Campus Safety & The Clery Act

1. Villanova University EDU 8656: School Law Nick Tumolo April 19, 2012 Campus Safety & The Clery Act

2. April 5, 1986 – Lehigh University A mentally ill sophomore, drunk and angry because he'd lost a student election, entered a dormitory through a propped open emergency exit. Joseph Henry, 20, went down the hall, trying the doorknob of each room until he found one unlocked…..

3. He later told police he had intended only to burglarize the room, but when Jeanne Clery awoke he slashed her neck with a broken beer bottle, raped her, and strangled her to death. Jeanne Clery, 19

4. Lehigh had not disclosed 38 other violent crimes over the past three years. Howard and Connie Clery began to advocate for change. On Nov. 8, 1990 President Bush signed into law the Crime Awareness & Campus Security Act

5. Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policyand Campus Crime Statistics Act • Federal law that requires colleges and universities across the United States to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. • Applies to all public & private institutions because the law is tied to participation in federal student financial aid programs. • Regulated and enforced by the US Department of Education. • Institutions that fail to comply may be fined or lose eligibility to receive federal student aid programs.

6. The Clery Act Three main components: 1. Crime statistics 2. Access to timely information 3. Annual report

7. Crime Statistics • Schools must disclose statistics for certain crimes that happen on campus, • adjacent to campus, and any area affiliated with the institution*. • 7 Categories: Homicide, Sex Offenses, Robbery, • Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Motor Vehicle Theft, Arson • Schools also must report 3 types off incidents only if they result in • arrest and/or disciplinary referral: 1.) Liquor Law Violations • 2.) Drug Law Violations 3.) Illegal Weapons Possession • Statistics must be broken down geographically into: “on-campus,” • “on-campus residential facilities,” and “noncampus/public property” • *Schools must also denote if incidents were reported as “hate crimes”

8. Access to Timely Information • Schools are required to provide both “timely warnings” • and an updated public crime log • The “timely warning” is subjective and is only triggered when • there is an ongoing threat • The log must record all incidents reported to campus security • (not just those required for statistics) • The log must be publicly available during normal business hours, • and must include the nature, date, time, location, and disposition • of each crime. Limited information may be withheld to protect • confidentiality or the investigation.* • *US Dept. of Ed. found that crime logs are not “educational documents” protected under FERPA

9. Annual Report • Schools must publish an annual security report every year by Oct. 1st • Must contain the following: • Campus security policies • 3 years worth of selected crime statistics • Sexual assault policies which assure basic victims’ rights • Current security measures, and where/how to report crimes • The report must be made available to all students/employees • A copy must be sent to US Dept. of Ed. by deadline • Prospective students, parents, etc. can request a copy • Internet can be used to disseminate as long as exact web • address is provided and paper copies are available by request

11. Flaws in the Clery Act • Experts argue that crime statistics do not reflect the full scope of • campus safety or the college-safety problem • Data only reflects reported crimes – many crimes, especially • sexual assaults, go unreported. • The Clery Act exempts professional and pastoral counselors from • reporting even aggregate totals of crimes. • Many offenses may be committed by or against students • off-campus and may never be counted by administrators as • campus-related crimes • Schools with better reporting systems in place may appear more • “unsafe” than institutions that have less reporting.

12. Amendments • The Clery Act has been expanded multiple times through • various amendments since it was signed into law in 1990 • 1992: Sexual assault procedures & victims’ rights • 1998: Current reporting requirements • 2000: Sex offender notification • 2008: Redefined “timely warnings,” campus emergency response, • and “whistleblower” protection

13. in loco parentis – “in the parents’ place” • Until 1960s, colleges operated under “in loco parentis” doctrine – • curfews, dress codes, strict standards of behavior. • That system didn’t survive social transformation. • The CleryAct, especially recent amendments, pushes campuses • to be stricter again. • Much more “paternal” when it comes to student’s mental health • Behavioral Intervention Teams • All done in the students’ best interest, however, schools typically • are going to tend to be safer just so they don’t get sued.

14. in loco parentis: The Current Situation at The University of Pittsburgh

15. Violations • The US Department of Education is the agency charged with • enforcement of the Act and where complaints of alleged violations • should be made. • Violators can be fined up to $27,500 for each offense. • Clery Act Violation Investigations are rare – only about 40 • investigations in the past 12 years • Only 12 schools since 1997 have actually been fined for a violation • Education officials never have invoked the ultimate • sanction allowed under Clery: barring a school from federal aid.

16. VIOLATION: Eastern Michigan University • Laura Dickenson was raped and murdered • in her residence hall on Dec. 16 2006 • Law enforcement determined it a homicide case from • the start, but University officials told students, faculty, and • even Dickenson’s parents that she died of natural causes. • 10 weeks later, when they arrested a murder suspect, they • disclosed the true nature of the case. The arrest happened to be • the first day students could not withdraw from classes and • housing for a full refund. • All University officials were fired, $2.5 million settlement to • Dickenson’s family, and a record $350,000 in Clery Act fines.

17. VIOLATION: Virginia Tech April 16, 2007: Virginia Tech Massacre 7:15 a.m.: A 9-1-1 emergency call to VT police reported a shooting in a residence hall. 8:00 a.m.: Classes at Virginia Tech began. 8:25 a.m.: Virginia Tech leadership team met to develop a plan on how to notify students of the homicide. 9:10 a.m.: Cho was seen in Norris Hall. Cho chained the building's entry doors shut from the inside. 9:26 a.m.: E-mails were sent to campus staff, faculty, and students informing them of a "shooting incident" in a dormitory 9:42 a.m.: Students in Norris Hall, made a 9-1-1 emergency call to alert police that shots had been fired 9:50 a.m.: A second e-mail announcing: "A gunman is loose on campus. Stay in buildings until further notice. Stay away from all windows" was sent.

18. 2 hours and 11 minutes • Between residence hall shooting and first email • $11 million settlement for victims’ families • $55,000 fine for Clery Act violations • The fine was the highest amount the Dept. of Ed. could levy for the two violations resulting from the failure to notify students in a timely manner of the shootings in the residence hall.

19. Havlik v. Johnson & Wales Univ. After a student was involved in a physical altercation with another student, the University issued a crime alert to inform the university community of the reported crime. Later, the student was found not responsible, and no criminal or disciplinary action was taken. The student sued with a claim of defamation, arguing that the university had no duty under the Clery Act to report his involvement in the alleged crime to the campus community, and that, therefore, it had no qualified privilege to publish the crime alert.

20. Outcome The court found that there was nothing in the record that undermined the reasonableness that the university had a responsibility under the Act to issue a timely notification about the incident, even more so, since school officials had to act expeditiously to satisfy their responsibilities under the Act with a reasonable belief, even if later shown to be incorrect. Thus, the university's reasonable belief sufficed to place publication of the crime within the sphere of the qualified privilege conferred by the Act. The court granted summary judgment for the University.

21. Thank You! Questions or Comments?