An ethical stance vs legal requirements RESPECT. NOW. ALWAYS. An ethical stance vs legal requirements Title slide- This generic slide allowing you type in your own heading If you would prefer to use a campaign message slide, these can be found within the toolkit section.

INCIDENTS OF HARRASSMENT / ASSAULT SURVEY UON Male Female Harassment 2016 Harassed 51% 55% 41% 66% Harassed in Uni 26% 31% 21% 38% Harassed Uni (ex transport) 30% 20% Sexual assault 2015/16 Assaulted 6.9% 8.0% 4.8% 10.5% Assaulted in Uni 1.6% 1.4% Text only slide – Grey background

Our obligations to both students Text only slide – Grey background

Case Study - Consider the following dilemma UON’s strategies are largely defined by US Title IX and UK policy “An effective response must also involve a clear understanding of risk and the identification of individuals within the institution who own specific risks (ownership of different types of risk may sit in different places). The risks encountered may relate to organisational risk, risk to the victim/survivor, risk to the criminal justice process, legal risks, reputation risks or risk to the wider student body. Universities should conduct a risk assessment which seeks to identify and assess risks across relevant functions Text only slide – Grey background http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2016/changing-the-culture.pdf http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2016/guidance-for-higher-education-institutions.pdf

Action and Advice matrix Support Advice Review under Student Conduct On campus situation ✓ Designated University activity Situation involving a staff member Off campus not designated event ?

Student Conduct Rule Enforced Leave DVC(A) prepare a Preliminary Assessment Report may Dismiss Issue show cause

So… Dismiss Uncomfortable as this does not feel survivor centric Show cause May provide responder opportunity to provide alternative evidence Likely to significantly negatively impact the responder Legal advice will be that the student does not respond

UK report recommends… “An effective response must also involve a clear understanding of risk and the identification of individuals within the institution who own specific risks (ownership of different types of risk may sit in different places). The risks encountered may relate to organisational risk, risk to the victim/survivor, risk to the criminal justice process, legal risks, reputation risks or risk to the wider student body.”

Title IX GMU Statement This policy applies to Students who are registered or enrolled for credit- or non-credit-bearing coursework (“Students”); University employees, consisting of all full-time and part-time faculty, University Staff, Medical Center employees and classified staff, wage (including temps), professional research staff, and post-doctoral fellows (“Employees”); and contractors, vendors, visitors, guests or other third parties (“Third Parties”). This policy pertains to acts of Prohibited Conduct committed by or against Students, Employees and Third Parties when: the conduct occurs on University Grounds or other property owned or controlled by the University; the conduct occurs in the context of a University employment or education program or activity, including, but not limited to, University-sponsored study abroad, research, on-line, or internship programs; or the conduct occurs outside the context of a University employment or education program or activity, but has continuing adverse effects on or creates a hostile environment for Students, Employees or Third Parties while on University Grounds or other property owned or controlled by the University or in any University employment or education program or activity. https://universitypolicy.gmu.edu/policies/sexual-harassment-policy/

Our proposed interpretation the conduct occurs outside the context of a University employment or education program or activity, but has continuing adverse effects on or creates a hostile environment for Students, Employees or Third Parties while on University Grounds or other property owned or controlled by the University or in any University employment or education program or activity. the conduct occurs outside the context of a University employment or education program or activity, but has a high and continuing risk for Students, Employees or Third Parties while on University Grounds or other property owned or controlled by the University or in any University employment or education program or activity.

UON Behaviour risk framework

UK advice “Irrespective of the individual circumstances of an incident, all universities will need to take considerable care to ensure that their involvement has not done anything to undermine a criminal prosecution or contaminate evidence relating to the sexual offence.”

316 Crimes Act Universities may be affected by the act Section 4 of the Act states that a serious indictable offence is an indictable offence. Sexual assault specifically appears as an offence under section 61I. Section 316 envisages that there may be a reasonable excuse for a person not to volunteer information about a serious indicatable offence but this of itself is not a defence to a possible charge. the prosecution must establish is that an alleged offender actually came to hold the alleged belief. It is not necessary that a person knows or believes that the offence is a serious indictable offence, it is enough that the person knows or believes the conduct occurred. A University should not discount that a student’s complaint is enough to form the basis of knowledge or belief.

…and my next dilemma Cyberbullying…