A felony crime has been committed. The victim does not have the choice of stopping the University from reporting it. It is her choice of whether or not to support the investigation by giving her testimony.
The Police will not say that. They will look into his background, canvas for witnesses, and grill him- perhaps he will confess, people often do- and ask her to give a statement. If she refuses, and the police cant get a confession or other evidence, it is likely no charges will be filed, but the case wont just be reported “nothing officially to investigate” because they* will* have investigated. It is then her fault a rapist goes free. Not the Universities, they have done all they can.
And dont dismiss lightly the chance the rapist will confess.
In a felony, that is not her choice. A felony is not only a crime vs a person, it is a crime vs the state. She can choose to not make a statement or testify, yes.
Instead of rape, consider if this was a murder. She saw the accused kill someone, then drag the body off. Would you then suggest that the police not get involved?
Sexual assault is something where the question of what the victim is comfortable with deserves the utmost consideration. But it’s still not the only consideration. If there’s a rapist on campus, he may well rape again. I’d give a lot of weight to the question of whether testifying might be traumatic for a victim. But I’m not sure I’d give nearly so much weight (if any) to a victim’s opinion on what punishment a rapist deserves, assuming that the facts of what happened are not in doubt. There’s a place and procedure for victim impact statements and other witnesses at sentencing, and the victim may contribute to that, but the victim is not sole arbiter of whether somebody should be punished and to what extent, even in a rape case.
I’d say that’s more a problem with how poorly constructed the hypothetical is (inability or failure to account for all relevant factors) than with how poor the answers are.
While it is true the woman was either raped or she wasn’t, that is not the only course of action others can take (either prosecute the accused rapist for rape, or prosecute the alleged victim for making a false report). This is, however, the sort of “gotcha” false dichotomy that may lead some victims to fear coming forward. The truth may be unknown or unknowable, but victim’s services and other assistance can be offered to the woman making the accusation even without taking action against the accused.
The broad answers given to broad theoretical questions aren’t designed to answer all possible situations. Answers may differ when additional information is provided.
I disagree with the “Dave raped me but I want nothing more to do with it and I won’t cooperate with the police or the university investigation” tact. Nobody should expect that action against Dave should be taken under those circumstances. As long as the accuser is an adult, she should understand that she has made a very serious allegation against someone and therefore be prepared to support her allegations or at least participate in the process.
Drive by allegations are not conducive to due process or for finding the truth. Doesn’t the accuser have a moral obligation to see the process through so that this person that she uniquely knows to be a rapist doesn’t harm another woman?
That seems to be what I am hearing. There would be a full investigation under that case with the police, the university, and Dave unable to confront the accuser and test her veracity. Dave could be suspended pending the investigation or have some sort of no-contact order in place or be referred to mental health services depending on which poster we are talking about.
Dave’s friends and family would be questioned and thus know he had been accused of rape with the idea that “Dave’s a rapist” being planted in their minds and believed to be fact by those who believe as many of our fellow posters do that women never or only rarely make false allegations.
Yeah, I would say that action against Dave would be taken.
Hmmmm…If it were that easy, couldn’t Dave just turn around and say “SHE raped me but I want nothing more to do with it and I won’t cooperate with the police or the university investigation” and get her suspended too?
In a society that treated accusers and women in general with respect, fairness, compassion, and dignity, yes. But we’re not in such a society, not even close, even though we’ve made progress. In a society in which accusers and survivors are treated like utter dogshit, like our society, no such obligation exists, since it would have a high likelihood of doing great harm to the woman.
I’m under the impression that many kinds crimes will be investigated with little more than an accusation. The investigation may not go very far if the victim doesn’t cooperate, but there would be an investigation. I thought that was true for attempted murder, assault, theft, etc.
Wouldn’t the university be opening themselves up to a lot of liability if they didn’t investigate? What if Dave is an accomplished serial rapist who puts the fear of God into his victims that he will kill them or their family if they talk? If the university doesn’t do any investigation into these accusations, then subsequent victims could sue and likely win massive settlements.
One of them drops the class, takes something else instead, and picks up the chemistry class next year.
Or… One of them finishes the class remotely. The professor makes tapes available, and that student can take the final in a different room. Lab times can be staggered.
Which is it? Do we treat them with such deference that we investigate on nearly nothing or do we treat them so poorly that we shut the door on them when they are ready and willing to prosecute? It seems that you are arguing contradictory positions.
Try this (not really). Go to the police and tell them that your buddy Dave took $1k in cash off of your kitchen table when he was over but you don’t want to testify, don’t want an investigation, and just want that to be the end of it. In this instance, one which is not tinged with political advocacy, the police would put their pen down and tell you that without your cooperation, there is no way that anything is going to happen.
And expect to be questioned yourself. As the police don’t know you, perhaps you have a beef against Dave and are trying to get him in trouble.
This is what real investigations do: the seek the truth without a pre-ordained outcome.
Who has to drop? Who has to finish the class remotely? Who gets to stay with the class while the other goes to the other room?
So what is the suggestion here? That disciplinary action should be taken against “Dave” without any evidence, simply based on one student’s word against another?
I’m not a lawyer or expert on law enforcement or university disciplinary procedures. But it seems to me that as the Dean, it is my obligation in the best interest of the University to contact the police that a felony has been reported to me. Then the police would go and conduct that investigation.
Now it may be possible that I can suspend or expel Dave without a felony conviction if there is a preponderance of evidence that he violated the ethical and behavioral standards of the University. But I don’t think it is reasonable to take action simply based on the word of one student who is unwilling to cooperate and provides no real evidence.
If a University official takes any action based on an accusation without any investigation they would face litigation, and probable discipline even without litigation. Due process is a fundamental right, even for persons actually guilty of committing crimes. The decision not to make charges includes a decision not to ask for institutional punishment. An accusation alone, without any follow up might be considered as evidence supporting any later charges by the same person accused, but for that to affect official reprisals would require investigation as well.
Rape is a sensitive issue. The cause of that sensitivity is the irrational evaluation of a woman’s worth based on sexual experience, and a presumed lack of it. If a woman tells the fifteenth guy at the gang bang she doesn’t want to have sex, having sex against her will is just as much rape as it would be with a nun.
I think the referred to mental health services part is referring to my post. I don’t think that qualifies as taking action against Dave. If for no other reason being accused of rape is stressful and even if there isn’t an investigation he’s got someone going around telling people he’s a rapist. That is a perfectly good reason to be referred to counseling. The school can’t do anything to shut the accuser up so it seems reasonable they at least offer him the ability to work through his life being destroyed.
If he is a rapist sure I guess counseling could give him a place to admit it and talk through his issues and maybe become a better person but that seems like a weird “punishment” for the school to use.
I’m not arguing anything contradictory. Generally, we treat accusers like shit – investigations are often shoddy, and every benefit of the doubt is often given to the accused, especially if they are wealthy and powerful.
We shouldn’t treat them like shit. If they want an investigation, we should conduct a serious and thorough investigation. If they don’t, we shouldn’t (or at least we shouldn’t require that they cooperate or otherwise involve them without their consent).
Where did I suggest this? I’ve made several posts about what I think should be done – which one are you disagreeing with?
But here’s the thing. If they don’t want an investigation, why are they coming forward? I mean, they are adults, right? They have a responsibility to fairness and to the society they live in. Does anyone not understand that if you tell the police or a university official “Dave raped me” that an investigation will follow which requires a follow up from the accuser? What do they think or expect will happen?
I understand the trauma that a sexual assault victim has experienced, but it should be understood that the whole world doesn’t just take your word for anything. You have a responsibility other than making an accusation and walking off.