IMAGINE this: You have been dating someone for a short while, and not long into the relationship, this individual begins to demonstrate abusive tendencies. He or she demands to know where you are at all times, is easily angered, belittles you with his or her words, and makes you feel guilty for taking your own needs into account. He or she even physically assaults you on occasion, apologizing afterward and blaming it on a fit of passion. Eventually, the relationship ends, and while in retrospect, you feel that something about this individual's conduct toward you was wrong, you suppress your feelings and keep quiet about your thoughts.
Now imagine that two months have passed and you are beginning to recover from the maltreatment that you suffered. You gather your strength and decide to take action against the individual that abused you. You go to the University Judiciary Committee to file a complaint, only to be informed that unfortunately, too much time has passed and there is no longer anything they can do. This is horribly unfair and practically ridiculous, but as the UJC policies stand today, this is exactly what would happen in this type of situation.However, UJC is considering a proposal that would correct this problem. For obvious reasons, this needs to pass as soon as possible.
The first of the UJC's 12 Standards of Conduct condemns "physical or sexual assault of any person on University-owned or leased property, at any University-sanctioned function, at the permanent or temporary local residence of a University student, faculty member, employee, or visitor, or in the city of Charlottesville or Albemarle County." This is a well-grounded and well-intentioned standard and is flawed only in its limitation. Should an assault take place, the victim is given only 45 days to report it. After this period, the UJC will not act in the victim's defense.
The logic behind this restriction is that the rights of the accused could be compromised should too great a window of time be allowed for the reporting of such an incident. While there is some merit to this thinking, we need to remember that this is not a simple process.
|
Should someone be accused of this type of assault, the accused will be given a councilman to act in his or her defense and will go to trial. If the alleged victim should exaggerate past events to gain revenge or in retaliation to some recent and unrelated event, this will come out during the proceedings. In addition, having only a short time to report assaults would not eliminate the possibility for the victim to make spiteful accusations; the chance still remains that someone could fabricate an incident in the hope of gaining revenge on another individual. In light of these factors, the time limitation placed on the filing of charges of assault serves no purpose.
In addition, this kind of restriction has a great potential to harm individuals involved in these types of cases by denying them the legal support that they should be entitled to. It is logical to assume that many victims of assault require a significant amount of time to come to terms with their experiences. By acknowledging only those cases that are reported within 45 days of their occurrence, UJC asks people to accelerate beyond what their psychological coping mechanisms may be capable of. This very likely excludes the possibility of taking action against the most serious cases of assault, as these probably would take longer to begin to recover from. Extending the time window for reporting cases of this nature would cater to the issue at hand by recognizing the need for a coping period. It also would help to make a stronger stand against perpetrators of assault and would in no way threaten the rights of the accused. Justice would be served in trial one year after the incident in question just as it would be served four days subsequent to its occurrence.
Members of the UJC Statute of Limitations Ad-Hoc Committee have just presented a proposal that would, if enacted, extend the period for reporting cases of assault to one year. Should two-thirds majority of UJC representatives approve this proposal, it will be passed on to the student body for ratification in the spring. UJC needs to act on its realization of the necessity of extending the time frame for reporting incidents of violence and pass this proposal. In turn, when the time comes for ratification, we as University students need to show our support for victims of assault and make sure that we vote to pass this modification of Standard No. 1 of the 12 Standards of Conduct.
(Laura Parcells' column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at lparcells@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 3 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
