Quote:
Originally Posted by amIblue?
I've said it before, but it is not up to any university to adjudicate any felony. There should be no such thing as a sexual misconduct board because these issues need to be handled by the legal system.
|
Very often where there are cases of he said vs. she said and there's no physical evidence (as is often the case), guilty beyond a reasonable doubt isn't something a lot of prosecutors are confident they can achieve. These are mostly kids who have the sorts of families who can hire good criminal defense attorneys who would typically be able to beat a lot of these kinds of cases where we just have the alleged victim's word.
That's why these Title IX panels were created in the first place. Sometimes the criminal justice system doesn't work.
Now I've read about cases (one might be this one) where the perp actually admitted to the tribunal that he raped or sexually assaulted someone and he was rewarded for his candor. That is particularly absurd. If the perp admits guilt, that needs to go straight to the police.
I am still squeamish about these Title IX panels and have my doubts as to the constitutionality of how they are conducted and especially as to the qualifications of the adjudicators of those tribunals, but I understand the good intentions behind them.
