Protester Will Face Ad Board, Not CRR

Student Arrested at Fogg Protest Will Not Go Before Controversial Committee

One of the two undergraduates arrested by the Cambridge police for her actions at a divestment protest two weeks ago said yesterday that the Administrative Board and not the Committee on Rights and Responsibilities (CRR) will review her case.

Elizabeth E. Ruddick '88-'89, who along with Alexandra H.T. Edsel '89 are the first undergraduates arrested during a political protest since the 1969 University Hall takeover, said her senior tutor told her yesterday her case would not appear before the controversial disciplinary body.

In the past the CRR has handled disciplinary matters arising from political protest. Students have traditionally boycotted the committee charging that the body, which was created to enforce the Resolution on Rights and Responsibilities (RRR), violates due process.

The CRR was last called into action in the spring of 1985 to try the cases of 18 students involved in divestment protests at Lowell House and 17 Quincy St. After a summer of hearings the committee punished several students with suspended requirements to withdraw. The Faculty Council is currently considering a plan to abolish the CRR and replace it with a new student-faculty committee.

At last month's protest at the Fogg Art Musuem, Cambridge Police arrested Edsel and Ruddick as well as 17 other divestment protesters on charges of disorderly conduct and trespassing.

Harvard police ordered the arrest of a group of six protesters who, by sitting on the steps of the museum, attempted to prevent more than 100 invited guests from attending a formal dinner for President Derek C. Bok.

The two undergraduates were part of a second group of 13 protesters arrested as they sat with linked arms on the sidewalk outside the art museum.

Ruddick said that her senior tutor, Assistant Dean of the College John R. Marquand, told her that the case did not fall under the jurisdiction of the CRR because she did not break any of theprovisions of the RRR, which states that no memberof the Harvard community may violate freedom ofspeech or movement.

Marquand could not be reached for commentyesterday.

Adams House Senior Tutor Marshall Hyatt, whowould serve as Edsel's representative before theAd Board, refused to comment on Edsel's casebecause he said he has not spoken to her about it.He added that it is customary for the College'sjudiciary body to review any case where a studentis arrested.

"Any time a student is arrested it is necessaryfor the Board to know about it," said Hyatt,adding that "there is no general rule of thumb" asto whether the Board hears the case.

Dean of the College L. Fred Jewett, who chairsthe Ad Board, could not be reached for commentyesterday.

Ruddick said that she was pleased with theCollege's decision to send her case to the AdBoard, rather than the CRR. "It's going to betreated like a normal Ad Board case. It's up tothem to decide if it was a breach of conductunbecoming to a Harvard student," she said