2017/04/09/wrongfully-expelled-student-hauls-elite-college-into-court/#5a24b6191929

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/expelled-for-sex-assault-young-men-are-filing-more-lawsuits-to-clear-their-names/2017/04/27/c2cfb1d2-0d89-11e7-9b0d-d27c98455440_story.html

http://www.nj.com/education/2016/08/expelled_freshman_sues_rider_university_over_sexua.html

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2017/05/15/former-student-sues-vanderbilt-10-m-after-expulsion-sexual-assault/323062001/

Being expelled for sexual assault is a career and life ender in most cases.  Another college won't accept you.  And having to explain why you didn't finish school at job interviews?  Ho boy.  For something this serious, we should be basing our decisions on due process.  Not on college boards.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

First article, sham piece

2nd, blocked by paywall

article 3. Ok, real piece. Guy grope drunk girl.  Admits to groping. He's expelled. Lawsuit filed. Uh huh. That's it. Nothing else. No resolution.  Let me know if he wins.

 Article 4. Drunks again. She's bruised, he's expelled. Article points out a lawsuit the college list as its policies and processes were inadequate in the past. He sues saying he didn't get to cross examine. Will be interesting to see what comes of it. I suggest nothing. They followed a process clear to the students in their guidelines.

fsce it. A customer or employee of s business is subject to loss of service and/or employment based on that businesses policies and processes. Just because Americans have a thing about sexual proclivities doesn't mean they are somehow different and must rise to the level of criminal before you are subject to loss of employment or services. It doesn't. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grrr... said:

A question..if a student is expelled from a uni (or other educational campus)for sexual assault, is there some sort of shared data base these records are kept on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

A question..if a student is expelled from a uni (or other educational campus)for sexual assault, is there some sort of shared data base these records are kept on?

Of course not, why should there be?  If it is a criminal offense, of course.  I had a friend of a friend's son get burned on one of these deals.  Ex-girlfriend with an agenda.  He was kicked out of the Uni but never charged criminally.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

A question..if a student is expelled from a uni (or other educational campus)for sexual assault, is there some sort of shared data base these records are kept on?

i don't believe so. you pick up and move on to a different school. the outlier is the dude who bruised the girl right before graduation and really messed up. Not many Unis are going to give you full credit for your course load, so he likely f'ed himself up for a year or so.

Good thing is, once he get's his degree - it doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites