MSU in the Crosshairs - Lawsuit Alleges MSU Encouraged Woman not to Report Rape by Basketball Players; Ohio State University Doctor Abused 177 Athlete (1 Viewer)

[Hawkeye21]

The basketball and football programs both covered up instances and allowed their players to continue playing without punishment.  Disgusting.  Goodbye Izzo and Dantonio.

 

[Hawkeye21]

LINK?

I've been listening to it on the radio.  The ESPN article has plenty of details of all the players that committed sexual assault.  I don't believe any of those players were ever suspended from any games.  They have a history of allowing players to play after getting into trouble whether it be for sexual assault or serving time in jail for DUI.

 

[LAUNCH]

BREAKING NEWS: Sources close to the Athletic Department reporting that Izzo may retire within next few days, Dantonio soon to follow.

https://twitter.com/BarstoolMSU/status/956975257222512640

 

[Da Guru]

The basketball and football programs both covered up instances and allowed their players to continue playing without punishment.  Disgusting.  Goodbye Izzo and Dantonio.

This report is nothing new to students and people around MSU athletics.  Both Dantone and Izzo were allowed to sweep things under the rug for years.  MSU was hungry for any kind of success ad was willing to overlook these rapes and domestic violence reported against football and basketball players.  Had Nasser not been convicted it would still be under the rugs.  You should hear the stories about Plaxico Burress and his time at state.

 

[Hawkeye21]

BREAKING NEWS: Sources close to the Athletic Department reporting that Izzo may retire within next few days, Dantonio soon to follow.

https://twitter.com/BarstoolMSU/status/956975257222512640

Did you read the comments from that tweet?

 

[Capella]

BREAKING NEWS: Sources close to the Athletic Department reporting that Izzo may retire within next few days, Dantonio soon to follow.

https://twitter.com/BarstoolMSU/status/956975257222512640

While I hope this happens, the local barstool sports chapter isn't exactly a great journalism source. 

 

[BroncoFreak_2K3]

Izzo's post-game presser after tonight's game should be pretty interesting...if he indeed is there coaching tonight...

 

[Hawkeye21]

Nancy Devos had visited MSU and two days later rolled back Title IX protections for sexual assault victims. 

 

[whoknew]

Time for the football team to hire Ed Gennero.

 

[Henry Ford]

Nancy Devos had visited MSU and two days later rolled back Title IX protections for sexual assault victims. 

Yup.  There's been a big bit of discussion about @rockaction's unwavering support (and my unabashed anger about it) for rolling those back in the political forum, though a thread discussing it was deleted.

 

[JuniorGong]

Doesn’t seem realistic that Izzo will be able to coach out the season

 

[rockaction]

Yup.  There's been a big bit of discussion about @rockaction's unwavering support (and my unabashed anger about it) for rolling those back in the political forum, though a thread discussing it was deleted.

Ah, yes. My position is that these are criminal matters that should be handled by the police and that the new protections put into place by President Obama's OCR "Dear Colleague..." letter does not give due process to defendants in any way, shape or form. Before we let a scandal color our positions on this, we should remember the Duke and Virginia incidents and fabrications. We should also remember Columbia University's "mattress girl" and others whose accusations have been proven false -- or at least have been subjected to rightful scrutiny. 

Kangaroo Courts have no business in college, nor is a preponderance of the evidence standard, determined by administrative officials (or, in some cases, official) be a standard by which a student, simply accused of inappropriate behavior, be subject to suspension and/or expulsion, both of which are life-altering and entail future repercussions none of us can really imagine 

And that thread disappeared because the mods sought fit to retitle a rather good title. That won't happen again. 

eta* What I mean to say is that I'll defer to them and not delete the thread. It had nothing to do with the content of the thread, which was fine, as I don't remember you being particularly angry or personal. I welcome the debate about this. 

 

[Henry Ford]

Ah, yes. My position is that these are criminal matters that should be handled by the police and that the new protections put into place by President Obama's OCR "Dear Colleague..." letter does not give due process to defendants in any way, shape or form. Before we let a scandal color our positions on this, we should remember the Duke and Virginia incidents and fabrications. We should also remember Columbia University's "mattress girl" and others whose accusations have been proven false -- or at least have been subjected to rightful scrutiny. 

