THE UNIVERSITY'S revised sexual assault policies, released last week, demonstrate a substantial and necessary change from previous policy, with an increased focus on the prevention of sexual offenses while providing adequate protection and support for the victims of sexual assault. This new policy, however, falls short of promising a substantial change in punishment for those convicted by the University's Sexual Assault Board.
Despite significant changes in the areas of prevention and victim support, the most looming shortcoming of the new policy is the sanctions for offenders convicted by the SAB. The new policy states "The panel may impose any sanction that it finds to be fair and proportionate to the violation ... including disciplinary probation, suspension and expulsion."
The policy of "considering" expulsion for sexual assault does not go far enough in punishing offenders. The discretion granted to the Sexual Assault Board in cases of conviction is a stark contrast to the Honor Committee sanction of expulsion for a conviction of lying, cheating or stealing.
The policy should be further revised so that a conviction of sexual assault -- which is defined as intentional and committed by force and includes ignoring another person's objections, using "violence, threat or intimidation" and intentionally impairing another through the use of alcohol or drugs -- results in immediate expulsion.
A mass e-mail by Vice President for Student Affairs Pat Lampkin was sent out to the entire student body on March 16, outlining the fundamental changes in policy. More detailed guidelines were posted on the VPSA Web site.
Among the revisions highlighted by Lampkin is the addition of a definition for "sexual misconduct," considered a less serious offense than sexual assault. Sexual misconduct is defined by the new guidelines as being committed "without intent to harm," where the offender "by failing to correctly assess the circumstances... believes unreasonably that effective consent was given."
A definition for "effective consent" was also added to the new policy, requiring a "voluntary agreement to engage in mutually agreed upon sexual activity".
Lampkin, in a March 17 University Relations news release, stressed the goal of the new procedures is to "serve first as a prevention tool."
The new guidelines promise to set up a Web site which will provide information to the University community. A campus-wide awareness initiative focusing on increasing knowledge of prevention and defining what constitutes misconduct and assault should supplement the Web site.
A Web site, www.uvavictimsofrape.com, was started by an anonymous "concerned U.Va. parent" in March 2004 and is supported by several University CIOs, including Sexual Assault Peer Advocacy. The Web site states "in the past three years, 38 students have been expelled for cheating or lying; in the same span, 60 U.Va. students reported they'd been sexually assaulted." Not a single student has been expelled from the University within the past five years due to an SAB conviction.
To increase the number of victims who report the crime, Claire Kaplan, director of Sexual and Domestic Violence Services, believes that the University community needs to continue working towards a "safe climate for survivors to come forward." Kaplan stated that she has personally been aware of "more than one situation" where a survivor has personally known other victims but the victims have refused to speak up.
Kaplan wishes "we could be stronger in language in relation to punishment." The new policy promises that all cases finding a student guilty of sexual assault will result in the SAB's "consideration of the sanctions of suspension and expulsion" which demonstrates a shift in policy. However, the promises of consideration of harsh punitive measures don't quite go far enough in promising justice for the victims.
In cases of sexual misconduct, which are less serious offenses than assault, it is important to maintain probation and suspension as potential punishments. Those convicted of sexual assault, which is a serious crime, however, do not deserve to be in the "community of trust" and should be immediately expelled.
Although laudable and significant change in the University's sexual assault policy has occurred, the University is continuing to hold a double standard. Plagiarism is punished by expulsion but a student convicted of sexual assault can still graduate. The policy should be further revised so that the only sanction for sexual assault is immediate expulsion.
Sophia Brumby is a Cavalier Daily viewpoint writer.
Read More
WILLIAMS: The future of Virginia is on the ballot this fall
By Ryan Williams | 23 hours agoHence, voters must make it their top priority to think critically and closely as they decide who their ballot will support this fall.
PARTING SHOT: On the art of walking and chewing gum
By Nathan Onibudo | 3 days agoStudent journalism, and maybe even life more generally, is about holding space for multiple conflicting truths.
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | 3 days agoWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
