Yale endowment down 25%
The institution that created the so-called "Yale model" of investing, the aptly named Yale University, reports that its endowment has fallen by 25% in the first four months of the current fiscal year. Unlike UVA, which is suffering a similar investment meltdown but which is less endowment-dependent, Yale relies on its endowment for 44 percent of its budget, so a crisis looms, the New York Times reports.
14 comments
If the UVA Campus Police and the Dean of Students had done their jobs properly 20 years ago, we would not be discussing the details of this case today. Unfortunately, we have learned nothing from this case -- other than the obvious, that Step 8 of AA does NOT mean write a letter admitting you caused harm to a person. Why do we tolerate knowing that twenty+ years later UVA continues to turn a blind eye to victims of rape and sexual battery? It has been documented and reported in the media that Campus Police investigate allegations of rape half-heartedly; the Dean of Students Office continues to persuade victims of rape (Rape is a felony crime)to deal with these matters by using administrative solutions rather than adhere to the laws of Virginia. I have always questioned why, if Mr Beebe's encounter with Ms Seccuro was as he stated, merely a drunken night of casual sex, did he feel the need to apologize twenty years later? Because he knew what he had done to her was so awful that she would carry that event within her for the rest of her life! There is the basis for his sentence - he was not apologizing just for having sex with her, he was apologizing for altering her life. Rape is not about sex, rape is about power. Rape is a crime. I find it reprehensible that any of us should question if he deserved jail time. I find it reprehensible that UVA tried to cover up this crime. I find it reprehensible that rapists are still among the students on the UVA campus.
I came across this story today and was simply schocked at the bitterness of Mrs Seccuro. Mr. Beebe obviously has remorse about what had happened... he didn't have to write the letter... he didn't have to use his real name... he didn't have to correspond via e-mail. He was convicted and served the sentence he was given. Mrs. Seccuro doesn't have to forgive him, but she needs to move on instead of holding on to this hatred and bitterness.
I was also a victim of a rape at age 17, by an acquaintance in college twenty years ago. While I understand the impact of this horrible crime on Ms. Seccuro's life, I have read some of the emails and letters written to her by Mr. Beebe and was struck by the heartfelt desire to make amends. I would have welcomed that from my assailant. That doesn't mean she should have. Just that I feel I know what his intentions were and they could have had a completely different outcome. I don't think he is the person he was then. I applaud his bravery for facing his demons and taking the consequences, even if they were diminished by time and circumstance. He seems to have served time over the years himself, haunted by his capacity for evil. We all have that capacity. I hope both Ms. Seccuro and Mr. Beebe find peace in their hearts.
Beebe assaulted Ms Seccuro when she was 17. He was not an acquaintance. Either he or another "frat boy" drugged her with the intent to assault her. There was sufficient evidence to classify it as a "violent assault". By all accounts, Ms Seccuro had put the incident behind her, moved on, married and had a child. She was not looking for Beebe or attempting to interfere in his life. What right did Beebe have to re-enter her life twenty years later and force her to revisit those memories and feelings - and on his terms? Beebe had to search for her since she had married and changed her name, and moved to another state. Knowing that a person who assaulted you has been able to keep track of you is scary. I'm sorry Florence, but I disagree with you - he is neither noble or brave. Did he look her in the eye and say he was sorry? No. He sent a letter. She, unprepared, opened it as she was beginning a family holiday. Kind of put a damper on things, don't you think?
Aaron, he wasn't convicted - he pled guilty and negotiated a deal with the Prosecutors. He promised to reveal additional information about that night, but once the deal was made, he had a memory lapse. How sincere was that?
Florence, did you report your rape to the College police? Did they respond? What happened to your attacker? I would be interested in knowing.
So, Charlottesville, statistics show that "1 in 4" women will be raped during their college years. That adds up to hundreds of felony crimes that are never prosecuted in your town - and a large group of sincere, remorseful men, don't you think?
