For years, I've been writing about the issue of censorship on our nation's
campuses. But I have given far too little emphasis to due process violations
within the so-called campus judiciary. Today, that all comes to an end. This
will be the beginning of a series of columns highlighting the worst colleges in
America when it comes to due process violations. I will reveal the name of this
week's winner after explaining why this university is being ushered into the due
process Hall of Shame.
In 2005, a professor was brought up on charges of quid pro quo sexual
harassment. Specifically, he was accused of giving a student an A in exchange
for dancing with the professor in a sexually provocative way. There was only one
problem with the charge: it wasn't true.
One set of university documents (the transcripts) revealed no A was given. The
university convicted the professor anyway even after it was clear that another
set of documents (the official harassment accusations) had been doctored in
order to sustain the charge.
In 2009, our present inductees disciplined a fraternity for waving a fraternity
flag that had a portion of the confederate flag imbedded within it.
Incidentally, they waved it at another southern fraternity that also had a
fraternity flag with a portion of a confederate flag imbedded within it. The
all-white fraternity waved it at the other all-white fraternity at a university
intramural game at which no nonwhites were present. So a white university
official charged them with violating the campus hate speech code.
I wrote about the incident and the university soon realized the campus speech
code (as applied) was illegal. So, rather than dropping the charges, they
doctored university documents in order to remove any evidence that the charges
against the fraternity were related to the speech code. They then inserted new
allegations and convicted them under those. The fraternity was then punished
with suspension from intramural sports competition for "taunting" rather than
"hate speech" as originally charged.
In 2011, a professor was accused of sexual harassment and sought out legal
counsel to defend him. During cross-examination by his attorney, the female
accuser claimed not to have made two statements included in the official
charges. In other words, the university helped the accuser by padding the
charges without even bothering to tell her.
The accused was eventually dismissed from the university. Those tampering with
the evidence were never identified and disciplined.
In 2012, police responded to an off campus alcohol-related incident involving a
campus social organization. The police left shortly after arriving and no
charges or arrests were even contemplated by police. Nonetheless, officers of
the student organization were brought in to the Dean's Office for interrogation.
Since they were being asked about behaviors that were minor violations of the
criminal law, they asked to have legal counsel present. Their request was
Recently, I had a chance to hear the tape recorded interrogation of the student
officers. University officials repeatedly denied their requests for counsel and
asked them to turn off the tape recorder. By the end of the investigation, the
university had prepared three different reports on the incident. The facts in
report #3 bore no resemblance to the facts in report #1. Each time the
university realized its charges were incorrect they simply constructed a new
version of events. Decent people would have dropped the charges once they
realized they were wrong. But this is not the way things are done at Evidence
Tampering U. The charges are still pending and the fate of the student
organization is still hanging in the air.
Again in 2012, a professor appealed a sexual harassment charge (anyone seeing a
pattern here?) and was exonerated on charges of inappropriately touching a
student. Finally, there is some good news at Evidence Tampering U, right? Wrong.
I'm not finished.
During the appeal of the conviction for inappropriate touching the university
inserted a new charge of "inappropriate communication." The university convicted
the professor of that in partial retaliation for his appeal on the charge of
inappropriate touching. No chance of winning an appeal at Evidence Tampering U.
These people are good. They rig appeals by adding new charges each step of the
way. They base their judiciary rules on Franz Kafka novels.
This is all very important because the way universities administer justice
affects the way students view justice. At Evidence Tampering U., justice is not
a process. It is a result. The ends justify the means. It is the same mentality
that justifies stealing elections. And it is not the way we educate young
people. It is the way that a constitutional republic eventually turns into a
Unfortunately, it is the way things are done at The University of North
Carolina at Wilmington, our inaugural inductees into the Due Process Hall of
Shame. Their liberal administrators make providing a liberal education damned
near impossible. It may seem ironic. But that’s what the evidence reveals.
In the next installment, we will learn about the role the Obama Department of
Education has played in the erosion of campus due process. Students aren’t
biting the hand that feeds them. They just re-elected the hand that is slapping
Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina
Wilmington and author of
Feminists Say the Darndest Things: A Politically Incorrect Professor
Confronts "Womyn" On Campus.