​New Bill Proposes College Transcripts Include Rape Charges

[mickybrighteyes]

non legal document trying to give details... not about convictions but allegations.

good job cali.

[cuafpr]

Criminal record checks are an entirely separate thing.



And there are plenty of cases where evidence for malfeasance does not meet the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard that's expected of criminal court. But may be convincing enough for administrative action. Which is what these universities are handling.

If there's specific instances you want to dig into where a particular school was far too willing to side with one party in the case, that's fine, but the concept that universities can apply administrative judgements against their own students, according to the standards of behaviour they expect of their student population, that's not a crazy idea that's somehow unacceptable.

There are plenty of cases where a student may not be able to be found guilty in a court of law, but absolutely SHOULD be kicked out of the college with a sexual infraction on their record. Same way you could be fired from your job for sexual harassment, even if that action wasn't actionably illegal according to the law.

they are all crimes though why list one and not the other? Is a rapist that much worse than a murder?

and yeah this should be a police thing, if it goes to trail and the guy is found innocent the university has no right to label him as a sexual predator. they can remove him for conduct unbecoming or even sexual harassment but to use the phrase sexual predator/assailant is wrong when the justice system has cleared him. Yes i view harassment as much less sever than the others.

then again i've never understood while rapist and the likes have to notify neighbors for life when a murder, thief doesn't. I'd be more concerned over a murder living next door than a rapist.

[Endus]

they are all crimes though why list one and not the other? Is a rapist that much worse than a murder?

Offenses that would be flagged on your transcripts aren't criminal cases, they're administrative rulings. How is that not obvious?

and yeah this should be a police thing, if it goes to trail and the guy is found innocent the university has no right to label him as a sexual predator. they can remove him for conduct unbecoming or even sexual harassment but to use the phrase sexual predator/assailant is wrong when the justice system has cleared him. Yes i view harassment as much less sever than the others.

The justice system never "clears" anyone. The furthest they will go is "we have not been able to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, at this point in time".

And again; we're talking about administrative actions, here, not criminal cases.

[cuafpr]

Offenses that would be flagged on your transcripts aren't criminal cases, they're administrative rulings. How is that not obvious?



The justice system never "clears" anyone. The furthest they will go is "we have not been able to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, at this point in time".

And again; we're talking about administrative actions, here, not criminal cases.

here is the thing to me thought, the article says "Universities and colleges are perfectly willing to include academic infractions like plagiarism on students' records, yet students who have committed sexual assault can walk away from campus with a clean academic bill of health." Sexual assault is much worse to me than sexual harassment. One implies criminal action in my mind, the other implies improper behavior.

[Ryme]

Disagree. For right or wrong I believe in the right for anonymity of the accused and accuser, as far as can be possible, until the case has been settled.

[Deleted]

Rapists should be executed once their guilt has been proven beyond all doubt (note that I didn't write "reasonable" since that shit is a plague on the US justice system). That being said, the proposal also includes charges that were dropped or rescinded and that's just fubar.

[Theodarzna]

That's what I'm thinking, shouldn't their criminal record show that they were convicted of rape? Are the college report cards going to say if that student was found drunk driving or taking drugs as well?

These are not criminal convictions, these are in house administrative tribunals done by the universities.

Whose notion of what constitutes sexual harassment and rape is so deliberately broad that everything can count if the person feels harassed (Even if its could never pass the reasonable person test) AND the standard by which someone is found guilty is the lowest possible standard.

[Dug]

If they're a convicted sexual offender then that should definitely be on their record. Isn't it law that you must inform people of that anyways? But this needs to be carried out by the police and a fair trial given.

Schools have the ability to kick out whoever they wish as they see fit, sure, but you can't go around slandering someones name with a serious crime like this if there was never an actual police investigation.

[Endus]

These are not criminal convictions, these are in house administrative tribunals done by the universities.

Whose notion of what constitutes sexual harassment and rape is so deliberately broad that everything can count if the person feels harassed (Even if its could never pass the reasonable person test) AND the standard by which someone is found guilty is the lowest possible standard.

Which isn't functionally different from how corporate policies on sexual harassment function, where you can get fired for such for things like "asking a coworker out on a date a couple times" or "hugging for just a little too long" or the like.

So it's kind of boggling that it's suddenly a huge issue when it comes to universities.

[Katchii]

here is the thing to me thought, the article says "Universities and colleges are perfectly willing to include academic infractions like plagiarism on students' records, yet students who have committed sexual assault can walk away from campus with a clean academic bill of health." Sexual assault is much worse to me than sexual harassment. One implies criminal action in my mind, the other implies improper behavior.

