'And colleges and universities should get the hell out of the criminal-justice business'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Back in September, I wrote in the magazine about the problems posed for colleges and universities by the Department of Education’s new rules governing how they must respond to allegations of sexual assault. Over the weekend, those chickens came home to roost, big-time, as the news spread that Yale University quarterback Patrick Witt had been accused of sexual assault.

You may remember Witt; he was lauded nationally for choosing to forgo an interview for a Rhodes Scholarship in order to play in his final college football game (against Harvard), which was scheduled for the same day. On Thursday, the New York Times reported that Witt withdrew his candidacy for the scholarship after the Rhodes Trust “learned through unofficial channels that a fellow student had accused Witt of sexual assault.” The Times story, written by Richard Pérez-Peña, is rather extraordinary. For example, it includes these lines:

“Witt’s accuser has not gone to the police, nor filed what Yale considers a formal complaint. The New York Times has not spoken with her and does not know her name.”
...

Witt’s sports-agency representative issued a rebuttal of the Times‘s version of events. The usual suspects are engaging in elaborate conspiracy theories, and shouting about rape apologists. But here’s the takeaway, in the end: A young man’s reputation is in tatters based on an anonymous allegation that he committed sexual assault. And this, folks, is why we need to have one simple, standard way of judging whether sexual assault is sexual assault or not. There should be proof—good proof, not just a hairsbreadth of proof—that a crime has been committed. That proof should be given to police. And colleges and universities should get the hell out of the criminal-justice business.'