Justice, Mercy, Rape, and the Honor Code

[mapman]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Has anything more been said about the BYU male athletes that the friend who turned in the report claims were implicated?  

I don't think so. I was confused about that because I don't understand how her police report had anything to do with BYU athletes. According to the Salt Lake Tribune this is what happened:

"According to charging documents, Barney was raped during a date in her off-campus apartment by Nasiru Seidu, 39. Seidu had identified himself by a fake name and lied about his age, claiming to be 26, Barney said. He also did not say he was married, she said. Seidu raped Barney as she told him no, crying and screaming, police wrote — details Seidu allegedly confirmed in a telephone call Barney and police staged after she filed a police report."

http://www.sltrib.com/home/3783429-155/boss-of-prosecutor-who-criticized-byu

Another news outlet describes it this way:

"According to Utah County authorities, Seidu was at the Belmont Apartments with the victim back on Sept. 25, 2015. Documents state he and the victim started to "engage in consensual sexual relations" when the victim became uncomfortable and said she wanted to stop. Official documents state that's when Seidu allegedly undressed and raped her. Police said Seidu told them he had consensual sexual relations with the victim but she says it was against her will."

http://fox13now.com/2016/04/15/man-accused-of-raping-byu-student-identified/

 

If it was really a date, I don't get what the athletes would have had to do with it.

[Calm]

"Friday afternoon the Utah County Attorney's office issued a statement in a press release that seemed to contradict Johnson's statement. It said in part:

"Referring to a report in the Salt Lake Tribune this morning, we want to clarify that BYU has not interfered with the prosecution of, nor has it acted unlawfully with respect to the pending sexual assault case. BYU has not in any manner impaired the ability of the Utah County Attorney's Office to seek justice for the victim of the case.""

"His attorney denies Randolph is a friend of Seidu. He also denies that he gave a copy of the police file to BYU with the intention they investigate Barney.

"Deputy Randolph never intended that BYU take honor code action against the female victim," the statement reads. "Rather, he intended that BYU investigate male students, particularly male athletes, who may have victimized women or otherwise violated BYU standards regarding sexual conduct."

It also states that the witness retaliation charges were dismissed once the county attorney had "all the facts and Deputy Randolph's intent was made clear."

"Edwin cares deeply about the victim in this case and hopes she is able to find comfort and closure.""

http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-county-sheriffs-deputy-denies-allegations-in-byu-rape-case

 

[Calm]

Perhaps he gave BYU more than one report?

[Calm]

I wonder if the Title IX office is doing something it shouldn't by university rules.  Given the purpose o f Title IX offices according to federal law, it seems like there could be a conflict of interest:

"University spokeswoman Carri Jenkins said Thursday that Title IX allows for universities to delay an investigation "while the police are gathering evidence in a related criminal case." But she could not comment on the woman's case or why no delay was granted after Johnson's request.

She emphasized that a Title IX investigation is separate and independent from the Honor Code process, and that a student would "never be referred to the Honor Code office for being a victim of sexual assault."

But multiple BYU students investigated by the school's Honor Code Office have disagreed,saying they were scrutinized as a result of reporting a sex crime."

http://www.sltrib.com/news/3773615-155/prosecutor-says-rape-case-is-threatened?fullpage=1

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Several months ago I saw an impressive speech by a feminist to a feminist audience. One thing she said stuck with me, paraphrased, "Being a victim does not give one moral superiority."

I'll try to source it with a link, but I do agree.

One of the problems here that perhaps has not been mentioned, on the flipside, is that rape victims fear the results of their own Honor Code violation more than they trust in the need for justice in the criminal courts. I suppose that whenever there exists punishment or discipline there will always be those who try to avoid it, or it wouldn't be punishment or effective discipline. Obviously there tends to be an inertia in everything including wrongdoing and we resist turning against it.

Of course rape victims should feel safe in reporting. But should BYU change the Honor Code that is intended in part for safety in the first place?

I don't think they should change it.  I do think they need to be more merciful in it's application.

