2019 Wisconsin Season Thread

[CWSooner]

Civil lawsuits already provide a remedy for those who have been injured, in whose case the burden of proof against the wrongdoer was not met in a criminal trial.

Title IX enforcement is not part of any judicial process or system.  But it has become at many schools a system of kangaroo courts where the accused is not allowed to face his/her accuser, not allowed to have counsel present, and essentially has to prove himself (rarely herself) innocent.

To say that we acquit many guilty parties in criminal trials, so to make up for that we'll convict many innocent parties in Title IX proceedings, and that that somehow balances the scales, is ridiculous, IMO.  We should not be seeking to average out the statistics, getting roughly as many false punishments as we get false acquittals, and call that justice.

If I am punished for doing nothing wrong, through procedures in which I was assumed guilty going in, the fact that some genuine bad actor elsewhere was acquitted in a criminal trial is no comfort to me.  But it is an injustice.

Again, civil lawsuits are already there as a remedy, and require a lower standard of evidence.

[Anonymous Coward]

My point doesn't rest on an interest in false positives. We can reframe it. That the issue here is also largely cultural. In the era before Title IX received its current "preponderance of evidence" advisement, victims too seldom felt comfortable bringing trials and civil suits. Separate from our conversation thus far about giving victims another (easier) test for true positives (perpetrators who truly committed the crime) at the risk of false positives (the wrongfully accused), this change to "preponderance of evidence" also gives victims more confidence that they will be taken seriously and (though it may be too soon to tell) further dissuades the crimes in the first place. That both increases the rates of legitimate reporting and decreases the rates of - for example - sexual assault. By itself, those are significant wins for the public good.

[CWSooner]

"Preponderance of the evidence" is already the standard in a civil suit.  Title IX proceedings don't even meet that standard.

I agree that "by itself" the result of Title IX in encouraging victims to file complaints and testify is a net good.  But when the system is producing a high percentage of wrongful punishments, that negates the gain.

Schools all across the country are getting sued by people wrongfully accused and punished, and the schools are losing those suits.

Nobody wants bad actors to go unpunished, and everybody wants the victims to feel free to come forward.  But in pursuit of this good we cannot set up an alternative "justice" system where due process is ignored, the presumption of innocence is thrown out, the accused cannot have counsel present and cannot cross-examine the accuser, and there is no right of appeal.

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you define "a high percentage of wrongful punishments," and where did you find that data?

Also, I think it's misconstruing things to say that those who sue the universities -- even those who sue and win -- were wrongfully punished. As if that's proven. Calling it proven would be a bridge too far. Not even the criminal justice system is capable of "proving" innocence. Those lawsuits only prove discontent, and we should expect both the rightfully and wrongfully accused to express such discontent. 

Heck, we should even expect the *rightfully* accused to *usually* win versus universities in civil court if their accuser never brought criminal charges.

[CWSooner]

This doesn't directly answer your questions.

But I think it is a fair critique of the problems with Title IX being enforced with administrative committees with such little guidance and oversight that they can end up being kangaroo courts.

The Problem With Title IX and Why It Matters

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks, I'll try to read it tonight. I think I understand the pitfalls you describe, even mentioning them preemptively. So far I think the impasse is respectful -- that I just weigh these differently -- but I am open to learning there's more to it.

[CWSooner]

Thanks, AC.

I'm not insisting that you come back and say that I'm right.  Title IX as a whole has certainly done a lot of good.  But I do think this aspect of it needs to be tightened up.

[SFBadger96]

Wow--interesting discussion here.

Not guilty isn't the same as didn't do it--it means not proven beyond the reasonable doubts of a jury. Anyone involved in the criminal justice system can recite stories of culpable people who won a not guilty verdict.

Schools have definitely struggled with implementing good procedures to deal with allegations of sexual misconduct. Finding the right balance is really, really hard. No matter how you cut it, a finder of fact (whether a jury, a judge, a panel of professors, whatever) will struggle with close calls, and inevitably get some wrong. What we do know is that historically, universities have not done enough to protect (mostly) women from abuse. It may be that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction, though, frankly, that would surprise me. Which isn't to say that innocent people haven't been harmed.

EDIT: But, the freshman writer of that opinion piece for an opinion outlet knows very little about standards of evidence and how they work in the real world. Using the beyond a reasonable doubt standard would be the death knell of Title IX sexual assault queries. And no, suspension, or even expulsion, from a university is not close to the same as a criminal conviction. Will it impact a person's life? Sure, but nothing close to the kind of impact that comes with a criminal conviction. Should the Department of Education issue more direct and consistent guidelines? Absolutely. 

I don't know enough about the facts alleged/proven in the Cephus case to even have an opinion, other than that the jury clearly didn't struggle with it (45 minutes is FAST for a jury).

[847badgerfan]

This could get interesting.


https://www.channel3000.com/news/cephus-asks-for-readmission-to-uw-madison-following-not-guilty-verdicts/1106446294


Lots of current and former players taking to social media too, to persuade UW to let him back into school.


I doubt they will, but who knows these days. I just hope this doesn't turn into a distraction for the players and coaches. Again.

[ELA]

Michigan State settled lawsuits earlier this summer both from the victim and the alleged assailant from the same incident, who both claimed violation of process.

The schools are beyond overwhelmed by this right now, far beyond the limited scope of athletics.

[847badgerfan]

Evan Flood‏Verified account 

@Evan_Flood

Follow Follow

@Evan_Flood

  More
 
#Badgers head coach Paul Chryst says he would welcome Quintez Cephus back if it's what's best for Cephus. No timetable on the chancellor's decision.
9:37 AM - 7 Aug 2019

[bayareabadger]

Evan Flood‏Verified account

@Evan_Flood

Follow Follow

@Evan_Flood

 

  More
 
#Badgers head coach Paul Chryst says he would welcome Quintez Cephus back if it's what's best for Cephus. No timetable on the chancellor's decision.
9:37 AM - 7 Aug 2019

I found that pretty interesting. I kinda figured PC would be tight-lipped. 

I can see him being whole hog interested in getting the kid back on the roster, but I could also see him saying that because he knows the school will run out the clock some and eventually it will make more sense for the kid to leave. He saves face with his players and doesn't have to deal with the longterm headache. 

I do think some UW fans are overselling what getting him back would mean. He's been off the team for how long? I assume he hasn't been practicing. That means maybe he's slightly worthwhile this year and delivers next year, assuming he can count last year as a redshirt, or he redshirts this year, makes a go next year. And I'm always wary of guys who have some sort of thing and then try to come back. I can thing of at least three kids who had some sort of mess that led to a long layoff and their returns quickly ending because of something they did. 

What I'm saying is, a divorce might be better for all involved. Go play for a smaller school, put up big numbers, hope that and testing gets you an NFL shot and work from there. The possibility this festers seems not great. 

[847badgerfan]

Seems the players are in full support of him too. 

What I would like to see is just what his coach and teammates are saying. Whatever is best for him, is great. If that means UW, fine. If it means going elsewhere, fine.

The kid was academic all-B1G. He's not stupid, but he made a stupid mistake (the camera thing tipped it in). Damn kids.

[FearlessF]

It's unfortunate that the coach didn't feel like he could give the kid his full support in the beginning

might have been on the kid, hopefully it wasn't on the administration above the coach

glad that the coach is supporting him fully now

I hope the kid gets back on the field as a Badger and has great success

just not on November 16th in Lincoln