Courtesy of today's Wall Street Journal Review and
Outlook Page:
* * *
* * *
Princeton University looks set to become the latest
campus to curtail the due-process rights of students accused of sexual
misconduct, including rape and other violent assaults.
On Monday the faculty voted to approve new disciplinary
policies under which allegations of sexual offenses — but only sexual offenses —
would no longer require "clear and persuasive evidence" to be
considered proven.
* THIS... IS... OBAMA'S... AMERIKA...
* THIS... IS... THE... DEMOCRATIC... LEFT...
* AND IT AIN'T GONNA END HERE, FOLKS!
"Preponderance of the evidence," the standard
used in civil lawsuits, would suffice.
* BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING CIVIL LAWSUITS. CIVIL LAWSUITS
ARE ON THE TABLE IN ANY CASE! WE'RE TALKING THE EQUIVALENT OF A
"CRIMINAL" CASE WITHIN THE UNIVERSE OF THE UNIVERSITY QUAD!
The new policy now goes to the Council of the Princeton
University Community, which is expected to approve it Sept. 29.
The new policies would also deprive accused students of
anything approximating a trial or a jury of their peers.
(*SLOW AND SARCASTIC CLAP...CLAP...CLAP*)
Under existing procedure, all offenses are adjudicated by
the Faculty-Student Committee on Discipline. A faculty advisory report asserts
the committee "has operated with fairness and discretion" but
nonetheless proposes stripping it of jurisdiction over sex offenses.
* WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO CALLING THE POLICE? THE
"REAL" POLICE? RELYING UPON THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM? ABIDING BY THE BILL
OF RIGHTS AND OTHER LEGAL PROTECTIONS PROVIDED BY BOTH THE U.S. AND RELEVANT
STATE CONSTITUTION?
Such allegations would instead be handled by a
three-person team acting as both investigators and jury.
* JUDGE... JURY... AND EXECUTIONER...
(*PURSED LIPS*)
That trio would conduct separate interviews with the
accuser, defendant and any other witnesses. Defendants would have no right to
confront the accuser or other adverse witnesses.
* DEFENDANTS WOULD HAVE NO RIGHT TO CONFRONT THE ACCUSER
OR OTHER ADVERSE WITNESSES...
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
* RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH PASTOR MARTIN
NIEMOLLER... (IF NOT... GOOGLE HIM.)
In a nod toward due process, the proposal stipulates that
an accused student (as well as the accuser) would have the right to a lawyer,
which is not the case under current policy.
(*SNORT*)
But the lawyer would be permitted to speak only to his
client, not on his client's behalf.
(*GUFFAW*)
The investigators would decide guilt or innocence, and a
pair of deans would impose a sentence. The investigators would "have
training in investigating and evaluating conduct prohibited under the
policy," although precisely what kind of training is unspecified. We asked
a university spokesman, who replied by email: "At this time it would not
be appropriate to discuss what will or will not happen until the process is
complete."
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
* OBAMA'S A*M*E*R*I*K*A... THE LEFT'S A*M*E*R*I*K*A...
* YOUR AMERIKA...???
How the investigators will be trained is a crucial
question.
* YA THINK...?!?!
In 2011 the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education
reported on training materials used at Stanford University that purported to
enumerate characteristics of abusers and victims. The former, according to the
Stanford materials, "act persuasive and logical," while the latter
"feel confused." Combined with the preponderance-of-evidence
standard, such vague and prejudicial guidelines are enough to create a nearly irrebuttable
presumption of guilt.
* DO TELL...!!!
(*SMIRKING WHILE SHAKING MY HEAD*)
Universities are ill-equipped to investigate and
adjudicate allegations of violent crime; that is why we have police,
prosecutors, judges and juries.
* AH... BUT THAT WAS AMERICA WITH A "C." THIS
IS THE NEW AMERIKA... WITH A "K."
* THIS IS OBAMA'S AMERIKA. THIS IS THE LEFT'S AMERIKA.
The pressure on universities to conduct such
investigations, and to jettison due process, emanates from Washington, where
the Education Department's Office of Civil Rights has imposed onerous demands
on educational institutions in the name of combating sex discrimination.
* SEE...
(*SHRUG*)
Schools that refuse to adopt the
preponderance-of-evidence standard, among other requirements, are threatened
with the denial of federal funds, including student financial aid.
* YOU'RE READING THIS - RIGHT, FOLKS?
* A*M*E*R*I*K*A... A*M*E*R*I*K*A...
Princeton has been under OCR investigation since 2010 for
alleged lenience toward sex-offense defendants.
* AND...??? HAVE ANY COLLEGE OFFICIALS BEEN CHARGED? (LET
ALONE CONVICTED...?) IT'S 2014 - ALMOST 2015! IF OCR HAS A CASE TO MAKE...
SHOULDN'T THEY MAKE IT... IN A COURT OF LAW?
* OH... SORRY... ALMOST FORGOT...
(*SIGH*)
* A*M*E*R*I*K*A...
Members of the Princeton Council may feel they have no
choice but to rubber-stamp this proposal.
* AND MEMBERS OF THE PRINCE COUNCIL CAN BE COUNTED AS
PART OF THE "ELITE" OF SOCIETY. IF THE GOVERNMENT CAN EXTORT THEM...
(*PURSED LIPS*)
* AGAIN, FOLKS... NIEMOLLER... PERHAPS IT'S TIME TO SPEAK
UP?
On the other hand, the university has an $18 billion
endowment, one of the biggest in the country. Perhaps it could afford to risk
some federal funding in the interest of preserving the rights of Princeton
students.
* MEMBERS OF THE PRINCETON COUNCIL... PUTTING PRINCIPAL
ABOVE "PROFIT?"
(*LAUGHING*)
1 comment:
Our "institutions of higher learning" should, perhaps, relocate to more primitive societies and allow justice to be determined by a toss of chicken bones or maybe tea leaves...
It was only a matter of time before college campuses became Constitution-free zones. Who would have ever predicted that enrollment in school nullified American citizenship?
Yup...this is indeed Obama's America. Sit back and cry as the completely ignorant public cheers this as something brilliantly marveolous...
Post a Comment