Kangaroo Courts have no business in college, nor is a preponderance of the evidence standard, determined by administrative officials (or, in some cases, official) be a standard by which a student, simply accused of inappropriate behavior, be subject to suspension and/or expulsion, both of which are life-altering and entail future repercussions none of us can really imagine 

And that thread disappeared because the mods sought fit to retitle a rather good title. That won't happen again. 

It disappeared because you deleted it.  Regardless, again, "mattress girl" existed because the university did not come down on the student, and she carried her mattress around campus to protest that he wasn't being removed from campus (meaning the standards worked just fine.)  Duke happened five years before the rule change even happened.  And UVA had nothing whatsoever to do with Title IX rules, it was a Rolling Stone article.  

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Ah, yes. My position is that these are criminal matters that should be handled by the police and that the new protections put into place by President Obama's OCR "Dear Colleague..." letter does not give due process to defendants in any way, shape or form. Before we let a scandal color our positions on this, we should remember the Duke and Virginia incidents and fabrications. We should also remember Columbia University's "mattress girl" and others whose accusations have been proven false -- or at least have been subjected to rightful scrutiny. 

Kangaroo Courts have no business in college, nor is a preponderance of the evidence standard, determined by administrative officials (or, in some cases, official) be a standard by which a student, simply accused of inappropriate behavior, be subject to suspension and/or expulsion, both of which are life-altering and entail future repercussions none of us can really imagine 

And that thread disappeared because the mods sought fit to retitle a rather good title. That won't happen again. 

Could be an interesting philosophical discussion, I suppose.  Most criminal matters are also civil matters.  Generally we as a society defer to the criminal matter running its course before addressing the civil matter, but not always. We do this for policy considerations, as you know.  The thing is, not many policy considerations trump the safety of minors and the responsibilities of persons in positions of power, educators, police, and doctors- including therapists, and of course clergy.  Now most college students are not minors, but some are. It is possible, difficult but possible, to run both matters at the same time.  Generally this inures to the benefit of the accused as some inquiries are disallowed in th ecivil matter do to the accused protections in th ecriminal.

I'm sorry I missed the discussion between you and Henry.  I find the both of you to be compelling posters.  Me, I would not seek to lock horns with ether of you as intellectually I am just a little pronghorn and you fellows are mature rams.

 

[rockaction]

It disappeared because you deleted it.  Regardless, again, "mattress girl" existed because the university did not come down on the student, and she carried her mattress around campus to protest that he wasn't being removed from campus (meaning the standards worked just fine.)  Duke happened five years before the rule change even happened.  And UVA had nothing whatsoever to do with Title IX rules, it was a Rolling Stone article.  

Yeah, I know. If you read my edit, you'll see my regret over doing that. 

I have respect for due process. If Duke had caved to faculty pressure, the students would have been gone, lax banned, etc. If UVA hadn't had some sharp journalists questioning the story, there may indeed have been kangaroo courts under Title IX. And that's the problem. There started to become a litany of students that have been suspended and/or expelled over mere accusations under the new standard under the "Dear Colleague..." letter and its implied threat of federal government involvement.   

We had a recanting of a rape claim on campus while I was there. Adolescents do things. It should be left to police and the courts. The University should not be involved in the disciplinary process in criminal matters until all the evidence is in, or, at the very least, counsel should be provided to students accused. 

 

[rockaction]

Could be an interesting philosophical discussion, I suppose.  Most criminal matters are also civil matters.  Generally we as a society defer to the criminal matter running its course before addressing the civil matter, but not always. We do this for policy considerations, as you know.  The thing is, not man policy considerations trump the safety of minors and the responsibilities of persons in positions of power, educators, police, and doctors- including therapists, and of course clergy.  Now most college students are not minors, but some are. 

