Category: Sexual Assault

Categories
Sexual Assault

Blissfully Unaware of the Constitution, Kansas City Star Endorses ‘Kangaroo Court’ Justice

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

 

Blissfully Unaware of the Constitution, Kansas City Star Endorses ‘Kangaroo Court’ Justice 

WASHINGTON / February 5, 2019 – A commentary by the Kansas City Star Editorial Board criticizes a campus due process bill recently introduced in the Missouri legislature. https://www.postbulletin.com/opinion/other_views/editorial-missouri-legislation-would-gut-title-ix-and-use-it/article_8064cc39-b882-5d09-b163-3f268b661467.html  The sharply worded editorial reveals a misunderstanding of the meaning of due process, and suggests the Editorial Board may not be familiar with key provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The Fourteenth Amendment states, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” Courts have interpreted a “property” interest to include the loss of educational opportunities due to a suspension or expulsion from an institution of higher education.

SB 259 and HB 573 would require that “Any institution of higher education that handles formal Title IX complaints shall adopt grievance procedures that provide for a prompt and equitable resolution….” It is difficult to understand why the Star Editorial Board would object to such a provision.

To date, appellate judges around the country have issued rulings against Boston College, Claremont McKenna College, SUNY at Plattsburgh, Tulane University, University of California, University of Cincinnati, University of Miami, University of Southern California, and Washington State University calling for hearing procedures similar to those outlined in the Missouri bills in question.

The House version, HB 573, would allow for cross-examination between the parties. Again, appellate judges have issued numerous decisions calling for cross-examination. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Appellate-Court-Cases-Report.pdf  Cross-examination benefits both accusers and the accused, so why would the Star Editorial Board be opposed to a procedure so fundamental to fairness?

The Editorial Board commentary is characterized by inflammatory language (“gut Title IX”), unsupported claims, and statements that are facially false, such as “the accused would become a protected class.”

Last year, District Court judge Brian Wimes ruled against the University of Missouri after one of its investigators told the accused student, an African-American graduate student, that he “looked like someone who might commit sexual assault.” https://kcjohnson.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/rowles-v-mizzou-order-on-mtd.pdf

This is the type of “Kangaroo Court” justice that SB 259 and HB 573 seek to avoid.

 

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Categories
Campus Sexual Assault

New Title IX Rules Enjoy Widespread Popular and Legal Support

February 4, 2019

Numerous public opinion polls show a strong bipartisan majority of American voters support due process on college campuses.[1]

Last November, the Department of Education released proposed Title IX regulations to address campus sexual misconduct. The proposed rule is designed to support both accused students and complainants.[2] These regulations are grounded in a milestone Supreme Court decision, Davis v. Monroe, and are supported by 14 appellate judicial decisions.[3]

In addition, over 50 editorials have been published that support the proposed regulations. These editorials, published both in liberal and conservative media outlets, are listed in reverse chronological order, below:

