I agree this is absolutely disgusting behavior on the university's part, but is there a reason Kerns can't report the rape to the police herself? Not blaming her in anyway way - obviously the school should be doing this for her - but if it's not, I don't see any reaosn for Kerns not to press charges herself. (At least while she was at school. Now that she's taking time off, I realize it's a bit more difficult.)

Someone actually asked that question in comments of the article, you can see Amy's response if you scroll down.

That's pretty horrifying.

And this is why I'm not going to UofP.

It's a little sad that the first time my favorite city is mentioned it's for something horrifying.

Sobriety as a prerequisite for rape? What kind of irresponsible policy is that?

It sounds like UoP is using gangster tactics to make cases of sexual assault disappear. "Listen, toots, you start making noise, and we lock you up for underage drinking." This sort of strongarm tactics should remain in 1930s James Cagney films, not modern-day universities.

Wow, so . . . how much alcohol makes the issue of consent so difficult for Shank to determine? Is a sip of beer now the new "come hither?" This is inexcusable on all levels, but I'm somehow not surprised. I wonder if Shank is buddies with that judge in Italy who determined that a 14 year-old girl couldn't have been raped, since she had previously lost her virginity.

I don't get any sense that Kerns' parents or parents have protested these backwards (and COMPLETELY IDIOTIC) policies regarding sexual assault. It's certainly good to see that students are protesting the policies, but I can't imagine that most parents would be fine and dandy with the idea of their daughter (or son!) being threatened with penalties if they report being raped or sexually assaulted and there was alcohol involved.

“[Shank] decided since we were both drinking, rape couldn’t have occurred. . . It was like she was the one deciding consent—not me.� – Amy Kerns

Shank said that “consent—or lack of consent—is difficult to determine�, not that rape could not have happened.

“Immediately after the event, her friend made an anonymous call to campus police. It wasn’t until a year later that Kerns gave campus security the man’s name so it could issue a “no contact� order and investigate.� – from the article

I would imagine it was particularly difficult when they did not even know who was involved for a year and the only evidence was a photograph of some blood on a sheet (which he explained away in his statement).

“I’m sorry I did this to you, I didn’t think it was that big of a deal and I cant [sic] change the past so all I can do is apologize,� the young man wrote in a private Facebook message to Kerns. “I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry.� – from the article

Although one certainly has to wonder what this guy was apologizing for if nothing bad happened that night.

It sounds like the university did not handle the situation well at all (threatening a year old alcohol violation is just plain petty), but in the end it seems it would have been impossible to discipline him anyway, unless evidence survives that is not detailed in the article. What a horrible situation.

�It sounds like UoP is using gangster tactics to make cases of sexual assault disappear. "Listen, toots, you start making noise, and we lock you up for underage drinking." This sort of strongarm tactics should remain in 1930s James Cagney films, not modern-day universities.� – StoutHearted

Agreed. I characterized the threat as petty in my previous post, but I should have acknowledged that it also seems like a thinly veiled threat to “shut up, or else…�

Apologizing for raping someone via Facebook?
Stay classy, kid.

No kidding Sarah,

This takes facebook and all the weird things it can do to relationships to a new low, I think...

I wrote a letter. I tried to be polite, but I think is still came out pretty angry. I also spent a lot of time writing it considering the fact that Shank is definitely not going to read it or give a shit.

Hopefully enough letters will come in that an impression can be made by sheer quantity.

Ugh, this makes me so angry.

My mom works as the SANE in my hometown (where I also went to college). She says that there's a particular judge there that throws out any sexual assault case where both the victim and the offender have been drinking. It doesn't matter if she's falling down drunk and he's only had a couple of beers, the case isn't even heard.

Also, in my old town, they probably would have also charged the victim with underage drinking and still not heard the case.

The court system disappoints me so much when it comes to prosecuting sexual assault. But at least my old college went as far as pursuing legal remedies. This is outrageous.

I agree with noname's comments. At this point, the case sounds like it hinges on whether a person chooses to believe the accused or the accuser as to whether the sex was consensual or not. I think that the best thing that can come out of this incident is for the university to institute a policy of forgiving underage drinking in cases of alleged assault.

This sort of thing is so common across the country. My undergrad sociology prof was really active trying to get the Clery Act (http://www.securityoncampus.org/) enforced.

The problem is, colleges don't want to report rape/sexual assault (among many other things) because that makes their crime stats go up. If a college is completely honest about all of the incidents that happen, parents of potential students get nervous and won't let their kids go there. This sort of cycle only encourages colleges not to report incidents -- and the victims are the ones who suffer. Likewise, colleges often tell victims not to go to local police for the same reasons.

This kind of story makes me so sad and angry.
I go to a very conservative school, but my group and the head of our rape crisis center have the word of the chief of campus police and the chief of the town police that if a rape is reported, the victim WILL NOT be charged with underage drinking. We try to publicize it as much as possibe, especially around Take Back the Night.

I wrote an email and tried to be polite, too:

Dear Ms. Shank

After reading the Willamette Week editorial (http://wweek.com/editorial/3424/10828/) on the University of Portland's failure to take action on the allegations of rape made by student Amy Kerns, I respectfully insist that your office reconsider the decision to ignore her complaints.

While underage drinking is a serious problem, rape is a far more serious problem. A rape victim's consumption of alcohol should not preclude her ability to seek justice against the perpetrator of such a crime.