I'm sorry I missed the discussion between you and Henry.  I find the both of you to be compelling posters.  Me, I would not seek to lock horns with ether of you as intellectually I am just a little pronghorn and you fellows are mature rams.

Thanks for the compliments, and it gladdens me, but I wouldn't want any part of a debate with your "pronghorn" self.  

I deleted it because I was mad at the mods. I'm not sure how my position actually susses out, actually, and pointing out policy considerations gives me pause. But I err on the side of caution in most instances. In this case, this was a doctor, and not a student. The apparently endemic problems at MSU don't sound like standard problems, they sound like a corruption problem. 

 

[wazoo11]

I have a feeling that many new cases are going to come out at other big D-I schools.

 

[Kal El]

While I hope this happens, the local barstool sports chapter isn't exactly a great journalism source. 

Most sports outlets have picked it up now. MSU is in huge trouble.

 

[Henry Ford]

Yeah, I know. If you read my edit, you'll see my regret over doing that. 

I have respect for due process. If Duke had caved to faculty pressure, the students would have been gone, lax banned, etc. If UVA hadn't had some sharp journalists questioning the story, there may indeed have been kangaroo courts under Title IX. And that's the problem. There started to become a litany of students that have been suspended and/or expelled over mere accusations under the new standard under the "Dear Colleague..." letter and its implied threat of federal government involvement.   

We had a recanting of a rape claim on campus while I was there. Adolescents do things. It should be left to police and the courts. The University should not be involved in the disciplinary process in criminal matters until all the evidence is in, or, at the very least, counsel should be provided to students accused. 

Should Larry Nassar have been allowed to continue practicing medicine on children until he pleaded guilty?

 

[Henry Ford]

Could be an interesting philosophical discussion, I suppose.  Most criminal matters are also civil matters.  Generally we as a society defer to the criminal matter running its course before addressing the civil matter, but not always. We do this for policy considerations, as you know.  The thing is, not many policy considerations trump the safety of minors and the responsibilities of persons in positions of power, educators, police, and doctors- including therapists, and of course clergy.  Now most college students are not minors, but some are. It is possible, difficult but possible, to run both matters at the same time.  Generally this inures to the benefit of the accused as some inquiries are disallowed in th ecivil matter do to the accused protections in th ecriminal.

I'm sorry I missed the discussion between you and Henry.  I find the both of you to be compelling posters.  Me, I would not seek to lock horns with ether of you as intellectually I am just a little pronghorn and you fellows are mature rams.

This is also somewhat dependent on the state.

In the State of Mississippi, for instance, everyone under the age of 21 is a minor.

 

[rockaction]

Should Larry Nassar have been allowed to continue practicing medicine on children until he pleaded guilty?

That's a red herring and inflammatory. 

There were remedies other than the OCR lowering standards of proof for male students, refusing to let students face their accuser, and accelerating judicial findings to a sixty day window in student cases.  

As a matter of fact, I happen to have a neat history of how regional OCR offices expanded powers broadly and strangely beginning in 1994, starting with California. Until then, Title IX did not apply to sexual assault claims.  

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/01/31/the-path-to-obamas-dear-colleague-letter/?utm_term=.d66493c52a64

 

[Henry Ford]

That's a red herring and inflammatory. 

There were remedies other than the OCR lowering standards of proof for male students, refusing to let students face their accuser, and accelerating judicial findings to a sixty day window in student cases.  

As a matter of fact, I happen to have a neat history of how regional OCR offices expanded powers broadly and strangely beginning in 1994, starting with California. Until then, Title IX did not apply to sexual assault claims.  

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/01/31/the-path-to-obamas-dear-colleague-letter/?utm_term=.d66493c52a64

The University should not be involved in the disciplinary process in criminal matters until all the evidence is in, or, at the very least, counsel should be provided to students accused

So the University should be involved in discipline in criminal matters, just not with students?

 

[whoknew]

Most sports outlets have picked it up now. MSU is in huge trouble.

EDIT - Apparently this is a fake tweet.

 

[Hawkeye21]

People like this are what make cover ups like this possible.

