Tweets by @Stanford_Daily

RT @StanfordSports: Our recap of Stanford's 45-0 win. Key takeways: McCaffrey has a bright future and the O-line still needs to gel http://…: 3 days ago, The Stanford Daily
RT @StanfordSports: And that's the ballgame. Stanford routs UC-Davis 45-0.: 3 days ago, The Stanford Daily
Suspect "described as a white male adult, in his 30's, approx. 5' 7" and 140 lbs., fit build with short brown hair and wearing black shorts": 4 days ago, The Stanford Daily
Alert: "A female adult reported that she was...struck from behind with an unknown object that she believed to be a stick.": 4 days ago, The Stanford Daily
AlertSU system reporting a physical assault nearby Palm Drive and Campus Drive at 9:11 p.m.: 4 days ago, The Stanford Daily

Graduate Student Council approves Alternative Review Process

The Graduate Student Council (GSC) voted unanimously to approve the Alternative Review Process (ARP), Stanford’s revised judicial procedure for sexual assault and harassment cases, at its Feb. 6 meeting.

The ASSU Undergraduate Senate approved the revised ARP on Tuesday night, and — following the GSC’s ratification of the policy — the Faculty Senate is expected to vote on the ARP at its March meeting. While a version of the ARP has been in place for over a year following an emergency decision by President John Hennessy, ratification by the Faculty Senate and Hennessy would make the ARP official Stanford policy.

GSC Co-Chair Michael Shaw Ph.D. ’13 introduced the final version of the ARP to the GSC and offered to answer questions from GSC members about the document before voting. However, all 13 voting members present at the meeting passed the ARP with little discussion.

Shaw expressed satisfaction that both the GSC and the Senate had unanimously approved the ARP.

“We really crossed all the t’s and dotted all the i’s this time, and got everyone on board,” Shaw said. “It’s a testament to that that we got unanimous votes from both the associations.”

Shaw cited the GSC’s collaboration with the Senate and the Board of Judicial Affairs (BJA) to address issues with the original version of the ARP as other positive aspects of the process.

“We’re glad that it was a conscientious, successful process,” Shaw said. “Over the whole year, people put in tremendous time and effort in the ASSU, GSC and BJA. Everyone has done their best to make this a successful operation.”

According to Shaw, the Faculty Senate should approve the ARP with little controversy.

“We’ve been in communication with the Senate, and we know they’ll have it on the agenda this spring,” Shaw said. “We’re pretty sure we’re all on the same page, and we know we’ve addressed many of the concerns that Stanford community members had. I fully expect the Faculty Senate to pass it.”