Rights of the accused cannot be sacrificed to make their accusers feel comfortable

Article here. Excerpt:

'The University of California-San Diego’s treatment of a student accused of sexual misconduct was not only unfair in the eyes of a state judge, but also to the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times.

The editorial generally supports the overhaul of sexual-misconduct policies and investigations at the behest of the Department of Education. “But in revamping their procedures, some schools have set up campus tribunals that curtail the basic rights of the accused,” it says:

"...
Hearings like this one are not criminal proceedings, and they cannot result in prison sentences or other criminal sanctions. But fundamental due process rights should apply even in quasi-judicial settings. Most sexual assault victims don’t lie, of course — and they should certainly be treated with respect and sensitivity — but the rights of the accused cannot be sacrificed to make their accusers feel comfortable. The accused deserve a full and fair opportunity to cross-examine, ask questions, challenge statements and look into the eyes of their accusers."

Note what’s left out of the editorial: the unreliable 2-8 percent false-accusation statistic that’s increasingly deployed to defend campus investigative practices that are heavily tilted against accused students. The editorial board members probably felt safer using their own “preponderance of the evidence” standard and figured that where there’s smoke, there’s fire, 50.01 percent of the time.'