• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Accused is guilty': Campus rape tribunals punish without proof, critics say

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 already covers that.

But this isn't a matter of a college kicking the kid out because of race, color, religion, or national origin.

This is a matter of a business refusing to serve an unprotected class (potential rapist) because continuing to business with the kid could potentially damage the college's brand.

Doesn't a private business have a right, even a fiduciary responsibility, to protect its brand and its future profitability?

Sure, except when false allegations are involved with zero evidence of wrong doing. The guy paid his tuition, he's got a right to expect the service he paid for.
 
There was more evidence, some of which is detailed in the article I linked to. I'm not going to read it to you. AFAIK, there was nothing preventing the accused from providing those texts to the school. The failure to do so was his.
The texts were reported to the school by the girlfriend of the accused.(who happens to be the roommate of the alleged victim) It appears as though the school never followed up on them. You can see them for yourself in this video...

Attorney for Amherst student accused of rape speaks out | On Air Videos | Fox News

It would appear that Amherst failed to do their due diligence in this case.
 
Even in a criminal trial, an admission that the accused had blacked out and had sex with the accuser would be considered evidence (but not proof) that a crime had been committed

Even there there is a difference. Is he blacked out but still functioning? Or, is he blacked out and passed out and things are being done to him while he is passive? (Generic question)
 
This guy wasn't "convicted" of anything.

A private business decided that they didn't want him as a customer.

On the one hand conservatives and FOX News argue that a business should be able to refuse service to anyone they want (as long as that "anyone" is gay), yet on the other hand they argue that business should be required to provide service to anyone who wants it.

Do you even double-standard, bro?

His lawsuit is frivolous and stupid:



Destroy whose reputation?

Oh, right, John Doe's.

Yeah, I won't be doing any business with that "John Doe" any time in the near future, I tell you!

:roll:

dude needs to quit being a crybaby looking for an easy payday, take his transcripts to some other university somewhere, finish his degree, and move on with his life.

Yeah, I know, sometimes the world isn't "fair".

Boo, hoo.

Suck it up and quit being such a pansy.

His lawsuit that he was EXPELLED WITHOUT CAUSE for a crime he DID NOT commit? Maybe if we started banning blacks from universities for crimes they MIGHT have committed you would sing a different tune? Or gays? Or women? But it doesn't count this time because it was a man?

Yea. Double standard.
 
What a colossal joke. As is typical with ANY idealism, and in this case extreme feminism, the pendulum was allowed to swing PAST justice and BACK into an area of unjust tyranny. These accusations ruin lives too. And when it is true it SHOULD. When it is NOT...it should ruin the life of the accuser.
soot thinks you need to just suck it up buttercup.
 
Saying that a private institution should get a pass from what are supposed to be our society's core values simply because they're private is just as repugnant as the alleged crime. Maybe even more harmful, if an innocent person's life is significant negatively affected. Talk about low standards.

Then, what does this tell the false accuser. That gain can be made arbitrarily at another's expense, and it doesn't matter if that other person is unjustly harmed. Wow. And we wonder why we are experiencing such a downward societal spiral. Connect the dots, people.
 
The texts were reported to the school by the girlfriend of the accused.(who happens to be the roommate of the alleged victim) It appears as though the school never followed up on them. You can see them for yourself in this video...

Attorney for Amherst student accused of rape speaks out | On Air Videos | Fox News

It would appear that Amherst failed to do their due diligence in this case.

It's certainly possible. I've never denied that.

However, it's possible that Amherst screwed up *and* the accused also engaged in misconduct of some type.
 
Even there there is a difference. Is he blacked out but still functioning? Or, is he blacked out and passed out and things are being done to him while he is passive? (Generic question)

Those are good questions but my point is that the answers would be evidence, regardless of what those answers specifically were.
 
His lawsuit that he was EXPELLED WITHOUT CAUSE for a crime he DID NOT commit? Maybe if we started banning blacks from universities for crimes they MIGHT have committed you would sing a different tune? Or gays? Or women? But it doesn't count this time because it was a man?

In this "John Doe's" own words:

Doe said he was not the kind of person who would do such a thing. But he told the disciplinary board he was so drunk that night he had no memory of the encounter.

So, he doesn't know what he did that night because he was staggering, blackout drunk, but it couldn't possibly have been what he was accused of.

Right.

And he bases all of this on the text message records of the girl he allegedly raped.

The girl says, of those text messages:

“I didn’t want to address what had happened to me and I was in no position yet to accept that it had been rape. So in my text messaging [to counselor] I only said things about the hook-up as if it had been consensual.”

So I'm not willing to accept the argument (especially not in CAPS, as though it's some sort of well established fact) that this guy did nothing wrong.

Maybe he did.

Maybe he didn't.

But there is definitely a lot gray here.

And understand that this guy is not a defendant in a court of law.

