Columbia student carrying mattress until school expels her rapist

[Martinus]

Seems that is the problem. They should stick to "disciplining" students over purely academic matters, and leave criminal matters to the courts. 

It strikes me at least of creating all sorts of problems to in effect "try" someone of a serious crime in what amounts to an administrative hearing.

The legal system has its methods of dealing with things like this, and didn't find sufficient evidence to prosecute.

The school is legally obliged by Title IX of the US Code to provide an educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear.  Students acts that fall short of criminal behavior can still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women.  Title IX requires the universities to combat such non-criminal-but-still-hostile behavior, up to and including dismissing students who have been administratively judged to have violated the student code of conduct by impermissible sexual behavior.

It is always easy to dismiss non-criminal behavior as nobody's business, but that isn't true even theoretically.

Jesus. I posted pretty much the same argument as grumbler.

[Malthus]

Seems that is the problem. They should stick to "disciplining" students over purely academic matters, and leave criminal matters to the courts. 

It strikes me at least of creating all sorts of problems to in effect "try" someone of a serious crime in what amounts to an administrative hearing.

The legal system has its methods of dealing with things like this, and didn't find sufficient evidence to prosecute.

The school is legally obliged by Title IX of the US Code to provide an educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear.  Students acts that fall short of criminal behavior can still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women.  Title IX requires the universities to combat such non-criminal-but-still-hostile behavior, up to and including dismissing students who have been administratively judged to have violated the student code of conduct by impermissible sexual behavior.

It is always easy to dismiss non-criminal behavior as nobody's business, but that isn't true even theoretically.

The allegation in this particular case is that he partly throttled and raped her, in her room. Either he did it or he didn't - that is, either he committed an undoubtedly criminal act, or he did not.  I do not understand that, in this case, the alleged perpetrator is alleged to have committed any "acts that fall short of criminal behavior" that nonetheless "still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women".

The concern here is not about the universities disciplining students over acts of harrassment to ensure an "educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear", but about the universities being an alternative forum to the courts for prosecuting charges of rape. This strikes me as a bad idea, bound to lead to all sorts of problems for everyone concerned. For one, the sketchiness of the iniversities' expertise in holding what amounts to a criminal trial will leave the party that loses feeling that justice has not been done - as is undoubtedly the case here.

There may certainly be a place for university discipline to fill that gap between the 'outright criminal' and the 'harmful to an educational atmosphere' - but this is not an example of that. 

[Malthus]

Jesus. I posted pretty much the same argument as grumbler.

See my answer to Grumbler.

To elaborate: in my opinion at least, administrative tribunals ought to hand over allegations of undoubted criminal acts (rape, murder, etc) to the police and courts. If the allegation is of a lesser, non-criminal nature, such as harrassment that creates a 'hostile atmosphere', then they play a reasonable role in dealing with that.

[HVC]

Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape

[Admiral Yi]

Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape

Maybe for vaginal sex.  Not after fucking her in the ass. 

[derspiess]

Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape

No, he's supposed to just deal with it I guess.

[The Brain]

Jesus. I posted pretty much the same argument as grumbler.

See my answer to Grumbler.

To elaborate: in my opinion at least, administrative tribunals ought to hand over allegations of undoubted criminal acts (rape, murder, etc) to the police and courts. If the allegation is of a lesser, non-criminal nature, such as harrassment that creates a 'hostile atmosphere', then they play a reasonable role in dealing with that.

FWIW in a security-minded workplace it doesn't take a conviction to get kicked the fuck out of there for a criminal incident. But one consideration is of course that unlike some companies unis are generally clueless and shouldn't wield too much power.

[grumbler]

The allegation in this particular case is that he partly throttled and raped her, in her room. Either he did it or he didn't - that is, either he committed an undoubtedly criminal act, or he did not.  I do not understand that, in this case, the alleged perpetrator is alleged to have committed any "acts that fall short of criminal behavior" that nonetheless "still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women". 

You obviously know far more details on the administrative hearing than I, but the schools are required by law to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct, even those that fall short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted.  The university carried out its mandated investigation and apparently concluded that the preponderance of evidence was that no such misconduct occurred.

You can argue that the mandate to investigate is over-stated, but that's the current law.  Schools similarly investigate other cases of misconduct, too:  cheating, stealing, bullying, lying... all kids of stuff that are not necessarily criminal or, if criminal, are not prosecuted by the legal system.

The concern here is not about the universities disciplining students over acts of harrassment to ensure an "educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear", but about the universities being an alternative forum to the courts for prosecuting charges of rape. This strikes me as a bad idea, bound to lead to all sorts of problems for everyone concerned. For one, the sketchiness of the iniversities' expertise in holding what amounts to a criminal trial will leave the party that loses feeling that justice has not been done - as is undoubtedly the case here.

Except that it's not a criminal trial and carried no criminal sanctions.  The American Bar Association has similar procedures for violations of its code of conduct, and I'm sure other organizations (AMA, etc) have similar procedures, too.

There may certainly be a place for university discipline to fill that gap between the 'outright criminal' and the 'harmful to an educational atmosphere' - but this is not an example of that.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion, and I agree that it can be carried too far, but this is not an example of that.

[grumbler]

Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape

He wasn't even found guilty of misconduct.  I am willing to bet that she is, in fact, in violation of the student conduct codes.  I doubt that he wants more publicity in the case, though.

[Malthus]

The allegation in this particular case is that he partly throttled and raped her, in her room. Either he did it or he didn't - that is, either he committed an undoubtedly criminal act, or he did not.  I do not understand that, in this case, the alleged perpetrator is alleged to have committed any "acts that fall short of criminal behavior" that nonetheless "still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women". 

