Campus Rape: Is It Just Girls Crying Wolf? - Expert // Study Shows Incidence Far Lower Than Claimed

WASHINGTON - Dec. 15, 2014 - PRLog -- Based upon this, USA Today has a new piece entitled “The great campus rape hoax.”

        The piece quotes public interest law professor John Banzhaf, a recognized expert on the legal problems related to campus rapes, this way: “As George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf notes, ‘After a while, the boy who cried wolf wasn't believed, and the women who cry rape may likewise not be believed, especially with the accusations of rape at Duke University and the University of Virginia fresh in people's minds.’" But this isolated quote may suggest a misleading impression of Banzhaf’s views.

        But here’s what Professor Banzhaf actually said in his own piece - “New Federal Campus Rape Study May Blunt Anti-Assault Efforts” - from which the quote above is taken:

        A dramatic new federal study showing that widely cited estimates of the rate of rapes and other sexual assaults on college campuses has been grossly exaggerated may blunt so-far successful efforts by the federal government and anti-rape groups to force colleges to not only crack down but to also convict more male students, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf.

        Rather than the very widely cited statistic that 1 in 5 coeds are victims, the new study shows that the rate of rape and sexual assault among college women is about 1 in 160; even lower than the rate among non-college women of the same age of about 1 in 140.

        These rates are also on the decline, says Banzhaf, suggesting that these figures may tend to knock the wind out of efforts to win support for a major crackdown, and more findings of guilty.

        "These new authoritative figures may help eliminate what some have called the hysteria about an alleged epidemic of college rapes which has led to many male students being wrongfully found guilty as the federal government and campus anti-rape organizations have pressed for more and more convictions," suggests Banzhaf, who first reported how almost two dozen males have had to sue their universities, college administrators, and accusers to obtain justice.

        As 28 male and female Harvard law professors reported, even Harvard’s procedures “lack the most basic elements of fairness and due process, [and] are overwhelmingly stacked against the accused.”

        Perhaps that’s one reason why almost two dozen courts have ruled in favor of the males, and many more similar law suits are pending, says Banzhaf.

        Another effect of the new study may be to make it more difficult for women claiming to have been raped to be believed.

        "After a while, the boy who cried wolf wasn't believed, and women who cry rape may likewise not be believed, especially with the accusations of rape at Duke University and at the University of Virginia still fresh in people's minds," says Banzhaf.

        Yes, rapes, on campus or off, are very serious and must be fought.

        But it doesn't help when the number of incidents are greatly exaggerated, parents are made very fearful of sending their daughters to major universities, and males are found guilty to satisfy the government's pressures for more convictions without much regard for Due Process procedures to protect the innocent, says Banzhaf.

        Banzhaf, unlike many pundits who largely just complain about the problem of campus rapes, has actually suggested solutions.  Here’s what he said in his very recent New York Times piece entitled “Consortiums Could Afford Proper Investigations of Rape Accusations - Inept, poorly funded college adjudication procedures serve neither victims nor men who may be wrongfully accused”:

        Many argue that rapes should be reported to police and not to colleges since they are serious felonies. But since most are date/acquaintance rapes where the only evidence is the testimony of the two participants, it is often impossible to prove lack of consent beyond reasonable doubt.

        But the alternative -- pushed by the federal government -- that they should be handled by colleges has produced disastrous results because most can’t afford to employ experienced sex-crime investigators, panels of professors can’t fairly adjudicate felonies, and colleges may be reluctant to go after athletes or well-connected students.

        But some innocent males have shown that wrongful complaints -- some outright lies, some mistakenly identifying the wrong man, some accidentally misstating what happened -- have forced them to leave the country, lose jobs, be forced to discontinue their studies, be virtually bankrupted by attorney fees, forever branded as rapists on the Internet, and put under unimaginable stress.

        As 28 male and female Harvard law professors wrote, even Harvard’s procedures “lack the most basic elements of fairness and due process" and "are overwhelmingly stacked against the accused.”

        Perhaps that’s one reason why more than a dozen courts have ruled in favor of the males, and many more suits are pending.

        One possible way to assure women effective and sensitive investigations, while protecting men from unfair procedures prompted by federal pressures to convict, might be to have all investigations and adjudications handled not by individual colleges, but by consortiums of colleges that could afford to employ experienced sex-crime detectives to impartially investigate all allegations, and panels of retired judges to adjudicate guilt whenever the evidence warrants.

        Also, many women have testified that they are also dissatisfied because, although they didn’t report because they and/or their peers thought dismissal from school would be too harsh, they still must face the guy in class, at the dorm or at meals. In such cases, allowing the women to apply for the equivalent of a campus restraining order, and moving him or her to different dorms or classes, would give women the relief they need while encouraging more reporting of rapes.

        In short, there are promising procedures that should be tried to provide women with the remedies they seek if their complaints are well founded, while also protecting men from the dreadful consequences of wrongful convictions at the hands of inexperienced campus cops and professorial panels.

JOHN F. BANZHAF III, B.S.E.E., J.D., Sc.D.
Professor of Public Interest Law
George Washington University Law School,
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor,
Fellow, World Technology Network,
Founder, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
http://banzhaf.net/ @profbanzhaf