Campus judiciaries for students accused of sexual assault are often unjust

A University of North Dakota student faced sexual assault allegations after a January 2010 incident. According to a U.S. News report, law enforcement refused to bring charges against the young man and instead charged the person’s accuser with filing a false report. Despite the findings of the law enforcement’s investigation, the school’s tribunal suspended the young man and handed down a three-year ban from the campus. The student repeatedly requested that the university review its decision, which it finally did after a year and a half and determined that their ruling was unsubstantiated.

At schools in Minnesota and across the country, students accused of committing a crime face the ruling of an often ill-equipped campus judiciary that can hand down punishments with lifelong repercussions.

How campus tribunals work

A June 2014 Lost Angeles Times report notes that more often than not, a campus judiciary uses just one investigator who looks into the complaint. Then, unlike a criminal trial, a panel of people determines the fate of the person accused of sexual assault often based solely on a preponderance of evidence as opposed to clear and convincing proof.

To complicate matters, The Witherspoon Institute reports that many universities, such as Columbia University, Duke University and Stanford University, broadly define sexual assault to include generalities such as sex after the consumption of alcohol. The Los Angeles Times report points out that a number of the young men who were suspended or expelled after campus judiciaries at these universities found them guilty of assault are now filing suit. The students claim that their rights to a fair hearing were violated. In one instance, a young man faced a panel of three people who were all friends of the accuser’s father.

Serious consequences

When a college finds a student guilty of sexual assault or misconduct, the resulting punishments can have lasting effects that include the following:

  • Expulsion from school
  • Banishment from campus
  • A tarnished reputation

Perhaps the most serious consequence is that a student’s permanent record will reflect that he or she was found guilty of sexual assault. That can limit someone’s opportunities for housing, education and employment. Without a fair hearing, students lack the opportunity to properly defend themselves and protect their futures.

Someone who is accused of a crime as serious as a sexual misconduct deserves the right to due process. Campus judiciaries often lack the expertise to determine someone’s guilt and deliver punishments that should be reserved for those who are convicted of criminal charges. Anyone with questions regarding sexual assault on college campuses should consult with a defense attorney.

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.