Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
What is "Intimidating" did she threaten him or what?
.

Talking about being raped apparently.

 Ouze wrote:
What exactly in that second link shows that Jezebel is "unreliable"?

Nothing, at least I didn't intend to show that. I just posted the link so that others could judge for themselves OP's claim.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
alking about being raped apparently.

The key is "apparently" and the only thing at the moment that makes it "apparent" is an article that seems rather vague on that point. Perhaps intentionally?

 Ouze wrote:
this is a matter for real policet

To be fair, all the honor court is judging is whether the honor code has been violated. The police are hardly capable of that.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
And why is an Honor Board run by students and not staff?

Because students, staff, and faculty make up the community in question and the issue is whether the standards of that community have been violated. Pretty reasonable.

One question I have is why is saying "This guy raped me" a violation of the conduct code?

Unless they are trying to prevent the guy getting flak until he's been proven guilty or something.

So basically;
Step 1; Girl accuses long time ex-BF of rape.
Step 2;School finds no evidence.
Step 3;Girl goes on to defame man.
Step 4;Girl whines when making harmful allegations is considered bad.
Step 5;The Internet reacts

 Spyral wrote:
So basically;
Step 1; Girl accuses long time ex-BF of rape.
Step 2;School finds no evidence.
Step 3;Girl goes on to defame man.
Step 4;Girl whines when making harmful allegations is considered bad.
Step 5;The Internet reacts

Step 2 is what I'm questioning here. Also this one girl is part of a collation of 67 students at UNC going to the Attorney General over the school's "cover up" policy on rape. So... wrong story chief.

What likely happened here is the school got concerned about false rape claims and started this program to reduce them.

Then the unintended consequence happened where the "honor board" started displaying a pattern where they seemed to think an awful lot of rapes were fake and they seemed to be doing it with less and less evidence.

A well intentioned policy can still become an abusive pattern. Both rape and fake rape claims suck for everyone involved, let's be adults and try to discuss this without "picking a side" or trying to be the bigger victim.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
What likely happened here is the school got concerned about false rape claims and started this program to reduce them.

Then the unintended consequence happened where the "honor board" started displaying a pattern where they seemed to think an awful lot of rapes were fake and they seemed to be doing it with less and less evidence.

A well intentioned policy can still become an abusive pattern. Both rape and fake rape claims suck for everyone involved, let's be adults and try to discuss this without "picking a side" or trying to be the bigger victim.

I think we've all learned a valuable lesson here. If someone is a victim of rape at a school, its best they just go ahead and burn down the school in righteous indignation.*



*Just an excuse to show this I'm afraid:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Gentlemen are stirring as this discussion of police efforts on university campuses is, I think this "honor board" which apparently has some form of judicial power apparently is far more concerning then any form of cop, renta or otherwise present on campus.

You have echoed my thoughts too.

That's kind of a shame, KK, because it's not an accurate assessment. The only power an honor board has is over people who voluntarily submit to its authority and only to the extent that they voluntarily submit. In the case of a university, a student submits to an honor board by choosing to go to a school with an honor code. That honor board only has the power to determine whether or not a student has violated the honor code and, if the board determines there has been a violation, how said determination will effect the student's enrollment and/or record as a student at that university.

Committing rape is likely a presumptive violation of the honor code. If a student says another student raped her, the honor board has to determine whether that allegation is true only as a matter of determining whether the accused violated the honor code. The finding of an honor board in this matter is in no way binding on a criminal court. It's rather obvious, I should think, that the alleged victim would as a primary concern report a rape to the actual police. The honor board in no way stands between someone who wants to report a crime and the police. If the members of the honor board are pressuring the reporting party not to contact the police, as a matter of policy or otherwise, then there is a real concern.

But the article doesn't mention any of this. Landen is not said to have contacted the police. Landen is not said to have been pressured by a fellow student or any employee of the university to not contact the police.

In fact the narrative of the article doesn't even make sense.

On January 29th, 10 days after news broke about the OCR case, Landen received an email from Elizabeth Ireland, the Graduate & Professional Schools Student Attorney General, who wrote that she "received a report of a possible violation of the Honor Code on which you are listed as the reporting party."

