<p>As a current student on campus, I apologize for the lack of effort by the students in upholding the speaking tradition.</p>
<p>However, I wish to hear some more comments on what I and other students can do to change the EC in our next three years here. I believe Morgan can now say that the EC's actions were less than honorable after finding out the truth for himself. Let's do something about it. </p>
<p>TheGFG- I wish your son the best of luck.</p>
<p>I find myself agreeing with wnlalum time and time again-- the biggest problem facing college campuses today is the strict (and often illegal) enforcement of political correctness in forms of Speech Codes and other means of restricting free speech. These ridiculous measures actually create a MORE hostile environment for students, and they severely inhibit true intellectual development. In order for one to really develop intellectually, he must have his fears confronted along the way. Please look at <a href="http://www.thefire.org%5B/url%5D">www.thefire.org</a> , and <a href="http://www.onthefencefilms.com%5B/url%5D">www.onthefencefilms.com</a> for some more information on this matter.</p>
<p>maysixxmom-- I'm curious as to what other schools your D visited. I've only stayed overnight at one other school-- Georgetown-- and they had just as much drinking going on as we do here. I think a better thing to do is to teach responsible drinking with a program like the one Colby started a couple years ago ( <a href="http://www.colby.edu/news/detail/540/%5B/url%5D">http://www.colby.edu/news/detail/540/</a> ). </p>
<p>I drink a lot more responsibly than many students here, and I managed to get a Minor in Possession last week. Under the newly changed VA law, police can just stop and breathalize anyone, and if alcohol is detected in the accused body, he has "possession" of alcohol. It was alumni weekend and most people were hammered by 4PM, but my friend and I were the ones who got busted. I now have to go through a ridiculously flawed court system. </p>
<p>I'm really digressing here, but it's somewhat related to the free speech thing-- just as the solution to bad speech is more speech rather than restriction and censorship, the solution to America's alcohol problem is not more enforcement. Everyone knows that kids like to do things that are restricted by authority. My international friends have been drinking wine with their families since they were 12, and thus learned early on how to drink responsibly. They say drinking's really not a big deal, and they don't get as ridiculously excited about it as America's college students do.</p>
<p>I feel that a substantial amount of posters here are either naive or ill-informed about W&L's Honor System. Although I readily admit that it is far from perfect, the Honor System provides a tremendous amount of freedom academically, socially, and otherwise. It is undoubtedly the most distinguishing attribute of W&L and is among the major reasons why students choose the University in the first place. How many other schools do you know that give unproctored, unscheduled final exams? How many other schools do you know where students can leave books, backpacks, and other belongs lying around unafraid that anyone will touch them? How many other schools do you know where honor, character, and virtue are the definitive elements upon which students model their behavior? I encourage everyone to read the following baccalaureate speech from 2003 entitled "A Place Like No Other". It better expresses the wonderful qualities of Washington and Lee than I could ever could. </p>
<p>Whether or not you agree with the law, you are supposed to abide by it. I can drive safely at 80 mph on open roads. I won't do it on a highway that's posted at 65 maximum speed because it's illegal.</p>
<p>Morgan- delete your PMs. I can't PM you anymore.</p>
<p>polo -- "How many other schools do you know where honor, character, and virtue are the definitive elements upon which students model their behavior?"</p>
<p>The school definitely wants students to model their behavior after these elements, but unfortunately that is not always the case, especially outside the classroom.</p>
<p>Well said, Morgan.</p>
<p>I am not attacking the honor system itself, but rather the ten students running and deciding what is honor behind closed doors- the Executive Commitee.</p>
<p>What would be your proposal to change the way the Honor System is administered?</p>
<p>"Whether or not you agree with the law, you are supposed to abide by it. I can drive safely at 80 mph on open roads. I won't do it on a highway that's posted at 65 maximum speed because it's illegal."</p>
<p>Motherdear, I apologize but with this statement you are simply asking to be chewed out. Whether or not you choose to drive 80 is irrelevant, the fact is, on a road with a posted 65 mph speed limit, police will rarely pull over a car going under 75. Most cars in fact will maintain a speed between 65 and 75, and studies have even shown that a driver traveling 5 mph under the speed limit is more of a traffic hazard than one traveling 5 mph over the posted limit. I find it interesting that you choose this scenario as support for cracking down on underage drinking, as I have actually used it in an opposite manner quite frequently. </p>
<p>The current drinking age on a college campus is simply an absurd limit. What if police chose to pull over every single car going 66 or more on the aforementioned road? You'd have a whole lot of speeding tickets...</p>
<p>Now imagine if those same cars were Washington and Lee students. Mostly drinking in a range of five to ten mph over the speed limit, if you may. If we decide that underage drinking is an official honor violation, we would now expel each and every one of these students that were caught. There is a big difference in a 50 dollar traffic fine and an expulsion from the University. </p>
<p>The University can not simply prevent all underage drinking, and it certainly can not expel people for doing it. Therefore, it can punish those that go 85 in a 65 (urinating in public, lewd behavior, sexual misconduct, frequent intoxication) and let it slide when people choose to go 70.</p>
<p>Well put wtets - if colleges began expelling people for underage drinking, there would be a lot less college diplomas around this country.</p>
<p>My analogy may be flawed but I still find it hard to reconcile that breaking the law isn't an honor violation. Wouldn't the use of a fake ID constitute lying and intent to deceive?</p>
<p>wnlalum,
You're right. Of course banning Confederate flags in dorm rooms at W&L wouldn't really be a good idea. And had I seen the same thing at any other southern college I wouldn't have thought much of it. My point is that W&L is selling the honor code and all its benefits as the school's main distinctive. The implication is that the college is concerned not only about academics but character. While I may not have understood the finer points about it nor the difference between a code and a system, when I envisioned a community that behaves with honor, somehow insults and drunkenness didn't come to mind.</p>
<p>The other honor code benefits which are so highly touted (such as the freedom to take unproctored exams and to be irresponsible with your possessions without losing them) are not all that special. Actually, a number of other schools we visited also claimed to have these benefits.</p>
<p>As far as the drinking, my S is not sheltered so much as unfamiliar by choice. It seemed to him that there were two primary social groups on campus: the drinkers and the non-drinkers, and never the twain shall meet. Since he felt more at home with the type of kids who were the drinkers than he did with the teetotalers, but he doesn't drink, he wondered if there would be a social niche for him. As noted on this thread, diversity is not a stong suit at W&L.</p>
<p>However, in fairness I want to note that we met some lovely people at the alumni reception. We also have friends whose children are quite happy at W&L. There's a lid for every pot.</p>
<p>motherdear, using a fake id could be considered an honor violation; however, most underage drinking at w&l occurs at fraternity and off-campus houses, rather than bars, so that is rarely ever an issue.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Using fake identification is an honor violation</p></li>
<li><p>There are plenty of kids here who don't drink yet spend most of their time with people who do. So while it often does seem like there are two groups on campus (although that is gross oversimplification) - the statement that they don't intermingle is incorrect.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>If a underage student is wearing the bracelet (or whatever the party sponsors use to designate the 21+ ages) wouldn't that be an honor violation as well? </p>
<p>Admissions claimed that all parties are open but 21+ year olds have some kind of identifier that is checked when getting an actual drink.</p>
<p>For liability issues, doesn't the host org'n have to check ID to make sure they're only serving "of age" people?</p>
<p>Wow -- a weekend away from CC's hottest thread and look what happens!</p>
<p>Having worked in trial and appellate courts for years, and as the parent of an incoming freshman, I have some questions about the EC's role (just the facts please, not characterizations/opinions!):</p>
<p>(1) Who investigates an allegation of HV? Is it someone from the EC?</p>
<p>(2) Who, if anyone, decides there is sufficient evidence to "prosecute"? Is it someone from the EC? Or does every allegation go to the EC?</p>
<p>(3) Who, if anyone, represents the accuser in proceedings before the EC? Is it someone from the EC?</p>
<p>(4) Are there restrictions on evidence (documents, testimony, "real" evidence) that can be presented at the EC hearing (closed or open)? </p>
<p>(5) Who considers the evidence presented at the hearing and decides whether the accused is guilty of an HV?</p>
