|
The Insect Court posted:If there were corporations whose policy was to handle allegations of rape by and against their employees in-house, rather than focusing on cooperating with police and prosecutors, people would be outraged. Why are colleges different? It's basically trying to do an end-run around the law by handling hard-to-prosecute "he said she said" cases in a special kangaroo court where silence can be held against you, you are specifically forbidden from having an attorney, and you are judged by an untrained and biased panel.
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 12:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
on the left posted:It's basically trying to do an end-run around the law by handling hard-to-prosecute "he said she said" cases in a special kangaroo court where silence can be held against you, you are specifically forbidden from having an attorney, and you are judged by an untrained and biased panel. But enough said about normal American jurisprudence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:If your problem is that rapes committed on college campuses are not being investigated and prosecuted by the criminal justice system how is the solution to keep it in the hands of university bureaucrats? Universities don't want to deal with the negative press of rapes/sexual assaults happening on campus. If a student goes to the police or it gets into the courts, it will almost certainly hit the media and will end up putting the school in a negative light. So Unis as much as possible want these complaints to be resolved through their own closed doors disciplinary procedures. The problem there though is that if you find a student guilty of rape, you're almost certainly going to kick them from the University. Which in turn is going to lead to angry parents & a lawsuit for being booted from the school on top of the rape lawsuit and the school will now not only look bad, but also have to spend money in court. So it's much easier to just blame the victim (she was drunk, she was wearing revealing clothing and thus obviously asking for it, etc) and slap one or both parties on the wrist, hoping it'll just go away. Shaming the victim into submission or convincing them that the rapist feels really bad and the light punishment the University is giving is good enough are preferable to an influx of media attention. Also, universities have a better rep than corporations do. So actions taken by a University aren't immediately considered malicious in nature and closely scrutinized. But as more of these cases are coming out in the news, that goodwill seems to have begun to wear thin.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Universities don't want to deal with the negative press of rapes/sexual assaults happening on campus. If a student goes to the police or it gets into the courts, it will almost certainly hit the media and will end up putting the school in a negative light.  That's such BS. Rapes are reported to the police from college campuses all the time and there is exactly 0 media coverage. Usually the officer says "well, since you voluntarily went into the room alone with him, there's no way we can prove it was rape. Be more careful next time missy".
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:
Not sure where on earth you get the idea that rapes committed on college campuses never get reported. Are you perhaps confusing the idea of a mention in the local paper with an A1 piece in the New York Times? Also not sure what point your whine about the police is supposed to be. Requiring the police and prosecutors to meet a legal burden of proof makes it tougher to put people in jail? Are you objecting to this? Here, let me just quote a group that I think you have to admit has credibility on this issue: quote:RAINN also stressed the need to de-emphasize colleges’ internal judicial boards. “The FBI, for purposes of its Uniform Crime Reports, has a hierarchy of crimes — a ranking of violent crimes in order of seriousness. Murder, of course, ranks first. Second is rape. It would never occur to anyone to leave the adjudication of a murder in the hands of a school’s internal judicial process. Why, then, is it not only common, but expected, for them to do so when it comes to sexual assault,” the letter asked. “The simple fact is that these internal boards were designed to adjudicate charges like plagiarism, not violent felonies. The crime of rape just does not fit the capabilities of such boards.” Did a student cheat on his midterm? Haul him before the academic review board. Did he rape another student? Then it's time to call the loving cops. The Insect Court fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Oct 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
Meanwhile, in California the drought is killing the fish for us! http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/delta/article2618501.html quote:At the American River Hatchery near Sacramento, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife is installing water chillers at a cost of nearly $1 million to ensure water coursing through the hatchery doesn’t become lethally warm for salmon and other species hatched and raised there. The chillers, essentially giant refrigeration units, are in place at a few hatcheries around the state but had never before been used on the American River.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Today's the deadline for registering to vote, right? Make sure you do that! http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_vr.htm
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Today's the deadline for registering to vote, right? Make sure you do that! Thank you for the reminder!
