. . . .The deputy provost dropped any pretense that Yale seeks to provide due process or find the truth. Instead, she affirmed that the informal complaint procedure's "goal is to achieve a resolution that is desired by the [accuser]," so that accusers can "regain their sense of wellbeing," even though the process provides no mechanism for determining whether the accuser is telling the truth. In fact, the process seems all but designed to ensure that the truth won't be discovered, especially if the accuser is less than truthful. According to Spangler, Yale wants the informal complaint procedure to give the accuser "choice of and control over the process." This goal is incompatible with providing due process to the accused.
You need to read the entire piece. Prof. KC Johnson explores how your son's due process rights and presumption of innocence are tossed to the winds in the academy: Patrick Witt and Yale's Disastrous Failure
Posts
2 comments:
The Obama administration has gone a long way toward ensuring that these injusticies continue. I can't imagine why any man would vote for him now, although many will do so in the next election, of course.
Sometimes I feel like I've eaten some sort of mushroom and have fallen down a rabbit hole.
In the US it is the defendant who has the rights not the accuser who is the one who must prove the allegation.
And what happens if a female makes a complaint and the man makes a complaint against her and says she drugged him and forced him to have sex? Since all of these things just involve allegations with no proof necessary anyone can claim anything they want.
Furthermore, colleges don't have the juridiction to hear complains of this nature.
This all reminds me of what used to happen in the Iron Curtain countries where someone would annymously denounce you for something and some secret committee would kick you out of the University.
Post a Comment