You obviously know far more details on the administrative hearing than I, but the schools are required by law to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct, even those that fall short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted.  The university carried out its mandated investigation and apparently concluded that the preponderance of evidence was that no such misconduct occurred.

You can argue that the mandate to instigate is over-stated, but that's the current law.  Schools similarly investigate other cases of misconduct, too:  cheating, stealing, bullying, lying... all kids of stuff that are not necessarily criminal or, if criminal, are not prosecuted by the legal system.

The concern here is not about the universities disciplining students over acts of harrassment to ensure an "educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear", but about the universities being an alternative forum to the courts for prosecuting charges of rape. This strikes me as a bad idea, bound to lead to all sorts of problems for everyone concerned. For one, the sketchiness of the iniversities' expertise in holding what amounts to a criminal trial will leave the party that loses feeling that justice has not been done - as is undoubtedly the case here.

Except that it's not a criminal trial and carried no criminal sanctions.  The American Bar Association has similar procedures for violations of its code of conduct, and I'm sure other organizations (AMA, etc) have similar procedures, too.

There may certainly be a place for university discipline to fill that gap between the 'outright criminal' and the 'harmful to an educational atmosphere' - but this is not an example of that.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion, and I agree that it can be carried too far, but this is not an example of that.

I think you are missing my point (or I am not stating it with sufficient clarity).

I am not saying that the allegation in this case "fell short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted". On the contrary. The allegation was extremely serious and was, without a doubt, one that concerned "criminal behaviour" and that "could be prosecuted". And so it should have been - in the criminal courts, after a police investigation.

To use another example: if a student came to the university discipline committee and complained that his roommate had committed a murder, should the administrators:

(1) hold an administrative hearing, to determine whether the roommate had, in point of fact, committed an offence against the student code worthy of having them expelled, or

(2) call the cops to investigate the alleged crime of murder, given that the cops have stuff like trained investigators and forensics, and so are in a better position to determine whether a murder has occured than some administrators working for a university?   

To my mind, it makes no sense to choose option (1). Same with this particular case in the OP.

[garbon]

Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape

He wasn't even found guilty of misconduct.  I am willing to bet that she is, in fact, in violation of the student conduct codes.  I doubt that he wants more publicity in the case, though.

Yeah article suggests that Paul has been hiding out.

Article did mention that it cases where male students were found guilty of misconduct that several have now been suing stating that their civil rights have been violated.

[grumbler]

I think you are missing my point (or I am not stating it with sufficient clarity).

I am not saying that the allegation in this case "fell short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted". On the contrary. The allegation was extremely serious and was, without a doubt, one that concerned "criminal behaviour" and that "could be prosecuted". And so it should have been - in the criminal courts, after a police investigation.

To use another example: if a student came to the university discipline committee and complained that his roommate had committed a murder, should the administrators:

(1) hold an administrative hearing, to determine whether the roommate had, in point of fact, committed an offence against the student code worthy of having them expelled, or

(2) call the cops to investigate the alleged crime of murder, given that the cops have stuff like trained investigators and forensics, and so are in a better position to determine whether a murder has occured than some administrators working for a university?   

To my mind, it makes no sense to choose option (1). Same with this particular case in the OP.

Ah.  I didn't know that the student went directly to the university disciplinary committee and that the committee decided not to notify the cops.  That was certainly wrong, and not in accordance with the law or university policies.

Where are you getting your excellent and interesting info?  None of it is in any version of the story I have heard.  Inside sources?

[garbon]

I think you are missing my point (or I am not stating it with sufficient clarity).

I am not saying that the allegation in this case "fell short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted". On the contrary. The allegation was extremely serious and was, without a doubt, one that concerned "criminal behaviour" and that "could be prosecuted". And so it should have been - in the criminal courts, after a police investigation.

To use another example: if a student came to the university discipline committee and complained that his roommate had committed a murder, should the administrators:

(1) hold an administrative hearing, to determine whether the roommate had, in point of fact, committed an offence against the student code worthy of having them expelled, or

(2) call the cops to investigate the alleged crime of murder, given that the cops have stuff like trained investigators and forensics, and so are in a better position to determine whether a murder has occured than some administrators working for a university?   

To my mind, it makes no sense to choose option (1). Same with this particular case in the OP.

Ah.  I didn't know that the student went directly to the university disciplinary committee and that the committee decided not to notify the cops.  That was certainly wrong, and not in accordance with the law or university policies.

Where are you getting your excellent and interesting info?  None of it is in any version of the story I have heard.  Inside sources?

It may have been my fault / I admittedly don't know much on exactly how these matters are handled.

[derspiess]

Apparently she decided not to go to the cops, stating that it would be a waste of her time.

[garbon]

Apparently she decided not to go to the cops, stating that it would be a waste of her time.

Actually here's what she said:

http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/09/columbia-emma-sulkowicz-mattress-rape-performance-interview.html

The last time we spoke you said you had filed a report with the NYPD and they were starting to investigate. What is the status of that?
It got transferred to the district attorney's office, and I decided I didn't want to pursue it any further because they told it me it would take nine months to a year to actually go to court, which would be after I graduated and probably wanting to erase all of my memories of Columbia from my brain anyway, so I decided not to pursue it.

Did the police seem to think there was a case there to pursue?
Yeah, they were going to contact the other women who reported against him, and they would have subpoenaed the information from the university files.

You were also hoping to file a complaint with the police regarding how you were treated. What happened with that?
I was contacted by an investigator who was really, really annoying to work with. He would call me randomly, and make me repeat everything that happened. He kept telling me I had to come into the station, and obviously I don't want to deal with the police any more right now. It's so disorganized, and it's really upsetting to work with them at all.