Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Georgia lawmaker stands up for due process for accused students

From SAVE Services:

We have a victory! Georgia state representative Earl Ehrhart, Chair of the Georgia Appropriations Committee, held a hearing on Monday about due process on college campuses.

During the hearing, he grilled college administrators on why they don't provide due process to students, threatening that the schools will not get funding if they don't immediately start providing fundamental due process protections:see video

Please call Rep. Ehrhart and thank him for speaking so boldly on behalf of due process.


Telephone: (404) 463-2247

Let's keep the momentum going and have a state we can use as an example for the nation!

Thank you!

Gina Lauterio, Esq., Policy Program Director

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments

You may want to contact your state legislators and governor and let them know that if Georgia can do they can do it.

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Thank you Marco Rubio

How Marco Would Combat Sexual Assault and Protect Due Process Rights on Campus

As a Senator, Marco has heard stories of sexual assault on campus, and of schools badly mishandling allegations and investigations. He’s heard from victims — both of assaults, and accusations gone wrong. He’s also heard from campus administrators who feel stuck between conflicting statutes, shifting regulations, and damaging cultural forces. And he has four children — boys and girls — who are on their way to college some day.

So in 2014, Marco joined a bipartisan group of senators to co-sponsor the Campus Accountability and Safety Act, which aims to improve the handling of sexual assault on campus while protecting the rights of the accused. Republicans supporting the bill include Senators Joni Ernst and Chuck Grassley.

We don’t need to buy into the Left’s overheated rhetoric and misleading statistics about campus sexual assault to believe something should be done. Of course, the government’s role is also limited: Many of the problems of campus life are connected with broader cultural issues, weakened values, and the plague of substance abuse.

Incidences of sexual violence are among the most serious and destructive crimes imaginable; they should be taken seriously whether they occur on campus or anywhere else in America.

A few important principles should govern the handling of such a crime: Perpetrators of sexual violence should face the same system of punishment no matter who they are; those accused of sexual assault should have their due process rights respected; victims should get the support they need to heal; and wherever possible, the cases should be handled by the criminal justice system.

Those are the main issues the bill tackles: It requires that every university enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with local police departments, so that law enforcement and campus personnel are best trained, prepared, and equipped to handle allegations of sexual violence on campus. The bill also requires that every school have a confidential advisor that a victim can speak to understand his or her options following sexual violence, including how to pursue a criminal complaint. These two measures together would help make it more likely crimes of sexual violence will be reported and prosecuted.

Second, the bill protect due process rights without more federal micromanagement: It simply requires that schools notify an accused student within 24 hours of the decision to move forward with a disciplinary proceeding, offering the details of the complaint, the process followed, and the due process rights of each party.

Third, it includes an important prohibition against schools operating, in the case of sexual violence, any special campus disciplinary procedures for athletes, honor students, or any other favored subgroup. Whatever policies universities have in this area must be uniform for everyone on campus.

Marco has fought successfully to exclude the key items on the left’s wish-list. The bill does not adopt “affirmative consent” (known as “Yes-means-yes”) as a national standard for campus sexual assault. Nor does it legislate a “preponderance of the evidence” standard for campus disciplinary proceedings.

Those ideas are an assault on notions of fair play and due process, and Marco would not stand for them. Opponents claiming that this bill includes or promotes them do are relying on guilt by association or simply no evidence at all.

Sexual assault can destroy lives, but so can false allegations of sexual assault. One need only review recent news reports to know that false allegations do, in fact, happen. Certainly, we should make additional efforts to protect due process on campus. Most importantly, as President, Marco would swiftly move to stop the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights’s assault against due process rights.

The Campus Safety and Accountability Act is not a perfect bill. It is a compromise, but it is a step in the right direction on a pressing problem. Sexual assault should not be a partisan issue, and the modest steps forward under consideration will improve the situation for the millions of students and their families who’ve put their trust in universities and law enforcement.