  1. David French (National Review): Just How Easy Should It Be to Destroy a Young Man’s Life?– 1/30/19
  2. Meg Mott (New England Public Radio): New Title IX Rules Would Empower Both the Accused and the Survivors– 1/16/19
  3. Scott Greenfield (Simple Justice): The “Survivors” Last Stand– 1/11/19
  4. Inez Stepman (The Hill): Changes to Title IX Enforcement Are Common Sense– 1/9/19
  5. Curt Levey (Fox News): Education Secretary DeVos’s New Rules for Title IX and Sexual Assault Will Restore Fairness Across the Board– 1/4/19
  6. Wendy McElroy (The Hill): The New Title IX Regulation Helps Women– 1/3/19
  7. Tom Ciccotta (Breitbart News): Feminist Professor Says Betsy DeVos Title IX Guidelines Benefit Survivors– 1/3/19
  8. KC Johnson (The Regulatory Review): Changes to Universities’ Sexual Assault Tribunals May Be Here to Stay– 1/2/19
  9. Nicole DeSmet (Burlington Free Press): Title IX College Sexual Assault Rule Changes; What You Need to Know; How to Act– 12/21/18
  10. Peter Wallison (Real Clear Politics): DeVos Rule on Sexual Harassment Restores Primacy of Law– 12/20/18
  11. Meg Mott (Inside Higher Ed): The New Title IX Guidelines Benefit Survivors– 12/17/18
  12. Robby Soave (The Times-News): Title IX Changes Are Needed– 12/16/18
  13. Courier Editorial Board (The Courier): Campus Sex Assault Rules Need Revisions– 12/16/18
  14. Editorial Board (The Washington Post): What Betsy DeVos’s New Title IX Changes Get Right – and Wrong– 12/14/18
  15. Wendy McElroy (The Hill): A Sea Change for Sexual Conduct on Campus– 12/13/18
  16. KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor Jr. (The Weekly Standard): It’s Time for Republicans to Show They Truly Care About Due Process– 12/12/18
  17. Greg Piper (The College Fix): Feminist Law Professor Supports DeVos on Title IX because of “Troubling Racial Dynamics” in the System– 12/6/18
  18. Stacey Lennox (The Resurgent): If You Care About Due Process for College Age Men, Click This Link– 12/6/18
  19. Shikha Dalmia (Reason): Betsy DeVos’ Title IX Campus Reforms Advance a Liberal Cause– 12/4/18
  20. Lara Bazelon (New York Times): I’m a Democrat and a Feminist. And I Support Betsy DeVos’s Title IX Reforms– 12/4/18
  21. Robby Soave (Inside Sources): Point: Title IX Reforms Are Contentious, but Necessary– 12/3/18
  22. Shikha Dalmia (The Week): In Defense of Betsy DeVos’ Title IX Plan– 11/29/18
  23. Lindsay Marchello (Higher Education): ACLU’s Opposition to Title IX Reform Betrays Their Claims to Defend Civil Rights– 11/27/18
  24. Andrew Kreighbaum (Inside Higher Ed): What the DeVos Title IX Rule Means for Misconduct Off Campus– 11/27/18
  25. Derek Newton (Forbes): Betsy DeVos is Making the Right Choice on Sexual Assault Rules– 11/25/18
  26. KC Johnson (Minding the Campus): Finally, Due Process Near for College Males– 11/23/18
  27. Heather MacDonald (City Journal): Feminists’ Undue Process– 11/23/18
  28. Erika Sanzi (The Hill): With Title IX Rewrite, DeVos Gets It Right for Accusers and Accused– 11/22/18
  29. Cathy Young (Arc Digital Media): Sex, Lies, and Campus Tribunals– 11/22/18
  30. Christine Flowers (Philadelphia Inquirer): Betsy DeVos’ New Rules for Handling Campus Sexual Assault Provide Much-Needed Balance– 11/21/18
  31. Franczek Radelet (JD Supra): Proposed Title IX Regulations Raise Many Questions, Particularly for K-12 Schools– 11/21/18
  32. Editorial Board (Wall Street Journal): Reviving Due Process on Campus– 11/20/18
  33. Greg Piper (The College Fix): Rape-Culture Activists Hate Cross-Examination. They May Have to Worry About the Supreme Court– 11/20/18
  34. Ramesh Ponnuru (Bloomberg): Betsy DeVos is Protecting Civil Liberties on Campus– 11/20/18
  35. Ashe Schow (Daily Wire): New Campus Sexual Assault Rules Will Help Stifle Current Moral Panic– 11/20/18
  36. Daily News Editorial Board (Daily News): Lesson Learned: Betsy DeVos (mostly) Gets Title IX Rules Right– 11/19/18
  37. Justin Dillon (Chronicle for Higher Education): New Title IX Proposal Would Restore Fairness in Sexual Misconduct Cases– 11/19/18
  38. Conor Friedersdorf (The Atlantic): The ACLU Declines to Defend Civil Rights– 11/19/18
  39. Lakshmi Singh (NPR): Education Secretary Proposes Enhanced Protections for Those Accused of Sexual Assault on Campus– 11/18/18
  40. KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor Jr. (Wall Street Journal): DeVos Keeps Her Promise on Campus Due Process– 11/18/18
  41. Tiana Lowe (Washington Examiner): The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of New Title IX Regulations– 11/17/18
  42. Anne Flaherty (ABC): Betsy DeVos Pitches New Protections for Students Accused of Sexual Assault– 11/17/18
  43. Adam Harris (The Atlantic): Betsy DeVos’s Sexual Assault Rules Would Let the Accused Cross-Examine Accusers– 11/17/18
  44. Alice Lloyd (The Weekly Standard): Will Colleges Actually Heed the New Title IX Regulations?– 11/17/18
  45. Laura Meckler (Washington Post): Betsy DeVos Releases Sexual Assault Rules She Hails as Balancing Rights of Victims, Accused– 11/16/18
  46. Collin Binkley (Associated Press): DeVos Proposes Overhaul to Campus Sexual Misconduct Rules– 11/16/18
  47. Erica Green (New York Times): Sex Assault Rules Under DeVos Bolster Defendants’ Rights and Ease College Liability– 11/16/18
  48. Teresa Watanabe (Los Angeles Times): Betsy DeVos Moves to Strengthen the Rights of the Accused in Campus Sexual Misconduct Cases– 11/16/18
  49. Sarah Brown and Katherine Mangan (Chronicle for Higher Education): What You Need to Know About the Proposed Title IX Regulations– 11/16/18
  50. Erica Green (New York Times): Sex Assault Under DeVos Bolster Defendants’ Rights and Ease College Liability– 11/16/18
  51. Kaitlyn Schallhorn (Fox News): Education Department Unveils New Title IX Guidance for Campus Sexual Assault: Here’s What Would Change– 11/16/18
  52. David French (National Review): Betsy DeVos Strikes a Blow for the Constitution– 11/16/18
  53. Robby Soave (Reason): ABC Makes Patently False Claim About New Title IX Rules– 11/16/18
  54. Robby Soave (Reason): Betsy DeVos Formally Unveils New Title IX Rules: 3 Ways They Will Strengthen Due Process on Campus– 11/16/18
  55. Richard Vedder (Forbes): Doing Things Right: Betsy DeVos, Title IX and Due Process– 11/16/18
  56. David French (National Review): ABC News Makes a Serious Mistake– 11/16/18

