If the two recent cases regarding the alleged spiking of two women’s drink with GHB at a Phi Kappa Psi party and the alleged sexual assault of one of the women have conclusively proven anything, it’s that many people do not trust Brown’s disciplinary system. Two of the biggest issues in the recent cases — the University’s possible preferential treatment of the male student accused of spiking the drink and a Student Conduct Board’s finding that a different student was not responsible for allegedly sexually assaulting one of the women because her incapacitation did not allow her to provide a complete testimony — are similar to incidents that have played out at Brown before.
For example, the 1996 Adam Lack case also rested on an incapacitated student’s testimony and whether the respondent should have known she was too intoxicated to give proper consent.
In the fall of 1996, Sara Klein ’99 accused Adam Lack ’97 of sexual assault. According to Lack’s version of the story, Klein initiated their sexual encounter, stayed up late talking with him and gave him her phone number. Klein, who said she was too drunk to remember the night, claimed that she must also have been too intoxicated to give consent. Lack was first suspended and then sentenced to two semesters of probation. He sued the University, and they reached a confidential settlement.
At the time, Vice President for Campus Life and Student Services Margaret Klawunn was head of the Sarah Doyle Women’s Center. In the spring 1997 issue of the campus publication “Issues,” Klawunn said men advocating for Lack “are afraid that they have already been or will be the next Adam Lack. Many men see themselves as potentially in that situation or have already been in that situation. This case has become a magnet for men who have skeletons in the closet.” On the issue of preferential treatment, The Herald reported in 2010 that in fall 1996 “the University Disciplinary Committee declined to hear a female student’s complaint of sexual assault against a male student, citing the complexity of the evidence. The male student, her ex-boyfriend, was a relative of Jordan’s royal family whose father had donated money to the University. The committee’s decision led to an investigation by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. According to a 1997 University press release, the investigation was later dropped at the request of the parties.”
In September 2006, Beth Dresdale ’10, daughter of wealthy Corporation trustee Richard Dresdale ’78, accused William McCormick III ’10 first of stalking her and then of having raped her. McCormick was handed a plane ticket home by now-Executive Vice President for Planning and Policy Russell Carey ’91 MA’06 before he was told that he had been accused of rape. Richard Dresdale emailed former President Ruth Simmons, saying he was trying to get McCormick to withdraw from the University — which he did, citing a seizure condition — rather than undergo a disciplinary hearing. A private investigator hired by Dresdale interfered with McCormick’s advocate, assistant wrestling coach Michael Burch. McCormick sued the University and both Dresdales, and the suit was settled.
Whether or not a conflict of interest changed the outcome of any of these cases, a potential conflict of interest obviously exists. Administrators are tasked with protecting Brown’s institutional interests, including preserving the school’s reputation, encouraging donors and maintaining academic excellence. I don’t mean to insinuate that all administrators calculate their decisions in terms of institutional interest. But administrator discretion in sexual assault cases can clearly create the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Given the history of mishandled sexual assault cases, both at Brown and at schools across the country, it’s time to consider taking these cases out of the hands of administrators. Students, both accused and accuser, could have more faith in the system if Brown retained independent professionals to handle these cases. Already, the University — following the interim recommendations of the Task Force on Sexual Assault — is implementing the single investigator model, in which one professional investigator gathers evidence and presents it as a book to the hearing panel, Katie Byron ’15, a member of the task force, told me.
This is a good step, but I’d rather see one investigator for each side of the hearing, and an accommodation to allow the accused to face the accuser while mitigating trauma for the complainant. Under the current system, attorneys cannot speak for their clients in the hearings — only students and their advocates can, Byron said. It may be worth reconsidering this ban. Additionally, many of the steps proposed by the activist group Act4RJ in their list of demands of the University presented at Wednesday’s protest would also make the system work better for both parties.
Going forward, administrators should refer all complaints to investigators, who should have the sole authority to decide whether the case goes to a hearing, provided the parties do not reach some other settlement. Hearings should be run not by a panel comprising a student, a faculty member and an administrator, but by a retired judge retained by the University. Students, faculty members and administrators could potentially be influenced by their institutional relationship to the University, creating the appearance of a conflict of interest.
More importantly, the judge will deliver a finding of fact and recommended sanction. If the University chooses not to implement that sanction, it should be obligated to provide a reason, and both sides should be given a chance to appeal. While independent professionals won’t get every case right — no system ever will — they would remove one potential conflict of interest from the disciplinary process. That’s a system we can all have more faith in. Students, both accuser and accused, deserve that.
Duncan Weinstein ’17 has a conflict of interest: He knows people who have been complainants and respondents in sexual assault cases. He can be reached at duncan_weinstein@brown.edu.