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Already sent in my mail-in ballot atop the pile of Fremont Democratic ballots that will bury Kashkari, almost certainly bury Peter Kuo, and hopefully keep Honda in over Khanna.  v Yeah, I also pulled the lever for Tom Torlakson. Jerry Manderbilt fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Oct 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Already sent in my mail-in ballot atop the pile of Fremont Democratic ballots that will bury Kashkari, almost certainly bury Peter Kuo, and hopefully keep Honda in over Khanna. In LA news, the LAUSD's wonderful Superintendent is stepping down. Was it because of his Billion Dollar iPad fiasco? Was it because a floor full of IT specialists in the District HQ forgot that 500,000 students hammering a Smarter Balanced server would cause it to fail like a Warcraft launch? Was it because the district's hasty move to an online student information system (replacing a command line interface that only ran on Windows XP) ruined a school's schedule? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
on the left posted:It's basically trying to do an end-run around the law by handling hard-to-prosecute "he said she said" cases in a special kangaroo court where silence can be held against you, you are specifically forbidden from having an attorney, and you are judged by an untrained and biased panel. That kangaroo court can do the exact same thing with allegations of cheating, plagiarism, violating the honor code in some other way, or even selling your own autograph. Not every punishment in life is a criminal sanction, subject to reasonable doubt and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Torlakson vs Tuck was one of the only races that I had to think about, but 15 minutes on both of their campaign sites made it clear that Torlakson was a pretty okay bureaucrat and Tuck was one of those charter guys all about privatization. His disagreeable policies weren't as immediately apparent as that crazy Common Core lady that got third in the primary.
Shear Modulus fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Oct 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:That kangaroo court can do the exact same thing with allegations of cheating, plagiarism, violating the honor code in some other way, or even selling your own autograph. Not every punishment in life is a criminal sanction, subject to reasonable doubt and whatnot. Those things don't have a mandatory expulsion from campus by law. If there is a rape, it should be handled by the police, not an inept administrative board.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
on the left posted:Those things don't have a mandatory expulsion from campus by law. If there is a rape, it should be handled by the police, not an inept administrative board. Cite your bullshit. What law mandates expulsion for sexual assault? There isn't one. Edit: here's a good example of you being full of poo poo. quote:Stanford University will not expel a student it found to have sexually assaulted a classmate off-campus this year, rejecting the appeal of the victim who said the school had treated him too leniently. and before you say "well, the victim should have reported it to the police!" quote:Francis reported the incident to police in her hometown, she said, but no charges have been filed. http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_25945425/stanford-wont-expel-student-sexual-assault-case Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Cite your bullshit. What law mandates expulsion for sexual assault? Title IX mandates that schools use "preponderance of evidence" and remove the accused from the campus. Trabisnikof posted:and before you say "well, the victim should have reported it to the police!" What kind of warped belief system do you have where the solution to police inaction is to subject people to bullshit kangaroo courts to achieve the politically correct outcome?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
on the left posted:Title IX mandates that schools use "preponderance of evidence" and remove the accused from the campus. Citation please. Because "less than one-third of students found responsible for sexual assault are expelled from their colleges" in a recent survey of colleges HuffPo did (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/29/campus-sexual-assault_n_5888742.html). Likewise, federal data backs up that survey: quote:The Huffington Post also surveyed data on cases at more than 125 other schools from fiscal year 2011 through 2013, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request to the U.S. Department of Justice. An analysis of that data, which reported on colleges that receive federal grants to combat rape on campus, reached a similar conclusion: A conservative estimate of the cases shows 13 percent of students found responsible for sexual assault were expelled; at most, 30 percent were expelled. In addition, between 29 to 68 percent were suspended. So this is two things in a row you're completely loving wrong about. Until you stop making poo poo up:  edit: before you complain about huffpo, here's an article from inside higher ed https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/06/27/should-expulsion-be-default-discipline-policy-students-accused-sexual-assault quote:Colleges are required to punish students they determine to be guilty of sexual assault in some fashion; that’s as far as the federal guidance goes on the matter, Franke said. Institutions can devise and enforce their own conduct standards, she said, but if they do adopt a zero tolerance policy, they’ll need to be clear about their definition of the phrase sexual assault. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 04:34 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 04:26