[1] http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/opinion-polls/

[2] http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/proposed-regulations-will-protect-and-empower-complainants/

[3] http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Appellate-Court-Cases-Report.pdf

Categories
Campus Sexual Assault

Harvard Law School Professors Evaluate Department of Education’s Proposed Rule for Title IX Enforcement

January 30, 2019
Feminist Harvard Law School Professors Evaluate Department of Education’s Proposed Rule for Title IX Enforcement
Jeannie Suk Gersen, Nancy Gertner, and Janet Halley, professors at Harvard Law School, have issued a Comment on the Department of Education’s Proposed Rule on Title IX enforcement. The authors write: “We strongly support vigorous enforcement of Title IX to ensure that students enjoy educational programs and activities unburdened by sexual harassment.”
They argue that “sanctions for sexual harassment should apply only under a clear definition of wrongful conduct
and after a process that is fair to all parties.”
With these dual objectives in mind, the Comment reviews the Department of Education’s Proposed Rule and agrees with some aspects and disagrees with others. The authors agree (with some suggested amendments) with the Rule’s treatment of the burden of
proof, the rejection of the single -investigator model, and the requirement of a live hearing process. They argue that the rules they endorse do not undermine the critical goal of enforcing Title IX. They express serious concerns about the provisions on cross examination and the definition of sexual harassment, and propose revisions that will be more protective of complainants.
The Comment strongly objects to provisions encouraging schools to file complaints when they have multiple allegations against a single potential respondent but no formal complainant: the inquiry there should be refocused on the threat of harm and take into
account the complainants’ as well as the respondents’
interests. The three professors say that they “strongly object to the deliberate indifference standard for schools’ ultimate responsibility to respond to sexual harassment.”
Gersen, Gertner and Halley have researched, taught, and written on Title IX, sexual harassment, sexual assault,  and feminist legal reform. They were three of the signatories to the statement of twenty-eight Harvard Law School professors, published in the Boston Globe on October 15, 2014, that criticized Harvard University’s newly adopted sexual harassment policy as “overwhelmingly stacked against the accused” and “in no way required by Title IX law or regulation.”
To access the Comment, go to:
https://perma.cc/3F9K-PZSB
Inquiries please contact:
Jeannie Suk Gersen, jsg@law.harvard.edu
Nancy Gertner, ngertner@law.harvard.edu
Janet Halley, jhalley@law.harvard.edu
Categories
Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

