Report: FBI Investigated Claims That Bob Knight Groped Women

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

History? I don't think the history book has been closed on this issue. And as people become aware of how far out of whack this has gotten we'll see some common sense adjustments.

Sorry if I insulted you - didn't intend to - but I stand by my belief - the idea that a person with an ,08 BAC is incapable of consenting to have sex with anyone with a lower BAC doesn't make sense to me. And I'd be willing to bet my opinion is the majority one by a wide margin.

Again, its not about their decision to do something legal. Its about the other person's decision to do something illegal (or against the student code of conduct). And we actually talked about the opinion on .08 BAC. Eng estimated it would be about 50/50. I don't know if its that much but more people agree with than you might think. Actually in my experience when I've talked to people it depends on how you phrase it. If I say "Too drunk to drive = too drunk to consent to sex." People tend to agree. When I say ".08 BAC." They tend to disagree. Same people. I think this is mostly from anxiety of never being able to know exactly what a person's BAC is.....and the scary reality that most people have no idea what too drunk to drive looks like.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

TAMU, a couple points about your argument:

1) Using.08 BAC (or any BAC) as a standard in your arguments is really difficult for people to accept.  Nobody is walking around with a breathalyzer and measuring the other person's BAC in front of witnesses.  I understand universities want to use an objective standard and .08 is a common legal standard.  But the opposing viewpoint is this is an unrealistic expectation and burden to put on the student.  There are so many variables that it is hard to ascertain what someone's BAC is without sophisticated tools such as a breathalyzer. (If you need me to expound on this, let me know.)

2) I understand that college campuses have to protect students from predatory acts.  Getting someone drunk to the point of unconsciousness or mental incapacitation for the purposes of having sex with that person is a real problem.  There are also situations where two people get drunk and have sex with no premeditated intent.  In these situations, I get the impression that the university focuses on when sexual advances are initiated while opponents want to focus on whether or not there is active intent to get someone drunk to have sex with them.

3) There is a lack of transparency in the process.  People outside of the university setting do not have a clear picture of university policy.  That breeds distrust.  I understand there are privacy concerns and regulations restricting the university from talking specifically about cases.  But if there was better awareness of the policy and understanding of the process, people would trust that due process.

4) Universities may be consistently applying the same standard individually but not collectively.  If universities have differing codes of conduct, it appears to the outsider that the process is not being consistently applied. A clear, public, federally mandated policy would help the general population know whether or not due process being served.  But as long as universities have individually set rules, the public has a hard time knowing if universities are acting consistently and in good faith.

5) Some people are under the impression that universities are more concerned with covering their backsides than actually protecting students and serving due process.  To them, it appears avoiding lawsuits trump the rights of the accused.

[CTWarrior]

I lean to Lenny's way of thinking with regards to this discussion.

Probably a dumb question with an easy answer I'm not thinking of, but how can you determine blood alcohol level at time of consent if an assault is reported after the fact (as in the next day), which I imagine is the normally the case?  What good does a 0.08 BAC standard do if you don't have a realistic way of measuring it?

[Pakuni]

I lean to Lenny's way of thinking with regards to this discussion.

Probably a dumb question with an easy answer I'm not thinking of, but how can you determine blood alcohol level at time of consent if an assault is reporte*d after the fact (as in the next day), which I imagine is the normally the case?  What good does a 0.08 BAC standard do if you don't have a realistic way of measuring it?

Toxicologists can reverse extrapolate if they know what was ingested and when. It's done, for example, in DUI cases when a blood draw is taken a several hours after a crash.

[GGGG]

4) Universities may be consistently applying the same standard individually but not collectively.  If universities have differing codes of conduct, it appears to the outsider that the process is not being consistently applied. A clear, public, federally mandated policy would help the general population know whether or not due process being served.  But as long as universities have individually set rules, the public has a hard time knowing if universities are acting consistently and in good faith.

I think it is perfectly acceptable for different universities to have different codes of conduct.  For instance, a Baptist institution could have a zero tolerance for any alcohol consumption by its students.  As long as the codes do not run counter to federal and state law, I don't see a problem with that.

[CTWarrior]

Toxicologists can reverse extrapolate if they know what was ingested and when. It's done, for example, in DUI cases when a blood draw is taken a several hours after a crash.

Thanks for the answer.  Are universities really using toxicologists to measure this? 