My issue with it is that plagiarism is an academic issue, and sexual assault is not. Transcripts are academic records, that specifically record and report academic performance and behavior, and therefore it makes sense for academically related issues to be listed on them, like plagiarism.

As others have stated, it is entirely reasonable for a university/ school to take administrative action against someone who has broken school rules or acted in a manner "unfit" for enrollment in the school, which can include sexual assault allegations and whatnot. But lampooning someone's academic, personal and professional life by putting sexual assault allegations on an academic record that the law cannot support/ enforce is asinine, and should be beyond the power of a university to do.

[Theodarzna]

Which isn't functionally different from how corporate policies on sexual harassment function, where you can get fired for such for things like "asking a coworker out on a date a couple times" or "hugging for just a little too long" or the like.

So it's kind of boggling that it's suddenly a huge issue when it comes to universities.

CSU's are not corporations, I know you revel in misrepresentation, but please stop with the bullshit. CSU is a California STATE entity, and all PUBLIC universities nationwide are overseen BY the Federal and State government.

[Ehrenpanzer]

So schools are not permitted to record breaches of university policy, then?

Laws like this are already active in Virginia and New York, I sincerely doubt that 'false rape convictions' happen with any appreciable frequency where this would be a problem.

Except for that one guy who gets falsely accused.... fuck that guy... lets tar and feather him.... America needs to change its law slogan from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty because some woman said so, and the whiny fucktards will bitch unless we exclude him"

[Endus]

CSU's are not corporations, I know you revel in misrepresentation, but please stop with the bullshit. CSU is a California STATE entity, and all PUBLIC universities nationwide are overseen BY the Federal and State government.

And plenty of government offices have exactly the kinds of sexual-harassment policies I'm describing. So how is this "misrepresentation"? They're as free as any corporate entity to make administrative decisions like this. Because that's what we're talking about; administrative decisions. Universities have precisely zero capacity to charge students with actual crimes and get actual legal convictions on those charges. That's not what's happening, in any of these cases, and claiming otherwise, that is the "misrepresentation".

This is about administrative decisions. Like finding a student "guilty" of plagiarising. Which isn't illegal, but can absolutely get you kicked out and will absolutely go on your permanent record from the university.

[Theodarzna]

And plenty of government offices have exactly the kinds of sexual-harassment policies I'm describing. So how is this "misrepresentation"? They're as free as any corporate entity to make administrative decisions like this. Because that's what we're talking about; administrative decisions. Universities have precisely zero capacity to charge students with actual crimes and get actual legal convictions on those charges. That's not what's happening, in any of these cases, and claiming otherwise, that is the "misrepresentation".

This is about administrative decisions. Like finding a student "guilty" of plagiarising. Which isn't illegal, but can absolutely get you kicked out and will absolutely go on your permanent record from the university.

They are not, their funding and survival depends on what the Department of education decides is policy and what the Department of Justice decides is policy. More over unlike any other institution where we are discussing EMPLOYEES, we are now discussing STUDENTS who pay with government subsidized loans and grants to go to these institutions that are funded by the State as well. The debt by the way is inexpugnable and if a student is removed from schools and unable to attend any they are left with a massive debt burden and no degree for it. So unlike being fired from a job.

As for plagiarism, one is able to actually try and prove they didn't plagiarise, one can bring fourth evidence of their lack of plagiarism, the Dept. of Just/Education have actually dictated that students accused cannot even really mount any form of defense of themselves. They can't cross-examine their accuser, they can't bring fourth evidence to prove they aren't guilty like say text messages or their own witnesses ect.

These standards are dictated BY the government and Schools have to follow the State on those policies. Before it was set by the Davis Decision, which the Dept. of Education and Justice misquoted and then threw out.

In those ways you misrepresent the situation, which is why I am honestly sick of talking to you and do wish you would eventually heed my requests to go pester someone else for a change. But alas' I lack the power to put you on ignore.

[Endus]

They are not, their funding and survival depends on what the Department of education decides is policy and what the Department of Justice decides is policy. More over unlike any other institution where we are discussing EMPLOYEES, we are now discussing STUDENTS who pay with government subsidized loans and grants to go to these institutions that are funded by the State as well. The debt by the way is inexpugnable and if a student is removed from schools and unable to attend any they are left with a massive debt burden and no degree for it. So unlike being fired from a job.

None of these are reasonable distinctions which have any effect whatsoever on what I said. Pointing out entirely arbitrary differences is not an argument.

