To the Editors of The CRIMSON:
The CRIMSON stated on Wednesday that John G. S. Flym, an attorney for some of the University Hall defendants, had told a reporter that he had "reason to believe that one of the defendants, Jack R. Stauder '61, instructor in Social Anthropology, had a key to the building" (University Hall). Flym also said several things in court that implied I might have a key.
This idea has no basis in fact. I have never had a key to University Hall, and I have never claimed to have one. Mr. Flym and the CRIMSON reporter never asked me whether I did have one. (Mr. Flym is not my lawyer.) I do not know how the suggestion arose that I might have a key, except through some confused discussions Flym had with other of the defendants. The idea was then advanced completely without my knowledge, much less my permission.
What I object to most strongly is the implication that a defense could or should be made on the presumption that we had a right to be in University Hall because I am an officer of the University. We occupied University Hall not under any pretense of "legality," but as part of a long campaign we are fighting for just demands, in the interests of the working people of Cambridge and of the people of the world who are hurt by Harvard policies. These considerations are what made our action right. I went into University Hall on the same basis as everyone else, and never presumed to have any special authority or privileges there.
Unfortunately, most of the lawyers have chosen to conduct an entirely "legal" defense, which has clearly been politically detrimental. I would have preferred an honest and straightforward political defense. Jack Stauder '61 Instructor in Social Anthropology