You must be logged in to comment on this page. Please log in.

2010-01-14 13:45:26   Hello there and Welcome to the Wiki. Please the Importance of using your RealName. While I appreciate the contributions you have made to Jennifer Beeman (CVPP), I am puzzled by your edit comment, "Because this is a wiki, not a blog." What do you mean by this? Wikis come in all varieties. We're not all like wikipedia, so you may have some misconceptions about what we are. We are closer to a blog than an encyclopedia. Strong, substantiated opinions are welcome. For more information, you might want to check out Welcome to the Wiki/Wiki Enthusiast. In the case of Jennifer Beeman, wouldn't you agree that it's pretty well settled that she cooked the assault statistics and that's a shameful thing to do? —WilliamLewis

2010-01-15 03:09:15   What does "cooking the statistics" mean to you? The research I cited indicates that 5% of college women experience an attempted or completed sexual assault every year (a victim of an attempted sexual assault is still counted as a victim, and they often suffer similar personal trauma). In Fall 2006 the female student population of UC Davis was 16,223. However, the research I cited was done with undergraduates, so let’s just consider the 13,000 female undergraduates at UC Davis in Fall 2006. 5% of 13,000 is 650 sexual assaults of women students per year at UC Davis. For the sake of argument, let’s say the research overstated the rate of assault by 100%, or that Davis is the bucolic campus that everyone imagines it to be, and that the true rate of assault at UC Davis is 2.5%. That would still be 325 sexual assaults in 2006, of which only a small fraction would have been reported to law enforcement or a campus official. In addition to that small fraction of assaults that were reported, the Clery Act limits what is counted as a sexual assault (forcible or non-forcible sex offense) for Clery stats in various ways - including that the assault occurred in the reporting calendar year and (as interpreted by UC Davis) that the property is owned, affiliated, or controlled by UC Davis. So, a rape in a campus residence hall or a fraternity house would be counted, but a rape of a student by a student at a study session in Woodland or a party in Sacramento would not. A student who was raped in 2005 but reported in 2006 would not be counted under reported Clery stats for 2005 OR 2006 (there is no requirement to update old stats).

So, I think Jennifer Beeman may have counted assaults for the UC Davis Clery stats that she was not supposed to under the Clery Act rules. Even if that is not true, and she blatantly invented assault reports she did not receive or could not substantiate, she still understated the actual rate of assault by a factor of 5 if not 10. Overall, I don’t know what Jennifer Beeman did or what she didn't do. If there was harm done by her over-reporting, the bulk of that harm was done to herself and to her professional reputation. If it is true that she stole or misused funds, I do think that is shameful... that is an accusation that has yet to be substantiated. But, with regard to her reporting of Clery stats for UC Davis, I think the thing that is the most "cooked" is how little people understand about sexual violence, and how much happens all around us. I think that it is shameful that it is a near certainty that at least one UC Davis student has been raped in the last seven days, and that another one will almost certainly be raped in the next seven days. I also think that it is shameful that after 16 years as a victim advocate at UCD (and many years at WEAVE before that), after helping hundreds if not thousands of women and men who had been raped or beaten, the last thing that people care about is whether it was 23 or 68 people who walked into her office in 2006, who had been sexually assaulted in the 2006 calendar year, and who had been assaulted on property that is owned, affiliated, or controlled by UC Davis.

I have known Jennifer Beeman for over ten years. I was a student at UC Davis and volunteered for CVPP for three of my five years as a UC Davis undergraduate. I know victims of rape that Jennifer helped personally. Because of my experiences at CVPP, I have spent most of my adult life working to end sexual violence. And know many other former CVPP students who have done the same thing. It that something Jennifer Beeman should be ashamed of? What do the readers of this comment have to be ashamed of? How does your shame compare to the shame of someone who spent over 16 years helping victims of rape learn to sleep at night? I live in Davis. If this is a wiki for the community of Davis by the community of Davis, then as a community member I am taking the shame out of this wiki entry, and leaving the facts in. I think people should consider their own shame before they consider Jennifer Beeman’s. —MadMadCow

2010-01-15 07:49:51   The problem with a single false rape report is that it re-victimizes all rape victims. The problem with altering rape statistics is that it does the same thing and then also damages the very 5% figure you state. Davis had a really bad false rape report in town in the early 90s that was a particularly bad example of how a false report can injure many people. I don't know what the outcome of the trial will be, but I do know that the news coverage of this event has hurt both rape victims and those that rely on statistics about rape, including other rape prevention program managers. —JasonAller

2010-01-15 15:52:42   Why not include your comments about Jennifer Beeman on the page about her? It would add another perspective. —CovertProfessor