I'm glad Senator Marco Rubio has seen the light when it comes to the importance of protecting due process for young college and university men. Perhaps if we wrote him and thanked him for clarifying his position on this serious matter that would go a long way to promoting the Men's Rights Movement. So let's do so without delay.

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Protest against affirmative consent

From SAVE Services:

Once upon a time, California students could choose how to give consent to private sexual activity. Nowadays, the state has mandated affirmative consent, which means an accused student must show something like a sexual consent contract or video to prove consent existed.

But now, the University of California has stated that students may not videotape sexual activity without possible consent, which means that students are not able to prove that consent did occur:Click here. This new policy is making it impossible to defend oneself against a sexual assault accusation.

Contact University of California President Janet Napolitano: and tell her that the school's new policy is dangerous for every student.

Let's not wait until innocent students are found guilty under it.

Very truly yours,

Gina Lauterio, Esq., Policy Program Director
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments

That is the whole idea. To destroy men all together. This goes together with this other post I wrote. Contact Janet Napolitano and the others listed on the aforementioned post. The more of us they hear from the better.

Saturday, January 16, 2016

California insanity

Kathleen Salvaty

California colleges to make proving innocence a punishable offense

By Ashe Schow (@AsheSchow) • 1/15/16 4:53 PM

Advocates for due process knew this day was coming. We knew that one day colleges would notice that there was only one way for students accused of sexual assault would be able to defend themselves and that the colleges would make that defense itself a violation of policy.

Of course the new policy is coming out of California, which led the way in inserting campus bureaucrats into the bedroom with its "affirmative consent" policies. These policies mandate how students must engage in sexual activity – not as a passionate act but as a contractual question-and-answer session. The only way to prove one followed such a policy is to videotape the encounter, but now, California colleges are making such recordings a violation of school policy.

Due process advocates knew that one day a student would try to record an encounter to retain evidence that he obtained sober consent. We also knew that if an accuser claimed she was too drunk to consent to sex, someone would make the argument that she must have also been too drunk to consent to a recording. And that's where the new policy comes in.

In a Q&A with the University of California's daily newspaper, the Daily Bruin, Title IX officer Kathleen Salvaty said students could be expelled for recording sexual encounters without consent.

Salvaty had been asked about the new policies including mandatory minimums for sexual assault, which include a two-year sanction for most cases. We'll set that aside for a moment. Salvaty said the sanctions can include expulsion, and listed the offenses that were subject to the mandatory minimums.

"Aggravated conduct is sexual assault, domestic violence or stalking, in which at least one of the following factors is present: use of force, causing or taking advantage of incapacitation or recording or showing sexual images without consent," Salvaty said.

New policies in effect at California universities also shift the adjudication process away from hearings and evidence and deliberation to the single-investigator model, which is opened to severe bias. Now, an investigator and the university (who is under pressure from the Education Department to find more students responsible) will conduct the investigation and determine culpability. If the accused student is found responsible he or she (more likely he) can appeal the decision and only then will he get a hearing.

The odds of the appeal body overturning a decision will be slim when the evidence they have is from a biased investigator. I've seen cases where appeals courts refuse to accept new evidence from accused students and end up affirming the original decision. The new California policies all but guarantee accused students will be found responsible without a fair or impartial investigation.

Now back to the mandatory minimums. These schools don't provide accused students with the means to defend themselves (and are now actively punishing them for providing the only evidence they could possibly present in their favor) and then want to impose mandatory minimum sanctions. Schools in California are railroading students and then ruining their lives without any care for the truth or due process.

Men looking to attend school in California should take note.

Salvaty did not respond to a Washington Examiner inquiry prior to press time.


If you're a California resident you may want to contact your Congressperson along with United States Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer and tell them you believe Title IX is going to far and disrupting the social interaction between the sexes.

Friday, January 15, 2016

A tale of two Senators

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) broke with his party on Monday, when he said that police departments, not campus tribunals, should be the ones who deal with sexual assault allegations.

From The Hill:

"Rape and assault is rape or assault whether it takes place on a campus or a dark street," he said Monday at the Black and Brown Presidential Forum in Iowa.