The standard necessary to take administrative action against a student accused of rape is a lot lower than the standard necessary to convict a defendant of rape in a court of law.

Sorry dude, but the business is in the right here.
 
In this "John Doe's" own words:



So, he doesn't know what he did that night because he was staggering, blackout drunk, but it couldn't possibly have been what he was accused of.

Right.

And he bases all of this on the text message records of the girl he allegedly raped.

The girl says, of those text messages:



So I'm not willing to accept the argument (especially not in CAPS, as though it's some sort of well established fact) that this guy did nothing wrong.

Maybe he did.

Maybe he didn't.

But there is definitely a lot gray here.

And understand that this guy is not a defendant in a court of law.

The standard necessary to take administrative action against a student accused of rape is a lot lower than the standard necessary to convict a defendant of rape in a court of law.

Sorry dude, but the business is in the right here.

So to YOU and the BUSINESS...he is guilty. No proof of it. Not a lick. You don't know for a fact he raped her. Neither does the university. And you act like just because he isn't NAMED that his future isn't in jeopardy. No. He is getting expelled and THAT is on his record. And people will ask why EVERY time he applies or does anything. Can he LIE? Will the "university" reveal why they kicked him out with NO evidence and NO conviction?

Basically now if a girl at this school is competing with a male or is upset or feels regret she can CLAIM rape and all she needs is circumstantial evidence and bye bye to the guy. Doesn't matter if he actually did it or not. You call that justice? But let me guess...it doesn't matter to you because this doesn't represent injustice? It wouldn't be completely different if it were not a female? And what is the lesson from this event?

Don't associate with college women? Don't get drunk? And defiantly don't get drunk around college women?

What a crock.

Oh

And never mind that she has no evidence he raped her either. When did this come out? How long after?

And the best you have for his expulsion is "maybe he did and maybe he didn't?"

Are you ****ing kidding me?
 
And both of her claims, though contradictory, are evidence
Which one seems more credible? By the other evidence gathered, and when all taken together, it would seem the one where she admitted it was consensual.

I suspect the college chose the other because it was expedient for them.
 
Why do we, as a society, accept a private entity doling out justice regarding a criminal matter?

If one student murders another student, are we merely satisfied with expulsion? No, we're not. Rape is a serious crime, so we're told, and anywhere else we would demand proper criminal prosecution.

If an employee of a company were to rape another employee within a company facility, would we be satisfied... or even allow... only an in-house investigation and punishment? Again, no, we would not. And reasonably so.

Why the double-standard? Because one private business is a cultured university and the other is something else?

If anything, by continuing to allow and defend this double-standard is a clear sign that we still don't treat women with the respect in which we think we do. We're still willing to dumb down this crime when we wouldn't for other crimes.
 
Which one seems more credible? By the other evidence gathered, and when all taken together, it would seem the one where she admitted it was consensual.

I suspect the college chose the other because it was expedient for them.

And it wouldn't draw unwanted attention. Better to give in than to be seen as promoting sexist "rape culture." Right?
 
Why do we, as a society, accept a private entity doling out justice regarding a criminal matter?

If one student murders another student, are we merely satisfied with expulsion? No, we're not. Rape is a serious crime, so we're told, and anywhere else we would demand proper criminal prosecution.

If an employee of a company were to rape another employee within a company facility, would we be satisfied... or even allow... only an in-house investigation and punishment? Again, no, we would not. And reasonably so.

Why the double-standard? Because one private business is a cultured university and the other is something else?

If anything, by continuing to allow and defend this double-standard is a clear sign that we still don't treat women with the respect in which we think we do. We're still willing to dumb down this crime when we wouldn't for other crimes.

"Cultured"
 
And the best you have for his expulsion is "maybe he did and maybe he didn't?"

Are you ****ing kidding me?

If we were talking about a court of law I'd agree with you.

Not enough there to convict the guy.

But we're talking about a private concern making decisions that are in the best interest of the profit motive.

And to be clear, they aren't just making decisions "out of nowhere".

The kid was accused of rape. He can't establish to anyone's satisfaction that he didn't rape the girl. He doesn't even remember the night in question. His best defense is, "Hey now, I'm just not that kind of guy".

If the school allows the kid to stay they've got egg on their face.

They don't need the negative publicity.

It could cost them money.

If I were accused of rape tomorrow my employer would fire me for the same reasons.

I work in financial services.

The perception of trustworthiness and good judgement are important facets of our brand.

If the company is employing accused felons, what kind of message does that send to customers who are trusting us with billions of dollars?

Same thing for this private school.

It's a Little Ivy, the students and faculty it's able to attract and the tuition it's able to charge are directly tied to it's reputation.

It sucks when the little man gets run over by the bus, but they're running a business, not a charity.
 
If we were talking about a court of law I'd agree with you.

Not enough there to convict the guy.

