Follow-Up On The Clery Report & Eastern Response Procedure
Mathew Biadun | Staff Writer
Note: Mathew Biadun currently serves as the President of the Student Government Association.
Following the atrocious news coming out of Cornell, students have been understandably concerned about safety on campus. These concerns were amplified by news reports following Eastern’s release of the 2026 Security & Fire Safety Report, our version of the ‘Clery Report’ which all colleges and universities are required to produce annually. News reports in Connecticut, such as this one, fairly alarmed many students attending Eastern.
In order to answer student questions, I reached out to relevant members of Eastern’s administration. This op-ed is meant to be a clarifier, sharing information provided to myself by Public Safety and the Office of Equity and Diversity, in regards to these numbers and to the way Eastern handles such cases.
This op-ed is not a statement of opinion, or policy, on behalf of myself or the Student Government Association. It exists to transparently share public information that has been shared with me, with the rest of campus. This is not a light read, and as a warning, discusses many uncomfortable topics.
Students are free to reach out to me, or to those mentioned in this article, for further questions.
Many students, including myself, were shocked and alarmed to read headlines citing 6 cases of rape on Eastern’s campus in the past year. I reached out to Police Chief Tavares in order to gain elaboration on these incidents. He shared the following public information with me. It includes clarifying numbers which were incorrect in the original Clery Report, as well as elaborating on how each incident was responded to.
The most common ‘disposition’ to each incident is ‘Received and addressed by OED, not referred to Campus Police’. In order to learn more about what this means, and what may or may not cause a referral to Campus Police, I reached out to Sara Judge, a member of the Office of Equity and Diversity, and Eastern’s Title IX Coordinator. She said the following:
“While I am unable to discuss the details or circumstances of specific cases handled by our office, I am happy to provide some clarification on our processes and how they differ from those of Campus Police.
First, I think it's important to distinguish between the role of the Office of Equity and Diversity and that of Campus Police. Our office handles administrative investigations under the University's policies, including Title IX and other forms of discrimination and harassment. Campus Police, on the other hand, handles criminal investigations. These are two separate processes, and a report made to my office does not automatically initiate a criminal investigation.
When someone reports an incident to our office, we discuss their options, including their right to make a report to Campus Police. However, we cannot require someone to participate in a criminal investigation or override their decision not to pursue that process simply because of the seriousness of the allegation. It is important that individuals who come forward understand their options and have a say in how they wish to proceed.
There are, however, circumstances where Campus Police may need to be involved, particularly when there are concerns regarding an immediate threat to campus safety. For example, our office may work with Campus Police and other appropriate University officials to conduct a threat assessment and determine whether emergency or interim action is necessary to protect the campus community. Those situations are assessed based on the information available and the potential risk presented, rather than solely on the type of allegation reported.
It's also important to understand that a complainant choosing not to participate in a criminal investigation does not necessarily prevent my office from moving forward with its own administrative process. Depending on the circumstances and the information available, our office may continue reviewing a matter and pursue an administrative resolution, including a hearing, without the complainant's participation. However, that is separate from initiating a criminal investigation on their behalf.
I also want to clarify our obligations under the Clery Act, as I think this is where some of the confusion may be coming from. Clery reporting and criminal reporting are not the same thing. Our office is required to share information regarding Clery-reportable crimes with Campus Police for statistical reporting and campus safety purposes, regardless of whether an individual chooses to file a police report. It's also important to understand that Clery statistics reflect incidents reported to the University that fall within the definitions of Clery-reportable crimes. These statistics do not necessarily mean that a crime was determined to have occurred, but rather that an incident was reported that met the criteria for inclusion in the statistics. This does not mean that the individual has agreed to participate in a criminal investigation or that a criminal investigation has been initiated.
So, when you see that a matter was "received and addressed by OED, not referred to Campus Police," that designation should not be interpreted as the University taking no action or determining that the reported conduct was not serious. It simply reflects how the matter was handled within the University's administrative process and does not, by itself, tell the full story of the response or any measures taken.”
I had previously emailed Sara Judge in regards to how Eastern would have handled circumstances similar to those at Cornell. This is what she wrote:
“I cannot speak directly to a case handled by another institution, as I am not aware of the full details, circumstances, or processes involved. However, I can and will speak to how Eastern would respond if a student came forward with similar allegations, including the steps we would take, the support available to the student, and the process that would be followed under our policy.
At Eastern, concerns involving sexual violence or sexual misconduct are reported to and assessed by the Office of Equity and Diversity under the CSCU Board of Regents Policy 4.13 – Interim Discriminatory Harassment, Nondiscrimination, and Title IX Policy. When we receive a report, my office meets with the student to better understand the concerns, assess the information under Policy 4.13, explain their rights and resources, and discuss the options available to them.
A student does not have to pursue an investigation in order to receive support. A student may choose to request supportive measures without moving forward with a formal complaint. Supportive measures are individualized based on the circumstances and can include measures such as no-contact directives and other supports intended to preserve the student’s access to their education and address safety concerns.
If a student chooses to move forward with a formal complaint, and the allegations fall within the applicable process, both parties are notified of the allegations and an investigation is conducted. The University is responsible for conducting an adequate, reliable, and impartial investigation and gathering sufficient evidence to determine whether a policy violation occurred. Both parties have rights throughout that process, including opportunities to participate, provide evidence, identify witnesses, review applicable evidence, and receive information regarding the process.
Following the investigation, the matter proceeds through the applicable resolution process, which may include a hearing before an impartial decision-maker. The standard used to determine responsibility is preponderance of the evidence, meaning whether it is more likely than not that the alleged conduct occurred. Interim-Policy-4-13-Title-IX-Pr… If a respondent is found responsible for violating Policy 4.13, appropriate sanctions may be imposed, up to and including separation from the University.
It is also important to distinguish between disciplinary action and measures taken to address an immediate safety concern. A respondent is presumed not responsible unless and until a determination of responsibility is made through the applicable process. However, when the reported conduct raises an immediate safety concern, the University can conduct an individualized safety and risk assessment to determine whether an emergency removal is warranted while the matter is being addressed.
For additional information, I have also included the Interim Connecticut State Colleges and Universities Resolution Process Procedure for BOR Policy 4-13 Interim Discriminatory Harassment, Nondiscrimination, and Title IX Policy and the Interim Connecticut State Colleges and Universities Resolution Process Procedure for Title IX Sexual Harassment, which provide additional detail regarding the processes that may apply depending on the circumstances of a report.”
Sara Judge will be coming to SGA to answer student questions and concerns on November 9th. SGA meets Mondays at 3PM, in Room 107 of the Student Center. All students are welcome to come and listen, speak up, ask questions, or otherwise participate.
Comments