|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ack! I tried to delete the "Test post" comment I had posted here earlier today, and ended up deleting the comment from the Anon. User who correct me about the Brandeis case. I apologize. I would like to thank that poster and ask him or her to re-post a link to another story on this case that was in the previous post.
Thanks and sorry!
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday December 20, @11:51PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
By the way, this case was reported last summer by The Chronicle of Higher Education. See their coverage at this link:
http://www.chronicle.com/free/v46/i46/46a03301.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thought I would pass on this reply I had from Brandeis University. It appears to be a standard reply. Hopefully they have had a lot of 'response'.
I have not been able to find a copy of the Massachusetts supreme court ruling but I would be surprised if the remarks here were accurate. The newspaper reports both seem to indicate that the fairness of the so-called judicial process at Brandeis was not the issue, but that, fair or unfair, they failed to follow their own code of conduct. But the legal matter hardly addresses their behaviour of ruining a young man's reputation and possibly career prospects by falsely branding him a rapist.
Ironically Brandeis seems to want "fairness" from the "court of public opinion" after going to court to ensure their right to treat the male students under their protection as inhumanely and with as much injustice as their political cowardice requires.
---------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 09:30:08 -0500
To: david_byron@my-deja.com
From: "John R. Hose"
Subject: David Schaer
Dear David,
The Wall Street Journal article of December 19, 2000 by Dorothy Rabinowitz presents a very misleading version of the 1996 disciplinary case involving David Schaer.
What Mr. Schaer was unable to obtain through the court system that rejected his claims, he now seeks to achieve in the court of public opinion. Unfortunately, federal law (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) bars Brandeis University, unlike Mr. Schaer, from disclosing all of the information in its possession regarding this matter.
There are, however, several misstatements in the article that demand correction. Chief among these is the impression that Mr. Schaer did not have an opportunity to present his side of the case. This is simply not true. In the course of several hours of testimony, he gave his own statement, presented seven witnesses and was allowed to question his accuser. In the end, the Student Judicial Board of five students and two faculty members believed her story and not his.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, after reviewing Mr. Schaer's complaint, found that the University's student judicial process was fundamentally fair, that Mr. Schaer's suspension was supported by the evidence and that he was not denied his rights.
Sincerely,
John Hose
***************************************
Dr. John R. Hose
Executive Assistant to the President, and
Assistant Secretary of the Corporation
Brandeis University
Office of the President
415 South Street, MS 100
Waltham, MA 02454-9110
(781) 736-3001 TEL
(781) 736-8699 FAX
hose@brandeis.edu
**************************************
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