Interesting article above. Apparently some people posting did not bother to read it. In comments attributed to Chapman it reads "There was an immense difference between apparent evidence [at the preliminary hearing] and what subsequent investigation established, says Chapman." Seccuro's story doen't add up? Obviously the "subsequent investigation" contents did not go along with her story. Or this one, "Commonwealth's Attorney Dave Chapman says he understands her pain, but insists Seccuro was told how the sentence would likely turn out and stands by his department's handling of the case." Again Seccuro's claims are different. Alright, one more. "As for the plea deal, Chapman says Beebe never promised he had information that would lead to other arrests-- he simply agreed to be interviewed and to share anything he could recall." Not the story she and others have been parading around. In fact quite the opposite.
It seems that if the evidence and "official" comments from the case support the cause, then all is good. If it does not, then crusaders no longer want address the case. They retreat to the cause. It does not matter about the truth any longer because they have had a turn at the microphone.
FDR - read your bits again in the context of the story. It may appear to you that women retreat to the cause, but why do men rarely believe the events surrounding a rape? If you were drunk and someone stole your wallet, would the police and media hound you for months, or would they arrest the person who stole your wallet and let it go? Well now, look what Beebe stole from Liz. The fact you want her to recant every nanosecond in harmony with Beebe would be impossible. For 20 years he knew he was part of a frat scenario that was reprehensible. What does he have to lose now if he were to tell her exactly what happened?
By the way, check out the release picture. I was shocked at Beebe's new look. There's much more to this guy than the media is reporting. Yuk.
Interesting quote that sort of refutes what Chapman is saying here to this paper:
"Commonwealth Attorney Dave Chapman said he is surprised by the early release, though he said he was aware Beebe could be released after serving only one-third of his sentence. "It is sooner than we expected," Chapman said. "It's surprising and disappointing. We expected that the actual sentence would be longer in terms of its actual length."
and then..."Chapman said he and his office are currently reviewing Beebe's release date, though he pointed out that Seccuro cannot appeal to a parole board because Beebe never had a parole hearing. "We'll take appropriate action," Chapman said. "We are looking into the matter and making sure that the correct rate of accrual of good time credit has been applied in his case."
Interesting bit of flip-flop.
clara, at least you seem willing to actually discuss it. I'm not asking for Seccuro to "recant every nanosecond..." as you state. Problems exist in some of the things she has actually said. Not brown shoes versus black shoes. That type of thing might fall under your description. In fact, it appears her account doesn't fall into harmony with some of the other evidence or statements. Chapman says "There was an immense difference between apparent evidence [at the preliminary hearing] and what subsequent investigation established, says Chapman." If he didn't say it, then I take it back. However that can only mean the story changed from her version to what they discovered. It doesn't seem responsible for you to say, "he pled guilty and negotiated a deal with the Prosecutors. He promised to reveal additional information about that night, but once the deal was made, he had a memory lapse. How sincere was that?" If the police/prosecution are saying that is not true, why would you say it is? If you know something else please post it. Those type of statements are perfect examples of moving from case to cause because someone else said it before. There were even things said in reference to your last question by the police/prosecution that already provide an answer.
I only know what I have read in the Press, and I also have empathy for what the woman went through. If Liz were paying a lawyer in a civil case, I might view this differently. But I believe, that since she is only a witness and the Commonwealth Attorney was looking for a win-only situation, then there are bound to be discrepancies in the stories. He had enough to get his conviction at a criminal level, and the rest of the story matters only to the victim and the victim's supporters.
It appears there is much semantics involved in whether or not this man promised additional information about that night. The media (additional to the Hook) implied that he had further information to share, yet the literal interpretation of his offers is now revealed that he was only willing to be interviewed about it. Did it help his case - yes. What do we really know about this man? Do we have the right to comment on his intentions? I don't know - he rarely spoke to the media except for prepared statements. We don't know if he uses foul language, knows God, or has slept with a hundred women. We just know, that on that night, he participated in something that was non-consenual and so horrid that it haunted him for 20 years. If he felt horrid for 20 years, then imagine how the victim felt. She doesn't need to remember the exact color of shoes, or whether 1, 2, or 3 guys raped her after they drugged her. It's probably better for her psyche that she doesn't remember all the details. Beebe does adn he should tell her. Nothing she did that night was her fault. She did the right thing to turn his confession over to the Police. The way the case played out was left entirely up to the Commonwealth Attorney. I am disappointed in his attorney's aggressive approach to discredit Liz. What would she have done if she were in Liz's shoes?
