The Department of Education is considering a proposal to ban efforts to train, educate, or otherwise unilaterally seek to affect or otherwise influence decision makers in campus sexual assault hearings, especially when done in secret. For example, Title IX deciders of guilt or innocence are being told that complaints of sexual assault by females are almost never false and are generally completely accurate -ie: “believe women.” And that major inconsistencies in the reports and testimony of females should never be taken as casting doubt on their stories, and emails and other communications sent after the event, in which the female says she enjoyed the date and wishes to continue the romantic/or sexual relationship, in no way undermines the claim that her complaint about a sexual act was committed against her will. 
“Such statements, which the deciders are supposed to accept and use to help them make their decisions regarding key issues such as the credibility of the witness and her story, are clearly very prejudicial, especially in situations in which the credibility of the complainant is key, and the standard of proof required for a finding of ‘responsible’ is a mere ‘preponderance of evidence.'” Since a practice of telling decision makers that complainants almost never lie favors typically-female complainants over typically-male respondents, such a practice also violates – in addition to Due Process and fundamental fairness – the underlying statute, Title IX, which requires equal treatment of both genders at colleges and universities, argues John Banzhaf. “Reports in many major media outlets, as well as statements in judicial opinions, indicate that persons involving in determining whether or not a respondent is responsible for a reported sexual assault are prepared, trained, and educated/indoctrinated beforehand, and told to accept and believe things which are clearly harmful and prejudicial to the interests of one party, and quite controversial, as they often go directly to issues such as assessing credibility.” Many judicial opinions have now made it very clear that the requirements of Due Process apply to campus proceedings which involve allegations of sexual assault, and where the result could be the suspension or even expulsion of the accused student. Prof. Banzhaf suggests that one-sided “educational” briefings are totally incompatible with Due Process…For these reasons the Department is considering banning any such efforts to train, educate, or otherwise unilaterally seek to affect or influence decision makers in campus sexual assault hearings, especially when done in secret without the knowledge of attorneys for accused students.
valuewalk.com By John Banzhaf Click here to comment on Devo’s new TIX proposal and tell her to ban bias/covert TIX training sessions
