Kangaroo courts for men on campus
Part of the War on Men on campus
The media often wonders why young men are staying away from universities and colleges. Perhaps the hostile environment on campuses is part of the reason.
Universities, protected by law and compelled by a directive from the Obama Department of Education, have established a kangaroo campus court system in which young men regularly face life-changing quasi-judicial proceedings based on accusations of sexual misconduct at which they have little due process protection.
At College Insurrection we highlighted one such case at Brown University, University without shame: How Brown betrayed one of its students.
But these cases take place regularly as documented by The FIRE organization.
Another chilling account comes from attorney Judith Grossman: A Mother, a Feminist, Aghast (h/t @jpodhoretz):
I am a feminist. I have marched at the barricades, subscribed to Ms. magazine, and knocked on many a door in support of progressive candidates committed to women’s rights. Until a month ago, I would have expressed unqualified support for Title IX and for the Violence Against Women Act.
But that was before my son, a senior at a small liberal-arts college in New England, was charged—by an ex-girlfriend—with alleged acts of “nonconsensual sex” that supposedly occurred during the course of their relationship a few years earlier.
What followed was a nightmare—a fall through Alice’s looking-glass into a world that I could not possibly have believed existed, least of all behind the ivy-covered walls thought to protect an ostensible dedication to enlightenment and intellectual betterment….
In fact, Title IX, that so-called guarantor of equality between the sexes on college campuses, and as applied by a recent directive from the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, has obliterated the presumption of innocence that is so foundational to our traditions of justice. On today’s college campuses, neither “beyond a reasonable doubt,” nor even the lesser “by clear and convincing evidence” standard of proof is required to establish guilt of sexual misconduct.
These safeguards of due process have, by order of the federal government, been replaced by what is known as “a preponderance of the evidence.” What this means, in plain English, is that all my son’s accuser needed to establish before a campus tribunal is that the allegations were “more likely than not” to have occurred by a margin of proof that can be as slim as 50.1% to 49.9%….
Thankfully, I happen to be an attorney and had the resources to provide the necessary professional assistance to my son. The charges against him were ultimately dismissed but not before he and our family had to suffer through this ordeal. I am of course relieved and most grateful for this outcome. Yet I am also keenly aware not only of how easily this all could have gone the other way—with life-altering consequences—but how all too often it does.
Across the country and with increasing frequency, innocent victims of impossible-to-substantiate charges are afforded scant rights to fundamental fairness and find themselves entrapped in a widening web of this latest surge in political correctness. Few have a lawyer for a mother, and many may not know about the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which assisted me in my research.
There are very real and horrifying instances of sexual misconduct and abuse on college campuses and elsewhere. That these offenses should be investigated and prosecuted where appropriate is not open to question. What does remain a question is how we can make the process fair for everyone.
I fear that in the current climate the goal of “women’s rights,” with the compliance of politically motivated government policy and the tacit complicity of college administrators, runs the risk of grounding our most cherished institutions in a veritable snake pit of injustice—not unlike the very injustices the movement itself has for so long sought to correct. Unbridled feminist orthodoxy is no more the answer than are attitudes and policies that victimize the victim.
Democratic politicians and vocal feminist groups demagogue the fictitious “war on women.”
On campuses, there is a very real war on men, but few seem to care.
Comments
I saw exactly this in work settings right after the laws were passed.
A couple of years later, a friend of a friend was complaining that she could not get the attention of a co worker she was interested in and asked my for advice. She did not like my comment that a man had to be some kind of idiot to socialize with a female co worker. If she complained, he was going to be found guilty, no matter what.
Back to that way in schools, eh? No surprise.
Good advice… During my entire working career, I have always avoided any sort of fraternization with co-workers and thus have reduced the possibility of being accused unjustly.
I am in the minority with regard to this but that just the way things go…
“What ye sow, so shall ye reap.”
KC Johnson (who wrote the book about the Duke Lacrosse case) writes about this a lot on Minding the Campus. I am absolutely amazed/appalled at it. Can you imagine Penn State investigating a rape? And if you have a real rapist involved, they don’t have the authority to send someone to jail, so the rapist is not taken off the streets.
I don’t understand why this hasn’t gotten more coverage. There was a Room for Debate in the NYT a few months ago, of course stacked pro-Kangaroo Court, but amazingly almost all the commenters were against it. Surely this must be a violation of due process?
When I’ve tried to tell others about this, they DO NOT believe me & thing I’m nuts. One can only imagine the other things that are going on with this administration under the radar.
I feel bad for her SON, but for her? Why exactly should I feel any empathy for this woman?