Andy Granger‏ @AndyGranger

FollowFollow @AndyGranger

More

Everything is fake news until I see facts. Tom Izzo has been at MSU since 1983 and has had how many incidents? Players smoking weed, kicked off team. Recruiting violations? 0. Everything else has gone to the court and Izzo is not a judge. ESPN is the CNN of sports

1:01 PM - 26 Jan 2018

 

[Uruk-Hai]

I have a feeling that many new cases are going to come out at other big D-I schools.

It's been 30 years ago and the world has changed, but I was witness to a major college program getting steamrolled. The final straw for Maryland's hoops program after Lenny Bias' death was an employee giving a player a ride TO class. They got a de facto death penalty. No TV, post-season bans, etc...That was in the 80s. 

That hammer that Maryland got hit with is going to be like a feather compared to the nuke that's getting ready to happen now. And it ain't gonna just be MSU. Louisville has already been caught in the crosshairs, and that was before the Nassar #### got rolling nationally. Iconic heads are gonna roll here, boys and girls.

 

[rockaction]

So the University should be involved in discipline in criminal matters, just not with students?

I never said that. But I would say at some point, it becomes responsible for the actions of its employees. Like my old professor said, "we draw lines. That's what we do." 

You're trying to defend extend a wild expansion in the OCR's powers by applying it to the inapplicable. Nasser was an employee of the University. It's different than being a student.  

I'm sorry Nasser happened, and tremendously sorry for these girls. But to argue that the "Dear Colleague..." letter has bearing on Nasser is a stretch at best, and an argument from emotion at worst, and the Socratic Method and getting in an argument about the responsibility of the University for its employees and discipline is simply a rabbit hole.  

 

[Henry Ford]

I never said that. But I would say at some point, it becomes responsible for the actions of its employees. Like my old professor said, "we draw lines. That's what we do." 

You're trying to defend extend a wild expansion in the OCR's powers by applying it to the inapplicable. Nasser was an employee of the University. It's different than being a student.  

I'm sorry Nasser happened, and tremendously sorry for these girls. But to argue that the "Dear Colleague..." letter has bearing on Nasser is a stretch at best, and an argument from emotion at worst, and the Socratic Method and getting in an argument about the responsibility of the University for its employees and discipline is simply a rabbit hole.  

I'm trying to explain to you, again, what the consequences are of requiring a criminal conviction before applying appropriate safeguards for students on a campus under Title IX when those students claim to have been the victims of sexual violence.  Those safeguards are intended to protect not only the alleged victim but the rest of the community. 

MSU was placed on oversight in 2014 as a result of its failure to comply with the Title IX investigation rules for various types of sexual violence.  The only reason that it's getting hit with massive penalties today (like the President resigning, like perhaps losing its coaches, the speculation about massive sanctions, etc.) is because it has been under that oversight and continually failed to comply during this trial.

A visit to MSU and discussion with its board immediately preceded our Secretary of Education's decision to rescind the rules you don't like.

The relationship between a university and its students is a curious thing.  In some ways it is the student's employer.  In some the student is its customer.  Some landlord, some partner.  In all of those situations, the university has some duty to protect and safeguard the other students when it has reason to believe that a student more likely than not is targeting other students with sexual violence.  That's what those rules were about.

 

[rockaction]

Here are some interesting links in case anyone is wondering why I hold the position I hold:

Dear Colleague letter in the courts - Feb. 1, 2017, KC Johnson, opinion, Volokh Conspiracy

Campus Sexual Assault and The Brown Trial - Feb 2, 2017, KC Johnson, opinion, Volokh Conspiracy

Fairness And Campus Tribunals - Feb. 3, 2017, KC Johnson, opinion, Volokh Conspiracy. 

 

[rockaction]

I'm trying to explain to you, again, what the consequences are of requiring a criminal conviction before applying appropriate safeguards for students on a campus under Title IX when those students claim to have been the victims of sexual violence.  Those safeguards are intended to protect not only the alleged victim but the rest of the community. 

