Campus Violence
A University Police Perspective*
By:
Dolores A. Stafford
Director of University Police
The George Washington University, Washington DC
The role of campus police departments on college campuses has changed dramatically
during the last decade. In the mid-1980’s, campus police departments came into the
spotlight through of an incident of campus violence at Lehigh University in Bethlehem,
Pennsylvania. Jennie Clery was raped and murdered in her residence hall room by a
fellow student who entered her dormitory in the middle of the night through a propped
door. This incident led her parents to create a non-profit organization called “Security
On Campus”. Initially, that organization was responsible for the passage of a
Pennsylvania State law that required colleges and universities to publish and distribute
information about campus security to students and employees on their respective
campuses. Other states followed suit with their own versions of campus security
legislation and ultimately, in 1990, federal campus security legislation was passed: the
Student Right to Know and Campus Security Act of 1990.
The federal legislation put a distinctly new focus on security on college campuses during
the 1990’s. As colleges became intimately familiar with the specific requirements of
providing crime statistics, crime prevention strategies and information about security
policies and procedures to current and prospective students, it became clear that
institutions needed to focus additional attention and resources on the areas of security and
safety.
(*Note: For purposes of this document, I will use the phrase “campus police”, however,
the position of campus police should be viewed as interchangeable with the positions of
security or public safety on your respective campuses.)
Several new standards developed in the campus security arena, the most noticeable of
which included improvements to the physical security infrastructure of the campuses.
Those standards included card access for buildings on campuses, at a minimum for the
residence halls, and emergency phones starting popping up on campuses all across the
country.
A more subtle change has been the need to create a more professional police or security
operation on the campuses. In the 1970’s and 1980’s, there were many of retired city,
state and municipal police officers working on college campuses because it was
considered an “easy” retirement job. However, in the 1990’s that trend began to
diminish. Colleges started changing their hiring practices at all levels of campus policing
and began hiring people who understood that the responsibilities of a campus police
officer and administrator are complex. The working environment is significantly different
for a campus police officer than the environment of a municipal or city police officer and
the policies and operating procedures for a campus police department are more gray than
those of a city police department.
The number of incidents of violence on college campuses has continued to increase over
the years. Campus police departments not only need to develop strategies to prevent
violence on their campuses, but they also have to be better prepared for the potential need
to respond to incidents of violence on campus. The nature of violence on campuses can
take many forms and can be caused by many factors. The most common forms of
violence include physical assaults between students, domestic violence involving victims
who are students and victims who are employees of an institution, gang related violence,
violence at events on campus and violence perpetrated by recognized groups and
organizations affiliated with the campus. The number one factor that precipitates the
majority of violence on college campuses is alcohol abuse.
The campus police departments must work in concert with various departments and
offices on campus in an effort to develop strategies for preventing violence on campus.
The most critical departments in this collaborative effort include the Dean of Students,
the Student Judicial area, Human Resources and the General Counsel’s office. It is
imperative that these areas develop a joint strategy for dealing with alcohol abuse
prevention and education and strategies for responding to and dealing with physical
assaults, domestic violence, violence at events on campus, gang related violence and
violence perpetrated by recognized student organizations on campus.
Dealing with alcohol abuse on campus is a challenge, but institutions have to be creative
in their approach to this problem. Police departments are typically called upon to react to
incidents involving alcohol abuse and to incidents of violence where alcohol abuse is a
factor. In incidents involving alcohol abuse, the campus police department must balance
the law with the institutions’ policies and procedures. In some states, a person who is
drinking while under the legal age can be issued a citation. However, in other states, there
is no citation process and the student would be “arrested”. For example, if an underage
student has consumed too much alcohol, does your institution react by dealing with the
incident by the letter of the law? Does your institution deal with the incident strictly
through the judicial process or with some combination of the two processes?
Once a representative of the institution has knowledge about an intoxicated student’s
condition, the institution must do what is right to protect the student from him/herself, to
protect him/herself from others, and to protect others from him/her. The campus police
department needs some sort of assessment process to determine if the individual is too
intoxicated to be safe from harm or even from becoming violent. This assessment could
include a breathalyzer test or the assessment of a medical professional. At GW, we have
a student EMT service, which is operated by the police department. We use these
medical professionals to assist us in our evaluation of intoxicated individuals. If the
safety of the individual is determined to be in jeopardy, we will transport the individual to
the Emergency Room for treatment. The individual has the right to refuse treatment and
if that is the case, we give him/her the option of going to our Emergency Room or to the
DC Detoxification Center. We have yet to have an individual choose the latter! This
approach does two things: our police department makes sure that the intoxicated student
is evaluated by a doctor and if the person’s condition is severe, the person is monitored
by a medical professional until he/she is no longer in danger. We also make sure the
individual is not going to be a threat to others while he/she is intoxicated. Some campus
police departments release intoxicated students to the care of residence life staff. If your
institution uses this practice as a standard of caring for intoxicated students, those
procedures should be reviewed and approved by the institution.
