Sexual Assault On College Campus

Sexual assault is perhaps the hardest type of case to win in a court of law—possibly because of rape myths, misconceptions, and juror bias against the victim. Prosecutors have the discretion to choose whether to pursue a case based, in large part, on the victim’s past behavior, looks, where he/she lives, etc. To think that only one-half of the assaults reported to the police result in an arrest is disturbing. New legislations attempts to find fault on a party other than the victim and provide aide to the victim. Sexual assault and rape is a relatively new major policy concern, which needs more research and improved trainings of professionals.

Multiple studies have concluded that preventing sexual assault, all forms, on campus is nearly impossible.

Armstrong, Hamilton, and Sweeney take note of the multiple cases on a college campus of “party rape”—almost every scenarios involved alcohol. While alcohol use is a huge factor in sexual assault, efforts to prevent underage drinking may contribute to sexual assault. These approaches lead to students binge drinking, or drinking in private and more dangerous places. While preventing drinking in residence halls, the universities are pushing students to go elsewhere to drink including bars, off-campus houses, and fraternities. Armstrong, Hamilton, and Sweeney focused their study on fraternity parties because of the vulnerability of women in those instances. Fraternities host parties that seem to sexualize women such as “Pimps and Hos” and “CEOs and Secretary Ho”—with names like these its astonishing that women abide by the so-called dress code for these parties especially with the rape myth stating that women who are sexually assaulted ask for it by the way they dress or

The DDA notes one specific case in which he was uncertain about filing a case with a detective. He describes the woman who was raped as: 20 going on 65, skinny, gangly, and a cluck head (willing to do anything to get drugs/high). The DDA clearly implies characteristic about the victim’s moral character and activities in which she chooses to be a part. The DDA questions why the female went to Center Heights after midnight implying that any “good” and sane woman would be off the streets that that time—questioning her moral character. Assuming the worst in every aspect of the case, the female met with a friend she met in rehab on an intersection known for its prostitution activity—prosecutors assume she is engaging in illegal activities at that location. The prosecutor pins the victim as a “drug addict who came to Center Heights to trade sex for drugs” (Frohmann, 1997, p. 540)—with this information, the jury views the victim as non-credible. In Victomology, Doerner writes about rape myths including the one where, if a woman has had multiple sexual partners, then she cannot be sexually assaulted. Another insidious one is the concept that, if a woman is drunk or passed out from drinking too much it is okay too have sex with her. He also writes about new legislations that were leaning towards making the criminal justice more “victim-friendly” by