MSU was placed on oversight in 2014 as a result of its failure to comply with the Title IX investigation rules for various types of sexual violence.  The only reason that it's getting hit with massive penalties today (like the President resigning, like perhaps losing its coaches, the speculation about massive sanctions, etc.) is because it has been under that oversight and continually failed to comply during this trial.

A visit to MSU and discussion with its board immediately preceded our Secretary of Education's decision to rescind the rules you don't like.

The relationship between a university and its students is a curious thing.  In some ways it is the student's employer.  In some the student is its customer.  Some landlord, some partner.  In all of those situations, the university has some duty to protect and safeguard the other students when it has reason to believe that a student more likely than not is targeting other students with sexual violence.  That's what those rules were about.

And I'm trying to explain to you, again, what the consequences are of the "Dear Colleague..." letter were for students, what its erosion of evidentiary standards meant, what the changes in procedural norms meant, the legal implications of the changes to the letter, the new guidelines set forth in who selected campus tribunals and how they were trained, and the broad and weirdly ahistorical expansion of Title IX into sexual assault claims under the OCR in the first place.

As for the bolded, community safety on campus is no different than community safety elsewhere. What differentiates the concern here? If a sexual predator is on the loose away from campus, should he be denied the protection of due process in the interest of community safety? Should we place community over due process, as you suggest? Or do we draw lines when it comes to campus issues and hold students to a different standard (if you're arguing that, then we're at an impasse).

It comes down to this for me: Adult women should report all crimes to the police. Reporting it to a tribunal where the accused has low evidentiary standards, no procedural norms, and is beholden to a jury chosen by a university administrator and trained in secrecy is simply an erosion of the due process rights of the accused.  

 

[Henry Ford]

And I'm trying to explain to you, again, what the consequences are of the "Dear Colleague..." letter were for students, what its erosion of evidentiary standards meant, what the changes in procedural norms meant, the legal implications of the changes to the letter, the new guidelines set forth in who selected campus tribunals and how they were trained, and the broad and weirdly ahistorical expansion of Title IX into sexual assault claims under the OCR in the first place.

As for the bolded, community safety on campus is no different than community safety elsewhere. What differentiates the concern here? If a sexual predator is on the loose away from campus, should he be denied the protection of due process in the interest of community safety? Should we place community over due process, as you suggest? Or do we draw lines when it comes to campus issues and hold students to a different standard (if you're arguing that, then we're at an impasse).

It comes down to this for me: Adult women should report all crimes to the police. Reporting it to a tribunal where the accused has low evidentiary standards, no procedural norms, and is beholden to a jury chosen by a university administrator and trained in secrecy is simply an erosion of the due process rights of the accused.  

If there's a sexual predator in your office raping your coworkers, your boss is made aware of it, and doesn't investigate the matter, your business will be responsible for what happens to the next victim.  If the business decides to fire him based on this, it doesn't need a conviction based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.  Yes, that's perfectly reasonable.  But you're arguing against it.

 

[rockaction]

If there's a sexual predator in your office raping your coworkers, your boss is made aware of it, and doesn't investigate the matter, your business will be responsible for what happens to the next victim.  If the business decides to fire him based on this, it doesn't need a conviction based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.  Yes, that's perfectly reasonable.  But you're arguing against it.

It's an imperfect analogy: The business can fire him because private employees are almost all at-will and have no protections.

Students are not at-will employees. That's why they're called students. They pay tuition and have safeguards built into university policy for discipline when they consent to pay the university upwards of 70,000 dollars to attend, some of which is a sunk cost after years of attending. Both reputation and future earnings are at stake.  

Why aren't the women in the office going to the police, anyway? This seems odd. 

But the point is, you're trying to make an analogy of students to employees, and it doesn't hold, in my opinion. It's a totally different thing.  

 

[Henry Ford]

It's an imperfect analogy: The business can fire him because private employees are almost all at-will and have no protections.

Students are not at-will employees. That's why they're called students. They pay tuition and have safeguards built into university policy for discipline when they consent to pay the university upwards of 70,000 dollars to attend, some of which is a sunk cost after years of attending. Both reputation and future earnings are at stake.  