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I think it is perfectly acceptable for different universities to have different codes of conduct.  For instance, a Baptist institution could have a zero tolerance for any alcohol consumption by its students.  As long as the codes do not run counter to federal and state law, I don't see a problem with that.

I agree.  I was talking about a very specific part of the code of conduct, sexual assault.  Some people would prefer a consistent federal standard and process with no variance by university.

[GGGG]

Thanks for the answer.  Are universities really using toxicologists to measure this? 

No.  They have no right to seek this information.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

TAMU, a couple points about your argument:

1) Using.08 BAC (or any BAC) as a standard in your arguments is really difficult for people to accept.  Nobody is walking around with a breathalyzer and measuring the other person's BAC in front of witnesses.  I understand universities want to use an objective standard and .08 is a common legal standard.  But the opposing viewpoint is this is an unrealistic expectation and burden to put on the student.  There are so many variables that it is hard to ascertain what someone's BAC is without sophisticated tools such as a breathalyzer. (If you need me to expound on this, let me know.)

Agreed. That's why BAC is the theoretical line. It is where a person goes from drunk to incapacitated. The standard actually used in conduct cases is "should a reasonable person have known that the person was incapacitated." In other words, was the complrightnt exhibiting enough visible signs of incapacitation or was the accused aware of how many drinks the complrightnt had consumed.

2) I understand that college campuses have to protect students from predatory acts.  Getting someone drunk to the point of unconsciousness or mental incapacitation for the purposes of having sex with that person is a real problem.  There are also situations where two people get drunk and have sex with no premeditated intent.  In these situations, I get the impression that the university focuses on when sexual advances are initiated while opponents want to focus on whether or not there is active intent to get someone drunk to have sex with them.

Since when does intent matter? If hit and kill someone with my car I certainly didn't intend to do it. I still need to be held accountable for my actions.

3) There is a lack of transparency in the process.  People outside of the university setting do not have a clear picture of university policy.  That breeds distrust.  I understand there are privacy concerns and regulations restricting the university from talking specifically about cases.  But if there was better awareness of the policy and understanding of the process, people would trust that due process.

Well I'm certainly never going to advocate for getting rid of privacy laws on these matters. Those laws are in place to protect the accused as much as they are to protect the comprightnt. The only reason we hear about cases like the USC one is because the accused chooses to make themselves known. As for making the policies more public....they are public. You can log onto any universities website and they will explain the conduct process and the student code to you in explicit detail. They aren't trying to hide anything. People and the media (sorry MU82) just don't take the time to read or understand the rules.

4) Universities may be consistently applying the same standard individually but not collectively.  If universities have differing codes of conduct, it appears to the outsider that the process is not being consistently applied. A clear, public, federally mandated policy would help the general population know whether or not due process being served.  But as long as universities have individually set rules, the public has a hard time knowing if universities are acting consistently and in good faith.

Well there is a national standard. That's what Title IX is. Universities are then free to interpret that standard and create their policies based on that. Students can then challenge those standards with the Office of Civil Rights within the Department of Education if they think the standards are unreasonable. To create a 100% uniform conduct system across all universities is quite literally impossible and wouldn't be ethical. As Sultan pointed out, why would a public land grant institution like TAMU and a private Baptist institution like Baylor have the same rules? Plus, a system that works at a giant school like UW would not work the same for a small institution like Marquette. Think of it like the states having different rules. On some matters the state (or the university) knows better what works for their constituents than the federal government (or the Department of Education). And again, these rules are readily available to anyone who is interested. They can research themselves whether or not we are being fair and consistent.

5) Some people are under the impression that universities are more concerned with covering their backsides than actually protecting students and serving due process.  To them, it appears avoiding lawsuits trump the rights of the accused.

But all the lawsuits are coming from accused students who are found responsible. If they were truly concerned about avoiding lawsuits and covering their backsides they would do everything in their power to favor the accused. The preferred narrative by universities is that sexual assault never happens on their campus. Finding students responsible for sexual assault goes against their best interests from a public relations standpoint.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I lean to Lenny's way of thinking with regards to this discussion.

Probably a dumb question with an easy answer I'm not thinking of, but how can you determine blood alcohol level at time of consent if an assault is reported after the fact (as in the next day), which I imagine is the normally the case?  What good does a 0.08 BAC standard do if you don't have a realistic way of measuring it?

I'm sure what Pakuni said is possible, but we do not use toxicologists. .08 BAC is just the scientific measure for when a person goes from drunk to incapacitated. Therefore it is the theoretical line. The standard used in conduct cases is "should a reasonable person have known that the other person was incapacitated."