So Landen is the reporting party. Landen received notice that Ireland received the report which Landen filed.

Since Landen knew she hadn't done anything wrong — she hadn't even (and still hasn't) publicly identified her rapist, even though he lives across the street from her on campus — she ignored the warning and continued to tell her story.

In what way is notice that Ireland received the report that Landen filed a warning about Landen's behavior? Something is missing here.

The article presumes a rape occurred, presumes Landen is a "rape survivor," presumes that Landen's ex-boyfriend is a rapist, and presumes UNC covers up rape.

Each of the presumptions is supported by no evidence. They are simply allegations being treated as facts for the sake of saleable outrage.

"The louder he spoke of his honour, the faster we counted the spoons."

So to look at the opposite side things, the accuser, not having gone to the police probably does not have a case, but has in the meantime been issuing some kind of threats or at any rate murmurings about another student constituting a defamation of character and it is this that the Honor Board is going to investigate.

I'd appreciation extrapolation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
the accuser, not having gone to the police probably does not have a case, but has in the meantime been issuing some kind of threats or at any rate murmurings about another student constituting a defamation of character and it is this that the Honor Board is going to investigate.

As far as I can tell, and it is difficult because the article is patently deficient, there are at least two matters before the honor board. One was reported to them by Landen herself. I suppose this is the allegation of sexual assault? The other matter is as against Landen, seemingly involving what we're calling defamation.

Well, it seems to me that the function of the Honor Board is a bit like the Dakkadakka rules.

In other words, by joining you accept the requirement to follow the rules and the arbitration of the Board, though genuine criminal cases would obviously take precedence for investigation by the police.

By not making a criminal complaint, the complainant is therefore subject to the Honor Board rules.

Even though she has not named the supposed rapist, clearly lots of people would know his identity since they were long-term boyfriend and girlfriend.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yes, there seem to be two complaints involved but it is not clear what they are. From what I can make out, one of them is about the defamation/intimidation of the boyfriend.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
By not making a criminal complaint, the complainant is therefore subject to the Honor Board rules.

She is subject to the honor code for no other reason than she submitted to it by choosing to go to UNC. She would not cease to be subject to the honor code by virtue of filing a report with the police. The police and criminal courts deal with one body of rules applicable to a certain jurisdiction; the honor board deals with another body of rules applicable to a different jurisdiction. The persons and facts related to this case are simultaneously subject to each of these jurisdictions as a separate matter.

Would the Honor Board investigate an alleged crime simultaneously with the police?

Lets start with the title:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
College Rape Survivor Faces Potential Expulsion For ‘Intimidating’ Her Rapist

Alleghed rapist. Now we shouldnt astart getting into gender role biases but we must be open to the possibility that Ms Gambill either was or was not sexually assaulted by anyone.
It wont be the first time a real sexual assault victim is ignored, it also wont be the first case of hysterical finger pointing by a spurned female at an innocent man.
The courts have to decide this first, then the press can have their say.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

Jezebel is always a little suspect as a source, but meine gott.

Possibly the accurate bit of the OP. I don't know the Jezebel, but Ms Gambill was touted as a 'rape victim', she is more accurately the claimed victim of an alleged sexual assault, notice the alleged rather than proven, and notice that its a sexual assault claim, not rape. The difference between a rape claim and a sexual assault claim can be as different as as slight scuffle and attempted murder. In fact a lot of minor inconsiderations can result in a sexual assault charge, whereas rape is rape.

article wrote:
Now sophomore Landen Gambill, one of the students named in the case, says she's being punished by the Office of Student Conduct for "intimidating" her rapist by speaking to the press about her sexual assault.

Actually that is a serious problem, for the faculty. While Ms Gambill did not name the victim once a journalist has half a story the rest can be found out easily enough. If the alleged attacker is in the dock the press has the right to report about it, if he is convicted then they can rake his name through the mud, but without fair evidence and the chance to defend himself in court of law the accused is entitled to a measure of protection.

