In today's world of academia, universities dole out
their own unique form of justice. Sadly, this new approach to crime and
punishment is often unfair, almost always biased and completely
unaccountable. It makes no difference whether you are the victim or the
accused; it doesn't even matter whether you're guilty or innocent, because
most current university officials enforce the rules on campus based solely
on their own personal prejudices.
Take the situation earlier this year at the
University of Iowa College of Medicine for example. A number of students
came forward to report highly inflammatory anti-Christian and anti-Mormon
remarks being made by professors during instructional time. Unfortunately,
due to petty political biases and an overall disinterest in dealing with
this major problem, the school responded to these students with a callous
indifference.
In fact, one administrator even responded to a
student by suggesting that the reason she got frustrated after being
verbally abused by an instructor was that she was just "depressed". To
this date, these students have been denied any resolution to this
unacceptable faculty behavior simply because of the biases of the inept
administration at the University of Iowa College of Medicine.
Now, three students at the State University of
New York at New Paltz have been accused of harassment by Director of
Residential Life Corrina Caracci. In a formal accusation she filed with
the police, Ms. Caracci stated that R.J. Partington, Justin Holmes, and
Dan Curtis encircled her in the hallway, screamed at her, and confined her
movement to the point where she could not move "on her own free will". As
a result of these accusations, Holmes was arrested and suspended from
school for one year while Partington was actually expelled.
There's only one problem with this situation: a
large part of the incident was caught on video tape and clearly proves
that Ms. Caracci's version of this story is far from accurate. In fact,
her deposition and formal accusation bear shockingly little resemblance to
the events in the video, outside of the names of the people involved.
For example, she accuses Partington, Holmes, and
Curtis of encircling her and yelling at her in a "threatening manner".
Contrary to Caracci's claims, the video shows the students randomly
dispersed throughout the hallway with Curtis leaning back against the wall
and Partington lazily resting his hands on his head. It is absolutely
impossible that either student could be accurately described as standing
in an aggressive position.
Later in her complaint, Caracci claims that she
was confined and her movement through the hallway was restricted during
the incident. However, throughout the entire length of the video, it can
be seen very clearly that Ms. Caracci had a 100% unobstructed path to the
doorway of the room where her next meeting was held. Not only was she not
confined, there were no objects whatsoever in between her and her
destination.
Equally damaging to Caracci's credibility is the
fact that, when the defendants began to leave the area, she actually
followed them in order to extend the discussion. By any measure, that is
not exactly the reaction one would expect from the intimidated, helpless
victim that she has tried to make herself out to be. After comparing this
aspect of the complaint with the video tape, the only reasonable
conclusion that can be reached is that Corrina Caracci is flat-out lying
when she claims that these students restricted her movement.
Unfortunately, that is of no importance at SUNY.
Partington and Holmes were still punished extremely harshly and denied
access to their due process rights because some school administrators were
upset with them for criticizing university policy while working in student
government.
When asked about why the students were punished
despite evidence exonerating them, a SUNY spokesman claimed that the video
tape was not an accurate representation of what happened. The school has
yet to explain how an unedited video of the actual event could distort the
situation. Regardless, SUNY decided to ruin the academic careers of these
two students anyway.
As things stand currently, political biases at
the University of Iowa are continuing to allow several hate-filled
instructors to continue using their positions as an opportunity to express
their religious bigotry. Meanwhile, the State University of New York has
chosen to virtually destroy the academic careers of two students just
because a few administrators disapproved of their campus activism. This
practice of manipulating the disciplinary systems on college campuses as a
tool to further personal political agendas is a total disgrace and cannot
continue to be tolerated. It's time for Americans to stand up to
universities across the country and demand that they respect the rights of
every student on campus.
Chad Kent is a freelance writer and political
commentator who lives in central Illinois.