colleges

Of Course Sports Boosters Shouldn't Judge Campus Rape Cases. Neither Should Title IX Administrators.

No one is equipped to play judge, jury, and executioner at a fundamentally unfair trial.

|

Football
Dreamstime

A female University of Florida student accused a male football player of sexual assaulting her. But she boycotted the subsequent Title IX investigation, because she believes the man in charge of it—a former assistant state attorney and donor to the football team—is biased against her.

An Inside Higher Ed news story suggests that this might be a problem—mostly be interviewing victims' advocates who think that it is. "I don't think it's that hard to find someone who is qualified that isn't also biased, yet it is a common issue that arises," activist Laura Dunn, of SurvJustice, told Inside Higher Ed.

Is an attorney who clearly loves Florida football equipped to adjudicate a sexual assault accusation against a football player? Of course not. I'll go further than Inside Higher Ed here. It's not that this could be a problem. It's absolutely a problem. The former assistant state attorney, Jake Shickel, should not be deciding the case.

But Title IX officials shouldn't be deciding it, either. Why is it that victims' advocates easily grasp that an athletic booster could be biased in favor of the accused, but fail to see that university bureaucrats with obvious connections to leftist-feminist groups are similarly inclined toward a kind of bias—the "believe all victims" kind—against the accused?

Campus sexual assault victims deserve fairness, justice, competent legal representation, and an impartial judge. Accused students deserve the exact same thing. But there's no way either of these groups will consistently enjoy the due process rights to which they are entitled when the university is judge, jury, and executioner.

That's not theoretical: we see case after case in which a university initiated Title IX proceedings against a student, deprived him of his due process rights, and harshly punished him—because the university was under public pressure to do so. We have also seen plenty of cases of universities mistreating sexual assault victims and covering up a perpetrator's wrongdoing in an effort to avoid bad publicity.

We shouldn't be naïve about the criminal justice system: there are plenty of biased prosecutors, judges, and juries as well. And that's a problem. But campus judicial systems don't just have problems—the way they operate is wholly flawed, and an insult to basic principles of justice.

So yes, victims' advocates are right: sports boosters should not adjudicate campus rape cases. Title IX officials shouldn't either, and for the same reasons: obvious bias, and a farcical approach to due process.

Advertisement

NEXT: Ex Top Cop Says We Need a New Policing Model

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. What about a reality show?

    “If you believe the rapist is guilty, dial 888-435-1221. If, on the other hand, you believe the rapist should get away with his raping, dial 888-435-1221. Voting will be open for two hours.”

    1. Now, here are some results from our phone-in poll: 95% of the people believe Homer Simpson is guilty. Of course, this is just a television poll which is not legally binding, unless proposition 304 passes. And we all pray it will.

    2. +1 American Idol Trial with Ryan Seacrest

    3. What about a reality show?

      Why stop there? How about an over the top violent competition where accused criminals have to fight their way past colorful characters trying to kill them – let’s call them “stalkers” – and if they get out alive they’re free to go?

      1. And by free to go you mean they are murdered in cold blood and their bodies stashed where they won’t be found right?

        1. Of course.

  2. Why is it that victims’ advocates easily grasp that an athletic booster could be biased in favor of the accused, but fail to see that university bureaucrats with obvious connections to leftist-feminist groups are similarly inclined toward a kind of bias?the “believe all victims” kind?against the accused?

    I’m assuming this is a rhetorical question.

  3. In the attached art, why has the black man been left out of the high fives?

    1. Because he was photoshopped in.

      1. Oh my god, he was!

        Good eye!

    2. BECUZ HEZ HOEDIN DA FUTBALL! DUH!

  4. You don’t have to be for the right thing to be against the wrong thing.

  5. Sounds like a good way to get the venue moved to the more appropriate criminal justice system. I’m all for it.

    1. C’mon, Fist, you are messing up my thesis:

      “From Fist to Hihn – The Life of a H&R Comment Thread”

      1. The Life of a H&R Comment Thread

        It aint over until the anonbot sings

        1. And even when its over, we’ve got some trolls who corpsefuck the thread to “get the last word in”.

  6. Accused students deserve the exact same thing.

    No they don’t. Because mumble mumble PATRIARCHY argle bargle MEN = RAPISTS. /SJW tard

  7. PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE.

    PROVE IT

    1. I think its a little unfair to bash robby in an article where there’s absolutely nothing to complain about. Really!

      Yes, he said that abortion-of-a-phrase yesterday… but today is a new day. And this is an article entirely free of any hideous pandering contortions. I think positive reinforcement is what’s needed.

      Good one, Robby

  8. I like how this accuser is boycotting the bullshit Kangaroo Court but still isn’t bothering to turn to the actual police.

    Maybe she thinks the guy is biased, and maybe he is, but really what’s being said is that the only people who are capable of judging these cases are the one’s that rule in favor of her.

    1. really what’s being said is that the only people who are capable of judging these cases are the one’s that rule in favor of her.

      Well, duh! You’ve been around at least a couple of women at some point in your life, right?

      TIWTANFL

  9. I just had the, ahem, *pleasure* of sitting through my employer’s mandatory Title IX/FERPA/Sexual Harassment legal training. Two hours of the same stuff from every year I’ve taught: mandatory reporting (if I see something, I MUST say something), don’t touch the students, don’t touch your coworkers, watch your mouth, anyone can file a report over any slight, and every report will be investigated. It’s hard teaching classes with sensitive subjects, or assigning any reading material that may burst a bubble.

    Interesting new twist: very little distinction now between “service animals” (trained dogs that assist specific tasks), and “support animals,” (any living creature that makes a snowflake feel better). If they claim it’s a support animal, I’ve got to do my best to make a reasonable accommodation; no questions asked about what the condition is it serves, nor how it helps. I’m thinking of walking in with my “comfort” Burmese python on the first day of class to test the outer limits of the policy.

    1. I’m thinking of walking in with my “comfort” Burmese python on the first day of class to test the outer limits of the policy.

      *kinky*!

    2. This is my support silverback?

  10. My mothers neighbour is working part time and averaging $9000 a month. I’m a single mum and just got my first paycheck for $6546! I still can’t believe it. I tried it out cause I got really desperate and now I couldn’t be happier. Heres what I do,

    ———– http://www.Max43.com

  11. I think its a little unfair to bash robby in an article where there’s absolutely nothing to complain about. Really!

    This presumes some inclination on my part to actually read it. These stories all just meld together into a miasma of idiocy which I can’t bring myself to spend the energy on.

    1. And besides, only FAGGITS actually read the articles, amiright!

    2. + Bonus points for use of “Miasma”. Up until now, “Flapdoodle” was the word of the day.

      1. “Flapdoodle”

        Is that where you try to draw a picture with your cum while you masturbate? Oh wait, Flapdoodle… Nevermind,

        I’ll show myself out now…

  12. BTW, does anyone else find it interesting that the photo shows people wearing University of Alabama colors in a story about the University of Florida?

  13. Is an attorney who clearly loves Florida football equipped to adjudicate a sexual assault accusation against a football player? Of course not.

    I wouldn’t say so a priori. Its entirely possible that he could (a) set aside his love of Florida football and be fair or (b) be motivated to keep Florida football free of rapists and thus something to be proud of, and either be fair or perhaps even on the strict side.

    The best medical staff officers I’ve had were the ones who were proud of their hospital and their profession, and had no patience whatsoever with their asshole colleagues who made them look bad by association.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.