Harvard law Professors Condemn Campus Sex-Assault Policy

Admin

A group of Harvard Law School professors condemned the university’s new sexual misconduct policy, saying it violates the rights of the accused and “departs dramatically” from current law. Full Article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Its time for the Supreme Court to get more involved with getting these unconstitutional rules and laws reversed. It should be a requirement that anyone in government involved with decision making that effects the people, be required to take a constitutional law class.

0

Something California (especially college campuses) needs to ponder especially after the Cal Berkeley student who had been accused of rape has just been cleared and proven factually innocent of the charges against him just yesterday. But not after a week long publication of his name, picture and calls for blood.

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_26750498/uc-berkeley-student-exonerated-rape-case

0
Reply

“The school also adopted the U.S. Education Department’s recommendation to use the “preponderance of evidence” standard in adjudicating cases, meaning that an incident is more likely than not to have occurred. ”
——————————————————————————-

I would have no problems with this provided the penalties for the accuser were as harsh if not more severe if the accused were found innocent. If we’re going to seek justice for the accused than there has to be balance.
Take the case of Brian Banks as an example. He was coerced into a plea when threatened with a possible fate of 41 years to life in prison. He served five years. He was later exonerated of rape charges after the accuser confessed to making up the rape and kidnapping charges.
How much time should the guilty party or the accuser have to serve considering not only the time Mr. banks spent in prison, but also for the damages done to those who’ve actually been raped placing doubt as to their sincerity. I know she was sued by the school district to compensate for her lawsuit against them. Is that it?
________________________________________________________________________________________

Gibson’s (his accuser’s) deception may lead to dialogue concerning punishment of those who fabricate being raped. Currently, there are no formal negative consequences for those who file a false report. The accusers never have to fully admit that the report was a lie. It is rare that legal actions are brought against the accuser. When done, in most places, the charge is only a misdemeanor.
http://rev-elution.blogspot.com/2013/06/brian-banks-is-not-only-victim-of.html
________________________________________________________________________________________

“Preponderance of evidence” puts too much power in the hands of the D.A. in my opinion and limits the ability to conduct a fair trial. I too accepted a plea and was never heard except by those who know, love, and still respect me

0
Reply