- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,718
- Reaction score
- 35,498
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Absolutely agree with this, but one wrong doesn't right the other wrong.
By the way, if there is over-enforcement of rape accusations now, it is because for many years there were many incidents of under-enforcement and cover-ups in the past.
Agreed. Unfortunately, the human species seems utterly incapable of letting the pendulum stop in the middle.
While I disagree with the standard, I have no issue with a college like Amherst deciding to use this standard to decide the issue as it is a private university.
I have a more significant issue with a State run school taking action against an individual that results in explusion or suspension for an act that is a criminal issue. Rape is a felony and a crime, and a state school should let what legal action occur rather than exterting a punishment upon the individual coming from a basis that the individual is assumed guilty.
I'm well aware of this, but a lot of it was not reporting by victims. You can't blame the system for that. But putting the accused in a situation where he can't adequately defend himself is not the right way to fix the problem. What we have here is a built in bias AND agenda.
Or, you know, raise him right, teach him how consent works, be responsible with alcohol, and be careful who he goes home with.
Look, there is no easy answer to dealing with alleged rape cases. The overwhelming majority of rapes are committed by someone the victim knows. So inevitably, unless the rape was video taped or done in front of witnesses, it is going to be a case of he said, she said. Because of that most rape cases don't even go to court, let alone end in conviction.
I certainly don't want to abandon our "guilty beyond all reasonable doubt" standard but one of the consequences of that is most rapists will remain free. And yes, sometimes a woman will falsely accuse a man of rape. But the crime of false accusation also cannot easily be proven beyond all reasonable doubt because, once again, it is usually a he said she said case.
In the end, you will usually end up with a rape victim who feels she never received justice and is forced to keep attending the same school as her rapist unless she drops out or you end up with man who was falsely accused and his life is likely ruined to some degree.
Both scenarios suck. There isn't an easy solution to it. But I really am not comfortable with universities being the ones to handle these investigations.
I couldn't disagree more. How we judge things in private affects how we judge things in public (i.e.: juries, etc.). When we dumb down the process for something important like criminal activity, that becomes our mindset. It is the very rare individual who would be able to fully separate one from the other... though I'm sure we all think that we are that rare individual.While I disagree with the standard, I have no issue with a college like Amherst deciding to use this standard to decide the issue as it is a private university.
I have a more significant issue with a State run school taking action against an individual that results in explusion or suspension for an act that is a criminal issue. Rape is a felony and a crime, and a state school should let what legal action occur rather than exterting a punishment upon the individual coming from a basis that the individual is assumed guilty.
Hmm...
I wonder if this has anything to do with it.
Oh, almost forgot....if you're sending your son to college don't bother getting him a box of rubbers. Get him an attorney.
BTW, here's a good rundown of the whole Amherst incident.
Expelled student sues Amherst College, faulting investigation into 2012 rape case | GazetteNet.com
Chick screws her roommate's boyfriend, figures this might piss off her roomie and decides to nail the guy's nuts to the wall. Yeah, the guy is a jerk for screwing around on his girlfriend but that doesn't make him a rapist.
Raise him to believe unless you have a signed, notarized affidavit, anything you do can come back to bite you?
As I understand the story, he was not conscious when it happened, if that is possible.
So he's the one that got raped?
That is the story in this case and she reported it more than a year later with no evidence of any kind.
This guys future was destroyed on her word alone more than a year later.
She also had sex with another guy that same night.
There are texts to prove it all, from her.
We either believe in "innocent until proven guilty", or we don't.
Looks like the majority of reported rapes in college don't have enough evidence to support convictions, let alone indictment.
So you support this guy getting expelled?
You here to make a point? Well make it. Some of these cases have already proven the male student innocence. You just want someone to go to jail to satisfy your attitude over other poorly prosecuted cases?
I can see the point kinda went over your heads. My point was the article makes it sound like the beginning is here to start locking people up left and right without convictions or without enough evidence. But thats not true as presented by the data...
But if they had found in his favor, there would have been hell to pay. Protests, calls for action from various victim groups, having to formulate a new plan because of said calls to action, the college president being called before a special committee (or, worse, the local media) to explain why they run a college that is "hostile to women", and so on. You know the routine.
That's not what I got from the article. What I got from the article is that the college's and universities are punishing male students with expulsion without evidence of an actual misconduct/crime happening. Just on the say of the woman. IE: Guilty until proven innocent... and even then still guilty.
I got your point. Your point is that just because this guy in the OP's article says that he's innocent doesn't mean that he is. And that is true. But without evidence he should be considered innocent. That is the way it is in this country and the way it has been since this country was founded. And we shouldn't follow it just for that though. We should follow that philosophy because otherwise we'll go back to the ages when innocents were thrown into prison or put to death just on the say of someone with power. Claiming something without facts and the truth to back ya up has led to riots before. It's also led to mobs and lynching's. We don't need that in a civilized society.
Well this approach is not a solution, and convicting the innocent won't reduce rapes.
I can see the point kinda went over your heads. My point was the article makes it sound like the beginning is here to start locking people up left and right without convictions or without enough evidence. But thats not true as presented by the data...
We either believe in "innocent until proven guilty", or we don't.
No. It's for everybody. Our individual mindsets are that we either believe in "innocent until proven guilty", or we don't.That's for criminal trials, not college disciplinary procedures
No. It's for everybody. Our individual mindsets are that we either believe in "innocent until proven guilty", or we don't.
When the topic is a criminal act the standards should be the same regardless who is involved. Why they wouldn't be is brain cell boggling. I addressed this in a previous post in this thread. If you're interested seek that out.I don't know why you would say that when standards much lower than "innocent until proven guilty" are found throughout society. In fact, there is only one place where that "mindset" is put into place on a regular basis (ie criminal trials)
When the topic is a criminal act the standards should be the same regardless who is involved. Why they wouldn't be is brain cell boggling. I addressed this in a previous post in this thread. If you're interested seek that out.
'Accused is guilty': Campus rape tribunals punish without proof, critics say | Fox News
So this is where we are now with college rape cases? WTF?
Just because they can doesn't mean they should. That's all you're really saying here... they can.The topic is college disciplinary actions and they can be whatever the college wants them to be.
Just because they can doesn't mean they should. That's all you're really saying here... they can.
Couldn't refute my points, eh?
I can see the point kinda went over your heads. My point was the article makes it sound like the beginning is here to start locking people up left and right without convictions or without enough evidence. But thats not true as presented by the data...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?