By Sarah Metcalf
Three students arrested on the night of the Super Bowl riots and 10 others identified through pictures on the Public Safety Division’s Web site will soon sit in front of a board of judicial members, comprised of their peers, who will decide their fate.
The student judicial board remains anonymous and is assembled from students on a volunteer basis. The students on the board go through extensive training before hearing the cases, said Student Government Associate Vice President for Student Affairs Allyson Savin.
“Any student can volunteer, and then a selection committee chooses who of those people will sit on the board,” Savin said. “[The selection committee] takes a lot of things into consideration when choosing members to make sure they are fair and responsible.”
The selection committee is made up of students in SGA, the Resident Student Association (RSA) and the Office of Student Conduct and Conflict Resolution (OSSCR), said William Fischer, the director of OSCCR.
“The Office of Student Conduct and Conflict Resolution, SGA and RSA carefully select students serving on the judicial board. All board members complete an extensive training program, as well as continuing education and training throughout their tenure on the board. Students were selected for this board as well as any other board based upon availability, and also taking into consideration their level of experience in serving on the judicial board,” Fischer said.
Students who sit on the board are asked to step down if they have any personal biases regarding the cases they will be hearing.
“Members who are connected to people in the case or who have personal vendettas are asked to abstain from voting,” Savin said. “Students need to be responsible enough to step out and let an alternate judicial member step in.”
The members hear the case, which includes the side of the student accused of misconduct. They then hand down a sanction, which the student has five business days to appeal.
“Sanction decisions will be determined based upon the nature of the disciplinary violations, and taking into consideration university precedent for sanctioning in similar violations, as well any student’s disciplinary history,” Fischer said. “Those students with experience serving on the judicial board have significant knowledge and skill base to make the appropriate determinations regarding sanctioning.”
Savin said while the judicial hearing is completely objective, once it gets to the appeals board, it becomes much more subjective due to the fact that the board does not meet with the student in jeopardy. Instead, the students submit a letter explaining their side.
Savin said the purpose of the sanctions is not to make an example of the students or to restore the university’s reputation, but simply to bring justice to inappropriate actions.
“It’s not a matter of being strict so we can make an example of the student,” she said. “Certain actions warrant certain sanctions. It’s stated in the student handbooks that there are natural penalties for actions that occurred. If you’re seen vandalizing property in such a way, you can expect serious repercussions.”
-Staff writer Glenn Yoder contributed to this report.
