The U.S. legal system operates on the theory that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. But Stuart Taylor argues that, when it comes to sexual assault allegations, college campuses are turning the American justice system on its ear and declaring young men guilty based on accusations alone.
What do campuses say is sexual assault? 2:26
What if the man and the woman are both intoxicated? 6:08
“Pressure from government to hand down guilty verdicts” 7:08
What happens if you question the campus orthodoxy? 8:35
“What we oppose is presumption of guilt” 10:52
“There is no rape culture” 11:51
“Campus rape activists do not take rape statistics seriously” 14:55
“What is it like to be falsely accused?” 15:32
Activists admit that their methods don’t work 19:22
“Activists say it’s better to presume guilt” 19:59
How does the media deal with campus rape claims? 24:01
Mattress girl 27:12
What happened to due process? 28:17
The roots of campus rape hysteria 33:21
“Is there a way out of the false campus rape narrative?” 35:21
Due Process Rights
Articles relating to due process rights for our College boys
Georgia State Rep. Earl Earhart has won committee approval for legislation that would remove the adjudication of felony sexual assault from campus administrators and return it to law enforcement. The bill would require any college or university employee who is told about a sexual assault that falls under the definition of a felony to report the crime to law enforcement. The actual text of the legislation is quite short, and takes less than a minute to read. Yet still it has been mischaracterized. Ehrhart has made campus due process one of his pet issues and this bill would go a long way toward establishing a system that could produce real justice.
watchdog.org By Ashe Show
Conviction in criminal trials in the USA requires establishing a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. By contrast, in Title IX proceedings allegations of wrongdoing are adjudicated according to a much lower ‘preponderance of the evidence’ standard. This article provides a framework for using information regarding false conviction probabilities in criminal trials to model the probability of false guilty verdicts in Title IX proceedings. An innocent person facing a 4% of being found guilty under the beyond a reasonable doubt standard would face a 33% probability of being found guilty under Title IX’s preponderance of the evidence standard…when the burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence, the risks faced by innocent defendants will be substantial.
academic.oup.com A-probabilistic-framework-for-modelling-false By John Villasenor
Remember John Doe who was expelled for sexual misconduct, even though his accuser performed a sex act on him while he was blacked out? Recently, Seattle District Judge James Robart, blocked Doe’s attempt to subpoena his accuser’s text messages on grounds that re-litigating the matter “would impose emotional and psychological trauma” on her. According to Judge Robart, John Doe who believes Amherst violated his due process rights, wrongfully expelled him, and ignored subsequent evidence that his accuser, ‘Sandra Jones,’ was the actual violator of the college’s sexual misconduct policies, does not deserve the opportunity to make his case because someone else’s feelings are more important. Judge Robart argued that since Doe isn’t suing Jones directly, he has no right to involve her in his case against Amherst. The Moral: SUE YOUR ACCUSER
reason.com By Robby Soave
About one new due process lawsuit per week was filed last year against a college by a student who had been found guilty of sexual assault by a campus tribunal, despite what the lawsuits claim is strong evidence of innocence. The strongest federal appellate win for an accused student was issued unanimously by an all-Democratic-appointed panel. And the biggest appellate loss for an accused came a few months later, from a unanimous panel that included two George W. Bush appointees. Those two decisions are bookends for the diverse approaches that different judges have taken to the civil liberties of accused students, mostly males, whose fates are decided by campus authorities.
washingtonpost.com By Johnson and Taylor
A “rape culture” does not pervade our campuses. Nevertheless, our universities have curtailed basic civil liberties and perpetrated gross miscarriages of justice. Those who doubt due process has been degraded in college disciplinary proceedings should read “The Campus Rape Frenzy: The Attack on Due Process at America’s Universities” by KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor, Jr. The authors of the indispensable “Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case” have once again performed an outstanding public service. In tale after harrowing tale, they expose “a system on our nation’s campuses in which accused students effectively have to prove their innocence, often under procedures that deny them any meaningful opportunity to do so.”
realclearpolitics.com By Peter Berkowitz
The Chair of the Decision-Making Panel with Tuft’s Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) revealed during a sexual assault misconduct proceeding that s/he was a victim of a sexual assault. The Chair of the Decision-Making Panel then proceeded to negate claims that were being made by one of the participants in the meeting and cited s/he own experiences as a victim as the rationale…OEO’s Sexual Misconduct Adjudication Process (SMAP) guarantees its participants that the Decision-Making Panel will consist of unbiased individuals.
Lawmaker Rep. Earl Ehrhart wants to limit the ability of Georgia’s public colleges to investigate and discipline alleged campus rapists. Ehrhart is worried about the lack of legal protections for those accused of sexual assault. In hearings last year, Ehrhart grilled officials from Georgia Tech. Several Tech students have sued, arguing they were forced out of the school unfairly after being accused of sexual assault. “I want to treat these crimes with the seriousness they deserve,” Ehrhart said. “But I am not going to sacrifice due process to get there.”
Imagine that President-elect Trump promised he would make it easier to deport immigrants who had been accused of a crime. People would be rightly outraged. They would point out that an accusation is not the same thing as a conviction, and that people were surely entitled to a fair hearing before having the course of their lives permanently altered. Say the same thing about students accused of sexual misconduct on campus, and you will get quite a different response. If you voice support for due process rights in this setting, you’re likely to be accused of not caring about justice. People accused of serious wrongdoing of any kind, people whose futures are rightly at stake given the severity of the accusations against them, deserve a fair process that affords them a meaningful opportunity to defend themselves. To understand this, consider the University of Kentucky lawsuit…
washingtonexaminer.com By Samantha Harris
Every defender of due process rights should take heart. Education Secretary-designate Betsy DeVos was asked whether she would uphold the Education Department’s 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter regarding campus sexual assault. DeVos didn’t give a “yes” or “no” response, but instead said she knew there were “a lot of conflicting ideas and opinions” surrounding the document. “If confirmed, I look forward to understanding the past actions and the current situation better and to ensuring that the intent of the law is actually carried out in a way that recognizes both the victim -the rights of the victims – as well as those who are accused.”
watchdog.org By Ashe Schow