Most students charged for their involvement in the University Hall occupation will be informed late this week of the punishment decisions that the Committee of Fifteen will submit to the Faculty June 9.
The Committee will release the results of its investigation to the students so that they may appeal the decision on two grounds: the factual findings-whether the students actually did what the deans charge-and the punishment decision itself. The students will be asked to submit any appeals as soon as possible, but the Committee probably will not adhere too strictly to any time limit for appeals.
The Committee has released a four-page statement questioning the points of a petition signed by 2514 students asking that no student be severed or suspended for the occupation.
Informed that many students-including the authors of the petition-say that the statement indicates the Committee will suspend at least some students, Alan E. Heimert '49, the Committee spokesman, said the statement merely put forth "Some of the implications and questions raised by the petition." Heimert said the statement grew out of a discussion between the Committee and the three authors of the petition.
In a sentence-by-sentence analysis of the petition, the Committee's statement questions most of the petition's points. The petition asked that "no student involved in the demonstration be suspended or expelled, including those on probation". The statement implies that the Committee cannot accept this position because it would "suggest" that "probation is a very ineffective form of discipline, at least as a deterrent" to disruptions.
The petition also stated that suspension or expulsion "will only be divisive and appear vindictive". The Committee's statement implies that any disciplinary action, including no action, would be "divisive to some portion" of the community.
Robert A. Hicks '71, one of the petition's authors, said that he has not been given the chance to answer the Committee's questions about the petition. Hicks and the other authors-Deborah B. Johnson '71 and Mark A. Faller '71- appeared before the Committee May 20. Hicks said he read a short statement, but was not permitted to answer the Committee members' questions.
Roger Rosenblatt, author of the Committee's statement on the petition, said he realized that the students "did not have enough time to develop their arguments fully," and that he regretted the situation.
He added that the Committee's schedule-which included interviews with Deans Glimp, Ford, and Stendahl-precluded the possibility of a longer meeting with the students at that time.
Heimert said that "slightly more than 120 students" have been charged by the deans in all. He added that "a considerable number" of students have appeared for the Committee's hearings, but would not state the number. In cases where students do not appear, the deans still submit evidence to the hearing panel in support of their complaints.
The Committee will probably not be able to inform all the students involved about the findings before the weekend, Heimert said, because of the difficulty of sending out so many letters and of preparing for the Faculty meeting.
(Due to a typing error, the second sentence of the Committee's statement states that the petition asks the Committee to "neither sever nor suspect any student found to be involved" in the occupation. The word suspend should be substituted for suspect, Rosenblatt said.