Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Feb. 14, 1968, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
the-daily tar heei Pane 2 Wednesday, February 14, 1233 A O 75 Years o Editorial Freedom Bill Amlong, Editor Don Walton, Badness Manager n t A .Honor system Survey: A Chance For Chan What kind of Honor System should this University have? A different one than it does now", to begin with. But why should it be different, and how? These are questions which the student body will get a chance to answer Thursday in the Attitudinal Survey on the Honor System, the referendum-style poll that grew out of Di-Phi's efforts last fall. And it is now time to earnestly analyze this system Carolina has, this system which some praise almost as much as others damn it. Generally, we agree with both at different times. To be sure, there needs to be some kind of student court system. There needs to be a set of stan dards in the academic community, just as there is outside of it. There needs to be an honor system. The only thing, though, is that it just doesn't need to be the one we have now. To begin with, there is at least part of it which is unenforcable the part about turning in anybody you know of who had either lied, stolen or cheated. Let's be realisitic: it just doesn't work like that. Were a student to turn in another student for cheating on a non-curved test, for example, the" accuser would be risking far stronger censure form his peer group the guys back at the dorm than he would risk from the Honor Council for not doing it. It is purely and simply not worth it, on a personal basis, to play stool pigeon for the University- However, should someone's cheating affect a grading curve, then it becomes a different matter. By his act, the cheater is injuring the rest of the class, and anyone who sees him should turn him in in self defense. The difference between the two situations : one is based on t h e what-does-it-mean-to-me reality of JUniversity life, the other on the Small World, Isn't It? v From the Florida Alligator Tired of an apathetic campus? Is student government more of a play pen for would-be politicians and not a true body that represents the students? Is the UF campus too large and impersonal? These questions ring of universal problems on most college campuses. In a 228-page report, a student faculty commission at Berkeley recommended sweeping changes in the way their campus should be run. The problems outlined in the commission report are very similar to problems at the UF. Recommendations in the report include: DECENTRALIZATION and "the creation of communities of more manageable size" A REVAMPING of student government A THOROUGHLY candid open examination of education priorities, and other significant university issues. A GREATER student role on the departmental level, including membership on important departmental committees such as Pamela Hawkins, Associate ,anur Wayne Hurder, Managing Editor Rebel Good, Weifls Editor Kermit Buckner, Advertising Manager ge ethereal notion that each man is his brother's keeper. Now, possibly that isn't a good way to look at the situation, since it's not all idealistic. It is, however, realistic. And since Student Government was supposedly playing for keepsies when it designed the system, it should seem that it would be most firmly rooted in reality, rather than in abstrac tions. ' FURTHER, JUST where should the Honor System have juridic tion? Presently, it's everywhere. If you lie to a cop down at the Beach, the Honor Council can try you. If you swipe a roadsign on a trip to New York, the Honor Coun cil can try. you. The gist of it is that, if you do anything, anywhere, that the Honor Council either doesn't like or is told by the Administration not to like then, baby, you're had. x By what right? None. That's just the way things are now. ' The honor system at this University needs severely to be whittled down to a more palatableP-ahd a less far reaching scale. It should have jurisdiction only over what students do either on campus, or while representing the University off -campus. By trying to extend its jurisdic tion past that, the Honor System is overstepping its bounds. What it all boils down to is that the Honor System, as it now exists, is one of the main butresses of the concept of in loco parentis, the philosophy that the University has a right to act as a second parent. Is that the way the student Honor System should work? That's what you're going to be asked Thursday. And how you answer just might have some effect on getting things changed. curriculum. THE DEVELOPMENT of an independent student-facultv judiciary system. The list reads like the platform of a politician, but the difference lies in the fact that the proposals are realistic and very appropriate to solve many of the problems at the UF. Myer Paid j I For Ad i 1 Himself 1 Randy Myer, president of the Interfraternity Council, said Tues day he didn't use IFC funds to pay for an advertising space in Sun day's paper which carried a car toon depicting Bruce Strauch as a lizard. He charged the $29 to IFC, he said, only because he didn't have his checkbook with him at the time. He later wrote IFC a check for the