Off Topic

Should U of C criminally convicted student be expelled?

  • Last Updated:
  • Jan 12th, 2018 8:45 pm
Deal Addict
Sep 23, 2007
4331 posts
737 upvotes
sandikosh wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 6:48 am
Do you think the 13 years old girl he sexually interfered with will grow up and forget about it? Don't you think that will interfere her relationship with men in the future? Every day there is an article about someone who was mistreated when they were young and is not able to get past it. When the mother of that child says he did his time for his crime, then let it be.
I think the impact of the crime and being expelled from university are different topics. People can be emotionally hurt by a number of things. I don't think the degree of punishment should tie to the degree of emotional trauma. And even if there is a legal philosophy to do so, how the heck do you translate a non-quantitative measure into a quantity based punishment? Is there some way to score your degree of trauma on a scale of 1-100? And then say something like if your trauma scale is a 75, then that's 3 years in jail. This would obviously be absurd. And then every trial will boil down to a show of "lets put on our acting hats and act as traumatized as possible". I think any legal system would be more effective if it is based on objective evidence and pre-defined definitions.

@Micelli, People will stigmatize others no matter what you do. Every society has formed in-groups and out groups and add stigma. That's almost like human nature to me. Yes I think he deserves as much stigmatization as people want to give. I don't agree with him being expelled, but I see nothing wrong with people stigmatizing him to the degree that he needs to relocate to another city. I think people deserve a 2nd chance. He is only 18. He doesn't deserve expulsion but he probably has enough reasons to start life fresh somewhere else anyways.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Jan 7, 2007
19580 posts
3115 upvotes
Poormond Hill
Micelli_Illuminatti wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 11:22 am
That's not the point. The point was that for what he did, he was punished by our criminal justice system. Although it is heartbreaking what happened to the 13 year old, no amount of punishment on the convict will ever change what happened to her; instead with the right amount of help from her family/community, she may be able to get over it, in time.
Apparently the mother disagrees with the justice system. And who should pay to help her overcome the trauma? The innocent taxpayers? The mother? The child?
A life spent making mistakes is not only more memorable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 17, 2009
1534 posts
483 upvotes
@BananaHunter Well said.

@sandikosh To answer your question, in Ontario, there is the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, to assist victims and their families. I'm not sure about Alberta. The point being that there are services to assist victims. In Ontario, the CICB is funded, at least in part, via the victims' surcharge fees, levied against convicted people/corporations.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.
Deal Addict
May 17, 2005
4034 posts
569 upvotes
Micelli_Illuminatti wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 12:20 pm
As I understood it, the short version is that victim used to send him inappropriate pics of herself. Then she stopped. He got mad. When they met, he held her in a choke-hold. The mother of the victim's friend, which victim's friend also used to send the convict pics of herself, found out and called police.

I was not involved in the prosecution of the case, but if it were me, charges for assault and child pornography would have also worked. The latter attracts mandatory minimum sentencing (I think at least 1.5 years), which may explain why that prosecutor withdrew the c.p. charge, following the plea bargaining. To say the offender dodged a bullet, in terms of incarceration length, is an understatement.
ok ... IMHO he deserve a kick in a groin ...
Deal Addict
Sep 23, 2007
4331 posts
737 upvotes
sandikosh wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 12:55 pm
Apparently the mother disagrees with the justice system. And who should pay to help her overcome the trauma? The innocent taxpayers? The mother? The child?
Regarding disagreeing with the justice system, I don't think the mother's opinion necessarily has merit. You can run over my cat by accident and I can argue that you deserve to be in jail for life. That doesn't make my desire reasonable. Justice cannot be based on emotions and degree of outrage.

In terms of overcoming trauma, you mentioned "pay". I can appreciate that certain professionals can assist, but I like to think that individuals are ultimately responsible for their emotional well being. And I'd argue that friends and family can probably do more good than a professional. Everyone has gone through some form of adversity in life. Some suffer more. Some suffer less. You can ask the love of your life on a date and get rejected. Then because you are so emotional that you fail to focus at work and perform your job. Then you get fired and your life goes downhill. You ultimately need to pick yourself back up and get over it. It takes a lot more than money to overcome trauma. It takes character. This is not intended to lessen the crime committed. This is simply the healthiest life philosophy a human being can follow. You can suffer a set back and then complain about it forever. Or you can get over it in time and make your life meaningful.
Deal Addict
Apr 28, 2004
1740 posts
299 upvotes
Micelli_Illuminatti wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 11:22 am
In today's litigious society, a university nixing a student b/c of a criminal record is asking for a human rights fight on its hands.
What are you talking about?!? A criminal record can LEGALLY preclude you from many things in society. This student has not been granted a pardon nor had his record suspended.