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I agree.  I was talking about a very specific part of the code of conduct, sexual assault.  Some people would prefer a consistent federal standard and process with no variance by university.

That's what Title IX is. Its up to universities to interpret it and their interpretations can be challenged and overruled.

You also have to remember that even the criminal process doesn't have a consistent federal standard and process with no variance when it comes to sexual assault. Individual states decide what they define as consent and sexual assault. Universities must also abide by state rules. What you are asking for is impossible.

[StillAWarrior]

In other words, was the complrightnt exhibiting enough visible signs of incapacitation...

I'm curious how this is interpreted.  For purposes of such matters, is there a difference between "incapacitation" and "intoxication?"

[Lennys Tap]

.08 BAC is just the scientific measure for when a person goes from drunk to incapacitated. Therefore it is the theoretical line. The standard used in conduct cases is "should a reasonable person have known that the other person was incapacitated."

.08 is the level at which the government has determined that the average person's reaction time is impaired enough that he or she shouldn't operate a motorized vehicle. It is NOT a "scientific measure for when a person goes from drunk to incapacitated". Sorry, but that's just absurd.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

.08 is the level at which the government has determined that the average person's reaction time is impaired enough that he or she shouldn't operate a motorized vehicle. It is NOT a "scientific measure for when a person goes from drunk to incapacitated". Sorry, but that's just absurd.

Again Lenny, you resort to insults and barbs. Tone it down.

You are incorrect on this. Between .07 and .09 BAC is when judgement and self-control are reduced and memory and reason become impaired. That is incapacitation as defined in Title IX.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I'm curious how this is interpreted.  For purposes of such matters, is there a difference between "incapacitation" and "intoxication?"

Intoxication is a general term for under the influence of alcohol. Incapacitaiton is the point where someone is so intoxicated that their reason, judgement, and self control has been impaired. So all people who are incapciated are intoxicated but not all people who are intoxicated are incapacitated.

[mu03eng]

StillaWarrior, I appreciate the level headed response. I think you and Lenny are trying to say the same thing, but I can't tell when Lenny always resorts to insults and barbs. Thus my response isn't always elegant.

I think you do a good job of laying out what a lot of the confusion around this topic is. What I have been trying to communicate (possibly poorly) is that it does not matter what the decision of the incapacitated person is. What they are deciding to do is not a crime. Choosing to consent to sex with a sober person is not a crime. But a sober person (or more sober person) choosing to have sex with some who is incapacitated by alcohol is now against the rules at all universities that accept federal funds...and is starting to become law across the country. So while both of them may be making a decision that they can be held to, only one of them is deciding to do something that violates the student code of conduct.

That being said, the situation of someone being right around .08 BAC and enthusiastically consenting to sex and then changing their mind the next morning is so rare it can be considered a myth. If that is truly what happened 99% of those cases are never going to get reported to anyone and a majority of them would probably be fine with the activity that occurred. As we discussed before, when sex and alcohol combine usually no one gets hurt but people get hurt enough that I think it needs to be addressed. The vast majority of these (at least that I have seen) are ones where either one individual is well beyond the .08 mark or there were other forms of force or coercion used in addition to alcohol. The couple of cases I have seen where someone may or may not have been over .08 bac and we can establish that they did "consent" to sex, the accused has been found not responsible. Because while .08 is the theoretical line, the actual standard used is would a reasonable person been able to determine that the other person was incapacitated.

One thing you point out here which I think I'd like some guidance based on your experience....percentage-wise how many cases are purely one party was too intoxicated to consent and the other person "knew" and how many cases might have that as a component but there was also an element of coercion be it physical or verbal? I'd have to think the later scenario is vastly more likely to result in some sort of finding than the former.

General statement as a result of all of this.....culturally people just need to understand, if you and/or the other party have been drinking and you don't really know each other, don't have sex in any form. Nothing good can come of it.

[jsglow]

One thing you point out here which I think I'd like some guidance based on your experience....percentage-wise how many cases are purely one party was too intoxicated to consent and the other person "knew" and how many cases might have that as a component but there was also an element of coercion be it physical or verbal? I'd have to think the later scenario is vastly more likely to result in some sort of finding than the former.

General statement as a result of all of this.....culturally people just need to understand, if you and/or the other party have been drinking and you don't really know each other, don't have sex in any form. Nothing good can come of it.

True dat.