I know you have kids.  I do too and thinking about this issue in those terms has really helped me process my thoughts about it.

For example, most parents have curfews for their kids.  Curfews with specific punishments attached (maybe grounding/losing a phone/or some other privilege).  These rules are good and they do help to keep our kids safe.  They are important.  However, if you found out that your daughter had been raped after she snuck out of the house one night after curfew (something you weren't aware of until you learned of the rape) would it seem like a reasonable response to say "I'm so sorry you were raped!  While we are waiting for law enforcement to get here, let's discuss the terms of your grounding and give me your phone."?

Of course as a parent we would want to address sneaking out of the house in some way and at some time, because it's obviously a dangerous activity.  Most parents would understand though that doling out the previously prescribed punishment while the daughter was dealing with the rape would be cruel--and more importantly given the reason for the rule in the first place--ultimately not help the child internalize good decision making skills at all.

[Calm]

"At a court hearing for the rape defendant, prosecutors played a recorded police interview with Randolph, who said he gave the woman's report to the Honor Code Office.

Randolph, who has coached track at BYU as well as working as a sheriff's deputy, said he consulted with a friend who previously worked at the Honor Code Office. He said that friend encouraged him to give the report to code enforcers.

Randolph also seemed to believe that law enforcement officers were obligated to submit records of Honor Code violations to BYU, testified Provo police Detective Martin Webb.

"Mr. Randolph mentioned that he worked for BYU, and ... he said even I would have to, or we would have to turn [the records] in — I assume he meant it as law enforcement — to BYU," Webb said in the hearing.

In the recorded interview, Randolph said he didn't believe the rape allegation and that the police report showed the woman's behavior was "unacceptable" for a BYU student.

"I'm not here to judge her, but I think, she's in school here and she's screwing around," Randolph said. "When I was [a BYU student], we had guys get in trouble for this stuff, so I think it's a problem."

Randolph and his attorney did not immediately comment. A trial in the rape case was scheduled for next month, but it was delayed due to questions as to the defendant's competency."

This is really strange, apparently one of the guys who investigated knows something because of his job that isn't available to prosecutors (something about civil cases) and that somehow demonstrates Randolph didn't violate any laws...but we just have to take his word for that.

"

Dismissed • Neither man faces a witness retaliation charge. The charge against the defendant was dismissed last month after a preliminary hearing, during which Judge Darold McDade ruled there was not enough evidence that the man knew that Randolph would use the case file against the woman.

It was Buhman, the county attorney, who asked a judge to dismiss Randolph's case.

Buhman said he opted to seek the dismissal after reviewing information gleaned from an internal affairs investigation conducted by the sheriff's office. He would not disclose what the investigation found — in fact, he said Johnson, his own prosecutor, was not allowed to know what facts led to the dismissal.

"It was fairly clear to me that there was not sufficient evidence to prosecute Mr. Randolph," the county attorney said. "... This was a very rare case that I was privy to information that a prosecutor could not have that was sufficiently important."

Buhman said he was able to see the information because he also oversees the county's civil division. He said that while the information would not be allowed in court, he knew it was true and believed dismissing the case was the right thing to do.

The case was dismissed without prejudice, which means it could be refiled. But Johnson said he's not planning to refile the charge."

[Calm]

http://www.sltrib.com/news/3773615-155/prosecutor-says-rape-case-is-threatened?fullpage=1

[MiserereNobis]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

In the recorded interview, Randolph said he didn't believe the rape allegation and that the police report showed the woman's behavior was "unacceptable" for a BYU student.

"I'm not here to judge her, but I think, she's in school here and she's screwing around," Randolph said. "When I was [a BYU student], we had guys get in trouble for this stuff, so I think it's a problem."

This seems to contradict the statement he gave out later that he was going against male athletes and not the victim.  And it seems to validate that he was targeting her, since he says he doesn't believer her and it was the police report he gave to the honor code office, not just a tip.

What a mess.

The honor code office should totally stay out of it while the criminal justice system sorts through it all.

[Calm]

Do we know how the victim met Seidu? (I haven't read all the articles) Could it have been at a party where there were student athletes?

