Among other things, panelists are provided an article by Lundy Bancroft called “Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men.” Here is an excerpt:
The goal of holding sexual offenders accountable for their misconduct is one that is universally shared by all civilized people. However, Stanford’s hearing process, as illustrated by the above, unduly enhances the risk of holding innocent persons responsible for such offenses in furtherance of the objective to hold true offenders accountable.
Stanford’s process, in short, is an affront to the fair administration of justice.
I follow these issues closely and can’t ever recall hearing of a school that wears its biases on its sleeve in so egregious a manner as is illustrated in the materials I've reviewed. Presumptively innocent young men accused of sex offenses at Stanford are assured a process with all the fairness employed in Salem, Massachusetts, 1692. If these biases were better known, I can't imagine any sane parent paying to send his or her son to that school.
It is a hallmark of the American experience and a universally accepted tenet of the common law tradition that hearings be conducted with impartiality, fairness, fidelity to the evidence, and free from even the appearance of bias. Those fundamental principles must never be tossed onto a scrapheap of politicized indifference to appease one interest group or another. Here we have not only an appearance of bias, we have a blatant, politicized, institutionalized embrace of partiality that favors the female accuser and the maligns the male accused.
Stanford owes it to all its students to treat them fairly, even when the charge is sexual assault, and even when the student is male. On this issue, there can be no plausible, just, moral, or legitimate debate.
Posts
14 comments:
This policy will obviously increase the number of convictions, as it is in effect a lowering of the standard of evidence needed to secure one (to a mere accusation!). This will give the illusion of an increase in actual sexual violence, which will justify further actions.
Soon, raping women anonymously will actually be less likely to result in punishment than having consensual sex.
point 2:
"People cannot claim to be opposed to partner abuse while assisting their own SON, BROTHER, friend or partner in HIS abusiveness toward a WOMAN"
The snippet of paper is about abuse.
Notice the terminology in it is sexually biased - against men.
It should read as follows:
"People cannot claim to be opposed to partner abuse while assisting their own FAMILY, friend or partner in THEIR abusiveness toward THEIR PARTNER"
Proof that the judicial panelists themselves are being bombarded with brainwashing, sexually biased material right out of the gate.
3:54 "raping women anonymously will actually be less likely to result in punishment than having consensual sex."
on raping girls anonymously, are you talking about when they gang rape girls in colleges ?
". . . are you talking about when they gang rape girls in colleges?"
I think s/he's referring to stranger rape.
P.S. Plug in "gang rape" on this site and see the incredible numbers of false rape claims that result from group sex. You may not be able to stomach reading beyond this one:
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/p/lamb-to-slaughter-hofstra-false-rape.html
Considering that rapists are rare, even among criminals. And go to great lengths to hide that they are rapists, even among other criminals. I wonder how someone determined to commit gang rape could even go about finding other rapists who would be interested. So the idea that some college kid would have any success trying to go around asking people if they wanted to join him in a gang rape is pretty ludicrous.
There are some animalistic gang rapes, but, again, these are largely limited to the lower socio-economic spheres. On college campuses, they are practically unheard of.
. . . and Georgia Girl, I know you read this -- don't even bother commenting.
Stanford's valedictorian a few years ago incorporated this hate speech into her graduation speech.
She screeched how one in three (one in three, not lower) Stanford women get raped by men on campus, when the rate is 7 reports a year, and 2 convictions.
This is not surprising.
I just tried searching at Change.org using:
1) REJECT THE PROPOSED SAVE ACT ABSENT AMENDMENTS TO PROTECT THE PRESUMPTIVELY INNOCENT
2) REJECT THE PROPOSED SAVE ACT
3) SAVE ACT
#1 & #2 did not return any results. When I tried #3, a number of results were returned. Even after going through several pages worth of results, not all, I did not see the one proposed by this site.
What I did find was this one:
"End Sexual Violence On College Campuses. Pass the Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act (SaVE Act)"
It was the very first result returned.
Atlas
A clear majority of American societal violence is coming from the matriarchal underclass. From the trailer parks of appellachia, to the ghettoes of south florida, the common denominator is matriarchy.
Not apprehending womens violence, leads to children learning "unrestrained violence" from their mothers. It is a perversion of American law enforcement that refuses to intercept violent women, as violent women raise violent offspring.
@Atlas: Change.Org removed it from their search results. The petition's still there if you have the link, but you can't find it through a search. I'm trying to find the contact s link to ask what the hell happened.
Sam Lancaster,
Thank you for looking into the matter.
Atlas
Holy Fuck!!!!
"From the trailer parks of appellachia.."
-------------------
WTF?
From the trailer parks of APPALACHIA(dipshit) I sincerely say: fuck you.
Who in the fuck do you think you are?
Have you EVAR been anywhere near Appalachia, jackass? I live here and have NEVER heard of any kind of "gang rape" anywhere in this region.
You are a bigot and a boob and a complete idiot.
You should thank your lucky stars I can't virtually whip your ass.
Post a Comment