Ms Gambill mentioned that she spoke to the press, it is less clear if she made a full statement to the police. That would be the first point, if so wait until the police can come up with a charge, if she hasn't there is no story beyond a possible case of slander.

Alleged victims should talk to the profile and if needs be seek professional support or support from family, and not tell stories to the press.

article wrote:
On January 29th, 10 days after news broke about the OCR case, Landen received an email from Elizabeth Ireland, the Graduate & Professional Schools Student Attorney General, who wrote that she "received a report of a possible violation of the Honor Code on which you are listed as the reporting party." Since Landen knew she hadn't done anything wrong — she hadn't even (and still hasn't) publicly identified her rapist, even though he lives across the street from her on campus — she ignored the warning and continued to tell her story.

Idiotic reporting. Ms Gambill had done wrong, she gave pointers by which a journalist could track down an alleged sexual attacker in lieu of seeking justice through proper channels. She might be a victim, that is as yet unproven, but until the alleged attacker is properly processed for justice so might he claim.

article wrote:
Landen said that she attended a preliminary Honor Court meeting and asked whether she could have violated the Honor Code simply by saying she was raped; the answer was yes.

Possibly again yes. Was she raped or 'only' sexually assaulted, the article says rape but quotes sexual assault. That is sloppy journalism. For all we know sexual assault could be something like bottom pinching while drunk in the student union bar. A lot of sexual assaults are like that, no I am not condoning that behaviour, but again those are not rapes.

article wrote:
"This type of gross injustice is the reason why UNC students are speaking out and demanding answers," Landen told us. "The reason why I'm so vocal about this isn't because I just want justice for my case. I want to make sure no one else has to go through this if they want to report an assault to the university."

Last time I checked sexual assault, and rape are crimes. If she has a case got to the police, get a crime incident report number. If she won't go to the police, she should SHUT THE FETH UP.
Leave justice to something other than hearsay.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

The question I come away with is why the nine circles of hell are schools dealing with felony grade criminal charges /internally/? I'm just a midwest jarhead but it seems to me that rape charges are abit out of the jurisdiction of a panel comprised of undergrad and postgrad students with some faculty. Given what just happened in Penn State though it wouldn't shock me terribly that a school is playing "CYA" as much as they can with just about everything.

You are getting the word rape from a hyped up article. The actual alleged offenses are most likely not full on rapes. Rape can and does happen at university but a full on rape would and should be taken very seriously at the highest level. It is far more likely the alleged sexual assaults are a blend of relatively minor unsolicited sexual indiscretions by horny teenagers with no social considerations and too much alcohol, and a number are likely to be ballooned reports by hysterical females overreacting to people bumping into them, unwanted ex-flings and bunny boilers.

An honor board is more like a court than a police force. A police investigation is basically the process of obtaining evidence that a court will consider. An honor board, like a court, will consider evidence -- but it doesn't "investigate" in the sense of the police.

 Manchu wrote:
An honor board is more like a court than a police force. A police investigation is basically the process of obtaining evidence that a court will consider. An honor board, like a court, will consider evidence -- but it doesn't "investigate" in the sense of the police.

More point to say. if you have an actual crime to report, take it to the police, not the press.

Assuming the complainant had made a criminal accusation to the police, would the honour board wait for the result of the ensuing investigation before conducting their trial.

 Orlanth wrote:
Was she raped or 'only' sexually assaulted, the article says rape but quotes sexual assault. That is sloppy journalism.

I agree that the journalism is very poor in this sense. The background is that in some jurisdictions rape is a colloquial term for a degree of sexual assault.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Assuming the complainant had made a criminal accusation to the police, would the honour board wait for the result of the ensuing investigation before conducting their trial.

I doubt it. Landen did make a report to the police in this case. I don't know what the eventual result was. But in the meantime, her honor code violation claim against the man she accused of raping her was dismissed by the honor board. And since then, sexual assault cases have been removed from the honor board's jurisdiction.

http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2013/02/sexual-assault-victim-charged

 Orlanth wrote:
You are getting the word rape from a hyped up article. The actual alleged offenses are most likely not full on rapes. Rape can and does happen at university but a full on rape would and should be taken very seriously at the highest level.