As for plagiarism, one is able to actually try and prove they didn't plagiarise, one can bring fourth evidence of their lack of plagiarism, the Dept. of Just/Education have actually dictated that students accused cannot even really mount any form of defense of themselves. They can't cross-examine their accuser, they can't bring fourth evidence to prove they aren't guilty like say text messages or their own witnesses ect.

I seriously doubt this is even remotely the case, and you've provided absolutely nothing to support it.

Documents like this pretty directly contradict it; http://policy.ucop.edu/doc/4000385/SVSH

Plus, you're applying court standards to administrative proceedings, which are not courts of any kind. You don't have the same kinds of rights. Which should be obvious. Because, again, these are not trials, they're administrative investigations.

[Theodarzna]

None of these are reasonable distinctions which have any effect whatsoever on what I said. Pointing out entirely arbitrary differences is not an argument.

I seriously doubt this is even remotely the case, and you've provided absolutely nothing to support it.

Documents like this pretty directly contradict it; http://policy.ucop.edu/doc/4000385/SVSH

Plus, you're applying court standards to administrative proceedings, which are not courts of any kind. You don't have the same kinds of rights. Which should be obvious. Because, again, these are not trials, they're administrative investigations.

Well I only work in CSU administration, what would I know before the unquestionable brilliance of Endus', as you wield all the power, I'll just let you have this.

We already had court standards applied to these proceedings as of the davis decision, But that doesn't matter, you're Endus' and Endus' must know. Plagiarism is hard to beat because the evidence is right there.

Sexual Harassment is a he said she said generally speaking. AND is a situation the Federal and State government already dictates policy on as these are State institutions and these are Students, not Employees. But what do I know, I've only helped set some Kangaroo courts up and work in the administration for years.

Your a MMO-C mod, you must know whats up. :3

There, is that the words you wanted? Can I get back to my thread now?

[Endus]

Well I only work in CSU administration, what would I know before the unquestionable brilliance of Endus', as you wield all the power, I'll just let you have this.

We already had court standards applied to these proceedings as of the davis decision, But that doesn't matter, you're Endus' and Endus' must know. Plagiarism is hard to beat because the evidence is right there.

Sexual Harassment is a he said she said generally speaking. AND is a situation the Federal and State government already dictates policy on as these are State institutions and these are Students, not Employees. But what do I know, I've only helped set some Kangaroo courts up and work in the administration for years.

Your a MMO-C mod, you must know whats up. :3

There, is that the words you wanted? Can I get back to my thread now?

The point is that you fail to provide any actual backing to your claims. The actual policies themselves don't support your position. You use standards from actual criminal courts, which don't remotely apply in the first place and are not standards which should be expected in these kinds of decisions. And so forth.

That they're students and not employees changes nothing, since in both cases we're dealing with a government institution's capacity to make administrative decisions.

Asking you to back up your assertions is hardly the wild request you're making it out to be.

[Theodarzna]

The point is that you fail to provide any actual backing to your claims. The actual policies themselves don't support your position. You use standards from actual criminal courts, which don't remotely apply in the first place and are not standards which should be expected in these kinds of decisions. And so forth.

That they're students and not employees changes nothing, since in both cases we're dealing with a government institution's capacity to make administrative decisions.

Asking you to back up your assertions is hardly the wild request you're making it out to be.

I cited the court case, the department of Justice and educations role in dictating policy. Those ARE the source of our standards, but again your a Mod on MMO-C, I wouldn't dare go against your infinite wisdom and correctitude.

[Saucexorzski]

I cited the court case, the department of Justice and educations role in dictating policy. Those ARE the source of our standards, but again your a Mod on MMO-C, I wouldn't dare go against your infinite wisdom and correctitude.

Don't worry to much, endus just likes the idea of folks in schools having the power to ruin the lives of students they do not like. Authoritarians such as himself bask in such power.

[cuafpr]

My issue with it is that plagiarism is an academic issue, and sexual assault is not. Transcripts are academic records, that specifically record and report academic performance and behavior, and therefore it makes sense for academically related issues to be listed on them, like plagiarism.

As others have stated, it is entirely reasonable for a university/ school to take administrative action against someone who has broken school rules or acted in a manner "unfit" for enrollment in the school, which can include sexual assault allegations and whatnot. But lampooning someone's academic, personal and professional life by putting sexual assault allegations on an academic record that the law cannot support/ enforce is asinine, and should be beyond the power of a university to do.

i'm on board with you here, especially the allegations part...

i actually had a friend charged with rape but during the process it was proved his Ex lied about it to get back at him for dumping her. He had it all cleared and removed from his record but it still comes in up in more detailed back ground checks and he has to prove it was dropped and she was lying.