# Due process no longer applies at Columbia University.

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/due-process-no-longer-applies-at-columbia-university/35811>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [October 5, 2000, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/due-process-no-longer-applies-at-columbia-university/35811 "2000-10-05T18:05:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\
**Post date:** [October 9, 2000, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/due-process-no-longer-applies-at-columbia-university/35811/21 "2000-10-09T17:23:06Z")

</div>

Maeglin wrote:

> [@](#):
>
> I recall several years ago that a student was hung out to dry at Brown on a similar policy. He was tried in absentia and expelled so fast it rolled his ears back. He could not reenter Brown, **nor was he accepted at any other school he tried to transfer to.**

(bolding mine)

I’m guessing this was because Brown invariably told the other schools that this student had been expelled.

This is where Universities differ from employers. If company 1 fires you, and you apply for employment at company 2, and company 2 calls company 1 and asks if you were really employed there, and company 1 says you were **fired** , they open themselves up to a huge defamation lawsuit. Thus, companies don’t tell other companies that a given employee was “fired” anymore. Company 1 will merely tell company 2 that you worked there from thus-and-such start date to thus-and-such ending date, and keep everything else confidential.

Perhaps universities should adopt a similar policy.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\
**Post date:** [October 9, 2000, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/due-process-no-longer-applies-at-columbia-university/35811/22 "2000-10-09T17:48:50Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by lucwarm \*  
> \*\*Why not let people have an attorney present? Maybe it’s not necessary, given the informal nature of the proceeding, but - what’s the downside? \*\*

Any student confronted with a harassment accusation should consult a lawyer immediately. Here is a [long article](http://www.bostonmagazine.com/highlights/harvard.shtml) that is definitely worth reading about date rape in college and how it can affect both the rapist and the victim. In particular, statements made to the Harvard Administrative board could be used to impeach the testimony of the alleged rapist, despite the total lack of procedural safeguards.

I don’t know what actually happened to these two people, and who’s “right” or “wrong,” but it’s worth considering the predicament of each of them and how they looked at the same situation through different eyes.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\
**Post date:** [October 9, 2000, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/due-process-no-longer-applies-at-columbia-university/35811/23 "2000-10-09T17:50:21Z")

</div>

I realize that there is a huge difference between sexual harassment and rape, but I think the issues are nevertheless closely related.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/due-process-no-longer-applies-at-columbia-university/35811.md?page=1)