amount, he said. An editorial in Tuesday's Daily Tar Heel said the IFC paid for the cartoon. Much has been said about the -desirability of the up-coming honor system referendum and about the possibility of reforming the student court system. Frequently, however, that which has been said has been said by persons who have had no direct confrontation with it. Those who have, on the other hand, have remained quiet. Someone who has' been tried in a student court usually ! doesn't want to tak. about it because it's embarrassing. However, there is a time when a person feels he must sacrifice that em barrassement to prevent injustice. I find myself in that predicament now. I became involved with the student court system because of a shaving cream fight. I had thrown some shaving cream. In all, the results of the shoit scuffle were not especially damaging. There was some shaving cream on two of the suite doors. And there was a little water on the floor. And some peas. Two of the guys had used a pea shooter. cOo.ut -fo beta 3 nV here'5 Wi AV Brian Cuinmings ' THAI The draft is a distinct and crucial issue because, Dr. Louis Lipsitz says, 'you put your life ' on ithe line." An equally vital, issue 'lor each UNC student is the Honor 'put his Me Code, for which he must on the line," in a moral sense. The difference is that if you're a con sciencious objector to the Honor Code, that's just too bad. So it is important that every student who votes in the referen dum Thursday has thoroughly examined his own attitudes on the Honor Codfe r To begm with, "you are on your honor not to lie, cheat, or steal." Of these three only cheating is defined clearly as an academic offense. Lying is more of a moral issue, and stealing is only involved remotely, if at all, with academic af fairs, 1 Admittedly the University 5s responsi ble for maintaining academic integrity, but its authority over moral" tissues is questionable. In other words, if the University is a purely academic institut ion, men it is. not wholly justified imposing the Honor Code. in The most controversial cart of thA H0nOr Code is Responsibility Clause w iiiivii i cuutti eaon stiiii Ant tv A --W..V WJ rerxvrt tmyvne ne sees lying, cheating, or steal ing. This way, not only idoes the Univer sity impose a basically moral code, but theoretically it intricates every student in the personal moral affairs of everv other student. ' It is a fallacy to claim that the Honor Code is based! on the integrity of the in dividual. If the University trusted its students, it would not enlist the entire student body as an enforcement service. Some students believe in minding their own business that they have no natural privilege ior obligation to turn in someone who violates a certain rule. For these students, involvement tin the personal moral affairs of fellow student is moraUv wrong. How does such involuntary jl volvement enhance the e d u c a t i In i enrichment of the students? The traoL is that Jhey have no choice; We itt 0 latrs of3 The problem stems from the about whether the UniversTty't These i problems are thoretical base , on the hypothesis that every 'stuS obeys the Honor Code. m Unfortunately, it's not that simole Some students still cheat Responsibility Clause is not faJS its effectiveness. Indeed SJSS?? for .i . . . the Honor Svsfpm ,17.". inan of System Coissi""Z;? that it is "seldom " 1 1 A. . Some . I Qfl kind J3L 1 AVAV.V.V.VAV.,.VAV.V.V.W.V.V. - The Honor System is one of whimsy and farce, writes Daily Tar Heel Columnist Mike Cozza who recently tan gled with it after tangling with his suitemates in a shaving cream fight. His column is an inside view, from the de fendant's seat, of just how a trial can go hefore the Men's Residence Council Court. It was a small mess, I admit. But we cleaned it up ourselves in a-few minutes. As everyone who has ever lived in a dorm knows, this type of thing is nothing to get all upset about. BUT SOMEONE did get upset. The dorm MRC representative. And he brought the Resident Advisor into the picture. The RA informed us that we had 24 hours to turn ourslves in.t lAfter he described how we'd be tried for our heineous crime, I asked the RA if he was really serious. Did he really mean T .-He 4i 1 no rooi-n for re s 'fellow shlj over 'b VVenf Ob! II W 7 the vital problems of the Honor Code. Take the average Carolina student. He isn't the type who wants to cheat. In fact he may even reach graduation without having ever cheated a single time. Hopefully he will have never lied or stolen either. But as for that Responsibility dause most probably, this average student has failed to report all of his fellow students who were guilty of lying cheating, or stealing. Chances are he pro- ilbably didn't turn in a one. Even the - chairman of the Honor System Commission finds it safe to assume that a majority of students have violated the Responsibility Clause, and subseauently, the Code itself. No one can say that because a few violations go unpunished, the system should be scrapped. But when a majority of students are fguilty of violating a part of the code, then that section needs serious ree valuation. Also, when a system is so widely abused, the effects can be