Thank you for taking the time to read this email and consider this matter.

End of message.

I used to live near UP when I had an apartment in St. John's. This is pretty disappointing, and I worry, too, given that the area is pretty unsafe to walk around, esp. at night. What else are they not investigating?

a few years ago, i was date raped at the college i was attending. they pulled similar shit! when my rape kit and police report weren't enough to get the guy on criminal charges (yah i learned that its pretty fucking hard to get your rapist arrested if he used a condom and claimed it was consensual, guess i just went through that hellish exam and trip to the ER and police station for kicks), i pursued the case within the college's own judicial system. they couldn't find him guilty of the assault for some bullshit reasons, but they did expel him based on his admitted drug use during the assault. problem is, to make it "fair" and "legit" for them to expel him, they also had to put on the record that they charged ME with drug use also. although i didn't get any true suspension/expulsion, i still got that shit put on my academic record. when i left the school, i refused to sign the paperwork for it, so they put a hold on my transcripts from there. I didn't really have the energy to fight it anymore, because I was sick of all the unfairness and defeat. I was also pretty scared that i'd be slut-shamed to death if i had fought any more or sought a civil case. I had had enough, and all i wanted was to get the hell out of there and get on with my life. Sometimes i get angry with myself for not fighting more, but i've recently come to accept that i really did do all that i could at the time. Damn this really boils my blood!

Wait a minute. It may well be "difficult" to determine consent when both parties have been drinking (assuming we don't take the radfem position that it's on the dude to prove consent). It is not, however, necessarily impossible to determine consent, and the difficulty shouldn't prevent an investigation.

Here, even the article provides evidence that there was no consent. The man wrote her a Facebook message saying "I’m sorry I did this to you, I didn’t think it was that big of a deal..." What did he "do to" her and think was only a minor "deal"?

Apart from the accusation of rape, the only other apparent claim of injury is related to the blood on the sheet. Yet the man claims this was his blood, not hers. If that's true, he certainly wouldn't be apologizing for the blood, because it had nothing to do with any injury to her.

Therefore, the only thing about which he might have needed to apologize was the sex itself. He apparently thought it was a problem for her – that it was at least a little bit "of a deal" and something he "did to" her. If he knew the sex was a problem – even a small problem – it is likely that he didn't think she meaningfully consented.

Am I missing something?

Ms. Shank's statement, "Based upon my findings in my investigation..." would seem to indicate that she did conduct an investigation.

Thanks, ndustudent. I somewhat glossed over that claim of Ms. Shank's. I suppose that my criticism might more usefully be that her "both were drinking" excuse is belied by the man's Facebook apology.

All other things being equal, "both were drinking" might create enough ambiguity that determining consent was effectively impossible. Here, though, all other things are not equal. The man made a statement indicating that at the time he knew the woman had concerns about having sex with him, to wit, "I didn’t think it was that big of a deal."

Perhaps the fact that he was drinking mitigates his failure to respect her concerns, but that it not what Ms. Shanks claims. Perhaps Ms. Shanks found that because the woman was drinking, the woman failed to protest "enough." That, however, is not what Ms. Shanks said, either.

Instead, Ms. Shanks seems to have painted this all over as simply a he-said/she-said where both he and she were too toasted to know what they were doing. Her apparent failure to address other evidence mentioned in the article led me to conclude that she did not conduct a thorough investigation. Her claim to have conducted an investigation does not change my assessment.

Yes, I realize I'm Monday-morning detective-ing. But this smells bad and that's largely because of Ms. Shank's public statements of explanation – not just her ultimate decision. If the school wants people to conclude it didn't just refuse to prosecute a rape, and threaten the rape victim, it would be helpful to release far more detail about the investigation and reasoning. They could likely comment on the bulk of the evidence without publicly identifying the accused.

"Am I missing something?" – alouatta

I find the apology highly suspicious as well, but it does not prove a rape. There are a million things he could be apologizing for, including bleeding all over her sheets. I haven’t taken a health class in awhile, but I imagine a bleeding penis could cause some problems on the safe sex front (not to mention being pretty gross).

noname, I agree the apology alone doesn't prove rape. It is, however, evidence that a rape occurred.

I disagree that there could be a million things the man apologized for. In fact, I think there are only a handful of possibilities, chief among them non-consensual sex. The reported apology sounds as if the man was mortified about something rather terrible:

"I’m sorry I did this to you, I didn’t think it was that big of a deal and I cant [sic] change the past so all I can do is apologize .. I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry.�

Bleeding on the woman's sheets does not seem to me to be a sufficient reason for such a full-throated and desperate apology, wishing to "change the past." Nor is bleeding on the sheets something he would have done to her, merely to her sheets. It's also unlikely that blood on the sheets would have been something that, at the time, did not seem like "that big of a deal" but later became a big deal.

Your suggestion that he was apologizing for breaching safe sex protocol is somewhat more plausible. I still find it a long stretch, though.

Regardless, and again, my point was not that the evidence mentioned in the article is sufficient to convict and jail this man. My point is, rather, that there seems to be more than enough evidence just in the article for the school to have pursued a quite rigorous investigation. Ms. Shank's dismissive comment about drinking and consent, as well as the implied threat to charge the woman, suggest to me that the investigation was rather cursory.