You point out several times that we don't really have a lot of information, and then, in the same post, are fully willing to totally dismiss it out of hand as "most likely not a full on rape".

Better make a new space on here for "full on rape", as opposed to, well, other rapes.

Hey Ouze, why don't you add Democrat's statement too?

Like what Rep. Joe Salazaar said recently:

Salazar was arguing that guns don’t make campuses safer, and that there are other security measures in place that could prevent unnecessary shootings.

“It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at,” the Democrat from Thornton said.

"And you don't know if you feel like you're gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone's been following you around or if you feel like you're in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop ... pop a round at somebody."

Because A.) His comments have nothing to do with rape, per se, rather then gun control; and B.) I didn't make the graphic, I just googled "types of rape" in image searches and that seemed pretty solid.

 Ouze wrote:
Because A.) His comments have nothing to do with rape, per se, rather then gun control; and B.) I didn't make the graphic, I just googled "types of rape" in image searches and that seemed pretty solid.

Fair enough...

Just pointing out that all pols, regardless of party, put foot in mouth all the time.

I would have preferred that graphic not have had the GOP header on it just to avoid this discussion we're now having, but hey, I'd also prefer to be getting a sensual massage from Kate Upton as well. Neither of those have yet come to fruition.

 Ouze wrote:
I would have preferred that graphic not have had the GOP header on it just to avoid this discussion we're now having, but hey, I'd also prefer to be getting a sensual massage from Kate Upton as well. Neither of those have yet come to fruition.

C'mon buddy... you & me need to work on getting that sensual massage from Ms. Kate Upton. I'll be a good sport and let you have that massage first.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Assuming the complainant had made a criminal accusation to the police, would the honour board wait for the result of the ensuing investigation before conducting their trial.

Not usually.

UNC is coming under a lot of flak because usually these honor boards are made up of individuals who just get presented the bare minimum of facts rather than the whole story. I know that UNCG has a habit of the honor boards relying almost entirely upon testaments of character rather than potential criminal evidence.

Apparently standard procedure for a rape or sexual assault is you report it to the University, not to law enforcement. Which if true is the second stupidest thing I've ever heard.

This article by a UNC student is fairly interesting though: http://shoulddoes.com/i-stand-with-landen-i-stand-with-the-honor-system/

This line in particular stands out to me:

The Honor System no longer claims to be equipped to handle a question of sexual assault. Sexual assault was removed from its jurisdiction in August of 2012.

This "Honor System" needs to be smashed along with it's attendant student judicial system. Immediately and with no hesitation. Regardless of Landen making a false accusation or not.

However I still feel like we're missing the ACTUAL story by focusing on whether Landen was raped or not.

Gambill, Clark, current student Andrea Pino, and anonymous female student and former associate dean of students Melinda Manning all filed a complaint against the University with the U.S. Department of Education in January that alleged sexual assault victims and their advocates were being discriminated against on campus.

"I'm a survivor as well," Clark, who graduated in 2011, told The News. "When I was raped, I was met with an awful response. They blamed me for my experience."

Details of the federal complaint were published in the Daily Tar Heel, and revealed that Manning resigned from her post because she was instructed to underreport the number of campus sex assaults.

Sauce and an excellent fully detailed right up on the whole thing: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/unc-woman-faces-expulsion-reporting-rape-article-1.1274035#ixzz2MAInslCx

Currently waiting for a friend of mine who's a Duke grad to call me back so I can get full details on Honor Court, and on what goes on on the campus. Hopefully she'll be enlightening.

It is not so much "standard procedure", but more what usually happens.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It is not so much "standard procedure", but more what usually happens.

No way I'd do that. I'd call 911.

If the school wants to make rules like "if you are convicted of making a false report, you can be expelled" that is fine with me. That means the real justice system is investigating and the school is just going by what they say.

The school should not, under any circumstances, be convening witch hunts to harass people who report rapes. Cases like this reduce rape reports.