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

He created us because of our potential.

Well Mormon doctrine from perhaps 1842-1844 or so and forward contemplates that position.  But before that no not so much save 2 Nephi Chapter 2.

[Russell C McGregor]

12 hours ago, mapman said:

As far as I know the apostles don't micromanage how the Honor Code Office does its investigations, so your implication that whatever the Honor Code Office does is the will of the Lord is irrelevant. As for the students that BYU is for, is it better for it to be for:

1. Students who obey the Honor Code; and
2. Girls Men or women who were raped while disobeying it.

Or is it better for BYU to be for:

1. Students who obey the Honor Code; and

2. Rapists who never get reported.

Surely it's not the latter.

I don't agree that it's an either-or case.

That shows an underlying assumption upon which a mighty edifice of argument has been erected; but it's all cloud piling.

12 hours ago, mapman said:

Unfortunately the reality is that BYU has many students that don't obey the honor code who are never reported. Of all the honor code violations that should be reported, surely rape is pretty darn near the top. I just can't see how BYU is going to get rapists that prey on BYU students behind bars unless they make some way to ensure that rape victims don't fear reporting what happened.

BYU is not a law enforcement agency. Getting criminals behind bars is not its mission.

 

[Russell C McGregor]

12 hours ago, sjdawg said:

Rape Amnesty?   Stay classy Russell

How? By emulating your example?

 

[Meadowchik]

39 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I don't think they should change it.  I do think they need to be more merciful in it's application.

I know you have kids.  I do too and thinking about this issue in those terms has really helped me process my thoughts about it.

For example, most parents have curfews for their kids.  Curfews with specific punishments attached (maybe grounding/losing a phone/or some other privilege).  These rules are good and they do help to keep our kids safe.  They are important.  However, if you found out that your daughter had been raped after she snuck out of the house one night after curfew (something you weren't aware of until you learned of the rape) would it seem like a reasonable response to say "I'm so sorry you were raped!  While we are waiting for law enforcement to get here, let's discuss the terms of your grounding and give me your phone."?

Of course as a parent we would want to address sneaking out of the house in some way and at some time, because it's obviously a dangerous activity.  Most parents would understand though that doling out the previously prescribed punishment while the daughter was dealing with the rape would be cruel--and more importantly given the reason for the rule in the first place--ultimately not help the child internalize good decision making skills at all.

That's an excellent way to see it. On the other hand, everything is more troublesome at the institutional level.

[Russell C McGregor]

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Your tone and diction are utterly reprehensible.  Despite being called out on it before, you continue to use "victim[TM]."

I'm sorry Miserere, but I seem to have missed the memo: who died and made you Grand Inquisitor?

Keeping in mind that that is exclusively a Catholic office, and not a Mormon one?

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

  And now you add "rape amnesty" and "get out of jail free" card.  Seriously, dude, what is wrong with your ability to have compassion toward victims?

What is the basis for that hasty judgement? I'm commenting upon arguments that have been put forward here regarding BYU policy. I have no problem with having compassion toward victims.

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

  I recommend you go and volunteer at your local rape crisis center, or your abused women's shelter, or someplace where can actually meet some victims and realize that they are human beings who have been traumatized.  That they are children of God who deserve our compassion, not our contempt.

Who holds them in contempt? Certainly not me.

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

  Your attitude is sickening.

Speaking of contempt...

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

On second thought, don't go volunteer at those places.  You'll just traumatize them more with your despicable attitude and language.

And you know this -- how, exactly?

 

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

What it appears you are saying is that victims are selfish because they would rather protect themselves against honor code violation punishments than accept those punishments in order to see justice done against their rapists.

The MAJOR factor that you are leaving out here is that a victim has just been brutally traumatized physically, spiritually, emotionally, and psychologically.  They are not sitting down and making a pro-/con- list that is dispassionate and divorced from their experience.  They have all sorts of emotions and traumas flooding their minds, and the most common tend to be feelings of guilt, self-doubt, and self-hate.  It is not selfish or cowardly for a victim to prioritize self-protection in a situation where the victim just experienced a gross violation of his or her self.  To put it succinctly, they are often not thinking clearly about what just happened to them and this is why they need love and support and counseling, and everything else that can help them.

