UVA is lowering the hammer on students who may have an evil twin. When students return August 21 for the fall session, they will be required to disclose any arrests or convictions. Failure to report an arrest or conviction will result in an honor code violation. Honor code violations are good for a trip home–permanently.
This crackdown is a result of the death of lacrosse star Yeardley Love who was murdered by her ex-boyfriend, George Huguely who was a fellow lacrosse player. UVA hopes to flag those with violent tendency. The dean’s office will be interviewing those who report an arrest or conviction or any crime committed other than a routine traffic violation.
According to the Washington Post:
University President Teresa A. Sullivan discussed the new rule at a news conference marking the end of her first week on the job. University leaders hope screening students for criminal encounters will flag those who might commit violent acts.
Students return to Charlottesville the weekend of Aug. 21. When they log onto the campus computer system for the first time, each will be prompted to report any arrest, other than minor traffic infractions, since enrolling.
UVA is getting serious about domestic violence and it’s about time all colleges follow suit. Domestic violence was a problem 40 years ago at UVA. Hopefully students will police themselves and take any and all expressions of violence seriously and report cases to the campus police. Young people are all too willing to dismiss acts of violence and blame them on drinking, stress, and ‘personal problems.’ These young adults need to understand that these types of behavior are harbingers of worse to come. The message must be sent that domestic violence, even that which can be classified as verbal assault, is dangerous and will not be tolerated in a civilized society.
Is violence that prevalent on campus? What else can be done to ensure students report it so we don’t have another Yeardly Love on our hands? How much does substance abuse contribute to the violence problem? How does the Love killing really differ from the beheading at Tech or from the Tech Massacre?
This will accomplish basically–nothing. Lots of super-nice people with clean records manage to beat the shit out of their wives and girlfriends anyway, with very little provocation. You can’t make some sweeping reform to solve a problem (based on a single tragedy) when you have no idea how large or small the problem actually is. The most savvy abusers leave very little marks and enough fear that they simply don’t get caught in the first place.
I don’t have a problem per se with the university wanting to know about prior infractions. I just don’t agree that all crimes necessarily lead to domestic abuse. It’s just giving the lawyers the illusion that the university is “doing something” about the problem.
Arrest or conviction? Why arrest? This is not a security clearance – or is that what they are trying to make it into. Requiring the submission of arrest data without regard to its deposition should be an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. Any action taken soley on an admission of arrest could/should open the state to serious lawsuits. So why require arrests? Nothing here would prevent the VA Tech.
I suppose that UVA has to do something. Its good PR. I think they probably should know about arrests, considering UVA, like other colleges and universities, involves rather high density living arrangements. At any rate, it is a start. I am not sure Emma isn’t right…but its a place to start. And it might make some of the students think before they act.
I have commented time and time again about college kids just being a different calibur than when I went through school. I went to a state supported college and I only had one thing stolen the entire time I was there. We didn’t have keyed dorm rooms until my senior year. We had unproctored exams. Utopia? Nah. I just grew up in different times when middle class people who were headed to college had a different value system.
TP, I think an institution can ask you about arrests. Employers sure can (and do). I agree that nothing probably would have prevented tech. However, I would like think that secrecy going under the privacy guise might have contributed. Had Fairfax County been legally premitted to notify Tech of Cho’s emotional problems, perhaps things might have been handled differently.
I agree that convictions should be disclosed and have mixed feelings about arrests. Parents with political pull or deep pockets may be able to prevent a conviction of an otherwise guilty child. At the same time an arrest may end right there – without a conviction for a variety of reasons including not enough evidence to support a conviction.
I don’t know how a university can handle a student’s history of emotional problems. Maybe a forced admission to a hospital could be noted. Generally – with no history of violence – I think a person’s medical history is his/her own private business.
I remember the good old days of unproctored exams also. The only time I remember anything being stolen was during summer school when students from schools without an honor code flooded the campus. I think there is a difference in parenting now. Too many parents are offended when junior is scolded, given a “C”, or arrested. My father told me not to end up in jail because he wasn’t going to bail me out. He sure as hell wouldn’t be down there defending my innocence without hearing exactly what I “had done”.
Oh mine wouldn’t have either and I knew he wouldn’t defend me. It did a lot to make me run the straight and narrow, knowing there was no bail out.
