Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby
I'm saying that a university can and should operate on a lower standard of proof than the criminal justice system. Much in the way we accept "the preponderance of evidence" in a civil suit, there's no reason we should expect the universities to take no action just because someone was criminally acquitted.
|
Let's just accept this as okay, I still don't see how even this lowered standard helps in so many of these cases. The accuser says she was raped, the accused agrees they had sex (so no need for DNA evidence to prove they had sex) but says the sex was a consensual hookup. What does a college administrator or misconduct tribunal base their decision on? Even with a preponderance of evidence standard, the bottom line is there frequently isn't any evidence one way or the other of what really happened. And as was already pointed out, that doesn't always mean one of them is intentionally lying.
I don't know if anyone read the link I posted to Drew Sterretts lawsuit against the University of Michigan but it's really instructive.
http://www.freep.com/assets/freep/pdf/C422124157.PDF