Why aren't the women in the office going to the police, anyway? This seems odd. 

But the point is, you're trying to make an analogy of students to employees, and it doesn't hold, in my opinion. It's a totally different thing.  

Who says they aren't?  Guy's out on bail, does he go back to work?  This isn't an "at will" thing.  You can fire someone for raping his coworkers, and he doesn't have to have been convicted of the crime.  Just like you can fire someone for stealing from you without him being convicted.

 

[Henry Ford]

And it isn't just employees.  If you have an apartment building and they realize someone there has been raping the other tenants, they can evict him.

If you have a student in a public high school who has been raping people, he can be expelled. 

If you have a customer in a restaurant or hotel who has been raping the other patrons, he can be removed and told he is never allowed back.

In all of those scenarios, it's okay for people to have consequences without a criminal conviction.  That is not a violation of due process.

 

[TobiasFunke]

People like this are what make cover ups like this possible.

Andy Granger‏ @AndyGranger

FollowFollow @AndyGranger

More

Everything is fake news until I see facts. Tom Izzo has been at MSU since 1983 and has had how many incidents? Players smoking weed, kicked off team. Recruiting violations? 0. Everything else has gone to the court and Izzo is not a judge. ESPN is the CNN of sports

1:01 PM - 26 Jan 2018

I'm trying to imagine thinking that a college basketball program has gone 35 years without having players who smoke weed, and I can't even wrap my head around it.

 

[Henry Ford]

I'm trying to imagine thinking that a college basketball program has gone 35 years without having players who smoke weed, and I can't even wrap my head zigzags around it.

 

[Hawkeye21]

I'm trying to imagine thinking that a college basketball program has gone 35 years without having players who smoke weed, and I can't even wrap my head around it.

He's not the only person in complete denial.  It's all fake news from the CNN of sports news, ESPN, according to them.  These are some sick people.

 

[rockaction]

Who says they aren't?  Guy's out on bail, does he go back to work?  This isn't an "at will" thing.  You can fire someone for raping his coworkers, and he doesn't have to have been convicted of the crime.  Just like you can fire someone for stealing from you without him being convicted.

I totally agree. You can fire him for any reason. Universities are bound by their own agreed-upon procedural norms, most of which are in the university handbook. 

Also, students in higher education are guaranteed due process by the Supreme Court.  Employees are not.  

 

[rockaction]

You're totally right about public high school and rape. We're talking about minors. 

You're talking about landlord/tenant law. 

You're not talking higher education law because it is its own doctrine. There is no analogy for it.  

 

[Henry Ford]

I totally agree. You can fire him for any reason. Universities are bound by their own agreed-upon procedural norms, most of which are in the university handbook. 

Also, students in higher education are guaranteed due process by the Supreme Court.  Employees are not.  

See my next post.  So are students in public high schools.  

 

[Henry Ford]

You're totally right about public high school and rape. We're talking about minors. 

You're talking about landlord/tenant law. 

You're not talking higher education law because it is its own doctrine. There is no analogy for it.  

I see.  So in your perception, a university student must be convicted of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt before he can be expelled from school.  And it is the only scenario where such a consequence is guarded against by that requirement.

 

[Henry Ford]

Alrighty then.  I'll just let that go. Back to Nassar.

 

[rockaction]

I see.  So in your perception, a university student must be convicted of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt before he can be expelled from school.  And it is the only scenario where such a consequence is guarded against by that requirement.

No. Students have due process rights under their university handbooks. If they are violent, they should be arrested and the disciplinary process the university puts in place should toll.  

In matters of accusations of sexual assault, women should go to the police notify campus administrators, and the standard disciplinary action should toll under the old standards. 

Student rights in higher education

Laws and court precedent on student rights in discipline and dismissal

Right to protection from ability discrimination in discipline and dismissal

The 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act[111] and Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act protect students against discrimination based on ability.[24][31][34][39][90][112] This includes ability discrimination in discipline and dismissal. Individuals shall be designated with a disability by a medical professional, legally recognized with a disability.[19][24][27]

Right to due process in disciplinary action

Matthews v. Elderidge (1976) found when there is the possibility that one’s interests will be deprived through procedural error, the value of additional safe guards and governmental interests, including monetary expenses, should be weighed.[3] Foster v. Board of Trustees of Butler County Community College (1991) found that students are not entitled to due process rights when appealing rejected admissions applications.[24] They are not yet students.