Here are two examples given by the lead rape investigator for the BYU police department (from an article at Deseret News):

Can you see how these victims are not thinking clearly? 

A victim's misplaced guilt and self-loathing is often so strong that there is no need to punish them further for some infraction of the honor code.

This is so sad and so wrong!

[BlueDreams]

On April 16, 2016 at 11:59 AM, MorningStar said:

I have mixed feelings about this.  I don't want a rapist to go free because the victim is afraid to say anything due to her rape happening while violating the honor code.  On the other hand, when I was living in BYU approved housing, I had a couple roommates who drove me nuts with their inviting their boyfriends into our shared bedroom.  One girl in particular had multiple guys over and they did extremely inappropriate things, then later told me one of the boys raped her while they were making out naked.  She didn't actually say the word "no" and when he suggested it, she responded by doing what he had just suggested she do.  She told me, "He didn't ask permission, so it was rape." She also claimed her old boyfriend raped her, again because he didn't ask permission.  Yet she went along with it multiple times and called it rape.  I asked, "Did you actually tell him no?"  "No, I was scared to tell him no."  If she had been truly raped while breaking the honor code and it came out that she had had four boys over to our apartment and got naked with them, should BYU ignore that? 

I think the wise thing to do would be to put the girl on probation when it comes to her enrollment.  If BYU matters to her that much, then she won't break the honor code again.  She can have her rapist charged while not getting kicked out of the school.  But I also don't want girls crying "rape" if they get caught breaking the honor code. 

I've been out for the bit. My initial reaction is that that was probably not rape. But I would be hesitant to give it a definitive....because there's not a lot of explanation as to why she was afraid. If there were power dynamics at play (he was physically, emotionally, or sexually coersive and manipulative) it could be assumed she was sexually coerced into something she wouldn't normally have done. If he was your average joe boyfriend who wanted to have sex and she didn't give any indication whatsoever that she didn't want to have sex it would be difficult, legally, to state she was raped. That stated there's a problem with boundaries for both her and the male partners. Permission should be sought before increasing sexual activity, whatever that increase is. Know very little I doubt she would have had much of a case, either way (BYU or police). Rape charges can be difficult to prosecute even when the case is a proverbial slam dunk (like the specific example given of the woman raped above by calm and MN). Part of the reason is evidence issues and party of it is the intense experience that going through the legal system to get a charge is for the victims. Many drop, not because they weren't raped, but because the process is emotionally devastating. There are other contributing factors that because of our general lack of information about rape and its effects can look a though it's being exaggerated. For example women who are raped by acquaintances,dates, or boyfriends are likely to go back and have sex with them. The shock of being raped creates a heavy denial problem that leads them to try and "make it ok" in their minds. Yet if there was indication of consensual sex after an act of rape it becomes a lynch pin for the defense to unravel a case. 

 

i also don't want women crying rape when they aren't to avoid consequences with the HC (or church or parents or whatever else women or girls are hiding from). But I think that's personally a lesser problem to the current situation.   I would quickly trade out the potential for people lying over the current policy that penalizes rape victims for HC infractions. I would prefer other options, such as the ones Calm suggested. 

 

General thoughts:

To me we could do better at BYU and in the US as a whole. There are cultural factors that play heavy parts in both victim and perpetrators that aren't being addressed. We need means to open up discourse about Sex and to help women develop greater sense of sexual voice and empowerment. We need men to have a more relational education to sex as opposed to an indivialistic and now porn-centered education around sex. When I read this thread and the other I was initially angry at some of the responses (not necessarily yours MS). Now it just makes me sad. There is so much misinformation about rape, obvious biases and blindspots about victims, and even concerns about are system in general that maintains problems for both victims and even perps to a degree (we need better prevention methods and better rehabilitation methods IMHO). I hope and pray for a system that one day is better than what we have now in so many ways. But in one small and fairly simple way I think BYU could easily make it just a little better.