I agree with Emma, that it will accomplish nothing except give the illusion of reassuring parents of students. Better to make students aware of crime and offer crime prevention including date violence. Here’s the crime report from the UVA police dept for one day, Wed, August 4:
DAILY REPORT #2010-216 08/04/2010
DRUNK IN PUBLIC – 1619 University Avenue Arrest made
CASE STATUS: Cleared by Arrest
VANDALISM –Monroe Lane Reported broken windshield
CASE STATUS: Active
LARCENY – HSC East Parking Garage
Reported GPS and satellite radio stolen out of vehicle
CASES STATUS: Active
LARCENY – Wilsdorf Hall
Reported digital camera stolen from room 205
CASES STATUS: Active
SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCE– UVA Hospital
Reported patient left emergency room without permission
CASE STATUS: Suspended
VANDALISM – Campbell Hall
Reported graffiti on brick wall on the roof
CASE STATUS: Active
LARCENY – MR 6
Reported money stolen from room 2520
CASE STATUS: Suspended
HIT & RUN – 400 South Emmet
NO P.I. Reported vehicle hit by unknown vehicle in parking lot
CASE STATUS: Active
LARCENY – HSC East Parking Garage
Reported cell phone stolen from vehicle
CASE STATUS: Active
SIMPLE ASSAULT – HSC East Parking Garage
Reported simple assault
CASE STATUS: Active
VANDALISM – Rotunda
Reported damage to base of flag poles
CASE STATUS: Active
PROPERTY FOUND – UVA Hospital
Reported narcotics found
CASE STATUS: Suspended
Two issues here; Is the UVA going to run NCIC checks against every student or is this a requirement to waive privacy rights and self incriminate (5th amendment issue) for crimes for which you were accused of but not convicted – with a serious impact on that persons life – ability to complete studies? This is crazy government out of control talk.
Cindy’s list is interesting given the GPAs and test scores required to even get into UVA. I wonder if there are statistics as to the percentage committed by non-UVA students – that or there is something else going on here.
Times certainly have changed, Moon. I remember full well those mad dashes to get a date back to her dorm by 11:00pm or midnight or whatever. Not there on time? The matron or resident graduate student dorm manager closed and locked the doors at the appointed hour. Especially embarrassing if it was a Catholic college and the person waiting for you at the door was a nun. Mrs. W remembers one of her friends at a Benedictine-run college being asked to leave because she had an open bottle of wine in her room. And she was of legal drinking age. Do they still do that kind of thing anywhere anymore?
This is known as security theater. And if penalties accrue because a student admitted an arrest, one that had no consequences, I hope said student sues the heck out of the school.
Useless rule to make it look as if something is being done so that the sheeple continue to be happy and go about their lives.
It’s not like the school will run background checks on every student to verify that the student lied or told the truth. And, assuming someone has been arrested and knows they’re probably guilty — they’re just going to type NO anyways and roll the dice.
Even if someone HAS been arrested they are in this country afforded the benefit of doubt. They’re assumed to be innocent until proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This ‘rule’ now means we have three types of people, the innocent, the guilty and the guilty until proven innocent.
Horrible, horrible, horrible idea.
When I was around college age I was arrested for refusing to allow a cop search my car. He was irked off that I stood up for myself by exerting my rights. I was given a summons with my court date and decided at 21 or 22 (I forget) to defend myself (pro se) because I knew it was a bogus charge. Showed up and the case was dismissed nolle prosequi after the judge explained the possible sentence if they had wished to prosecute.
So, in this situation I’d have informed this school that I was arrested for having a minor out after curfew and for telling the cop to pound sand. Good to know UVA would think I’m a security risk and eligable for the tin foil hat treatment.
I think any adult with common sense can see how this ‘plan’ has epic fail written all over it.
If Yeardley Love has used a weapon to defend herself and then called police she could’ve faced arrest as they figured out what happened. Even though she would’ve been the victim she would’ve had to report her arrest to the school. Great way to treat victims of domestic abuse when the abusers have the ability to file charges against their own victims as well.
This was very well thought out. Heck of a job Ms. Sullivan. You have a future career at FEMA when you want it.
All they have to do is report the arrest or conviction. Your employer has a right to ask those questions. If you lie about it, you can be fired. Why should college be any different?
MH, depending on the state the question almost always is ‘have you been convicted of anything other than a traffic violation’ or ‘have you been convicted of a crime of x, y, or z.