|
|
|
I loving love it when people get all up in arms about a better consent standard and then when called out on it try to switch the conversation to problems with administrative process. That's not new. Nothing you claim to be upset about has changed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Citation please. Because "less than one-third of students found responsible for sexual assault are expelled from their colleges" in a recent survey of colleges HuffPo did (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/29/campus-sexual-assault_n_5888742.html). Students shouldn't be suspended or expelled from university without a guilty verdict in a criminal trial, doubly so when it happens off campus. The fact that it happens at all is terrible, it's not a good thing that only "29 to 68 percent were suspended". I hope that the court cases against colleges, and court cases against the people who accused them of rape are successful because it's the only thing that might stop this problem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
on the left posted:
Why don't you go complain about that in the D&D Higher Ed thread? If there isn't one, you can make it! I'd rather have inane talk about if I'd use more water growing 10 acres of oranges than running 1000 slip-and-slides, at least water politics is a Californian issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 05:18
|
|
that have poo poo all to do with Californian politics
|
on the left posted:Students shouldn't be suspended or expelled from university without a guilty verdict in a criminal trial, doubly so when it happens off campus. The fact that it happens at all is terrible, it's not a good thing that only "29 to 68 percent were suspended". What about for academic dishonesty or other charges that aren't criminal charges? Are you suggesting they be civil court cases or something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:What about for academic dishonesty or other charges that aren't criminal charges? Are you suggesting they be civil court cases or something? Those things are related to school directly, so why not let the school handle them? The rape issue and many other related issues (stuff like alcohol, drugs, and weapons on campus) are a tricky area where universities try to balance their responsibilities between landlords and temporary parents.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Please also throw a vote to Tom Torlakson. Oh man, what a terrible and awful surprise. I remember him being a complete rear end in a top hat on NPR a year or two ago, I'm glad he finally can't gently caress up LAUSD any worse now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
Hawkgirl posted:Oh man, what a terrible and awful surprise. I remember him being a complete rear end in a top hat on NPR a year or two ago, I'm glad he finally can't gently caress up LAUSD any worse now.  the breaking point was recently, when he was before a court and testified that it was the District/Board that hosed up Jefferson High School's Master Schedule by not providing leadership during their troubles.That's when the board went to Ramon Cortines (the Sup. Predecessor) who basically Palpatined up and asked that the board unanimously ask Deasy to step down/approve Cortines. As a final gently caress y'all, Deasy's resignation stipulated the board send out a nicely worded goodbye thanks for all the good work email, and the possibility of letting his iPad bungle slide.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:That kangaroo court can do the exact same thing with allegations of cheating, plagiarism, violating the honor code in some other way, or even selling your own autograph. Not every punishment in life is a criminal sanction, subject to reasonable doubt and whatnot. Honor code violation trials are BS too. Students are paying customers -- they deserve their day in civil court when a school tries to unilaterally break a contract.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Honor code violation trials are BS too. Students are paying customers -- they deserve their day in civil court when a school tries to unilaterally break a contract. You realize that you agree to the terms of the honor code et al when you enroll at the university, right? Its part of the contract you sign to go to the school. Also, what does this have to do with California?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:You realize that you agree to the terms of the honor code et al when you enroll at the university, right? Its part of the contract you sign to go to the school. It has nothing to do with CA, so I'll drop the argument. But it's absolutely bullshit that as a customer to a government department or private corporation, you can be bound to participate in private arbitration. Maybe you agree with with AT&T Mobility vs. Concepcion?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:It has nothing to do with CA, so I'll drop the argument. But it's absolutely bullshit that as a customer to a government department or private corporation, you can be bound to participate in private arbitration. Maybe you agree with with AT&T Mobility vs. Concepcion? Good job confusing giving up the legal right to sue and contracts having termination clauses in them. Usually its unilateral, so a kangaroo court is better than that. \/ Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Good job confusing giving up the legal right to sue and contracts having termination clauses in them. Yeah, it's totally a legit termination clause when one party can run a kangaroo court to declare that the other party has fulfilled the terms of the clause...