Milestone Award in Maine to Compensate Victim of Prosecutorial Misconduct

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Milestone Award in Maine to Compensate Victim of Prosecutorial Misconduct

WASHINGTON / October 2, 2018 – In a first for Maine, the state has agreed to compensate a victim of prosecutorial misconduct. Last week it was announced that the state will pay Vladek Filler a settlement of $375,000, arising from the misconduct of former Hancock County Assistant District Attorney Mary Kellett, police officials, and others.

In 2007, Ligia Filler alleged she was a victim of marital rape. Ignoring exculpatory evidence, ADA Kellett prosecuted Vladek on several counts of sexual assault. Filler was convicted of assault, but was cleared of the rape charges made during a divorce and child custody battle. Eventually, the assault charge was also dismissed.

In 2011, SAVE filed a Grievance Complaint against Kellett with the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar alleging improper withholding of evidence and other misconduct. On May 12, 2011, SAVE held a press conference at the Penobscot Judicial Center in Bangor (1).

The complaint was investigated and eventually referred to the Maine Supreme Court, which ruled against the prosecutor in 2013. Mary Kellett issued a public apology and was required to attend ethics training. She later resigned her position.

In 2015, Vladek filed a civil rights lawsuit against Kellett and other parties. The lawsuit against a nurse who coached Ligia to cry during testimony to make her claims more credible  is still outstanding (2).

More information on Vladek Filler’s exoneration is available from the National Registry of Exonerations (3). The legal documents of the lawsuit are available online (4).

October 2 is Wrongful Conviction Day (5).

Citations:

  1. http://www.saveservices.org/camp/intolerable-injustice/
  2. https://www.dailywire.com/news/36302/maine-man-receives-375000-after-false-rape-ashe-schow
  3. https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4694
  4. https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/6844884/FILLER_v_HANCOCK_COUNTY_et_al#
  5. http://www.intlwrongfulconvictionday.org/

SAVE — Stop Abusive and Violent Environments — is working for effective and fair solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Categories
Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

SAVE Calls on Sen. Hirono to Withdraw and Apologize for Sexist ‘Shut-Up’ Remarks

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Email: info@saveservices.org

 

SAVE Calls on Sen. Hirono to Withdraw and Apologize for Sexist ‘Shut-Up’ Remarks

WASHINGTON / September 21, 2018 – During a Tuesday press conference, Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii made remarks that have stirred controversy about the diminished importance of free speech and due process in America. Commenting on a possible FBI investigation of allegations of sexual misconduct against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Hirono declared, “Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed… I just want to say to the men in this country — just shut up and step up!.” [emphasis added] (1)

A recent YouGov poll confirms a different picture. The poll found only one-quarter of Americans believe the sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh to be credible. When asked: “Do you think that the allegation of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh generally is or is not credible?” 28% of men said it was credible, while 25% of women gave the same response (2).

