JIO stats include 2 rapes

By STEPHANIE DESMON The Judicial Inquiry Officer placed acquaintance rape in its own category of delinquent behavior for the first time, according to last year's statistical report of JIO cases released earlier this week. The statistics reported two acquaintance rapes were brought to the attention of the JIO between September 1990 and August 1991. According to the report, the sanctions for the two rape cases included expulsion and a "notation" on the transcript. Interim JIO Jane Combrinck-Graham would not say whether the punishments were in two separate incidents or if both punishments were used in the same case. However, the statistics show only one student was expelled for violating the University's Code of Conduct last school year. The judicial office, which formerly included acquaintance rape with another category, said the new category was created in response to the University's new Acquaintance Rape and Sexual Violence Policy. The policy defines acquaintance rape, describes the University's resources for prevention and investigation and states the sanctions that will be taken against an individual who commits a sexual assault. "There is no behavior in this state called acquaintance rape," Combrinck-Graham said yesterday. "But we have defined that behavior and given it a name as part of the University policy." "We looked at two cases and said those cases were consistent with cases outlined in the acquaintance rape policy," Combrinck-Graham added. The JIO investigated only one fewer case during the 1990-91 academic year than during the previous year. The number of complaints of violations of the Code of Academic Integrity, which includes use of another person's work, plagiarism and miscellaneous cheating, dropped from 51 complaints to 30 last year. Sexual harassment complaints doubled last year, from eight to 16. Combrinck-Graham said that since "so many factors" are involved in the entire process, she could not point to any single reason for either the stability or change of the statistics. Combrinck-Graham also said she wishes she could divulge more information about the cases that come before her to create a deterrence for future misbehavior. "I'd like to say lots more that might have more meaning," she said. "The major constraint is our confidentiality policy." A yearly report by the JIO is required by the University's Judicial Charter. Combrinck-Graham said she is looking into the possibility of being able to report more frequently and in a bit more detail. She also said she may change some of the sanction categories in order to update them. "[Greater] information can serve as a deterrent but it is more likely to serve as an educator," Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson said yesterday. This semester, Morrisson's office will establish a JIO advisory board with some student members which she said will increase student involvement in all aspects of the judicial process. And while Morrisson said she does not know what to conclude from the statistics, she hopes to see a positive change in the future. "I think things will change when students themselves care enough about each other and the community they live in to take steps to insure these incidents don't occur," Morrisson said. The report was published in this week's Almanac. Former JIO Constance Goodman, who held the post during much of the time covered by the report, declined to comment this week.