 

with luv, 

bd

 

[Jeanne]

It is my belief that unless something illegal happens on campus..no police should have any right to contact anyone at BYU other than for an investigation.

Edited April 18, 2016 by Jeanne

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, Russell C McGregor said:

I'm sorry Miserere, but I seem to have missed the memo: who died and made you Grand Inquisitor?

Keeping in mind that that is exclusively a Catholic office, and not a Mormon one?

I was wondering if someone was going to bring up the fact that I am Catholic discussing a policy at a Mormon university.  The way I see it, it is irrelevant.  If a Mormon came to a Catholic board to discuss the clergy abuse scandal, I wouldn't care they were Mormon.  I'd be more interested in listening to their ideas for solving a terrible tragedy.

1 hour ago, Russell C McGregor said:

What is the basis for that hasty judgement? I'm commenting upon arguments that have been put forward here regarding BYU policy. I have no problem with having compassion toward victims.

Who holds them in contempt? Certainly not me.

Your tone and diction point to an attitude that speaks volumes.  If you had compassion towards victims you wouldn't be using "victim [TM]" and discussing "rape amnesty" as something someone could cash in whenever they broke the honor code as a "get out of jail free card."  I don't believe you are so obtuse as to not be able to recognize the derision and contempt in those word choices.

 

1 hour ago, Russell C McGregor said:

And you know this -- how, exactly?

Based on your language here.

[Russell C McGregor]

10 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I was wondering if someone was going to bring up the fact that I am Catholic discussing a policy at a Mormon university.  The way I see it, it is irrelevant.  If a Mormon came to a Catholic board to discuss the clergy abuse scandal, I wouldn't care they were Mormon.  I'd be more interested in listening to their ideas for solving a terrible tragedy.

As you know, I wasn't bringing up the fact that you are a Catholic discussing a policy at a Mormon university. As you know, I was bringing up the fact that you are a Catholic trying to censor a Mormon discussion.

I am also giving a nod to the fact that people used to be granted indulgences for denouncing witches to the Inquisition; a wise and enlightened policy you seem to think we should emulate in the present case.

10 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Your tone and diction point to an attitude that speaks volumes.  If you had compassion towards victims you wouldn't be using "victim [TM]" and discussing "rape amnesty" as something someone could cash in whenever they broke the honor code as a "get out of jail free card."  I don't believe you are so obtuse as to not be able to recognize the derision and contempt in those word choices.

And I don't believe you could be so obtuse as to not be able to recognise that I am reserving my derision for the hasty and ill-formed arguments being put forward here.

But then again, maybe you could be.

That you may have no excuse for any further misrepresentations on this point: I have expressed no derision, nor any contempt, for any actual victims of any actual attacks.

No intelligent person thinks that I have, and no honest person has accused me of such.

You will kindly refrain from making such accusations in the future, thankyouverymuch.

10 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Based on your language here.

The sole world authority on my view of actual victims of actual attacks disagrees with you.

 

[Meadowchik]

47 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I've been out for the bit. My initial reaction is that that was probably not rape. But I would be hesitant to give it a definitive....because there's not a lot of explanation as to why she was afraid. If there were power dynamics at play (he was physically, emotionally, or sexually coersive and manipulative) it could be assumed she was sexually coerced into something she wouldn't normally have done. If he was your average joe boyfriend who wanted to have sex and she didn't give any indication whatsoever that she didn't want to have sex it would be difficult, legally, to state she was raped. That stated there's a problem with boundaries for both her and the male partners. Permission should be sought before increasing sexual activity, whatever that increase is. Know very little I doubt she would have had much of a case, either way (BYU or police). Rape charges can be difficult to prosecute even when the case is a proverbial slam dunk (like the specific example given of the woman raped above by calm and MN). Part of the reason is evidence issues and party of it is the intense experience that going through the legal system to get a charge is for the victims. Many drop, not because they weren't raped, but because the process is emotionally devastating. There are other contributing factors that because of our general lack of information about rape and its effects can look a though it's being exaggerated. For example women who are raped by acquaintances,dates, or boyfriends are likely to go back and have sex with them. The shock of being raped creates a heavy denial problem that leads them to try and "make it ok" in their minds. Yet if there was indication of consensual sex after an act of rape it becomes a lynch pin for the defense to unravel a case. 