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
For the midterms, someone mentioned something about a republican posing as a democrat... who was that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
redreader posted:For the midterms, someone mentioned something about a republican posing as a democrat... who was that? Jerry Brown. He's the governor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
I don't really see how Jerry Brown is a Republican in disguise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Bizarro Watt posted:I don't really see how Jerry Brown is a Republican in disguise. I don't see all the cuts state labor and public education have taken over the years being fully made up any time soon while he's governor. He's much too *fiscally prudent* to do that. To top it off he's got the legislative backing to do more for both.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
The budget is passed by the state legislature, which is dominated by the Democratic party. If Brown is a republican because of budget cuts, then so are the rest of them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:The budget is passed by the state legislature, which is dominated by the Democratic party. If Brown is a republican because of budget cuts, then so are the rest of them. Except as a senior statesmen with more political cred and depth then the whole legislature put together there's no real way for the legislature to challenge Brown's moderatism. The times they've tried to pressure him from the left he's spanked them like a bad puppy. Though that's not say all of the legislature has great credentials on the issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
No doubt his position and authority helps a lot. But I think it's a long way from being a moderate corporatist democrat with fiscally conservative leanings, and being a Republican; and I think most of the legislature is in the same mood as most of the public... coming out of years of fiscal crisis and not being too eager to spend.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:No doubt his position and authority helps a lot. But I think it's a long way from being a moderate corporatist democrat with fiscally conservative leanings, and being a Republican; and I think most of the legislature is in the same mood as most of the public... coming out of years of fiscal crisis and not being too eager to spend. This would carry more weight if Brown weren't forging ahead with the high speed rail project. I mean I'm not against it on principle though I am a bit leery of some of the specifics. But it's hard to argue that you're all about fiscal responsibility and cutting costs in a time of excess and then break ground on a project which will take several billion dollars from the state at the least to complete.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
So, Brown is a Republican because he hasn't gone nuts restoring the education budget to previous levels in the face of a slow CA recovery, but he's not a Democrat on the basis of being willing to break ground on a voter-mandated transportation/infrastructure project that will cost money in future years, much of which will come from federal funds? I think you're just sore about the education budget (which is reasonable) and calling him names as a result (which is not). Jerry Brown may or may not be a good governor, but he's not a Republican and it's silly to say he is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:So, Brown is a Republican because he hasn't gone nuts restoring the education budget to previous levels in the face of a slow CA recovery, but he's not a Democrat on the basis of being willing to break ground on a voter-mandated transportation/infrastructure project that will cost money in future years, much of which will come from federal funds? Honestly my bigger beefs are with the cuts to state labor and the state courts before those to education. And if you go by old school Republican values instead of the pants on head craziness that is the current Republican party, cuts to labor, education and a system chockfull of minorities while spending on infrastructure isn't unheard of. Even factoring in the benefits of moving now on high speed rail, Brown has pushed for bond measures and funding for other infrastructure improvements in a way that has been markably absent for other pressing issues. Obviously he's better than Kashkari and way better than whatever tea party nut was run out of the Central Valley, but I don't think it's a mystery why more leftist elements in the party might be grumbling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
Well I can't disagree with much of that. I'll just say that the Democratic Party is not a leftist party, and that the type of Republican you are referring to is essentially extinct.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
redreader posted:For the midterms, someone mentioned something about a republican posing as a democrat... who was that? I assume you're talking about Robert Murray. He ran in 2012 for the exact same seat against the exact same incumbent, but as a Republican. As far as I can tell he's changed absolutely none of his stances and just thinks that slapping a "D" next to his name will make up the 73/23 result against him last go around. Leperflesh posted:So, Brown is a Republican because he hasn't gone nuts restoring the education budget to previous levels in the face of a slow CA recovery, but he's not a Democrat on the basis of being willing to break ground on a voter-mandated transportation/infrastructure project that will cost money in future years, much of which will come from federal funds? Basically he managed to actually balance California's budget for the first time since 2008 (From a $42 billion deficit to a surplus), but to get there he gutted a lot of things the Democrats figured he would sure up, such as education & state labor. Pick your poison, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:34
|
|