I was falsely accused of rape in college – twice. I am not ashamed of admitting it – at least not now. Society has seen how easy this is to do to a man and attitudes have signifigantly changed.
I have seen first hand how the colleges make it, in any real sense, for you to defend yourself.
You cannot have a lawyer present, and your hearing is scheduled quickly. You are given no resources, no advocate, no one to guide you through the college regulations or procedeures, and no one will help you.
Your statement, which you had BETTER MAKE, or else you’ll surely be found guilty (often a foregone conclusion anyways), can be used against you in a court of law – again, while you are stripped of any chance to have a lawyer present. Convenient huh?
If you try “too hard” to interview witnesses, who have probably already been interviewed by the college and given assurances that you’re likely guilty, then the college can claim you tried to “interfere” in their investigation or tried to “intimidate” “their” witnesses.
Maybe your first clue that any charge is being brought against you is when 3 cops show up your room, and 1) Inform you that you’ve been alleged to be a rapist, 2) Present you a restraining order and 3) Give you 1 hour to pack up and leave your residence and order you to not go into any dorm. That this leaves you unable to interview most witnesses and surely makes you look guilty.
All the people who are ALLOWED to serve on hearing boards have been vetted to make sure they have drank deep of the “PC Rape Culture” Kool-aide. Anyone think they’ll be fair and impartial, holding fast to innocent until proven guilty? They, the ones judging you have been to briefings, seminars, had rape advocates speak to them, and heard the feminist factoids on the subject – they are not there to be unbiased. And (try not to laugh) does anyone think that even if by some miracle you are found innocent that the person who has sat in judgement on you will then render a written opinion in their decision that decries the manifestly unjust proceedures that nearly railroaded an innocent man?!
Judith Grossman claims she “didn’t know” this infrastructure of evil bigotry and kafkaesque “justice” was being set up on college campuses? Really? Duke Lacross comes to mind – it was national news.
The false accuser in that case, Crystal Mangum is now facing MURDER CHARGES – because, well, she kept escalating her violence (indirect and direct) and using the victim card to get out of it. She finally escalated to stabbing her boyfriend and he’s dead.
Judith Grossman didn’t know of the one sided and subjective sexual harrasment laws that turned American jurisprudence on it’s head?
Judith Grossman, as a practicing attorney, didn’t see how the laws were twisted against men and boys, in our schools, our workplace, our family courts, and how demonizing men became common satire!?
I feel empathy for her son – because I’ve been there. She feels bad? Really? Besides lamenting HER son’s near miss with possible prison, what has she said or done to stop this from happening to others?
Nothing? Judith Grossman is still a model of feminist thinking: narcissistic, self-absorbed, fully imbued with “but, but, but that’s different when applied to me” mentality, and wants others to believe she’s “finally seen the light.” I call bullsh!t. She helped install the wiring, ensured the electrician got paid, turned on the switch, and revelled in her feminist accomplishments while turning a willfully blind eye to blatant and patently unjust outcomes based purely on genetic predisposition.
Grow up Judith. You helped make this mess – now do what we tell children: clean it up.
Steven
Oh, it should also be noted – here is the cost of being falsely accused. I’ll go from the standpoint of her son who never faced charges and was exonerated – clearly the best outcome he could hope for.
1) If she filed a restraining order (and that is not clear) then he has a permanent record of him having a restraining order based on an allegation of sexual assault.
Even if she did not, I can assert even without reading it in the article that the campus police were somehow involved.
This means that FOREVER if his name is run that it will be associated with sexual asault.
EVERY time he has an interaction with the police the officer will not trust him, will be wary of him, not believe him, and, God forbid, he ever has any other allegation made against him he’s screwed.
2) Good luck for him to get any recommendations from any of his professors for him to get into any industry or field of endeavor. Anyone who has been “out in the world” knows that these connections and networking introductions knows how necessary and vital they are to your future.
A person accused of rape is a social and professional pariah. I cannot blame a potential employer for their reticence in hiring a person who may be a rapist. Even if you are 99.9% sure he is innocent, if something later happens you can be sued into nonexistence.
3) How do we find a spouse / soul-mate? Mostly through our social interactions from our various friends and acquaintances is often the answer. So now the accused but innocent, and even exonerated, man is a social outcast. Few women want to be known as being intimate and tying her life to a man accused of such a thing.
So – just by an accusation, even if exonerated, the man is a legal, political, financial, and social second hand citizen. He MAY be able to build a full and successful life, but it will take YEARS to rebuild.
And that is the best case scenario – with no arrest, no trial, no prison, and no sex offender registry.
The woman who did this needs to spend time in prison and there needs to be a national false accuser database.
It’s called a deterrent.
Steven