An arrest simply means you’ve been charged with a crime not that you’ve actually done it.
Anyway you slice or dice it – it will have ZERO effect on the crime at UVA. None. If nothing else those students that believe govt is an all protecting force may assume that every student on campus has a ‘clean’ record and lower their guard.
Agreed, that it’s only security theater.
Marin, right. But, if there have been arrests, that is also an indicator. One can often assume that mumsy and daddy have taken care of things. Its just another tool in the drawer. Additionally, the army can get that kind of information when there is no conviction so why not a college?
Someone asked earlier about crime at UVA, I expect there is a townie population that keeps the UVA cops quite busy also.
I figure as long as the army can get it and the employers can ask and get it, a college is a fair game. If you want to go to school there, comply.
…..ok, what about if the college asked questions about sexual promiscuity. You could argue that it’s a valid question for the GOVERNMENT to ask as it deals with public health and the college may want to flag those students that have a history to make sure follow up partners understand risks associated…
Back to these questions – how will collecting this information from the student populace protect these students? How will it solve any crime problem? How will it actually do anything other than giving the government more information about these adults and violating their privacy? How does it help anything?
Since it’s a public college anyone can walk around the campus and visit it. So, how will collecting the student information protect the student body from those citizens that may have arrest or conviction records?
This plan offers nothing, plain and simple. It’s sad that the best and brightest minds of UVA came up with it. I expected better.
I don’t think that is a valid question for employers to ask. The only exception I would make there would be for very top security positions and I am not even sure why, other than vulnerability.
Why ask on an employment application? Why does the army want to know. Once we get those first two need to knows established, maybe we can decide how it will help a college.
@marinm
That was my question, marinm. What about adults in the community who participate in school-sponsored activities and clubs? What about people who take non-credit courses, walk their dogs through campus, eat at university establishments or attend university entertainments, and have access to students?
I remember when I was an undergrad, I worked in the college Rathskellar serving beer and food. There was a guy who happened to live in the neighborhood (not a student) and hung out there almost every day and cozied up to every female who would talk to him and try to ask them out. Who’s going to ask about his arrest record? What about the fact that many abusers are exceedingly charming to everyone else, so that no one believes the abused woman?
Smoke and mirrors that won’t protect anything but the University’s backside.
On the upside, the State is only obligated to pay 100K per student death.
I don’t remember ever being asked about arrests, only convictions. As to colleges, they have no business knowing MY business. The student is BUYING their product. They are servicing the student. In fact, unless the college is acting as a landlord, why should ANY college worry about any students background? Almost every student is an adult. They are subject to the laws of the land and have every right that non-students have. Colleges today should not act as parental substitutes. The 18 year old student is no different than the 18 year old living on his own working for a living.
This idiocy will do nothing to “IDENTIFY” those with violent tendencies. How are they going to identify the women that are attracted to such men? And yes, there are such. NO, I’m not saying that they want to be beaten, but that “dangerous” men are attractive to some women. Not all “violent” men (or women) will be students. This is an invasion of privacy. Will they next ask about sexual history so that they know which students may spread STD’s? How about those that live off campus? Will they ask about those that may own a gun? Drink heavily?
Colleges are service providers. The students may not “run” things, but they ARE the customer.
Some of you folks sure are setting up a dangerous world. A college is a mini city. You need to know people’s criminal records. When I was in college it wasn’t an issue. It sure is now. Invasion of privacy? ha! When you have to live in a ‘house’ and attend class with strangers, someone needs to know something about them.
Colleges are more than service providers. They have their own rules and regs and they also get to be the final say as to whether you are in their presence.
And I would agree with every word if the college were University of Phoenix where most of the students are tele-students.
I also want to go out on a limb and say that while 18 year olds might be legally adults, they aren’t really. They are still very wet behind the ears. That might be the reason why those with a few brains decided they can’t legally drink.
To my knowledge, Cho was never arrested or convicted of any crime.
He did have a long history of mental illness that was not shared with Tech. I am not aware of any arrests either.
No one thinks that the conviction/arrest disclosures will solve the problem. It is just another tool to use. I wouldn’t be so quick to discount it. Failure to disclose the information results in an honor code violation which means expulsion.
@PWC Taxpayer No, he was not. So the masacre would not have been prevented by this screening. And are we going to invade the privacy of any student who may have sought mental health counseling at some point in high school, too? That tells me it would be far better to just bottle it all up and risk just exploding in rage sometime in the future, rather than risking your college admission.
