A devastating article by Sabrina Rubin Erdely published yesterday in Rolling Stone described a brutal alleged gang rape of a first-year college student and asserted that UVA routinely downplays sexual assaults because “nobody wants to send their daughter to the rape school.”
Jackie was just starting her freshman year at the University of Virginia when she was brutally assaulted by seven men at a frat party. When she tried to hold them accountable, a whole new kind of abuse began.
Rather than immediately contact the police when she learned of the allegation, this is how Dean Nicole Eramo, head of UVA’s Sexual Misconduct Board, responded:
When Jackie finished talking, Eramo comforted her, then calmly laid out her options. If Jackie wished, she could file a criminal complaint with police. Or, if Jackie preferred to keep the matter within the university, she had two choices. She could file a complaint with the school’s Sexual Misconduct Board, to be decided in a “formal resolution” with a jury of students and faculty, and a dean as judge. Or Jackie could choose an “informal resolution,” in which Jackie could simply face her attackers in Eramo’s presence and tell them how she felt; Eramo could then issue a directive to the men, such as suggesting counseling. Eramo presented each option to Jackie neutrally, giving each equal weight. She assured Jackie there was no pressure – whatever happened next was entirely her choice.
Rape is a felony, and one of the most serious violent crimes that can be committed. Colleges should immediately report all such incidents to law enforcement authorities. Let the courts sort out innocence and guilt. If schools want to pursue additional actions on their own, that is a separate discussion.
Lo and behold, that is exactly what UVA — or UVrApe, as it is apparently now known by some — decided to do today, a day after the article was published. Rolling Stone reports that the president of the university in a statement today “asked Charlottesville police to formally investigate the sexual assault on Jackie and [said] that the university would cooperate with the authorities.”
There are a lot of colleges and universities here in Massachusetts. They may be ivory towers, but they are not worlds unto themselves where the writ of criminal law does not travel. Felony crimes must be reported to law enforcement authorities for prosecution and not downplayed or swept under the PR rug.
Christopher says
…is exactly why I have long thought the victims should skip the university altogether and report to the local police.
Mark L. Bail says
point Ernie made as well. As the father of three daughters, I’m inclined to agree.
tedf says
The article as a whole is damning, but it’s not clear to me that what the dean did in the passage you quote was wrong. He explained the young woman’s options to her and said that the choice on how to proceed was entirely hers. Isn’t this empowering the alleged victim? Wouldn’t it be worse to presume to make her decisions for her?
theloquaciousliberal says
… if she had instead said something like: “It is unacceptable, wrong and a criminal felony that these men assaulted you. In cases like this, Jackie, we strongly encourage you to file criminal charges with the Richmond police. It’s ultimately your decision but, if you choose to file charges, please know that the University and this office will join you in and assist you in filing a complaint, finding an attorney, and throughout the entire process. If you decide that you prefer not to file charges, there are alternative processes – both formal and informal – available through the school’s Sexual Misconduct Board.”
Wouldn’t that be better? Isn’t that more empowering?
tedf says
So the issue is that the dean presented the options in a neutral way rather than expressing a preference for one of them? Okay, but that doesn’t seem like the kind of thing to be outraged about. As opposed to the general culture on the campus explored in the article, which is of course outrageous.
Bob Neer says
To keep people safe. I outlined my thinking below, and I’d be interested in your response. A few prosecutions of university administrators as accessories after the fact would produce a dramatic change in attention to the importance of taking crimes seriously.
tedf says
My fundamental reaction is a little bit of head-scratching. I haven’t hunted around for links, but I believe I’ve read credible advocates for rape victims or alleged victims arguing that whether to participate in the criminal law process should be the victim’s choice, given the trauma of the crime.
centralmassdad says
But the institution has a hopeless conflict of interest, and can’t be in the position of advising anything at all.
The response has to be: “You are telling me that you have been the victim of a violent crime. You should immediately seek medical treatment, and talk to the police.”
Once the institution starts the “here, let us support and advise you” process, they are inevitably going to steer things in the no-bad-press direction. They have to direct the victim to an outside party to give that advice. Otherwise, things like this will always happen.
Al says
If a crime is committed on a college campus, it’s still a crime and not just an infraction of school rules. Once the campus police, usually the first responders in these cases, have been informed, the local police should always be informed, and take primary control of any investigation into alleged criminality. Any scandal we have heard about from Penn State to Florida State to UVA, have always been due to violation of that principal and an effort by the organization to look the other way and minimize any negative publicity.
Christopher says
…that the same motivation doesn’t exist for towns (and obviously I’m not complaining)? If a college doesn’t address this properly because they don’t want people to think sexual assault happens to them, couldn’t a town by the same logic try to avoid the negative publicity and reputation as a place where these crimes occur?
centralmassdad says
Certainly this crime is under-reported and under-prosecuted everywhere. Maybe this is a partial explanation for that. But generally, it seems to me that law enforcement generally has a personal interest in law enforcement– police (outside of MA at least, ha) aren’t promoted for saying they have nothing to do, and no DA or ADA advances her career by not prosecuting criminals. So I think the motivations of police and prosecutor are different than the motivations of a university dean.