<p>(6) Is there some form of appeal available to those convicted of an HV, so that allegations like the witness intimidation and jury manipulation can be aired and considered? (These would be classic reasons for a new trial if the original were tainted by them.) If so, who serves as the appellate panel? Anyone from the EC?</p>
<p>I am, to say the least, very familiar with the types of complaints I am reading about here. I see many similar allegations of procedural unfairness -- in fact, reviewing such complaints is pretty much what I do for a living. Sometimes there is merit to them, sometimes not. The key is having an agreed upon set of rules for deciding which ones have merit. </p>
<p>Separating investigatorial, prosecutorial, fact-finding, and appellate functions is critical to ensuring procedural fairness, as well as to inculcating the community's perception that the system in general and the result in particular are fair. To what extent, if any, do the concerns raised here reflect a lack of such separation? or a perceived lack of separation? For example, are any of the same people who conduct investigations/decide to prosecute also on the panel that decides guilt? </p>
<p>Is there some reason that an accused would not be allowed to present evidence and argument about "tainted process" allegations such as the witness intimidation and jury manipulation that I am reading about here?<br>
It seems to me that someone accused/convicted of an HV due to a "stacked deck" would welcome an open hearing at which such allegations and supporting evidence might be made public within the student body. Why would someone choose not to proceed with airing his or her specific claims of bias, disproportionatality, or other unfairness in a forum where both sides have the right to question witnesses, to present other evidence, and to argue how the HC should be applied in that specific case?</p>
<p>Esquette, unfortunately I don't hav the time to look up all your questions in the White Book and don't have all of it memorize and the EC website is essentially useless (none of the links work). The entire policy is outlined in the White Book, though I am not sure how a parent of an incoming student would be able to obtain a copy.</p>
<p>Motherdear, I'm not really sure whether wearing a wristband at a fraternity party is an HV. If you got the wristband by saying you are 21, then I would assume it is. It is really up to the EC to figure that out I guess. One problem I do think we have with the Honor System is that since it is not codified and there is no permanent record of offenses people have been found guilty of in the past, it is sometimes difficult to tell whether or not something is an HV. This was mentioned a lot in the "Day of Dialogue" we had earlier this year and I hope it gets addressed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Separating investigatorial, prosecutorial, fact-finding, and appellate functions is critical to ensuring procedural fairness
[/quote]
Very true. I've read this thread and the questions about how to change the EC. If we work under the assumption that it needs to be changed, Esquette starts in the right direction.</p>
<p>The EC essentially combines the functions of prosecutor and judge, which can be unnerving at the least and disastrous at worst. As Americans, we are thrown off by this system but do not see that it resembles the European system of an inquisatorial trial, where the judge makes an investigation instead of passively sorting evidence. Works fine in other countries; I don't think there's anything per se wrong with this. However, once on appeal, the EC is no longer the unbiased "judge" but is in the role of a prosecutor. </p>
<p>To fix the flaws mentioned earlier, whether or not they exist, W&L could:
1) Change the student body hearing slightly. At this point, you have the EC defending its decision and the student fighting that decision - they are at odds and the EC is no longer a neutral decision-maker. Therefore, it is inappropriate for the EC to have a role in selecting jurors beyond the peremptory strikes. Another body, individual, or group should screen the jury.</p>
<p>2) As Dima put it so well, there is nothing wrong with having the jurors believe in the single sanction. Excellent analogy to the death penalty.</p>
<p>3) Change the examples of honour violations - if they are going to be enumerated, rape should be in there, explicitly. There should be a stronger correlation between actual laws and honour violations; however, given that the LPD can be a tad overzealous, they should diminish the reliance upon outside punishments for wrongdoing. </p>
<p>4) The entire system could benefit from being more open. A short blurb about EC hearings are put up around the school; however, it's nearly impossible to determine what happened and why the EC ruled that particular way. Perhaps it should import some habits from the legal world, such as making findings of fact and conclusions based on those findings. That could be helpful for a Student Body hearing and for future amendments to the White Book.</p>
