Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This judicial quote perfectly sums up what is wrong with placing the preponderance of proof on the accused, instead of the state. It is about due process.
Quote:
And in the preliminary legal skirmishing that has taken place so far, a federal appeals court thunderously rejected the university's motion to dismiss John's lawsuit.
“When it comes to due process, the 'opportunity to be heard' is the constitutional minimum,” Judge Amul Thapar wrote in a majority decision. “If a student is accused of misconduct, the university must hold some sort of hearing before imposing a sentence as serious as expulsion or suspension, and ... that hearing must include an opportunity for cross-examination.”
It's a cut and dried matter regardless of anyones political orientation.
You have to follow an open and honest process for each and every case or risk getting the crud sued out of you.
Even more so, University Administrators out of fear of having the mob turn back on them have not only made errors there but made injurious public statements that have lead to further lawsuit trouble (aka Duke Lacrosse).
Has nothing to do with real claims, fake claims etc. but just basic due process for all.
It's a cut and dried matter regardless of anyones political orientation.
You have to follow an open and honest process for each and every case or risk getting the crud sued out of you.
Even more so, University Administrators out of fear of having the mob turn back on them have not only made errors there but made injurious public statements that have lead to further lawsuit trouble (aka Duke Lacrosse).
Has nothing to do with real claims, fake claims etc. but just basic due process for all.
I actually agree with much of what you wrote. The one thing that is off was that the Duke Lacrosse case was actually instigated by an outside prosecutor. If the University was deferring to what they had been told by the prosecutor- who was disbarred for his handling of the case- I can see where the problems began. That situation also encapsulated a large number of on-going issues on that campus and was one of the first time social media/texts/etc played into an investigation. What were inside jokes and literary references (I believe to American Psycho) read horribly when not in context. It was the moment where it dawned on a lot of people that their written word would carry far beyond a verbal comment/off hand joke.
I think establishing what the basic thresholds are and sticking to them would benefit everyone. Far too often you see universities that do not take claims seriously and hide them. And in response some other campus sets their standard short of reasonable due process.
The basic thresholds were established long ago. it is called simply, due process. You are innocent until proven guilty in our legal system. What the universities have done is outside of our legal system. Vigilante justice, pure and simple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpeatie
I actually agree with much of what you wrote. The one thing that is off was that the Duke Lacrosse case was actually instigated by an outside prosecutor. If the University was deferring to what they had been told by the prosecutor- who was disbarred for his handling of the case- I can see where the problems began. That situation also encapsulated a large number of on-going issues on that campus and was one of the first time social media/texts/etc played into an investigation. What were inside jokes and literary references (I believe to American Psycho) read horribly when not in context. It was the moment where it dawned on a lot of people that their written word would carry far beyond a verbal comment/off hand joke.
I think establishing what the basic thresholds are and sticking to them would benefit everyone. Far too often you see universities that do not take claims seriously and hide them. And in response some other campus sets their standard short of reasonable due process.
What sucks with such accusations is often when the person is proven to have not committed that time, the false accuser* won't serve any jail time or get sued. Even when they do, it is often a wrist-slap.
*Note: I am not talking about when Person A claims Person B attacked Person A but it was proven to be a mistaken identity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
