Monday, November 2, 2015

Sen. Claire McCaskill: foremost enemy of the wrongly accused on campus--the latest evidence

The sexual grievance industry's hostility to the Safe Campus Act--which would insure that students accused of sexual assault are afforded minimal fairness--knows no bounds. Readers will recall the Washington Post reported that one prominent opponent of the Act declared that "we are not at a point" to worry about due process for those accused of sexual assault. She announced: "If we are to truly believe in due process for all, we must prioritize the needs of survivors first and foremost."

But leading the opposition to the Safe Campus Act Act are two Democratic female United States Senators, Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), as explained in this article appearing in Slate. (Note that Slate calls the Safe Campus Act the "so-called Safe Campus Act." Do you think Slate ever called The Affordable Care Act the "so-called Affordable Care Act"? Somehow I doubt it.)

Sen. Claire McCaskill is no friend to wrongly accused college men. Before we get to the latest evidence of this, let's briefly review. When she was asked about the DOJ report showing that it's not 1 in 5 college women who are sexually assaulted, but more like 1 in 52 or 53, she said it was "irritating that anybody would be distracted" by that statistic. (At least Sen. Gillibrand had the sense to remove the false 1-in-5 stat from her website after the DOJ's report--but Gillibrand is also astonishingly hostile to the presumptively innocent.) McCaskill also forwarded an extensive survey about sexual assault to 350 colleges and universities. The survey referred to sexual assault accusers as "victims" and to the persons merely accused as "offenders." The survey further implied that it is improper to insure that students accused of serious sexual offenses are aware of their rights--that might "discourage victims from disclosing and reporting assaults at some schools." Then, after McCaskill got the responses from the schools, her report about it ignored male victims en masse and suggested that college kangaroo courts that fail to provide accused students even the most basic rights are fair enough for them.

McCaskill is at it again. She's quoted in Slate as opposing the Safe Campus Act:
“You have this anomaly they’re proposing, where a young woman could be robbed at gunpoint and decide that she wanted to just try to get that person off campus and go to her university and they could take action under Title IX,” McCaskill said today. “But if she was raped, she would not be able to do that unless she made the decision to go to the police.”
Excuse me while I bang my head against the wall.

I challenge McCaskill and her staff to cite even one instance--just one--where an armed robbery occurred on campus and the alleged victim and the college did not involve the police.

This kind of argumentation is grotesquely dishonest, and the truth underscores why the Safe Campus Act needs to be passed: serious crimes--like armed robbery--are, in fact, always handled by the police and not internally by the college. If sexual assault is the serious crime that McCaskill and her ilk insist it is, then it, too, needs to be handled by the police. End of discussion. Anyone not drunk on gender politics knows that. In fact, 90 percent of likely voters agree with us: allegations of serious sexual wrongdoing on campus need to be handled by the police, not the college.

McCaskill's demagoguery has no place at the adult table when a serious issue is being discussed. It is hateful to our sons because it deprives them of fair hearings, and it does no favors to our daughters because it assumes they need fainting couches and are too fragile to respond to serious criminality the way other crime victims do.

I suggest everyone write to McCaskill and ask her to cite all the instances (or even one) when colleges have handled armed robbery in-house without involving the police: