April 25, 2007
To: Boalt Community
From: Dean Christopher Edley, Jr.
It has been a week since the distressing events involving a Boalt
student’s threat —a hoax — against the community at Hastings College of
the Law. I am writing to let you know that all our actions following the
incident have been taken with the intention of securing the safety and
well-being of our community and that at Hastings, while respecting the
procedural rights of the student.
On Wednesday, April 25, 2007, the Law School filed a complaint with the
U.C. Berkeley Judicial Affairs Office against the law student who
claimed responsibility for posting the threat on a website. We, the
administrative leadership of Boalt, believe that the student’s action is
clearly in violation of a number of regulations detailed in the Student
Code of Conduct. The case will be adjudicated by Judicial Affairs
according to campus regulations. Those regulations prohibit us from
disclosing the name of the student against whom we are proceeding.
Based on the facts as we understand them today, we have recommended
expulsion. This is based not only on the intrinsic wrongfulness of the
act itself, but also the disruption, turmoil and emotional toll on the
Hastings community and, to a more limited extent, the Boalt community as
well. I have received ample evidence of this through a great many
emails, some of them painful to read.
This incident has once again confirmed for me the strength and qualities
of the Boalt community. Even in this challenging circumstance, you have
engaged in thoughtful and productive discussions. We should all take
some pride in this, imperfect though we are.
Christopher Edley, Jr.
Professor of Law and Dean
I was a little surprised to hear the school has settled on expulsion as the recommended course of action so soon, though I do believe it's warranted (maybe) if we're looking only at punishment and deterrence. From a policy standpoint though, expulsion would send a strong message to people like Trustafarian that the best course of action when one realizes the full ramifications and costs of one's mistake is to stay silent, lest you be made an example. Think about how much worse the situation would have gotten, how much more costly, how much greater a toll would've been exacted on Hastings students on the cusp of final exams and graduation had this guy not come forward so soon. That he did should be good for something. A public apology, as some have suggested, would have been worth even more - but would perhaps have been as bad for the perpetrator as expulsion since breaking his anonymity will inevitably tarnish his legal career for a very long time. It may be too late already to salvage his 'character' since state bars typically require disclosure of any 'non scholastic' school discipline. I.e. disciplinary discipline as opposed to grades-based discipline. On the other hand, I've never heard of anyone not getting into the bar because of a line item on their moral character and fitness application. Which is not to say it doesn't happen but my guess is that it's rare. In any case, this whole episode has been an oft forgotten lesson as to how seriously jokes, mistakes, and lapses of judgment and character are taken in this community.
I have to commend the system for an air-tight job keeping the name of the perpetrator confidential. None of the student-run threads or blogs in the Boalt or Hastings communities have come up with a name. That said, it can be (only speculatively) narrowed down to 3-4 people in the facebook based on uncorroborated self-descriptions Trustafarian has left over the past several months on AutoAdmit.
Note that the word in the halls these days is that Edly's (perhaps draconian) recommendation is really a strategic ploy to come off as hard-on-crime when everyone is aware that the notoriously flaccid Judicial Affairs won't really kick him out.
No comments:
Post a Comment