>These tribunals are too often full of shit. There are a few horror stories going around and you've probably read a few. Some places I think are not requiring a

>These tribunals are too often full of shit. There are a few horror stories going around and you've probably read a few. Some places I think are not requiring a high enough burden of proof. The regulations and standards at the federal and state levels ought to be improved, and in light of the fact that sexual violence on campuses is on the decline, the improvements should result in fewer students being expelled, not more. Part of the problem is that the Obama administration has been issuing new "legal interpretations" (i.e. making up new laws) that require colleges to apply a preponderance standard to sexual assault proceedings, based on a very contorted reading of Title IX, which requires equal treatment of genders by universities receiving federal funds. "Preponderance of the evidence" means that whoever is more likely to be right wins, even if its 51-49. So in a "he said, she said" situation you have to convict if the accuser's story is even a bit more plausible. Additionally, accused are denied the right to have counsel, to confront their accusers, to remain silent. Such rules are particularly egregious when you realize that the contents of the proceedings could prejudice the result of a subsequent criminal trial.