Campus police agencies are often put in the position of having to deal with the aftermath
of student to student violence. This can include individual students fighting with each
other, groups of students fighting with each other, or sexual assaults. In addition to
educating students about crime prevention strategies in these areas, it is imperative that
institutions act swiftly through the judicial process to suspend or expel students who are
guilty of this violence.
Many campus police departments do not have procedures for responding to specific types
of incidents of violence. Institutions need to ensure that their campus police departments
have standard operating procedures in place. There should be separate standard operating
procedures for incidents of domestic violence, workplace violence, sexual assault, and
drug induced sexual assault. The reason for developing separate procedures is that each
of these types of incidents typically has separate and distinct laws that require specific
responses and/or other nuances that affect the way a campus police department must or
should respond.
For example, most states now have laws specifically dealing with response to incidents of
domestic violence. In the District of Columbia, the law requires that a police officer
“arrest” an individual if there is probable cause to believe that the person was violent or
threatened a victim with whom he/she lived and/or with whom the victim has or had a
romantic relationship. In addition, domestic violence is the only “probable cause”
misdemeanor for which an officer does not need to witness the crime and can still affect
an arrest without a warrant.
Workplace violence has several different nuances, including compliance with the
“general duty” standards in the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 which
requires employers to provide their employees with a workplace free of “recognized”
hazards. There also needs to be specific information in the response procedures for
dealing with a current employee who might be threatening another employee. The
human resources department for the institution must be prepared to act swiftly in
situations where an employee of the institution acts in a violent manner or threatens
violence. An employee in this situation should immediately be suspended pending
investigation.
Another situation that is becoming increasingly common on college campuses involves
employees who are being threatened by a person who is not employed by the institution.
Where does the institution draw the line with regard to the responsibility for protecting an
employee from a non-employee who has been making threats against the employee?
How does the institution ensure the safety of the employee’s co-workers? What liability
does the institution have once it are made aware of these types of threats being made
against an employee? These are questions that institutions must answer in the standard
operating procedures.
Institutions are challenged to find a way of protecting students from violence that is
perpetrated by individuals involved in recognized student organizations and teams. The
“groups” most commonly involved in violent acts include fraternities and sports teams.
Clearly, substance abuse by individuals in these groups is a large factor in the violent
behavior that is frequently displayed on college campuses. The challenge for university
administrators is to find a way of approaching the problems from a global perspective. It
is imperative that institutions have policies and procedures governing parties and events
at fraternity houses. If there are violations of the established rules, the sanction must be
appropriate and swift. Campus police departments must be diligent about filing reports
with regard to violations of the university’s policies and violations of the law. In addition
to filing reports, it is imperative that all reported incidents are reviewed on a regular basis
with a view to recognizing patterns of behavior that need to be addressed.
Institutions cannot turn a blind eye to the activities of student organizations, whether
those events occur on campus or off campus. It does not matter whether the group is a
fraternity, a sports team or some other organization, liability exists for the group
involved, and as well for the college or university associated with or to the group.
Liability is only one of the concerns that face administrators. The reality is that the
institution has responsibility for student safety and that responsibility must include
notifying and educating students about incidents that have occurred on campus, and
security and safety concerns that students need to keep in mind. Institutions need to be
forthcoming in providing information to students about the “climate” on campus. This is
the only way students will even consider protecting themselves against becoming the
victim of a violent crime at an event or party.
Violence at large events on campus, such as athletic events or concerts, can be
perpetrated by students but many times students are the victims of violent behavior.
However, because these types of events often cater to the surrounding community, they
are a breeding ground for violence. It is critical for the campus police department to be
involved in planning major events on campus. Police leaders need to properly plan for
security coverage at major events, which includes researching the people, groups, and
types of crowds that are coming to campus prior to the event. Institutions should not
schedule events which have been known to attract unruly crowds with a history of
weapons possession or violence. The risk is not worth the revenue that an institution
might gain.
Campus police officials need to make sure that they have developed specific and concise
standard operating procedures for the officers who will respond to incidents of violence.
The other important factor to consider is that when a campus police department has a
procedure for responding to a certain type of incident, it is imperative that the officers
follow those procedures. Failure to act within the guidelines of existing procedure can
cause as much if not more liability for institutions as not having operating procedures in
place.
In addition to developing adequate procedures, it is imperative that campus police
officers and supervisors receive formal training for dealing with emergencies on campus.
The training should include information regarding building evacuation plans for buildings
on campus, crisis communication procedures for the institution and critical incident
response.
If an institution has the appropriate procedures and response plans in place and the
police/security staff have been properly trained, institutions will significantly reduce their
liability in the aftermath of a violent incident on campus.