Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
Support independent student journalism. Support independent student journalism. Support independent student journalism.
The Dartmouth
April 24, 2024 | Latest Issue
The Dartmouth

Zeta Psi decision expected in mid-July

The future of Zeta Psi fraternity will remain in question until mid-July, when the College will make its final decision on the organization's derecognition appeal, according to Dean of Residential Life Martin Redman.

Redman attributed the relative lateness of the decision to his own busy schedule and impending vacation plans.

The College announced on May 11 that it would permanently shut down the fraternity following the discovery of internal house newsletters containing detailed accounts of members' supposed sexual exploits with named students.

The decision was largely the result of an administrative hearing held to determine whether or not the fraternity had, through its newsletters, violated Dartmouth codes of conduct.

In a press statement released soon after the announcement, Zeta Psi president Gene Boyle '02 called the decision unjustified and also said the fraternity would "consider its appeal rights and whether further legal action is merited" in order to overturn its derecognition by the College.

The fraternity proceeded to file an appeal -- in the form of a 200-page document -- on May 29. The appeal is currently under review by Redman, who had also presided over Zeta Psi's administrative hearing and ultimately determined that permanent derecognition by the College was the most appropriate sanction to impose on the nearly 150-year-old house.

Redman must now judge whether or not the arguments presented by Zeta Psi are valid and warrant the reversal of his original decision.

While Redman would not comment specifically on the content of Zeta Psi's appeal, in an earlier interview with The Dartmouth, he explained that -- as with any appeal of Greek disciplinary action -- it must be based on at least one of three claims: that not all relevant information was presented during the initial judicial process, that procedural errors were made during the process or that the imposed penalties are too severe relative to the determined violations.

Boyle was not available for comment.