"If a student rapes another student it has got to be understood as a very serious crime, it has to get outside of the school and have a police investigation and that has to take place."

He added that too many schools are treating it as a "student issue" instead of referring accusations to law enforcement, and added that victims shouldn't have to be in classes with their rapists.

Sanders is exactly right on this issue. Rape is a serious crime, not a petty student offense, and rape should be treated as a serious crime by people who are trained to investigate these types of crimes.

I guess it's true that broken clocks can be right twice a day.


Petty crime? A lot of wrongfully accused men have even committed suicide because they were accused of this "petty crime". This is nothing to be cavalier about. Anyway thank you to Senator Bernie Sanders for sticking up for men and for referring "he said/she said"'s to courts of law where they belong. If fact let's contact Bernie by clicking on the link above,click on "education" and thank him for sticking up for due process.That is a big step up. Note to Republicans out there: Bernie Sanders is making a lot of sense and we're not married to the Republican Party so if you want help from MRA's to stave off Hillary it's either match Sanders offer or beat it.

And now going the other way:

We urge our readers not to vote for Senator Marco Rubio (R. Fla.). Rubio has sold out to the sexual grievance industry. He is an original co-sponsor of the Campus Accountability and Safety Act--bill S. 590, a proposed law that throws our sons under the proverbial bus in the interest of pandering to extremist women's groups. The proposed CASA refers to accusers as "victims" 59 times and as "accusers" only twice. (In an earlier version of the bill, accused students were actually called "assailants.") This is a chilling barometer of how gender extremists have seized not just the public discourse on this issue but the reigns of government. It is very disappointing that Rubio, who otherwise largely seems to eschew political correctness and group identity politics, buys into the injustices the gender extremists promote.

The bill famously affords substantial resources only to accusing students, none to students who are accused. It would require schools to provide confidential advisers to accusers without providing confidential advisers to accused students, an unmistakable signal that the federal government's goal is not to insure fair hearings but to help accusers prevail--to expel more of our sons. The penalty for schools that don't provide such advisors? According to the bill, it's based on the school's operating budget. A school like Harvard could be fined up to $42 million per year.

Perhaps the greatest of the bill's many affronts to fairness is the requirement that the persons who will decide whether our sons are expelled are to question accusers in a manner that will assure a finding of guilt. The bill calls it "victim-centered, trauma-informed interview techniques," and it requires that the school be "focused on the experience of the victim." In other words, the people who will decide whether to expel your son must be sympathetic to his accuser. The accuser's "experience" will always be that she was raped--but as even Brett Sokolow, the nation's preeminent campus victim's advocate, has conceded: "We see complainants who genuinely believe they have been assaulted, despite overwhelming proof that it did not happen," and "in a lot of these cases, the campus is holding the male accountable in spite of the evidence – or the lack thereof – because they think they are supposed to . . .." Mr. Sokolow suggesetd that mental health issues play an important role in these wrongful accusations. (As another example of the injustice that will result by focusing on the experience of the accuser--almost half of all college women think that when a woman gives a guy a "nod in agreement," that isn't enough for consent.) According to the proposed bill, the interview cannot suggest that the school is "judging" the reporting student's account of the alleged assault, even though judging is exactly what has to happen to decide whether to initiate charges and to decide guilt or innocence. The bill leaves it up to "the victim" whether she wants the interview of her accusation recorded--an interview that could destroy the life an innocent young man.

Strangely, Sen. Bernie Sanders is also a co-sponsor of this terrible bill, but statements he made earlier this week indicate he wants sexual assault claims to be decided by the police, not colleges. We fear that Sanders will "clarify" the statements he made earlier this week to say he won't dismantle the campus sexual grievance industry, but if he stands by those statements, he will be on the record as supporting fairness.

Senator Rubio's support for CASA is inexcusable. Until he backs away from it, he is no friend of the presumptively innocent.


Fucking jerkoff Rubio. He doesn't care about due process for men. Let's tell Marco Rubio that we are no fans of his.