But we're talking about a private concern making decisions that are in the best interest of the profit motive.

And to be clear, they aren't just making decisions "out of nowhere".

The kid was accused of rape. He can't establish to anyone's satisfaction that he didn't rape the girl. He doesn't even remember the night in question. His best defense is, "Hey now, I'm just not that kind of guy".

If the school allows the kid to stay they've got egg on their face.

They don't need the negative publicity.

It could cost them money.

If I were accused of rape tomorrow my employer would fire me for the same reasons.

I work in financial services.

The perception of trustworthiness and good judgement are important facets of our brand.

If the company is employing accused felons, what kind of message does that send to customers who are trusting us with billions of dollars?

Same thing for this private school.

It's a Little Ivy, the students and faculty it's able to attract and the tuition it's able to charge are directly tied to it's reputation.

It sucks when the little man gets run over by the bus, but they're running a business, not a charity.

Let me ask you one VERY simple question: how would you feel if you were accused of rape and didn't do it? And specifically accused for a point in time when you were drunk?

Would your defense be...oh well I'm expelled I can't prove my innocence? Never mind that your guilt can't be ascertained by the university. Would you be so quick to concede that YOUR are a rapist?

Now. Let's look at this more. They couldn't convict him of rape. They EXPELLED him for it. They don't know he raped anyone. They don't have evidence. And now EVERYONE that knows this kid or has any information about his assumes he is a rapist. It doesn't matter if they didn't release his name. You think we can't find out?

He has to explain for the REST of his LIFE why he was expelled. And he was NEVER sentenced or found guilty. The only reason? Some girl THINKS he raped her. You are calling that justice? Acceptable?

Let's not forget that by ALLOWING this...you just set a precedent for ANY school to expel ANYONE who is arrested for ANY reason regardless of any conviction. You call that freedom? Would you support a company firing an employee who is arrested?

And it doesn't matter that this school is private. The kid was not found guilty. In the eyes of the law he is innocent. He was expelled for nothing.
 
Let me ask you one VERY simple question: how would you feel if you were accused of rape and didn't do it? And specifically accused for a point in time when you were drunk?

Would your defense be...oh well I'm expelled I can't prove my innocence? Never mind that your guilt can't be ascertained by the university. Would you be so quick to concede that YOUR are a rapist?

Now. Let's look at this more. They couldn't convict him of rape. They EXPELLED him for it. They don't know he raped anyone. They don't have evidence. And now EVERYONE that knows this kid or has any information about his assumes he is a rapist. It doesn't matter if they didn't release his name. You think we can't find out?

He has to explain for the REST of his LIFE why he was expelled. And he was NEVER sentenced or found guilty. The only reason? Some girl THINKS he raped her. You are calling that justice? Acceptable?

Let's not forget that by ALLOWING this...you just set a precedent for ANY school to expel ANYONE who is arrested for ANY reason regardless of any conviction. You call that freedom? Would you support a company firing an employee who is arrested?

And it doesn't matter that this school is private. The kid was not found guilty. In the eyes of the law he is innocent. He was expelled for nothing.
You don't understand. Right or wrong is irrelevant. It's all about the profit motive.
 
You don't understand. Right or wrong is irrelevant. It's all about the profit motive.

I guess so. Certainly not justice and being for someone's civil rights.
 
Would you support a company firing an employee who is arrested?

Since it's easier to respond to everything you said by simply answering this one question:

Yes, I would.

It's a private business.

It exists for one reason: to turn a profit for its stakeholders.

If the leadership of the business feels that an employee's arrest jeopardizes profit maximization then I support the business' right to fire that employee.

No, I don't care that the employee has to go through the rest of his life explaining why he lost that job or any subsequent hole in his resume.
 
Since it's easier to respond to everything you said by simply answering this one question:

Yes, I would.

It's a private business.

It exists for one reason: to turn a profit for its stakeholders.

If the leadership of the business feels that an employee's arrest jeopardizes profit maximization then I support the business' right to fire that employee.

No, I don't care that the employee has to go through the rest of his life explaining why he lost that job or any subsequent hole in his resume.
You would if it were you or somebody you cared about.

Is that hypocritical?
 
You would if it were you or somebody you cared about.

Is that hypocritical?

I don't really think so.

Granted I'm being a bit hyperbolic but still.

I would "care" if my brother were a drunken bum eating out of a garbage can on skid row, but I don't think we, as a nation, should be providing every drunken bum with 40 acres and a mule and arranging for every other material comfort they could possibly want.

I would "care" if my kid wasn't able to win an analyst internship at Goldman Sachs, but I don't think that Goldman should have to provide everyone who wants one with an internship.

Life is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. Getting so drunk that you black out and can't even remember whether or not you raped a girl is just...stupid.

Something tells me that this isn't the last hardship this kid is going to face in life as a consequence of his own poor decision making.
 
Back
Top Bottom