Online: | |
Visits: | |
Stories: |
Story Views | |
Now: | |
Last Hour: | |
Last 24 Hours: | |
Total: |
Tucker Reed claims “it would be unduly burdensome” for a college “to apply a higher level of scrutiny than the ‘preponderance of evidence’ standard” in sexual assault cases (“On Fairly Adjudicating College Sexual-Assault Charges,” Letters, May 13).
But colleges long used a higher, “clear and convincing evidence” standard in student discipline, which worked reasonably well. As a 1987 Yale Law Journal article noted, “Courts, universities, and student defendants all seem to agree that the appropriate standard of proof in student disciplinary cases is one of ‘clear and convincing’ evidence.” That standard applied even to things like sexual assault that a college could be sued for ignoring.
The “preponderance” standard that Ms. Reed (and the Education Department) advocate in sexual assault and harassment cases is hardly the only “standard used in civil court matters.” The clear and convincing evidence standard is often used for cases such as license suspensions and many issues involving fraud, punitive damages, wills or family decisions. The Education Department should allow colleges to use the traditional “clear and convincing evidence” standard, rather than imposing the “preponderance” standard by administrative fiat.
Indeed, this is a very delicate business. You cannot accuse someone without clear evidence, yet college officials should pay attention to every accusation to stay alert. It is always better to know the situation in your college and settle things before they spread. Because of unhealthy atmosphere I barely managed to graduate last year (if I didn’t get help from custom case-study online writers I doubt things would’ve turn this way). So I think it’s important not to make too much fuss over events like that, preserving healthy environment is essential.
Ann