We are observing Sexual Assault Awareness Week at Dartmouth. Our collective commitment to the principle that sexual intimacy requires mutual consent should be so ingrained that a week devoted to raising awareness should be unnecessary. But a gap exists between our values and the behavior that sometimes occurs on campus, between our aspirations and the hurtful reality of sexual abuse. We need to be confronted by violence that too often is inflicted, usually by men against women. Each of us needs to accept the challenge to reflect on the social circumstances and conditions that sometimes allow sexual assault to be tolerated at Dartmouth and elsewhere or to be unrecognized for what it is -- an act of violence that harms our friends and our community. We also need to consider how best to maintain and improve our systems of adjudication so that they are, in appearance as well as reality, receptive to and supportive of legitimate complaints, judicious and fair in evaluating evidence, and appropriate in determining sanctions when individuals are found responsible.
In some respects, those issues of College policies and procedures pale in significance compared to issues of social norms, personal responsibility, and the consequences of violence. But our policies and procedures are sometimes inadequately articulated and understood, though they have enormous importance for the individuals most directly involved. They can be equally perceived or misperceived as symbols of the College's commitments and values. As a work in progress, they are constantly under review as we look for ways they can be improved.
Those policies and procedures have changed for the better in recent years. As a result of community involvement, Dartmouth has moved from having no explicit sexual abuse policy, to having a policy that merely prohibited sexual abuse, to the current policy that describes a range of behaviors constituting sexual abuse and that articulates the importance of consent as a precondition to non-abusive sexual intimacy. We have revised our procedures to make them more accessible to students bringing forward complaints without compromising the rights of students accused of a violation. A student reporting a violation of the sexual abuse standard is permitted to have an advisor present at a hearing, is entitled to copies of all hearing materials (personal statements, security reports, etc.) in advance of the hearing, and is entitled to know the outcome of the hearing and the sanction imposed if the other student is found responsible for violating our standards of conduct.
The College's sexual abuse policy addresses a wide spectrum of behaviors. Not all of them are physical and not all involve intercourse or penetration (see pp. 201-203 of the Student Handbook). Reports of behaviors involving non-consensual intimate sexual contact are normally referred to the Committee on Standards for adjudication because the COS deals with alleged violations for which a sanction might include some period of suspension or permanent separation. It is important to note that a student who is alleged to have violated any College policy is presumed to be innocent unless it is determined through the hearing process that there is a preponderance of evidence that the alleged violation actually occurred. The only evidence upon which the COS is allowed to make that determination is the evidence presented at the hearing -- the written material compiled and distributed to all participants in the hearing and the statements of students at the hearing.
A COS hearing panel normally includes two students, two faculty members, an administrator, and a non-voting chair. (The Dean of the College is the designated chair of the COS, and when the Dean is unavailable the Senior Associate Dean serves as alternate chair.) At the hearing itself, the student who brought forward the allegation and the student who is accused begin by making opening statements. (They also have an opportunity to include written statements in a packet of information distributed in advance to all participants.) Both students may be accompanied by advisors who are not actively participating in the hearing itself. The students do not directly question one another, but they are asked questions by members of the committee, and they have an opportunity to request that particular questions be asked. There may also be witnesses asked to attend the hearing and respond to questions. When the committee has asked all the questions that seem to be relevant (a process than can take several hours in complicated cases), the participating students have an opportunity to make closing statements. Then the students, their advisors, and any witnesses are excused, and the COS goes into executive session to deliberate about the case.
At that point, the COS has two responsibilities. The first is to determine, based on an analysis and weighing of available evidence, as to whether the alleged violation is supported by a preponderance of evidence. That determination is made by a majority vote of committee members (excluding the chair) and is preceded by extensive discussion about the circumstances of the case. If the committee votes to find the student not responsible, the committee's business is concluded and students are informed of the outcome. If, on the other hand, the committee votes to find that the accused student was responsible, its second responsibility is to determine an appropriate sanction. That determination is also made by majority vote. Sanctions imposed by the COS for violations of the sexual abuse policy have ranged from one to multiple terms of suspension to permanent expulsion from the College. Sanctions applied in particular cases have depended on the committee's assessment of the evidence and circumstances of that case.
Students and others have periodically asked important questions and raised significant concerns about whether the range of sanctions imposed in particular sexual abuse cases or in general are sufficiently stringent. A couple of years ago, the COS confirmed following its annual meeting that it was fully prepared to separate (i.e., permanently expel) students for violations of the policy when the circumstances of a particular case would warrant that sanction. Last year, a student was separated for violations of the policy.
Questions about appropriate sanctions should indeed be asked regularly about a whole range of behaviors (and not exclusively about violations of the sexual abuse standard). They should be asked about other acts of violence, threats, harassment, and intimidation, for example. Along with sexual abuse, these kinds of behaviors fundamentally contradict our purposes as an institution and threaten the security and respect to which every member of this community is entitled. Has the Dartmouth community in general been too tolerant? Has the COS in particular been too lenient? Dean of the College James Larimore, myself, and Marcia Kelly, the College's judicial affairs officer, have discussed these matters and will be asking the COS to consider these issues at its annual meeting later this term.
The membership of the COS is all of us: It is comprised of faculty members and administrators (who are appointed) and undergraduate students (who are elected as well as appointed). Its judgments and deliberations reflect our collective attitudes and assessments of the College's standards and values. I have found its members to be consistently conscientious and fair. They work very hard on our collective behalf. Courts have upheld our procedures and findings when they have been subjected to legal challenge by individuals found responsible and sanctioned. We periodically ask that those procedures be reviewed by the College committee on Sexual Abuse and Sexual Harassment, by ad hoc College committees, by external consultants, and annually by the General Counsel's office.
Even if our judicial process is as good or better than processes in place at other colleges and universities, we can do better still. I want to encourage anyone who has questions about our system and process to read the relevant sections of the Student Handbook (the "green pages"), to read the annual report issued by the COS and the explanatory brochure about the College's judicial system (let me know if you would like a copy), or to arrange a time for individuals or groups of students to meet with some of us who work with the COS. My colleagues and I would be happy to talk and work with you toward our common goal of helping Dartmouth more fully achieve its aspirations.
