The real difference in situations is that the people you interviewed had time to 'think up a defense' this was pretty much spur of the moment.:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum Log Board ]

Posted by Me on October 9, 2000 at 18:12:02:

In Reply to: Actually, I have some RL experience in this 'field'. posted by Proud Blade(VIP) on October 9, 2000 at 17:57:47:

I've been both an RA, and served on Judicial Board for all students with any rules infraction as well. People act much differently in the heat of the moment, than they do after they've had time to think about it.



In my early graduate school days, I used to hold an appointed position where I would be called upon to help review cases of academic dishonesty brought by faculty against undergraduates. (Typically, the review "jury" consisted of me, two faculty, a dean, and an undergrad. The dean served as judge and "executioner" as needed, but she honestly did listen to each other member very carefully.) It was one of the more educational things I have done in my life. I certainly learned a lot about teaching through it, and even more about the concept of justice.
>
> One thing I learned was how people react to being accused of lying and/or cheating. In the cases where the evidence was most solid (e.g. two nearly identical papers turned in for the same assignment), the student(s) in question would usually either 'fess up (the best plan), or attack the faculty member's judgment, teaching ability, or objectivity. This guy reminds me of the latter, IMHO.
>
> There were other cases where the faculty member in question was likely a bit overzealous, either by pressing charges on trivial matters, or charges for which they had no evidence. In these cases, the accused was (almost without exception) calm, and simply explained matters as they saw them. When the evidence was thin, there were very rarely instances where one side accused the other of lying. Usually, they agreed upon what had happened, and just had different views of what was "legal".
>
> You'll notice that I very carefully described my opinion on what happened. I do not know the evidence, beyond what what written here on the Forum. But my opinion remains that a person who was not cheating would not have been quite so... hair-triggered. Of course, it may be the normal reaction of someone who has been called in for cheating several times in the past, as others have stated.
>
> > ...That being said, he certainly -acted- like someone who was caught cheating. He immediately got confrontational with the IMM who called him in...
> >
> > How the hell do you figure he acted like someone who was caught cheating???, if you get pulled in for something that you did not do you are very upset and act in an irrational manner.. trying to prove you're not guilty is not easy when dealing with someone who has already made up their mind, you scramble for anything, which explains his behaviour. I'm not saying he's not guilty, I wasn't there, but don't say he acted like he was cheating.. I'd like to see you do any better if you get pulled in while sitting around doing nothing...


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Comments:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum Log Board ]