Patrice Lee Onwuka of the Independent Women’s Forum emphasizes, “We cannot abandon the presumption of innocence because assuming he’s ‘probably guilty’ serves certain political motives…. it’s wrong to jump to conclusions or use unsubstantiated allegations for political purposes. Not only is that unfair to the accused but it sets up a harmful precedent for the future.” (3)

Writing in the Boston Globe, Jennifer Braceras wrote, “The she-said/he-said nature of the allegations; Ford’s failure to mention the event to anyone for decades; and her inability to provide key details such the location or specific time frame of the alleged assault raise reasonable questions about her credibility.” (4)

One of the strongest critics of Hirono’s remarks was Fox News host Tucker Carlson. During his September 19 monologue, Carlson commented on the meaning of Hirono’s statement:

“It’s not just Brett Kavanaugh that’s guilty, but ‘the men of this country,’ every single one of them, Carlson said, because they’re men. Tucker also said liberals recently ignored a woman who accused Keith Ellison of sexual assault, which occurred within the last year, not 36 years ago.

“That’s a command from the United States senator,” Carlson said of Hirono’s call for men to shut up. “It’s not optional, it’s mandatory. So repeat after Mazie Hirono: Men always lie, women never do. One sex is evil, the other is holy. That’s the Catechism of the Church of Late-Stage Feminism.” (5)

Seldom has an elected official instructed a class of Americans to “shut up,” or to accept the veracity of a sexual assault allegation without corroboration. The First Amendment guarantees the right to express opinions and beliefs. The presumption of innocence is a key element of due process, which is guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

SAVE believes justice is best served when Constitutional guarantees of due process are respected, not when lawmakers engage in a politically calculated rush to judgement.

Citations:

  1. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/09/18/sen_hirono_on_kavanaugh_men_need_to_shut_up_accuser_needs_to_be_believed_and_i_believe_her.html
  2. https://www.dailywire.com/news/36107/huffpo-survey-finds-smaller-percentage-women-men-ashe-schow
  3. http://www.iwf.org/blog/2807463/Why-Joy-Behar-is-Wrong-to-Slam-%E2%80%9CWhite-Men%E2%80%9D-in-Congress-over-Judge-Kavanaugh-Allegations
  4. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/09/19/brett-kavanaugh-and-limits-hashtag-feminism/sokDfHFYGxD4n9Glld5qoI/story.html?event=event25https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/09/19/brett-kavanaugh-and-limits-hashtag-feminism/sokDfHFYGxD4n9Glld5qoI/story.html?event=event25
  5. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/09/19/tucker_carlson_left_believes_men_are_guilty_kavanaugh_accuser_not_lying_because_shes_a_woman.html

SAVE — Stop Abusive and Violent Environments — is working for effective and fair solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Categories
False Allegations Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Wrongful Convictions

Recent Exoneration of Joshua Horner, Wrongfully Convicted of Sex Abuse, Spotlights Widespread Problem of False Allegations

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Email: info@saveservices.org

Recent Exoneration of Joshua Horner, Wrongfully Convicted of Sex Abuse, Spotlights Widespread Problem of False Allegations

WASHINGTON / September 12, 2018 – This past Monday, Deschutes County Judge Michael Adler overturned a 50-year sentence against Joshua Horner of Redmond, Oregon. Horner had been convicted on April 12, 2017 of sexual abuse of a minor. In the trial, the complainant testified that Horner shot and killed her dog as a warning that she not bring her sexual molestation claim to the police. https://www.opb.org/news/article/redmond-oregon-innocence-project-exonoration-josh-horner/

With the assistance of the Oregon Innocence Project, the dog was recently found alive and well in another city, casting significant doubt on the truthfulness of the accuser. It was the first exoneration for the Oregon Innocence Project, launched in 2014 to exonerate the wrongfully convicted and promote legal reforms.