Once we see university officials bragging about how many students they expel, and that 80% of all matters brought to their attention result in an expulsion, then I might think otherwise.
howlandlewnatick says
… to accessory after the fact? On the federal side it is:
“Whoever, knowing that an offense has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact; one who knowing a felony to have been committed by another, receives, relieves, comforts, or assists the felon in order to hinder the felon’s apprehension, trial, or punishment.” U.S.C. 18
Wonder what it is in Virginia? At some point protecting one’s own nest becomes preventing a crime from being properly reported.
jconway says
To me, my dad, and most people-this should be common sense and second nature. Sadly, it seems many people in power are just not convinced rape is a serious crime, probably because women and children are the predominant victims. But those that cover up are just as guilty as the perpetrators in my book.
centralmassdad says
I am not sure that people think it isn’t serious. I think that people feel that, as suggested by tedf, frog-marching the victim to the ER for a rape kit might be just as bad, and so the first impulse to be gentle is eventually overwhelmed, probably not even consciously, by the institution’s interest in no bad press.
I don’t think that universities are filled with malicious misogynists as they are with well-intentioned people trying to navigate a conflict of interest and failing. They shouldn’t be in that position. They should punt, immediately, just like a lawyer with a client conflict.
Bob Neer says
Imagine the scenario if the student had said she observed a murder. Would the Dean have been justified to say: here are your options … Of course not: they should say: we need to contact the police immediately! And we can also separately discuss what the university should do internally. That is what colleges must do in the case of rape: it is a serious crime that needs to be investigated and prosecuted. And that is what UVA eventually did. It is outrageous that it requires national publicity to make it happen.
tedf says
… but what if the victim does not want to pursue criminal charges? It seems to me you are saying that’s not really an option on the table. What you’re objecting to is not how the dean framed the choice, but that she gave the student a choice at all. Maybe that’s right, but I don’t know that all rape victims’ advocates would agree with you.
Bob Neer says
There is a broad social interest in investigating and prosecuting serious crimes. Rapists shouldn’t be allowed to roam about any more than murderers, thugs who rob people on the street, or other violent criminals. Victims should be supported, not put on trial themselves, and helped to find a measure of justice by the full power of our law enforcement system.
centralmassdad says
Her options would have been explained by law enforcement.
Outside the academic environment, that is what happens, and victims make whatever choice they want anyway.
The difficult questions arise after the victim declines to press charges with the police, or after the DA concludes that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute, or a prosecution results in acquittal. Then comes the thorny issues of how the institution handles it in its own internal quasi-judicial proceedings.
But it sure seems to me that this was not a difficult question: the first call is to the police, not to a dean. If it is to the dean, the dean’s first reaction is to say, I am the wrong person to call, use my phone to call the police.
jconway says
The Catholic Church, now colleges like Penn State and UVA, private high schools like Horace Mann, the US military, and probably many private sector enterprises all respond to this with cover ups and sweeping crimes under the rug. For too long the onus has been on victims to report. There should be no in house anything, being in the cops as soon as you are made aware of the accusations and let law enforcement do it’s job. This shouldn’t be hard.
centralmassdad says
This thread may have dropped below Page 1, but I saw something today that explains the bizzare procedure that has us all scratching our heads above: Why is rape, a violent felony, treated by universities as if it were an internal matter, not unlike cheating on a test?
Turns out that Title IX requires the procedure, as an anti-discrimination measure. Universities must have internal procedures to address instances of “sexual harassment.” But “sexual harassment” has no upper bound– it includes everything from non-criminal conduct up to and including violent rape by force, and everything in between. And the reasoning appears to be that law enforcement is a blunt instrument that might further victimize the victim, etc.
So the initial process, and the conflict of interest that we have noted, is one created by law.
Perhaps it might be time to re-think that particular matter under Title IX.
petr says
Cheating on a test involves somebody coming forward and making an accusation, saying “I saw so-and-so cheat.” Often it is a professor or TA… but it’s as likely to be a fellow student. At UVA, despite a gang-rape in a crowded fraternity house, why is the onus upon the victim, only, to speak… THAT is what I find bizarre
The most astounding thing about the rape allegations described in the Rolling Stone article is that it is clear that, at least, ‘Drew’, the facilitator of the rape, does not actually believe he committed a violent felony. There were, according to the article, 7 rapists and 2 onlookers, who raped the victim over three hours and beat her into unconsciousness and then left her alone. Did no one wonder were ‘Drew’ and the others were for three hours? Did no one stumble into the room accidentally? She was alone in the room, unconscious, for a time after the rape. Did no one else enter the room during that time to find an unconscious bleeding women? There was also a fraternity house full of party-goers, a portion of whom must have taken note of a beaten and bleeding women trying to flee after regaining consciousness. Days later ‘Drew’ approached the victim either unaware of the trauma he had caused or cruelly all too aware…
There is absolutely no way that a large number of people at UVA were unaware that the victim had been brutally raped by 7 men. Whatever they tell themselves to justify their in-action, doesn’t mitigate their involvement: they are either witnesses or conspirators.
Why, under these circumstances, is it necessary for the victim — and only the victim– to testify? Will no one come forward on her behalf and say, “I saw it”… ? Or, “I was there”…? Where was “See something? Say something.” …?