To the Editor:
As stated in the April 10th article in The Dartmouth ("ORL considers Psi U Appeal") on the Student Assembly's decision on the punishment of Psi Upsilon, I was one of the individuals on the lawn of Psi U during the incident. I am not coming forward now to state my side of the story, nor am I trying to discount any of the feelings that Anonymous has expressed. Although I remember the event quite differently than she does, the fact that she felt frightened and threatened still remains the most important issue.
I do not disagree with a punishment of two terms of probation. If the facts were explored and the Judiciary Committee recommended this punishment, then I would not have a problem with it.
I am not now, nor have I ever, defended this incident as "free speech." A member of the Dartmouth community has a right to walk anywhere on campus without feeling scared and threatened, and I believe that this right is more important than the right of people to shout ignorant phrases at the top of their lungs.
The reason that I have come forward is to express my dissatisfaction with the adjudication process. As the only person involved who was neither intoxicated nor frightened during the incident, I believe my story should have been heard by the JC and by Dean Redman. I remember the faces of everyone on that lawn, and I know their names.
I tried to get in touch with Anonymous, asking a person that knew her to forward a blitz containing an apology and an invitation to call me. This way we could talk about the incident, and she could still retain her anonymity. My hope was for a resolution only after the incident had been fully examined and the truth had come to light.
Unfortunately, Dean Redman and the JC did not agree and decided not to speak with me or talk with anyone involved in the incident. A couple of officers from Psi Upsilon were asked about the incident, but because they were not present, they were unable to speak about what happened. The only testimony used from people actually involved was an emotionally charged letter to the Generic Good Morning Message, meant to rally people against the actions of the brothers. After the JC hearing, Anonymous made an official statement that differs from her original letter on many points, including that the "series of insults" was actually one brother calling the girl fat, and that I personally apologized to her for our actions. If Anonymous herself does not fully agree with her first account of the incident, how can it be reasonable that it was the only testimony used to assess what happened?
The hardest part of these last few days has been trying to show the injustice of the adjudication process without defending the actions. Anonymous was right when she said, "Psi U is not the victim here. I am." I am not saying that Psi Upsilon or the members involved should not be punished. All I am saying is that any one person or any group as a whole should be punished based on knowledge of the facts and testimonies of those involved, and not on blitzes passed around campus.