Right to due process in disciplinary with the potential to lead to a monetary loss

Due process is required when actions have the potential to resulting a property or monetary loss or loss of income or future income etc. This includes degree revocation[3][113] or dismissal. Students have a property interest in remaining at the institution and have protection form undue removal.[24][114]

Right to due process in disciplinary with the potential for a loss of liberty

Students also have a liberty right to protect themselves from defamation of character or a threat to their reputation. Federal district courts have, therefore, found that due process is required in cases involving charges of plagiarism, cheating[90][115] and falsification of research data.[3][113]

Right to a clear notice of charges in the disciplinary process

In disciplinary measures students are entitled to the provision of a definite charge.[11][90][116][117]

Right to a prompt notice of charges in the disciplinary process

Students are entitled to a prompt notice of charges, e.g., ten days before the hearing.[90][118][119]

Right to a hearing before an expert judge

In cases involving expulsion or dismissal students are entitled to right to "expert" judgment with a judge who is empowered to expel.[90][118][119]

Right to inspect all documents in disciplinary hearings

Students may inspect documents considered by institutional officials in disciplinary hearings.[90][118][119]

Right to be a witness in disciplinary hearings

Students may stand as a witness and tell their story during disciplinary hearings.[118][119][120]

Right to record disciplinary hearings

Students may record disciplinary hearings to ensure they are conducted in a legal fashion.[90][118][119]

Right to unbiased ruling in disciplinary hearings

Students can expect rulings in disciplinary hearings to be based solely on evidence presented at the hearing.[118][119][121] Students are also entitled to a hearing before a person or committee not involved in the dispute.[11]

Right to a written statement of findings in disciplinary hearings

Students may expect to receive a written account of findings from disciplinary hearings showing how decisions are in line with evidence.[90][118][119]

Right to fairness in disciplinary hearings

Board of Curators of the University of Missouri et al. v. Horowitz (1978) found that fairness means that decisions, a) may not be arbitrary or capricious, b) must provide equal treatment with regard to sex, religion or personal appearance etc. and c) must be determined in a careful and deliberate manner.

Right to hearing before discipline

Hearings must be conducted before suspension or discipline unless there is a proven threat to danger, damage of property or academic disruption.[122]

Right to action in line with inquiry findings

Texas Lightsey v. King (1983) determined that due process requires that the outcomes of investigation be taken seriously. A student cannot, for instance, be dismissed for cheating after a hearing has found him not guilty.[3]

Right to investigation and consideration of circumstance

The American Bar Association (ABA) found that the need for a fair and just hearing also precludes the use of zero tolerance policies which ignore the circumstances surrounding an action.[3] An individual who commits a crime because they believe they are in danger may not be held accountable in the same way as an individual who conducts the same crime for self-interest.

Right to greater due process in criminal matters

Students accused of criminal acts including drug possession,[3][123] plagiarism, cheating[90][115] and falsification of research data or fraud, may have greater due process rights.

Right to cross examine in criminal matters

Students accused of criminal acts may cross-examine witnesses,[3][124] counsel.[3][125]

Right to an open trial in criminal matters

Students accused of criminal acts may have an open trial to ensure that it is conducted fairly,[3][124] counsel.[3][125]

Right to a fair evidentiary standard of proof in criminal matters

In non-criminal hearings in the educational setting, schools may use a lesser standard evidence but where criminal matters are concerned they must have clear and convincing evidence.[3][124]

Right to counsel in criminal matters Students accused of criminal acts may have counsel present. This does not mean that the institution must pay for it but that they

may be present.[3][125]

Right to a higher appeals process in criminal matters

Students accused of criminal acts should have access to a higher appeals process.[126]

Right to legal representation during any formal university disciplinary procedure

The Student & Administration Equality Act is proposed legislation in the North Carolina General Assembly (House Bill 843) would allow any student or student organization that is charged with a violation of conduct at a North Carolina state university the right to be represented by an attorney at any stage of the disciplinary process regarding the charge of misconduct.