Horner’s exoneration highlights the problem of false allegations in criminal cases. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, false allegations/perjury are the most common contributing factors for wrongful convictions, representing 57% of all exonerations. False allegations/perjury are especially common in child sex abuse cases (85% of exonerations) and homicide cases (69% of exonerations). http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/ExonerationsContribFactorsByCrime.aspx

Nearly one in 10 persons – 9.7% — of respondents to a national survey said they had been falsely accused of sexual assault, domestic violence, or child abuse. Three-quarters of persons claiming to be falsely accused were male. http://www.saveservices.org/dv/falsely-accused/survey/

On college campuses, false allegations of sexual misconduct are believed to be commonplace. In over 100 lawsuits against universities, judges have sided with the accused student. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0 At one university, the training materials openly justify false allegations of sexual assault, claiming that verified “lies” of accusers “should be considered a side effect of an assault.” https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/47631/

False allegations are not a victimless crime. Nikki Yovino, 18, was recently convicted and sentenced to one year in jail for false reporting of an alleged campus rape in Connecticut. At the sentencing hearing, Malik St. Hilaire, victim of her false accusation, explained, “I went from being a college student, to sitting at home being expelled with no way to clear my name.”

September is False Allegations Awareness Month. http://www.saveservices.org/camp/faam-2018/

 

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments works to end sexual assault and domestic violence.

Categories
Campus Sexual Assault

Responding to Judicial Scoldings, State Legislators Seek to Rein in Campus ‘Kangaroo Courts’

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Responding to Judicial Scoldings, State Legislators Seek to Rein in Campus ‘Kangaroo Courts’

WASHINGTON / August 13, 2018 – The movement to restore due process in campus sexual assault cases is gaining momentum, as lawmakers in several states have worked to restore due process and fairness in campus sexual assault proceedings. The trend began with California Governor Jerry Brown’s 2017 veto of a bill that would have solidified a number of anti-due process policies on campus. The trend is now being propelled by a surge of lawsuits by accused students against universities and colleges.

“In a stunning collective judicial rebuke to many campuses’ unfair treatment of students accused of sexual misconduct, courts have issued at least 102 rulings against universities since 2011, compared with 88 rulings in their favor,” notes a recent report (1). Many of the decisions were written using pointed  language that was strongly critical of the university policies procedures. In 46 other cases, colleges have opted to settle the lawsuit prior to a judicial decision, rather than pursue expensive and potentially embarrassing litigation (2).

In two states, pro-due process bills have been introduced in 2018, but not enacted into law:

In South Carolina, House Bill 3303 would provide students with reasonable notice, a presumption of non-responsibility for the accused, the right to have an attorney who can participate in proceedings, and impartial fact-finders (3).

In Ohio, public colleges would be required to develop sexual-misconduct policies “with the goal of enhancing due process,” under a bill that has passed the House and moved to the Senate (4).

In Maryland, lawmakers took up Senate Bill 607, which required disciplinary proceedings to include a description of the rights for students and specified that an institution may not prevent a student from retaining an attorney. The bill passed both the Senate and House with strong bipartisan support (5).

In three other states, bills that erode due process protections have been sidelined:

In Massachusetts, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives declined to take action on H.632, which had been previously passed by the state’s Senate. Critics of H.632 highlighted the flaws of trauma-informed training for investigators, a provision that had been derided as “junk science.” (6)

In Colorado, House Bill 18-1391 was approved in the House. But the bill failed to include sufficient due process protections, so the bill it was significantly amended in the Senate, resulting in the bill’s postponement (7).

In West Virginia, House Bill 2825, a bill that would have mandated problematic “affirmative consent” polices at the state’s colleges, was not voted upon prior to adjournment of the legislative session (8).

A summary of the current status of the campus sexual assault bills introduced in 2018 is available on the SAVE website (9).