<p>5) Give the accused more time to prepare for a trial. The downside of this is that it is such a stressful and all-consumming event that no one wants that hanging over their heads for more than necessary.</p>
<p>6) My biggest issue: clarify the role of the EC and the role of reporting honour violations. Currently, students are obligated to report possible honour violations; the EC then investigates and can decide to have a hearing. That's all fine, but it seems as if you move from a "probable cause of an honour violation" to a "substantial likelihood" (or whatever) without additional findings.</p>
<p>7) Perhaps the EC could be split up into two groups, one of which investigates the honour violations and the other one of which makes the decisions. Younger students could do the investigation and the older students, esp. the law students, could do the findings. </p>
<p>I really do like the honour system. There is something to be said for going to a school in which the faculty assumes that you are honest, where you are expected to be your best. I was able to see in March the effect that it has on students - there is definitely a huge benefit to being at a school that values honesty and integrity.</p>
<p>AriesAthena has made several concrete suggestions to address specific problems/perceptions -- a constructive step in the right direction for those who are discussing change. </p>
<p>Another analogy that may make the current system seem less unusually "stacked" -- from administrative law in this country. In most cases that originate in an administrative agency (such as, for example, proposals to suspend an individual's driver's license or professional license -- like the opportunity to attend a college, the rights to drive and to practice a licensed profession are also considered a "privilege rather than a right"), agency personnel also serve as investigators, prosecutors, fact-finders, and even "sentencing" authorities who decide the appropriate "punishment" (e.g., 90 days license suspension for accumulating a certain no. of points from speeding tickets). "Appeals" may also be made within the agency, to a designated official charged with reviewing initial decisions made by hearing officers. </p>
<p>What might be different, from what I have heard so far, is that there is still a right to judicial review after an administrative agency decision is final. This is so that the party aggrieved by that decision has the right to have an independent judicial officer review claims of procedural and substantive unfairness, including the type of complaints about which I am reading here. Even then, however, the court will presume the administrative decision to be correct (that is the law, so that we don't have to justify our agreed upon decisionmaking systems in each and every case!), so that the burden is on the party challenging the administrative decision to rebut that presumption -- to prove that the decision is tainted by some illegality, abuse of discretion, clear factual error, or error of law. </p>
<p>As daunting as that may seem, it is a burden that I have seen met on many occasions, even by litigants who do not have the benefit of counsel. The only thing in this system that is certain is that those who choose not to challenge the decision must live with it. </p>
<p>Most importantly, what this type of independent judicial review does ensure is that each aggrieved party has a forum for his or her complaints about the investigation and trial, and the right to be heard, without possibility of further penalty, by an independent decisionmaker who takes an oath to be neutral and to listen, and who has authority to decide that some error in the investigation or trial warrants either a different result or a new hearing. </p>
<p>Is there some analogous independent EC review by an entity other than the same one that just rendered the HV conviction? Are there perhaps some "firewalls" within the EC, to ensure that the EC prosecutor does not also serve as EC trial judge and EC appellate court? It would surprise me somewhat if there are not, particularly with the esteemed reputation of an institution that has produced four Supreme Court Justices on the line.</p>
<p>Perhaps this is a ripe time to ask, to understand how the EC really works, and to examine how a better understanding of this process might promote actual and perceived neutrality? And, ultimately, actual and perceived justice. </p>
<p>That's all I'm going to say about this because I don't know how the system works. It is up to all of you who are living within this community of honor to find out the facts about the process you voluntarily agreed to live under before condemning it, and before deciding whether and how it needs to be changed. </p>
<p>Something to think about -- and to talk to each other about. With civility please, ladies and gentlemen . . . .</p>