It's time to do a story on the following: Do you know how many rapes have occured in Charlottesville (on and off grounds) and even though they were reported to the Police, and even the women state they are willing to testify against the accused, the Commonwealth has refused to prosecute the "alleged rapist"? More cases than you would want to know! Why?? Why is Liz's case important? Because it emphsizes what rape victims have said - no one cares - when it happens or 20 years later.
FDR - allow me to clear the air. I appreciate the lively debate, truly I do, however, the problems did not exist in what I actually said, but in what I (and other witnesses) could NOT say - and that would have been disastrous for the prosecution in that Rhonda could have blamed the whole shooting match on the "others", rendering Beebe innocent, which he was most certainly not. I have no memory of the first two rapes - and yes, I've seen the reports and know all the terrible details and who the perps are, so it's not about my "story" per se, but about the fact that the complete picture, provided by none other than Beebe's investigator, could not be testified to by the main witness - me. That happened in November, right before trial was to begin. That's when a deal was struck. Beebe had the option to hand over the file of evidence to us, but he asked for a huge reduction in sentence, which would have left us (in hindsight) with, what? Three weeks for rape?
We know who bought the LSD and the grain. We know who served it. We know who raped me first, then second. We know about the bloody towels and the high-fives. We know who was silenced. We know who complied. We know who is still silent. None of this means a darn thing at trial.
Clara is right - I am happier NOT knowing exactly what happened. I know enough from witness statements and it's brutal and terrible. It doesn't change the fact of Beebe's hateful assault on me and his is the one I reported as he is the one I remember and had the audacity to come to my dorm and try to silence me two days after the rape. There's a theory he tried to use the "caring bystander" role - dragged me into a bathroom and cleaned me up for raping me after the first two. One brother almost died that night from ingesting the same punch I did. Did that come out? No.
Truth be told, no DA is going to the mat without a sure win. Because the case became worse (for the prosecution), it got better for Beebe. I like Dave Chapman - would have him over for dinner, no second thought. But he has no right to spin it right now. He got his jailbird in a cell and that's OK by me. The credit goes to Claude Worrell, indeed.
I'll say this, though - who knows if Beebe, a complete loner who only yearned for acceptance (his words), is covering up or was too out of it to rat out his brothers? I vote acceptance. I'll say this: everyone else in that house knew the others did what they did - but they were so drunk/so much time has lapsed/bonds of brotherhood are so strong that they cannot provide a timeline, which is KEY in a trial. In a civil court, it would be easy to prove, as the burden of proof is so much lower. How do you live in a fraternity house in the aftermath of a serial rape and not know what your brothers did?
Anyway, I don't normally read these things, but this last week has been, quite obviously, difficult and the media chooses to spin it only as me being "disappointed". Well, sure - who wouldn't be? I'd be disappointed if my sister's rapist went free after five months and change. What you may not know is that I am happy it will no longer take up my every waking moment, because that's how it works. Let's look at the bigger issues.
I've received many emails from UVa grads at the time; those who knew Beebe - none of it's flattering. Worse, I've received emails regarding the other two (it wasn't hard to guess!)that make it even harder to ponder that they won't ever be prosecuted. But life goes on and, as Clara asks, "why is this case important?" It does indeed emphasize what we go through as witnesses, nothing more . Here, we had a basic "slam dunk" case (or so one thinks) as he confessed to Detectives and, of course, wrote me his confession after nine years of stalking me. Opine if you must, but sometimes, I feel the need to insert my knowledge - not opinion, but knowledge.
PS - I don't think he looks at all like Johnny Depp. I feel badly for Mr. Depp now!
Well, there are problems in what you say even if you don’t want to believe it. You have said previously that you remember essentially everything from that night up until the point of blacking out during an attack by Beebee. Is that not the story you told to 29, among others, and as reported by others in your testimony during one of the earlier court hearings? If what you are saying now contains an ounce of truth, your statements previously about knowing what happenened that night prior to the attack by Beebee cannot be true. Yet that was your reported testimony. That is one place where your statements become a story. Both cannot be true.