[mu03eng]

You are incorrect on this. Between .07 and .09 BAC is when judgement and self-control are reduced and memory and reason become impaired. That is incapacitation as defined in Title IX.

Maybe I'm putting words in your mouth but this standard is a guideline and this is where the reasonable person stance comes in. If both parties are at, lets say, 0.1 BAC was it reasonable that the accused could know that the accused either didn't or couldn't provide consent. Am extreme example to make the point: both parties at 0.1 BAC and it is known conclusively that no words were exchanged and zero physical coercion was applied, both parties seemingly engaged in the activity. Afterwards the accused says they were assaulted and did not knowingly grant consent. In that case, it would not be reasonable for the accused to know that the other party was unable to consent (they seemed to be acting "normal" and didn't say no) and very likely the finding around be for the accused.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

That's what Title IX is. Its up to universities to interpret it and their interpretations can be challenged and overruled.

I'm not sure if I found the actual statute (we former media types have no clue how to do research  ) but the most consistent explanation I can find is:

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) enforces, among other statutes, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Title IX protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance. Title IX states that:

"No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

According to the U.S. Depart of Education website (where I found the above quote), the scope of Title IX includes "sex-based harassment".  So as far as I can tell, there is not an expressed statute about anything regarding sexual assault but it is implied.  I'm ok with that.  Merely pointing out that some people want there to be an expressed statute.

You also have to remember that even the criminal process doesn't have a consistent federal standard and process with no variance when it comes to sexual assault. Individual states decide what they define as consent and sexual assault. Universities must also abide by state rules. What you are asking for is impossible.

True.  I was not meaning to imply that was my viewpoint but that there are some people who do.

Edit: I'll try to respond to your longer post later when I have more time.

[Lennys Tap]

Again Lenny, you resort to insults and barbs. Tone it down.

You are incorrect on this. Between .07 and .09 BAC is when judgement and self-control are reduced and memory and reason become impaired. That is incapacitation as defined in Title IX.

Sorry, I'm not suggesting that you are absurd - the idea that it is a scientific fact that a .08 BAC = incapacitation is though. The 4 levels re alcohol consumption are impairment, intoxication, incapacitation and overdose. .08 is LOWEST level that defines #2 (intoxication) legally, not a level that indicates incapacitation. I confess that I don't know the level at which incapacitation sets in (there is likely a variance do to several circumstances) but it should be (and in my experience is) at a much higher level than the lowest level of intoxication.

[rocket surgeon]

 even the victim seems victimized here.  so what is title IX's real purpose here?  isn't there a point at which "reasonable" people can come to the conclusion during the "investigation" there is no "is" here?  in this situation, obviously not.  which leads me to believe one of 2 things-either these "investigators" are completely incompetent or there is some other motive here.  have we lost all sense of common sense? 

http://reason.com/blog/2017/08/02/student-athletes-torn-apart-by-title-ix

[mu03eng]

Sorry, I'm not suggesting that you are absurd - the idea that it is a scientific fact that a .08 BAC = incapacitation is though. The 4 levels re alcohol consumption are impairment, intoxication, incapacitation and overdose. .08 is LOWEST level that defines #2 (intoxication) legally, not a level that indicates incapacitation. I confess that I don't know the level at which incapacitation sets in (there is likely a variance do to several circumstances) but it should be (and in my experience is) at a much higher level than the lowest level of intoxication.

This is why it's a guideline not an absolute standard (or should be anyway). I am 100% willing to put my judgement/mental acuity to the test at 0.08 BAC and say it will be better than a lot of folks at 0.08 BAC simply because I practice my craft

I'm not advocating that I can/should operate a vehicle at 0.08, but I have zero doubt that my judgement is not impacted sufficiently that I can't make good/legal decisions. For some people that is absolutely not true......so guideline in my book.

[jsglow]

This is why it's a guideline not an absolute standard (or should be anyway). I am 100% willing to put my judgement/mental acuity to the test at 0.08 BAC and say it will be better than a lot of folks at 0.08 BAC simply because I practice my craft

I'm not advocating that I can/should operate a vehicle at 0.08, but I have zero doubt that my judgement is not impacted sufficiently that I can't make good/legal decisions. For some people that is absolutely not true......so guideline in my book.

My friend, I worry about your decisions when you're stone cold sober!  (Too easy.)

[mu03eng]

My friend, I worry about your decisions when you're stone cold sober!  (Too easy.)

Have you been talking to my wife????

[Golden Avalanche]

Bah