 

[rockaction]

Alrighty then.  I'll just let that go. Back to Nassar.

Tap tap tap.  

 

[SHIZNITTTT]

I am torn @Henry Ford about the expelling of a student without due process.    Oklahoma just had this very thing happen where a player was accused of rape.   In the several days of the investigation, it was found that the lady was lying, and was upset the player didn't want a relationship.   I don't know how to get to fairness for everyone.    

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

You're totally right about public high school and rape. We're talking about minors. 

You're talking about landlord/tenant law. 

You're not talking higher education law because it is its own doctrine. There is no analogy for it.  

Of course, there is.  You've been making this category error for several years.  Due process does not always mean the level of process due in a criminal trial.  Students can be entitled to due process without being entitled to a jury trial.  Or to the protections against self-incrimination and the entitlement to confront their accusers.  That is criminal due process, the highest level of process anyone is entitled to and it applies when the government wants to deprive you of your liberty (i.e., lock you up).  It does not apply when the government may want to deprive you of a property right.  For instance, the government can seize your assets by merely showing probable cause that they were used in conjunction with a criminal activity.  You have due process.  You get a hearing.  But not the same protections as a criminal trial.  

EDIT:  The screed you just posted makes exactly this point.  What of the due process protections identified in that article (that are not specifically identified with criminal matters) does the Dear Colleague letter eliminate?

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I am torn @Henry Ford about the expelling of a student without due process.    Oklahoma just had this very thing happen where a player was accused of rape.   In the several days of the investigation, it was found that the lady was lying, and was upset the player didn't want a relationship.   I don't know how to get to fairness for everyone.    

The get process.  Nobody is expelled without a hearing.  

 

[Moe.]

I'm trying to imagine thinking that a college basketball program has gone 35 years without having players who smoke weed, and I can't even wrap my head around it.

3.5 hours would be a stretch. Does he know Z-Bo went to MSU?

 

[rockaction]

Of course, there is.  You've been making this category error for several years.  Due process does not always mean the level of process due in a criminal trial.  Students can be entitled to due process without being entitled to a jury trial.  Or to the protections against self-incrimination and the entitlement to confront their accusers.  That is criminal due process, the highest level of process anyone is entitled to and it applies when the government wants to deprive you of your liberty (i.e., lock you up).  It does not apply when the government may want to deprive you of a property right.  For instance, the government can seize your assets by merely showing probable cause that they were used in conjunction with a criminal activity.  You have due process.  You get a hearing.  But not the same protections as a criminal trial.  

No, you're exactly right. And they do not have a right to a jury trial. We've long since agreed upon that. I'm arguing for procedural fairness and university due process before the "Dear Colleague..." letter. In light of the new arguments being proffered for:  

• reduction in the former evidentiary standards
  
• absolutely no cross
  
• expedition of the disciplinary process
  
• secrecy of standards by which students are to be judged
  
• university administrators determined who judges  
  

I'm also now arguing that the best course of action for the universities, victims, and the accused is a criminal due process standard.  

 

[Doug B]

I have a feeling that many new cases are going to come out at other big D-I schools.

If we get down to the level of "Schools that have one more covered-up 2018-style sexual assault" ...  very hard for me to imagine any athletic department clearing that bar.

 

[rockaction]

Of course, there is.    

But Henry was first arguing that the campus community was a concern and that we should take the community into concern when suspension or expulsion is considered. Then when I asked if an eighteen year-old off of campus got accused do we remove him from the community, he then switched over to the office analogy, which can't hold because private employees are at-will and have little constitutional rights regarding removal, something students have. 

And landlord/tenant law is not analogous as landlord/tenant law is a specific doctrine with specific policy considerations.   

Nor is public high school a good analogy. They're minors. 

So if there's a good analogy to campus, I'd like to hear it.