 

i also don't want women crying rape when they aren't to avoid consequences with the HC (or church or parents or whatever else women or girls are hiding from). But I think that's personally a lesser problem to the current situation.   I would quickly trade out the potential for people lying over the current policy that penalizes rape victims for HC infractions. I would prefer other options, such as the ones Calm suggested. 

 

General thoughts:

To me we could do better at BYU and in the US as a whole. There are cultural factors that play heavy parts in both victim and perpetrators that aren't being addressed. We need means to open up discourse about Sex and to help women develop greater sense of sexual voice and empowerment. We need men to have a more relational education to sex as opposed to an indivialistic and now porn-centered education around sex. When I read this thread and the other I was initially angry at some of the responses (not necessarily yours MS). Now it just makes me sad. There is so much misinformation about rape, obvious biases and blindspots about victims, and even concerns about are system in general that maintains problems for both victims and even perps to a degree (we need better prevention methods and better rehabilitation methods IMHO). I hope and pray for a system that one day is better than what we have now in so many ways. But in one small and fairly simple way I think BYU could easily make it just a little better.

 

with luv, 

bd

 

I had a roommate at BYU who got pregnant and eloped with the father, presumably (my impression, anyway) to avoid an Honor Code punishment jeapardizing her schooling.  There is something so extremely disturbing about being SO afraid of punishment that she'd do that...giving an external system so much power, but also others who reinforce those fears. I think of my bishops and feel blessed...I feel like they were there to help me when I needed to confess. To not feel that and feel trapped for whatever reason is not healthy for LDS.

[Calm]

58 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

It is my belief that unless something illegal happens on campus..no police should have any right to contact anyone at BYU other than for an investigation.

It is private property.  Do you believe if police were called to your house for a party being disruptive, but not illegal, they should not be able to tell you,the owner, anything about it?

[Calm]

52 minutes ago, Russell C McGregor said:

 

That you may have no excuse for any further misrepresentations on this point: I have expressed no derision, nor any contempt, for any actual victims of any actual attacks.

No intelligent person thinks that I have, and no honest person has accused me of such.

 

The confusion from my POV is how you are defining actual victims.  Can an actual victim attempt to abuse the system in your view, for example.  It comes across to me that in your opinion, victims will act in appropriate ways and if someone doesn't, that demonstrates to you they are not actual victims.  Whether or not you actually believe this, your use of victim(TM) and some other stuff in this conversation is easiest to read this way for me.

[Damien the Leper]

[Russell C McGregor]

10 minutes ago, Valentinus said:

If you think that's witty, you're half right.

What He actually said was "Go thy way and sin no more." By the standards of the feminists here, He was cruelly abusing and victimizing her by daring to suggest that she had done anything wrong, and thus perpetuating a "rape culture."

 

[Russell C McGregor]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

The confusion from my POV is how you are defining actual victims.  Can an actual victim attempt to abuse the system in your view, for example.  It comes across to me that in your opinion, victims will act in appropriate ways and if someone doesn't, that demonstrates to you they are not actual victims.  Whether or not you actually believe this, your use of victim(TM) and some other stuff in this conversation is easiest to read this way for me.

I use constructs like "Victim[TM]" to show that I reject the implicit claim that as soon as anything bad (or one of a selected list of somethings bad) happens to someone, they join a special category of people who must be wrapped in cotton wool, whose every assertion must be believed without question, and who are exempt from any expectation that they function like competent adults.

There's no such thing as "rape culture." But in my observation, there is such a thing as "Victim culture."

And I reject it.

If anyone is willing to abandon the assumptions of "Victim culture" and discuss this issue on that basis, I'll be interested in what they have to say.