In addition to the unconstitutional conditions problem you mention, I don’t believe that any university police department in the country has a forensics unit such that a search of an apartment would do any good. If we are at that level, we are at regular police level.
My only point was in response to the idea that if it happened off campus then it is hands off for the university. Like any organization it can have its own rules of personal conduct and can expel or take disciplinary action for conduct which does not occur on campus.
Of course, but I wouldn’t think the university is required to open a Title IX investigation for a rape that takes place off-campus at a private, unaffiliated residence. I would think the school is immune from liability, unlike say, on-campus residences or an affiliated fraternity house
But I’m really way out of my area of expertise here.
If the (alleged) assailant and the victim are both students at the university, they do. A Title IX investigation is NOT a university-level criminal investigation. This explains it:
Hmm, OK. Assuming the victim does not provide enough evidence for me to discipline the accused, and does not want to involve the police, how else do we get additional documents and evidence, except through voluntary production from the accused?
Why do you keep assuming it would be the accused who would be removed? Why wouldn’t it be the accuser who wants to get away from the person they claim raped them? Why wouldn’t the special accommodations be made for them, and not the accused?
Not that removal from the class is the only option. I was actually in a class in college where one student put out a restraining order on another student. There wasn’t another offered class of the type, so the result was that both of them had to sit on opposite sides of the room and never interact with each other in any way.
I also remember situations where students could not attend classes for various reasons, and the teachers would set up private sessions with them. That also seems a workable solution for keeping two students separated.
No matter what, something has happened between these two students. A rape, a misunderstanding, a false accusation, whatever. Keeping the students separated is a good idea, and there are various ways of doing so, each with their pros and cons. And it is ultimately up to them to decide how “harmful” any of them are.
As I noted earlier, the university would examine cell phone records, social media, as well as interviewing others. They don’t dust for fingerprints. The primary goal of Title IX is not to “discipline” the accused but to ensure the victim has fair access to education free of discrimination and sexual harassment/assault and to protect others in the student body. If the university determines from the evidence–and again, we’re talking much lower standards than “beyond a reasonable doubt”–that the only way to do that would be to expel the accused and bar him from campus, that may happen. Or class schedules might be changed. Or the victim would get extensions on deadlines for papers, etc.
I was under the impression that the university cannot compel the production of phone records, “private” social media posts, letters, etc. Neither do I think they can compel testimony from people not affiliated with the school.
So if a victim comes to me without enough evidence to support a case, and involving the municipal authorities is off the table, all I can do is interview the accused. If the accused’s testimony is unimpeachable, then what?
Let’s say the victim claims that the accused’s roommate (who is not a student) was in the room while she was being raped. She alleges that the roommate placed two calls to someone named “Steve”, and that they talked about a drug transaction and must have overheard her being raped.
The accused says he was home with his roommate and does not remember if somebody named “Steve” was called. The roommate volunteered testimony and said he could not remember calling anybody, and he has since lost his phone. The roommate refused to volunteer records from the phone company, even as accused asks him, citing personal privacy. Both accused and roommate claim not to know who Steve is.
If I could confirm a “Steve” was really called twice at the time given, that would contradict the accused’s testimony. But I can’t compel the roommate to produce phone records, and I can’t fault the accused if his roommate refuses to volunteer phone records.
No. Posters in this thread have made claims that false allegations of sexual assault are vanishingly rare. This being GD, I would like a cite to studies with methodology. I think I have made a decent prima facie case.
I’m not a lawyer and certainly not one specializing in Title IX cases. I won’t address any more hypotheticals. You seem determined to make this into an investigation to determine guilt, and as I’ve said a few times now, it’s not. If the victim has cell phone or social media records, the college could access those. If the accused refuses to hand over evidence he may have, it’s not considered. OK?
Here it is one more time:
THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF A TITLE IX INVESTIGATION IS TO ENSURE THE VICTIM HAS EQUAL ACCESS TO EDUCATION. TITLE IX IS TO HELP THE VICTIM.
REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING ELSE, THE COLLEGE MUST TAKE STEPS TO HELP THE VICTIM, INCLUDING COUNSELING, EXTENDED TIME FOR ESSAYS, ETC.
IF THE EVIDENCE–WHATEVER IT IS–SHOWS THE ACCUSED IS A PROBABLE THREAT TO THE VICTIM OR OTHERS ON CAMPUS, THE COLLEGE COULD EXPEL HIM.
IF THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT SHOW THIS, THE ACCUSED GOES ON HIS MERRY WAY, BUT THE COLLEGE MUST STILL TAKES STEPS (ABOVE, AND MY PREVIOUS POSTS HERE) TO HELP THE VICTIM. NOTHING HAPPENS TO THE ACCUSED.
No need to shout, it actually makes it harder for me to read.
I don’t see a difference between expelling a student I find to be a probable threat and determining that he violated the code of conduct (is guilty). I mean, expulsion is discipline. Class reassignment is discipline. To me, the dean, the entire point of bringing in the accused at all is to discipline them. I don’t need to do hear anything from the accused to give a victim access to counseling or… did you say extended time for essays?
I mean yes, there is a chance that people could abuse the system and lie about being raped to get free counseling. I’m not sure whether I should be concerned about that.
No you have not, in fact what you are doing is a perfect example of *moving the goalposts. *You ask for a cite, you are given a great cite, then you say you need a cite for the methodology.
But here is another:
A review of research
finds that the prevalence of false reporting is between 2 percent and 10 percent. The following
studies support these findings:
and another:
T*he five studies mentioned above and this study are consistent in suggesting a false allegation rate of between 2 and
8% among child and adolescent reports of sexual abuse.
*
So, since you are the one making the claim, you come up with a cite that shows that false allegations of sexual assault are common.
Not according to Federal regulations under Title IX. Universities are required to investigate and to provide safe places for students to get their education.
