Recent news reports inform the public that yet another sexual assault occurred on the University of Massachusetts campus. On Sept. 2, an 18-year-old male student is alleged to have assaulted a female student. Bystanders intervened, police soon apprehended the alleged attacker, who is no longer a student at the University. At least two news reports reveal UMass students’ surprise that the incident took place. After all, the school failed to disclose the alleged crime to the campus community.
The administration declined to send an emergency text notification, and it similarly declined to later release an email to the school. The news report describes student disappointment at the school’s inaction, but if we use the Clery Act to guide our judgment, then UMass acted within reason. This act requires colleges and universities that use federal aid programs to comply with its regulations on addressing campus crime.
On the whole, UMass systematically complies with this act. For example, administrators have devised an emergency response system as well as release an annual crime log.
The Clery Act also requires relevant schools to “issue timely warnings about Clery Act crimes which pose a serious or ongoing threat to students and employees.” Under this requirement, UMass’ actions fall well within legal bounds. Since police quickly caught the alleged sole offender, the incident ceased to pose a threat to the UMass community and thus failed to legally warrant campus-wide notification.
Nothing justifies sexual assault, so we should do all that we can to develop methods that prevent it. One of the easiest ways is for the campus community to engage in dialogue about the topic. When this dialogue occurs, people create and promote suggestions such as the need to increase the number of blue lights on campus or the need to hire more nighttime security. The school’s actions do obey the law, but I suggest that UMass should transcend the bare legal minimum.
I contend that the University should promote discussion about the topic. The administration holds the most power to facilitate dialogue, and it should use its power to improve the campus climate. It still stands that everyone should facilitate this dialogue, but only a few people have the ability to easily send the campus mass texts and/or emails.
By the time students pack their bags for Thanksgiving break, more offenders will surely have committed these horrific crimes. Within recent years, more student victims have come forward with their horror stories. Six cases of sexual assault occurred in 2009: 12 in 2010; 13 in 2011; and 15 in 2012.
I don’t claim that UMass deals with this issue inadequately — on the contrary, our school stands as a leader in higher education regarding confronting sexual violence. The school participates in the Five College Clothesline Project, educates Residential Life staff on the topic and advertises resources such as the Center for Women and Community. It even hosted a regional conference about sexual and domestic violence to more than 100 school administrators earlier this semester.
The administration’s attitude toward sexual violence reveals the school’s already mature approach to an issue that peer institutions often shy away from. However, by improving its response methods now, the University can garner only more constructive responses by the community in the future.
Brandon Sides is a Collegian columnist and can be reached at [email protected].
![By freestocks.org [Creative Commons Zero], via Wikimedia Commons](https://dailycollegian.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Picture1-1.png)
Mr Mars • Dec 7, 2013 at 12:16 am
The SGA has walked for the last 9 years, back when I was there. They can do nothing about this, it’s the UMPD that has the funding.
Stefan Herlitz • Dec 3, 2013 at 10:47 am
Don’t worry, there are plenty within the SGA on the ball on this- the Associate Speaker is already set to meet with the UMPD this week specifically about blue lights.
Brandon Sides • Dec 2, 2013 at 12:29 am
Hi, Billy. I saw your comment a while back and checked the blue light in question. University staff had covered it up to indicate that it was out of order. A few days later, though, it was lit and presumably fully functioning.
.
Your note about the twice-faulty light supports even more so the need for the University to publicly acknowledge its shortcomings with respect to campus sexual assaults. I’m concerned that UMPD/Maintenence/the SGA declined to acknowledge this lighting issue, and that they didn’t at the very least quietly fix it. I understand the desire to avoid bad publicity (especially after last year’s well-publicized incident), but it worries me that the lighting issue has occurred on at least two recent occasions before Maintenence was called to fix it.
.
Hi, Dr. Cutting. I think your comments about cell phones not always working, like Billy’s comment, further supports the need for UMPD/Maintenence/the SGA to address the habitually faulty lighting system. I hope to soon address the issue to an SGA representative. Routine checks are inexpensive and could prevent serious harm. An easy win-win, I think.
Dr. Ed Cutting • Nov 16, 2013 at 12:19 pm
Three things worth knowing:
1: A 911 call from a cell phone goes to the State Police dispatcher who has to then has to route it back to the UMPD. This not only takes precious time as you have to explain the problem at least twice (sometimes thrice) but there is often a significant decrease in reception with each new connection.
The business number of the UMPD is 1-413-555-2121 and it is answered by the UMPD’s dispatcher — a call made to that number goes directly to someone who can send help and even though the blinking light is on the other side of the board, if you immediately say “this is an emergency” when they answer, the human being sitting in the police station will treat it as one.
As you are paying for the call, you will have an indisputable record of exactly when you made the call. This is quite valuable not only if you have to document the incident but should there later be a judicial hearing, you have your own record of exactly when you called the police.
2: The FCC requires that *all* 911 calls be routed to the authorities, even if the phone has service with a different carrier or no service at all. Any 911 call that physically reaches a tower must be sent to the authorities unless a different tower is already doing it.
Hence as long as the battery is charged and your signal can reach a tower, you can still make a 911 call on a Tracfone that no longer has service. (You have to go through the state police dispatcher, but you can still reach the UMPD.)
3: Cell phones are two-way radios, and while the towers transmit a strong signal, the cell phones signal is something like 1/3 watt — a very weak and signal strength then decreases by the *square* of the distance. You can get into a situation where you are too far away for your signal to make it back to the tower — and your calls get dropped as soon as you dial them.
Text messages are transmitted differently and while it might take several minutes, they often will go through in situations where you can’t make a voice call. Something to remember if you break an ankle while hiking in some remote area — and if the authorities are looking for you after dark, particularly if they are looking for you with a helicopter, there’s a good chance they have some sort of night vision device that amplifies existing light — I’m told that the lit panel of a cell phone shows up incredibly well on those….
But as to the Blue-Light HELP phones — I wouldn’t depend on them. And we won’t get into the three different times (that I know of) when a 911 call could *not* be made from *any* of the wired phones in *any* of the dormitories! The Ericsson boxes (546 & 545 exchanges) had stopped talking to each other — all one would get would be a busy signal. But I digress….
Dr. Ed Cutting • Nov 14, 2013 at 12:37 am
Two words: “bystanders intervened.” Do we have a gender breakdown of the “bystanders” — I’m willing to bet that at least some of them were male.
Compare this to — well just google “Big Dan’s Tavern”….
Are UMass students implicitly (if not explicitly) supportive of underaged drinkng? I think we can answer that.
Are UMass students implicitly supportive of rape — no.
“Bystanders” don’t intervene when someone’s smuggling a case of beer into the dorm, do they????
Billy • Nov 13, 2013 at 3:13 pm
Hi Brandon, I think it’s important to note that according to second-hand accounts of the Sep. 2 assault, the blue light nearest the attack was found to be inoperable:
http://dhunki.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/umass-mishandles-sexual-assault/
In the aftermath, the administration assured those concerned that the light had been fixed, “checked, and checked again”.
However, after another incident over a month later, the very same blue light was once again found to be inoperable. How can we talk of adequate responses or adding more blue lights, when the current response system is clearly not working?
There are many other unpublicized details about this case in the blog article, which I encourage all to read.