Citations:

  1. https://regproject.org/wp-content/uploads/RTP-Race-Sex-Working-Group-Paper-Campus-Misconduct-Proceedings.pdf, page 4.
  2. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xPUcbL-JaNQqQMt1lszncDbVhwHt92eLaDPfuzEywtA/edit#gid=0
  3. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/bills/3303.htm
  4. https://legiscan.com/MD/bill/SB607/2018
  5. https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/47140/
  6. https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/39099/
  7. https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb18-1391
  8. http://www.wvlegislature.gov/Bill_Status/bills_history.cfm?INPUT=2825&year=2017&sessiontype=RS
  9. http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/state-legislation/

SAVE — Stop Abusive and Violent Environments — is working for effective and fair solutions to domestic violence and campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Categories
Campus Press Release Sexual Assault

PR: 23 Cornell Law Profs Support Suspended Student in Sexual Assault Appeal

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

23 Cornell Law Profs Support Suspended Student in Sexual Assault Appeal

WASHINGTON / April 3, 2018 – Twenty-three Cornell Law School professors have requested to file an Amicus Brief in support of a student who was accused of campus sexual assault and later suspended. The Cornell statement is the fourth statement from law professors calling for the restoration of due process rights on campus.

Two Cornell students had a sexual encounter in August of 2016. The woman filed a complaint, claiming she had consumed too much alcohol to give valid consent. The university panel later recommended that the male student, “John Doe,” be suspended for two years. The student has now appealed the suspension to the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, which is the intermediary appeals court in that state.

The crux of the appeal is the right of a student to cross-examine his accuser. The male student submitted a series of questions to the university panel to be answered by the woman. But Cornell refused to forward any of the questions, thereby negating the student’s right to cross-examination.

The professors’ Statement of Interest notes, “we have an interest in ensuring that Cornell’s procedures are interpreted properly and applied fairly and faithfully. And, as is explained below, we believe that in this case, a Cornell disciplinary hearing panel failed to comply with an important procedural safeguard clearly set out in Cornell’s Title IX policy – the right of an accused student to have a disciplinary hearing panel conduct inquiry of his accuser about proper topics that he proposed.” (1)

The Cornell professors’ Motion to File Amicus Brief is the fourth public statement by law professors in support of due process in campus sexual assault cases. The other letters were filed by law professors from Harvard Law School (2), University of Pennsylvania (3), and from other universities (4).

In 86 cases, judges have ruled in favor of accused students who have filed lawsuits against their universities (5). SAVE anticipates that professors from other law schools will offer statements in support of campus due process.

Citations:

  1. https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/04/23-cornell-law-profs-support-suspended-male-student-in-title-ix-court-appeal/
  2. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/14/rethink-harvard-sexual-harassment-policy/HFDDiZN7nU2UwuUuWMnqbM/story.html
  3. http://media.philly.com/documents/OpenLetter.pdf
  4. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Law-Professor-Open-Letter-May-16-2016.pdf
  5. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0

SAVE — Stop Abusive and Violent Environments — is working for effective and fair solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Categories
Campus Due Process Sexual Assault

PR: Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg, Joined by Dozens of Federal and State Judges, Calls for Due Process in Campus Sex Proceedings

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg, Joined by Dozens of Federal and State Judges, Calls for Due Process in Campus Sex Proceedings

WASHINGTON / February 20, 2018 – In a recent interview for The Atlantic, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg affirmed the need for due process in campus sexual assault proceedings. In addition, Ginsburg clarified that due process protections are not incompatible with aspirations for gender equality.

Asked, “What about due process for the accused?”, Ginsburg gave this reply: “Well, that must not be ignored and it goes beyond sexual harassment. The person who is accused has a right to defend herself or himself, and we certainly should not lose sight of that. Recognizing that these are complaints that should be heard. There’s been criticism of some college codes of conduct for not giving the accused person a fair opportunity to be heard, and that’s one of the basic tenets of our system, as you know, everyone deserves a fair hearing.” [emphasis added]

When the interviewer sought clarification whether “some of those criticisms of the college codes valid?”, Ginsburg provided this unequivocal answer: “Do I think they are? Yes.”