FDR, what's your point? He admitted to raping her. What do you think should have been done? As Liz says, the law precluded her from saying certain things at the trial. That doesn't mean she can't recant them now. Don't victimize the victim. Do you think Beebe should have told her exactly what went on? Why can't the police interview the others? Where's the fairness in that? You gotta love the law - UVA Law school has turned out a few lawyers who were also identified as rapists during their undergrad years. They are now alumni Donors - a source of revenue that Casteen enjoys. Beebe came from a wealthy family - who knows what they donated to the school "back in the day"? Maybe he was let go without scandal to protect the Donor Dollar. Personally, I don't believe the media focused on the initial domino that started this whole series of events - the UVA Dean of Students. Ms Seccuro was 17, therefore, she was (even then) a minor. The Dean of Students failed in his role when he did not contact the local police. The UVA ER staff also failed in their role when they did not contact the local police. This young girl tried to get these adults to react to her situation, but they did not. UVA should be held accountable for their lack of action. And the young "feminists" of today - where the hell are they? Having dessert parties on campus and pretending to be pioneers in the fight for women's rights? They should have seized the opportunity to use the cases of the past 5 years to demonstrate that violence against women will not be tolerated on the UVA campus! The Silent Protest in 2004 caused change immediately. These women should have been outside the courthouse demonstrating when Beebe was released. Yes, FDR, the case becomes the story and the cause. Look at the JENA 6 rallies today -- one small incident can illustrate an entire case. Liz's experience is not unique. It's just public.
Liz,
I can't even comprehend how difficult this whole experience was for you. Thank you for having the courage to stand up and speak about your experience. As a man, I'm ashamed of the kind of frat boy culture that would treat any person this way. I hope that your courage stands as an inspiration to other victims, and that somehow our community can someday find a way to stop this cycle of violence.
My point is we have someone telling at least two very different accounts now. Not with minutia but with significant elements. That is cause to look closer in my book. How can you be so close minded refusing to even look at that? When it has been the other way around many were waving their finger a mile a minute. That is their right. I am not victimizing the victim as you claim. She has stated a specific account, in court and under oath I presume, as to the events of that evening. The same or close enough stories have been told to various media outlets. Now, we really get something vastly different. Different in ways not easily dismissed as technicalities. These are not sound bytes, assumptions, or media spin. I would guess that you would be asking some of the exact same questions if your belief, cause, or opinion would benefit or be supported by the answers. Did that not already happen when Beebee wrote the email and then we got a different explanation from his attorney? That understandably was jumped on. Who, that wanted to say something or thought “that is messed up” should have been quieted? Nobody! Your near refusal to admit there actually are valid questions and clear contradictions, when it comes to the story she has told, is difficult to understand. We do not have to agree on any point or impression in this situation but should understand neither of us hold the only one that exists. I do not believe that because she said it, that automatically qualifies as fact. Your use of saying she was precluded by the law of saying certain things at trial is misleading. There was no trial. There was a plea agreement. It creates more suspicion in my mind when someone says essentially that they and other witnesses can't tell the truth because it will hurt the case. Since when is the truth, if you are a victim, going to hurt you? The police can interview anyone they want to talk with. That person can refuse to cooperate. If the police want or feel they need them, then they go through the paces in getting a subpoena. I'm also unsure about your “it is UVA’s fault” position. You are entitled to it. I just do not arrive at the same conclusion. In order to do that I would have to believe any and all reports substantiating your words have simply disappeared. The police (wasn't it multiple times), hospital, ER, and whoever else have banded together in this case to prevent any justice. It is just too many people for there to be nothing. There was the Dean’s report mentioned. Although in one of the news reports it was mentioned that she stated at least part of the report was full of lies. The only item that we know of and it doesn't help the prosecution, so it must be lies. Your loose suggestion about UVA rapist lawyers money somehow being behind a cover up in this case is ridiculous. Then to further put out the idea the University was “maybe” paid off by Beebee’s family is just wrong. That is unless you have something to back it up. That is the type of behavior that furthers a complete lack of clarity even though you may feel good saying it. Did you ever stop and think possibly part of the reason you didn't see a flood of demonstration upon his release from all the young "feminists" is because not all of them agree with you?