Last night's mock hearing of a sexual assault case by the Committee on Standards in Collis Commonground generated earnest student discussion. Judgements on the case itself were mixed, reflecting some of the complexities of sexual abuse cases dealt with by COS.
Dean of the College James Larimore, who was present at last night's presentation, cited student curiosity and unfamiliarity with the powerful COS as key reasons for holding the thearing
"There is still an air of mystery -- even cynicism -- regarding the college disciplinary system and particularly the COS," he said.
The mock committee was composed of two students, two faculty members, and two administrators, many of whom were current or former members of the real COS.
The hearing itself focused on the fictional case of "Lisa," played by Christina Einsiedler '00, and her classmate "Todd," Andy Louis '00.
After attending Todd's annual "Slow Screw" party -- suggestively named for the Sloe brand alcoholic beverages served -- Lisa returned to her room, intoxicated, and fell asleep. She woke up an hour later, surprised to find Todd at her door. The two chatted until Todd initiated sexual intercourse. Several days later, Lisa reported the incident to college authorities.
The hearing began with testimony by both Todd and Lisa and was followed by questioning of the two by the committee. Audience members were invited to formulate and ask their own questions. Lisa then introduced a witness who was also questioned.
Following the hearing, committee members encouraged the 50 member audience to deliberate the case in smaller groups, simulating the actual deliberations of the COS. According to members, the combined process of testimony, questioning, and deliberation often exceeds seven hours.
Groups were instructed to assume Todd's innocence unless they found what the committee called a "preponderance of evidence," meaning that Todd should not be found in violation of a rule unless it seemed more likely than not that he had violated college behavioral standards.
After conferring, student opinion was mixed, consistent with that of the mock committee.
"In a situation such as the case that we have heard tonight it wouldn't surprise me at all if there was a split vote," Larimore said.
The combination of the committee's split vote and the heated group discussions left some students hanging.
"I'm glad I came, but it's left me with more questions than I came in with," Liza Cowan '00 said.
Much of the discussion on Todd's innocence centered on whether or not Lisa, in her intoxicated state, was mentally and physically able to consent to Todd's requests for sex. If not, the committee would be obligated to find Todd guilty.
Other points of contention included discrepancies in the two testimonies. While Lisa claimed that she had asked Todd to stop before initiating intercourse, Todd had no recollection of her entreaties.
Some students wondered how Todd's drunkenness might have affected the committee's final decision.
"The alcohol piece is frequently the most confusing part of all of this," noted Coordinator of the Sexual Abuse Awareness Program Susan Marine.
Larimore cited alcohol as an aggravating, rather than a mitigating factor, in such cases, pointing out that Todd's drunken state could in no way have excused his actions.
In COS cases only a simple majority is required to charge a COS defendant with a violation of standards, but clearer verdicts usually result in harsher sanctions.
The presentation was sponsored by the Sexual Abuse Awareness Program, the Women's Resource Center, the Undergraduate Judicial Affairs Office, and the Dean of the College.