Queried about her thoughts how to balance the values of due process against the principle of sex equality, Ginsburg explained, “It’s not one or the other. It’s both. We have a system of justice where people who are accused get due process, so it’s just applying to this field what we have applied generally.”

Ginsburg’s sentiments on this issue have been echoed in recent rulings issued by dozens of federal and state judges.

Since 2012, over 200 lawsuits by students accused of sexual assault have been filed against colleges and universities. The SAVE report, Lawsuits Against Universities for Alleged Mishandling of Sexual Misconduct Cases, documents that in a majority of cases, judges have ruled in favor of the accused students (1). To date, 79 of these lawsuits have resulted in decisions by state and federal judges against the defendant university (2).

Justice Ginsburg’s comments were published in the February 15, 2018 edition of The Atlantic (3).

Citations:

  1. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Sexual-Misconduct-Lawsuits-Report2.pdf
  2. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0
  3. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/ruth-bader-ginsburg-opens-up-about-metoo-voting-rights-and-millenials/553409/

SAVE (Stop Abusive and Violent Environments) is working for effective and fair solutions to sexual assault, sexual harassment, and domestic violence: www.saveservices.org

Categories
Believe the Victim Campus Sexual Assault

Professors and Legal Experts Call for End to Guilt-Presuming ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

Professors and Legal Experts Call for End to Guilt-Presuming ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations

WASHINGTON / February 7, 2018 – Today 137 professors and legal experts are releasing an Open Letter that calls on college administrators, lawmakers, criminal justice agencies, and others to promptly end the use of so-called “victim-centered” investigations. Such investigations are fundamentally flawed because they presume the guilt of the accused. The professors come from leading colleges and universities around the country.

The letter traces the source of the “victim-centered” approach to the early 1990s when advocates began to call for “swift and unquestioning judgments about the facts of [sexual] harassment without standard evidentiary procedures with the chant ‘always believe the victim.’”

According to a Human Rights Watch report, a “victim-centered” approach means the investigator assumes “all sexual assault cases are valid unless established otherwise by investigative findings.” The University of Texas School of Social Work’s Blueprint for Campus Police instructs investigators to anticipate legal defense strategies and urges that complainant inconsistencies be covered over by not recording a “detailed account of prior interview statements.” (1)

The Open Letter concludes, “By their very name, their ideology, and the methods they foster, ‘believe the victim’ concepts presume the guilt of an accused. This is the antithesis of the most rudimentary notions of justice. In directing investigators to corroborate allegations, ignore reporting inconsistencies, and undermine defenses, the ‘believe the victim’ movement threatens to subvert constitutionally-rooted due process protections.”

The use of biased victim-centered investigations on campus has given rise to numerous lawsuits by accused students alleging biased collection of evidence (2). In many cases, the judge has issued a ruling in favor of the accused student (3).

Victim-centered practices, sometimes referred to as “Start by Believing,” are becoming widespread in the criminal justice system, as well (4). In 2016 an Arizona governor’s commission issued a letter advising the state’s criminal justice agencies to reject “Start by Believing” investigative methods because their use “creates the possibility of real or perceived confirmation bias.” (5)

More information about “victim-centered” investigations is available (6). The Open Letter can be viewed online (7).

Citations:

  1. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/SAVE-Believe-the-Victim.pdf
  2. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Victim-Centered-Investigations-and-Liability-Risk.pdf
  3. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0
  4. http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/13/start-by-believing-investigations-are-a-multimillion-dollar-threat-to-justice/
  5. http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/duceys-faith-office-assails-start-by-believing-advocacy-program-for-rape-victims-8896373
  6. http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/investigations/
  7. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Victim-Centered-Practices-Open-Letter-FINAL.docx.pdf

SAVE (Stop Abusive and Violent Environments) is working for effective and fair solutions to sexual assault, sexual harassment, and domestic violence: www.saveservices.org