Canadian universities make their own laws

It’s rather stunning that, in the midst of university “Title IX” cases being overturned by the courts in the US, Canada is adopting the same failing system of #BelieveWomen in university-mandated reforms. It’s as if Canadians can’t read the news.

The advocates pushing these Star Chamber style inquisitions seem to think their hashtags on Twitter will somehow deter judges from upholding the law. But they are wrong. The only delay thus far has been the expense of litigation but, as more students are suspended without a fair hearing, more lawsuits will result.

Primarily, social hysteria has been based on claims that the legal system is broken and thus women, particularly those in university, are turning to a different method of justice. These complainants apparently don’t go to police because they have a better option.

But what makes university students so special?

If the justice system is as broken as they say then why should university students get some sort of special tribunal where they don’t have to follow the normal rules of due process? If this system is so good, why isn’t it available to everyone? How does this not “privilege” people who can afford to go to university? Think of all those rape victims who don’t have access to education!!

With so many questions, judges in the US are making the answer clear: the so called “justice” in these tribunals doesn’t pass the smell test and it would never be accepted as justice in any other venue.

As David French wrote in the National Review, ”the court’s ruling requires schools to afford accused students basic due-process rights, restoring a system of justice that existed for centuries before #BelieveWomen corrupted the legal landscape.”

Of course the “woke” universities disagree. They’ve got a new vision for how to deal with trials and they promise better percentages of convictions. After all, when you’re dealing with accusations of sexual assault it’s not a matter of guilt or innocence, it’s just a question of how many of the bastards you can convict.

Well who needs the law? One thing has become very clear in the court of public opinion: if someone proclaims innocence he or she is worse than human garbage. Want a plea bargain? Good. They’ll take your apology then make you pay double the sentence.

And who are these fuddy-duddy judges to tell university people how to think? Universities are the breeding ground of the next generation of thought! They’ll set these stupid judges right.

Maybe the law just has to wake up to their wokeness.

Why should someone actually know what they are accused of? Ridiculous! Why should they have the right to cross-examine their traumatized accuser? It’s not like the accused person is suffering any trauma or needs a chance to challenge any witnesses who might be lying. No. Instead we should let a “neutral” person investigate and conclude without any interference in the narrative.

An interesting aspect to these substitute legal systems is that, without the ability to hear the accusations themselves, the accused often have to respond to things they’re told were said about them as relayed to them through a third party. Or maybe as told to the third party by the support person who heard what the accuser told them.

But don’t worry, the arbitrator is completely neutral and she’ll tell you everything you need to know. Just make sure you give a good answer without any warning in advance of what you’ll be accused of. And make sure you’ve got your side of the story documented thoroughly when you walk in the room not knowing what you’re accused of.

But it’s all about conviction rates, right? There are other ways to improve convictions - don’t bother with a trial at all. Of course that would be too bold so we get the show trial instead. Have to maintain illusions to keep the common people happy.

This farce has gone on for too long.

Nobody really thinks these tribunals are fair. The only reason #BelieveWomen has lasted this long is because people are afraid to speak out until it’s a friend or family member who has his life destroyed. Then they are afraid to speak out because they might be targeted next for saying anything.

These university tribunals were not created to make the world safer they were designed as a testing ground to see if “progressive” ideologues could get away with perverting justice. In the US, the law has started to take a stand.

In Canada, we’re just pretending we haven’t noticed.