MH says: Some of you folks sure are setting up a dangerous world. A college is a mini city. You need to know people’s criminal records. When I was in college it wasn’t an issue. It sure is now. Invasion of privacy? ha! When you have to live in a ‘house’ and attend class with strangers, someone needs to know something about them.
I respond: That’s a great idea.. How about we brand people with some sort of marker so they can tell at a glance blood type, arrest/conviction record, sexual orientation, what medical conditions they have and home address.
After all, we need to know something about the ‘strangers’ among us.
Maybe certain classes of criminals or other undesirables could wear a star on their clothing…
Thank you mighty government for protecting us from ourselves.
@marinm And how about a scarlet “A” for the cheaters out there? Oh, wait, I think I’ve heard of that being done before…
“Those who sacrifice liberty For security deserve neither.”
Old Ben would be rolling in his grave.
See, that’s the thing. Colleges ARE NOT mini cities. They want to be, but, they are not. They want to be autonomous. I still don’t understand why colleges have to have their own police forces. Security I can understand, but police, with all attendant authority? No wonder college is expensive.
18 year old men and women are either adults or they are not. There is no “not really.” They may be “wet behind the ears” but they are adults and should be treated as same. The drinking issue is not due to their age, but to Americans not teaching their children to handle alcohol in a responsible way.
How is sitting in a classroom any different than being in any other crowded space? What is the college going to do about those arrested but not convicted of a crime. That person is innocent. Even if that person was arrested for domestic abuse.
If you are living in the dorms, that is different. The college is acting as land lord. But, even then, arrests are not convictions. Domestic abuse is defined as what? Physical violence? Verbal abuse? Both can be considered crimes in their own right. Why is domestic abuse supposed to be so much worse? The colleges have no right to ask those questions. However, if they want to make that rule, as a private (kinda) entity, more power to them. And if students are restricted or expelled because of certain answers, I expect law suits. And a drop in enrollment. I wouldn’t send my child there.
Americans have gotten too accustomed to surrendering their personal authority and rights to others. It has to stop.
Ouch! Don’t you think thats a high cost and a high risk to our system of government – our liberty – sense of freedom – for a solution we already agree will not work?
Cargo, agreed that colleges are not mini cities but to the extent that a corporation within Virginia has a 2nd Amendment right to protect itself and can deputize it’s own police force via the Special Conservator of the Peace program (or just security guards [armed or unarmed] etc.) I think a college can do the same. But, it should be done via tuition surcharge or within the tuition itself rather than on the public dime as public colleges are operated by the government.
So, if the Board of a college does want it; they pay for it and it’s not paid out of the funds that come in from the State. The students, by tuition proxy, can decide for themselves if they want a police force much like we as citizens can disband our county police force at anytime we wish to do so.
But, to all your other points…. I agree 100%.
NO one said that there was one solution.
No one said that the students should know about someone else’s mental health issues or arrests or convictions. But the college should. As long as an employer or the military can get hold of information like that, a college should be able to also.
I was thinking of a dorm as being the ‘house.’ Apparently dorm living is not a familiar experience? You want someone with a sex crime conviction living down the hall from you? Those kinds of questions are asked on admissions applications. This is simply a way of keeping updated once a student is admitted. I totally support it.
pssst…colleges and universities also ask about your legal presence status…or most of them do.
MH, legal presence is an issue that’s been settled in the courts (Kilgore, 2004). But, if you’d like for schools to ask for questions about sexual orientation, et al. I can email our good Attorney General to get his opinion since UVA has already opened the door…………………
Not sure where this statement is going. NoVA doesn’t require legal presence proof (or they didn’t use to.) Most other Virginia schools do require it.
What does that have do to with sexual orientation? Are we getting don’t ask dont tell colleges? I expect Liberty University enforces that.
The point – I could swear others understood it – was that if you open the door on asking this question at a college in the name of public safety what then becomes the limit? Could you have a social conservative (I hate that term) then make the arguement that sexual orientation should be disclosed because of the possibility of attacks on those persons? Would you be ok with the Cooch making colleges require both pieces of information. After all, it’s for the public safety… Or, my favorite tired phrase… it’s for the children.
What’s the limit of information that we will disclose to the government voluntarily?