This DC Council Member Wants Sexual Assault Convictions to Appear on College Transcripts

[niyad]

This DC Council Member Wants Sexual Assault Convictions to Appear on College Transcripts


DC At-Large Council member Anita Bonds proposed new legislation this week that would require colleges and universities to clearly mark the transcript of a college student convicted of sexual assault while on campus, putting it permanently on a student’s college record.



The legislation, which is being referred to as the “Scarlet Letter” bill, would require colleges and universities to indicate a conviction of sexual assault on a student’s transcript, or on the transcript of students who withdraw from school while under investigation for sexual misconduct. Furthermore, the legislation would institute a number of sexual assault preventative measures and tools for colleges and universities to handle reports of sexual assault. For example, it would require a ratio of campus sexual assault workers to enrolled students of 1 for every 2,000, as well as mandate a sexual assault prevention course for all incoming students within the first six weeks of school.

“I am outraged by the proliferation of sexual assault on our college campuses,” said Councilmember Bonds in a statement. “I am introducing this bill because we need to do much more to combat these assaults and protect the victims.” Bonds is also the head of the Democratic Party in Washington, DC, and was joined by three council members in introducing the measure.

Bonds cited a recent Post-Kaiser poll which reaffirmed the commonly-cited statistic that one in five women, or twenty percent, who attended college in the past four years say they were sexually assaulted. The data from this poll also show that students are divided about the definition of consent, that victims of sexual assault suffer from trauma, and that a small minority of victims report the crime.
. . . .

Studies have also shown that most rapists are repeat offenders; one study, supported by many others, found that though only 6 percent of men admitted to attempting or committing rape, on average those men had committed rape 5.8 times. Bonds’ proposal has many activists excited at the prospect of seriously impacting the cycle of sexual abuse on college campuses, in which often times if a student is convicted of sexual assault and expelled, they are then able to freely apply to and attend another college.

http://feminist.org/blog/index.php/2015/07/16/this-dc-council-member-wants-sexual-assault-convictions-to-appear-on-college-transcripts/

[niyad]

1. 3. . . 2. . . 1. .

[niyad]

2. . . .

[geek tragedy]

3. If it's a criminal conviction this a no-brainer

And whoever calls this a Scarlet Letter law is a jackass.

[niyad]

4. one would think so.

[geek tragedy]

5. Like the passive voice "is referred to as the Scarlet Letter law"

By whom?

We can probably guess.

[niyad]

6. pretty sure we can.

[dsc]

7. as long as this doesn't become like the sexual offender registry

where all kinds of crimes no one would have dreamed of including wind up being included and it is restricted to convicted and not just accused then this is a good idea.

[niyad]

8. you did see that the title said "CONVICTIONS", did you not?

[dsc]

12. yes which is why I said keeps limited to convictions

these things have a tendency to expand. You get the hard case where for some reason a conviction can't be obtained despite clear evidence of guilt, and then we decide to expand for this reason or that. Sexual offender registries were supposed to be limited to people who were actual sexual offenders and then you had people who took a piss in public decades ago added to them after the fact or people who were 18 and slept with a 17 year old added to them. Strict limits need to be put explicitly in place or else these things grow like kudzu and become meaningless in the process.

[niyad]

13. it would be nice if this level of concern were directed at the VICTIMS of the assaults, rapes, etc.

[dsc]

14. maybe because as recently as 2003

I was a sexual offender in many states simply for sleeping with other men. Maybe that is why I think we need to be careful about deciding who to label and when and where we label them. I can easily see young black men having major problems with giving police even more power than they currently have to make their lives not matter very much. There is a reason we protect people accused of crimes in this country. The reasons are Fergerson, Staten Island, Cleveland, Texas, Charleston, and a whole lot more. Imagine giving white prosecutors (and a vast majority of them are white) unfettered power to label any black male they wanted a sexual predator on the basis of so and so said they did it. If this isn't limited to convictions, then the list would indeed be giving prosecutors that power.

[niyad]

16. the title of the article says "CONVICTIONS".

[dsc]

17. then you should have no problems with people saying it should remain limited to convictions

which is what I said.

[niyad]

19. since it clearly says that, why do you keep on as though it did not?

[dsc]

21. do you have a crystal ball?

I sure as hell don't. I have no idea what such a registry would stay at, and neither do you. We have a tendency to pass laws like this and then see them expand and expand and expand. Look at RICO as one example. The PATRIOT act is another example. That is why I say it needs to be limited to convictions and stay limited to them.

[Bad Thoughts]

9. As long as it is germane to the university, then yes

Anything that happens on the university and the area patrolled by the university policy; university affiliated organizations (including off-campus); in the performance of university related activities (including things like athletic events and conferences at other academic institutions).

If not, it is strictly a police matter. Colleges and universities are already strained enough to be burdened to investigate and check the activities of students that are outside the context of the university.

[Comrade Grumpy]

10. Shouldn't we attach ALL criminal convictions to college transcripts?

If not, why not?

[niyad]

11. it is amazing the responses about why this isn't a good idea.

[geek tragedy]

15. Those that implicate the safety of other students

are probably a distinct category.

[Lee-Lee]

18. So just sexual assault? Not regular assault? DUI? Vehicular Manslaughter?

What about non-sexual domestic violence?

Why not all criminal convictions?

It's very interesting that this is proposed at the same time that there is a growing movement to discourage or even prohibit criminal background checks for employment applications and such.

Will the schools be conducting background checks on all applicants and putting prior offenses on transcripts?

This opens up a ton of questions- but I don't think it should just sexual assault if they go down this road. Regular assault, domestic violence, etc are also worth noting.

[Comrade Grumpy]

20. No, I don't think this is a good idea. College transcripts are not criminal records.

And it singles out only one category of crime. Sexual assaulters would get what is in effect a "DO NOT HIRE" stamp on their transcripts, but murderers would not? Arsonists would not? Armed robbers would not?

Also, think about it for a minute: Someone graduates from college with a conviction for sexual assault. That means that person has been convicted of his crime and, presumably, has served his sentence (or he wouldn't be in college). It seems like this would destroy any prospects for rehabilitation for someone who has already served his debt to society.

And, come to think of it, if someone has been convicted of a serious sexual assault, they are more likely to be in prison than in college. Unless they've already served their sentence.

I understand the impulse behind this, but this doesn't seem like the correct response.

[Nye Bevan]

22. So kind of like an extra sex offenders register,

except that it's only for college students, and you're on it for the rest of your life?

[aikoaiko]

23. If she really means on-campus rapes only, this is very limited.

The last data I saw on college rapes indicated they were mostly happening off campus in off-campus housing or at or near parties.

But yes, if aware of judicial action, schools could do criminal background checks to verify conviction.

Although expensive schools really should be doing national and state of residence criminal background checks on students before admitting them.

Employers are already do it for job applicants.