Micelli_Illuminatti wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 11:22 am
This may explain why U of C is not rushing to a decision to expel him.
No, the logical explanation is that like most large institutions, there are written procedures in place to deal with such non-academic matters, of which one is a meeting with the student and the disciplinary committee.
Micelli_Illuminatti wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 11:22 am
I would suggest there would be no issue if the offender was a woman. Indeed, if the convict is a member of visible minority, not only will she be allowed to a prestigious university, but also celebrated (despite a murder rap). Remember, some issues seem to be attracted only to white people, or more specifically, white men.
Please provide some statistical support that visible minorities or women get preferential treatment related to past criminal records upon re-applying to colleges and universities. Otherwise I can easily pull up individual examples of white males getting into university (law school) too. Here's a recent one by 60 Minutes' Steve Kroft: Meet a convicted felon who became a Georgetown law professor.
Micelli_Illuminatti wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 11:22 am
I'm calling this for what it is: a social justice trial. I'm sure neither you nor me would want our lives and careers destroyed for something stupid we did when we were teenagers.
He was convicted in a Canadian court of law. He's on the Sex Offender registry for the next ten years. A school expulsion seems like a typical consequence. The only "social justice warrior" I see here is you trying to defend his actions and excuse his behaviour when he was already an adult. And as your Michelle Jones link and my Shon Hopwood example, convicts that already served their time can always turn their lives around.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 17, 2009
1534 posts
483 upvotes
@akira1971 I get your point. I'm not sure you get mine. If a person does something unlawfully and goes to prison, I suggest that should be the end of it. A person's life ought not to be ruined because of a mistake, especially one done early in life.

As per the link In my original post, after pleading guilty, the guy will do 90 days in jail and be on the S.O. registry for 10 years. A school (or employment) expulsion should not be a typical consequence. You cannot punish people relentlessly, especially young people (he's 21).

Advocating that people can be rehabilitated even after doing terrible things, does not make me a social justice warrior. On the other hand, giving media interviews and creating a petition, actively calling thousands of people to shame the convict, does.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.
Deal Addict
Sep 13, 2016
1495 posts
663 upvotes
Micelli_Illuminatti wrote:
Jan 11th, 2018 2:54 pm
@akira1971 I get your point. I'm not sure you get mine. If a person does something unlawfully and goes to prison, I suggest that should be the end of it. A person's life ought not to be ruined because of a mistake, especially one done early in life.

As per the link In my original post, after pleading guilty, the guy will do 90 days in jail and be on the S.O. registry for 10 years. A school (or employment) expulsion should not be a typical consequence. You cannot punish people relentlessly, especially young people (he's 21).

Advocating that people can be rehabilitated even after doing terrible things, does not make me a social justice warrior. On the other hand, giving media interviews and creating a petition, actively calling thousands of people to shame the convict, does.
One more point to consider is that how many times should a person be punished for the same instance of crime. I would argue that if ppl feel a 90 day sentence is too lenient, then it should contested be in courts. I could understand if he were a serial offender, but for one instance of crime done when he was barely an adult legally does not warrant expulsion. I agree that a school or employment expulsion should not be a typical consequence, and if done, they would only push him further away from a course correction in life.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
May 1, 2003
6490 posts
179 upvotes
what does university have to do with having a criminal record? There are plenty of people with criminal records that attend university. Why would this be different?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
5727 posts
3034 upvotes
Edmonton
Considering Canadian senators have been convicted of assault and possession of cocaine (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Brazeau) WHILE he was a senator, kicking a student out for things that they did prior to him being a student seems excessive. And as others have said, it’s not like he’ll be working with 13 year olds while attending school.

And if one was to actually read the U of C’s code of conduct, it only talks about student’s actions while representing the school. Actions that occurred prior to even attending school (much less representing the school) would not be relevant. Now if this “man” performed his crime while providing guided tours around the school to junior high school kids, that would be a different story.

And personally, I agree with many of the others. It’s up to the justice system to provide punishment for crimes. Or should we be allowed to kick the crap out someone on the street because they committed a crime 2 years ago? It’s one thing for convicts to face additional hurdles in life as repercussions to their criminal history. But it’s another to specifically try to punish them further. If we’re not going to try to help people rehabilitate themselves, we might as well keep them in prison

C
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
5727 posts
3034 upvotes
Edmonton
Btw, I do agree with some of the mother’s statements regarding the exceptions made for this student to not inconvenience him during the trial while he was attending school and playing hockey. But that doesn’t mean expelling him from school is the right thing either.

C
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
5727 posts
3034 upvotes
Edmonton
Updated article on CBC today (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/u ... -1.4483598) has the following quote:
Two days after the University of Calgary launched a review of Connor Neurauter's status as a student, the school says it has no grounds on which to expel the 21-year-old convicted sex offender.

But the school is advising him "not to return to campus for the remainder of the term."

...

"The matter in British Columbia occurred before Mr. Neurauter was a student at the University of Calgary. This is important, because our policies do not apply to activity that occurred before the person was a member of our campus community," said Dru Marshall, the university's provost and vice-president academic.
C
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 17, 2009
1534 posts
483 upvotes
@CNeufeld Thank you for the update and insight.

I'm glad that cooler minds prevailed. Now, if the university is urging this man to stay off campus, they should return some of his tuition money, because technically he is told not to use certain facilities.

In regards to the "delay because he has hockey practice" comment, I'm not sure that is accurate. From perusing the various media outlets, it looks like he tried once, after he was charged, to partake in hockey camp, but was shut down. Other than that, he did not play hockey anymore. Also, his family is disputing that the court/prosecutor gave him preferential treatment.

I really hope he gets the help he needs.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 17, 2009
1534 posts
483 upvotes
ishfish wrote:
Jan 12th, 2018 2:22 pm
http://www.660news.com/2018/01/12/u-c-w ... es-school/
The article says he will not be expelled, but he will be escorted off campus.
Ugh. Now it gets ugly. If he's paid full tuition, he can argue that he is lawfully allowed to be there. You're either allowed or not. Besides help, I also hope he will call a lawyer.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.

Top