see HuffingtonPost: UCSF Let A Student Accused Of Sexual Assault Finish His Classes Before Punishing Him
The University of California, San Francisco, asked an alleged sexual assault survivor to allow a dean access to her medical records, then dragged out the investigation for so long that the accused student was able to finish his classes before the school suspended him.
...Once UCSF decided the accused had violated the university's policy on sexual assault, it took another two months to decide on a punishment, according to emails obtained by The Huffington Post.
The protracted nature of Vera's case has raised questions about whether the University of California system, which currently has four campuses under federal investigation, is actually making progress adjudicating sexual assault cases. A June 2014 report by a state auditor concluded that two other UC campuses, Berkeley and Los Angeles, "did not consistently complete investigations in a timely manner." In response, University of California President Janet Napolitano promised to review policy and implement changes on all campuses in the system.
and then it includes this:
UCSF declined to answer any questions, including those that were about school policies rather than any specific case.
Just the other day, Napolitano said "we are on this" regarding questions raised on Title IX, Clery Campus Safety at that National Journal event where she was interviewed - that video available in this previous post.
'No Comments' = 'We Are On This'?!
UC Won't Answer General ?s On Its Title IX Policy?,
Other Red Flag: Won't Confirm Or Deny Board Members Serving On UC Boards?! Won't Give Data Requested By CA Leg.Leadership?! etc.
UC is in a state of handing out rolling 'NO Comment's all over the place
On Admissions Decisions post earlier --see San Jose Mercury:
San Jose Mercury News: UC Delays Release Of Admissions Data Amid Budget Negotiations
State Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León -- who is still waiting for data he requested weeks ago on how many UC applicants were placed on wait lists -- says the university is "using the hopes of wait-listed students as a bargaining chip in funding negotiations."
SF Chronicle: 'UC Fails To Reveal Spending Details - data under new law sought in Tuition Debate', 'UC Resists Detailing How It Spends Public Money' and 'UC resists law requiring disclosure of expenditures' (2014)
On Policy questions in USA Today coverage and HuffPo coverage listed here:
HuffPo: "Similarly, UC Berkeley provided data to The Huffington Post last year, but declined to separate how many students were expelled versus suspended. Initially, the flagship campus cited federal privacy law but later admitted it was just declining to share the information."
USA Today: "A spokesperson for the University of California state system declined to comment on how top administrators have met to craft and implement a coordinated policy change among the University of California schools."
The resources implemented by UC-Berkeley, Warner says, are still problematic for survivors.
Over and Over
They won't even comment to credentialed reporters to answer or clarify if someone is sitting as a board member for UC or not:
On Peevey - did Sac Bee really confirm it or deny it (on behalf of?, in place of?) UCLA?-see:
When last we wrote,* UCLA seemed to be mum on the subject which is strange because apparently he never did take his seat.
Earlier UCLA Fac Blog bolded this here:
In an interview with U-T San Diego last month, Pincetl could not explain how she knew about the San Onofre funds months before the grant opportunity was made public. Pincetl and UCLA officials have declined to answer follow-up questions or provide a copy of her proposal...
-then goes on to include this here:
UCLA officials did not respond to an inquiry this week about whether Peevey remains on the Luskin Center board.
see: UT San Diego on it here for their full article.
Is UT San Diego right that he did serve/sit on that UCLA board??!
Or is Sac Bee right that he did not serve/sit on that UCLA board??!
Also, see Title IX Blog analysis: here especially the ending where pregnancy and retaliation come up.
It is an analysis of
this report: Latest Report to the President, the Secretary of Education, and Congress
summarizing its work in fiscal years 2013 and 2014.
(The bold emphasis is added throughout this post to highlight the no comments approach by UC.)
- Richard Blum (AGAIN!)
- Wm. De La Pena
- Gareth Elliott
- George Kieffer
- Sherry Lansing (AGAIN!)
- Hadi Makarechian
- Eloy Ortiz Oakley
- Norman Pattiz (AGAIN!)
- John A. Pérez
- Bonnie Reiss
- Richard Sherman
- Bruce Varner
- Charlene Zettel
- VACANT (M Anguiano?)
- VACANT (L Park?)
- UC Regents Committees
- Staff Advisors, Faculty Reps, Designates
- Ex Officio UC Regents
- UC Alumni Regents
- VACANT (E Tauscher?)
- VACANT (H Guber?)
- Paul Monge
- Vacant (by Lozano)
"If the University were a business, it would likely be the largest corporation in California."
"If The University Were A Business, It Would Likely Be The Largest Corporation In California"-Regents Minutes (2010)