disastrous. First of all it establishes a double standard. For dishonest people, the Honor Code has no meaning and it is us eless to make them sign any pledge. On the other hand, honest people who feel obligated by the Code to turn in then fellow students, are put under tremendous pressure. . They realize that they must jeopardize their standing in their peer group. They The 4Fun City' The Chapel HiU Weekly Those newspaper pictures of ail that garbage in the New York streets reminded us of. a couple of weeks of enforced bachelorhood some while back. At the end of the first' week the kitchen sink was filled with dirty dishes and pots and pans. The garbage can was so stuffed that the lid rested' about two feet above the rim. At the end of the second week things were beginning; to grow in the sink. Apot of sauerkraut and. weiners on the stove had worked up to about 150 proof. The garbage can had disappeared in a pile of Utter. And the breakfast room table had begun to sag dangerously under a load of dishes, all of them covered with a delicate green fungus. Just fi i we'd have to go trial for a simple shaving cream fight? As a matter of fact, I asked him the question three times. And three times he assured us that we would. I asked him if he didn't think that was a little Mickey Mouse and a stupid way to handle the situation. The RA admitted that it was. But he had already committed himself. It's the system, he said, and he had to go along with it. I told him his remarks reminded me of the people in Nazi. Germany who "went along with the system." lec; All we 1 tina rf- -me 1 1 body uiho Tom realize that they must,, for personal in tegrity and safety from prosecution, do, something that they don't like, even though a majority of students wouldn't do the same thing. They realize that whomever they turn in will be punished severely perhaps. This is. their dilemma, created by the Honor Code's responsibility clause. What about the in-between people, the semi-honest majority who don't cheat, but don't report their fellow students? they believe in personal honor, and yet they willingly violate a moral code. These people have basically moral instincts, but they become corrupted by the fact that they get away with dishonesty which i? minding their own business. The commitments imposed by the University lose their meaning. If these people had any previous ideals of personal honor, these ideals are tarnished somewhat iby the Honor Code. 'By asking too much, the Honor Code actually renders its own ineffectiveness, while simultaneously eroding the moral fiber of the student body. So here are the issues. Is the Universi ty justified in imposing the Code? Is it fair? Is it effective? What students does it help or harm? Before the referendum every student should make his decisions on these issues. . s - Plus Garbage walking past the kitchen was enough to make your nose smart and your eyes water. - The put-upon woman who came in to clean up that mess felt about like Mayor John Lindsay must be feeling today. Tke Daily Tar Heel is tsufciished by the University of N&rth Carolina Student Publication's Board, daily except Mondays, examinations periods and vacations. Offices are on the second floor of Graham -Memorial. Telephone numbers: editorial, sports, n ews 933-1011; business, circulation., ad vetising 933-1163. Address: Box 1080. Chapel Hill, N.C.. 27514. Second class postage paid at UJS. Post Office in Chapel Hill, N.C Subscription rates: $9 per year; $5 per semester. S 3 gib. T"V"r t rt w Nevertheless, the RA repeated that we'd belter turn ourselves in. If -are didn't, he said, they'd be rough on us for not co-opera tir 2. - THE WHOLE tMng stiU seems pretty risky-dink, but the next day we trudged up to the attorney-general's office and surrer:dured. We didn't want them to think we weren't co-operating. We later came to regret this action after an AG staff member-told us if we hadn't turned ourself in, they would have thrown the whole thing out a s ridiculous. Before the case came to trial, however, things got even more ridiculous. Supposedly, any individual has the right to a speedy trial. I have been told that a week after the crime is generally considered the appropriate length of time. In our case, however, it took a -month and four days. I'm not sure why it took that long, bus. I do know that it was postponed one week after being set for the same night as a basketball game. After that date was set, the prosecuting investigator told me he was trying to get it changed for that reason. I assume the MRC men thought it more important to see the game than to hear the case. BUT FINALLY, after more than a month, our speedy trial was ready to begin. We were being tried collectively because our officially-apointed defense counsel said it would be easier that way. Our counsel also cautioned us about making any fuss about any evidence that was presented, even if we thought it was irrevlevant or unfair. "Just go along wiih them" he advised. "They won't consider anything that isnt relevant. And remember, .they're trying you collectively. Youll all get the same penalty. Just don't make a fuss about anything." Remembering this advice, I didn't challenge the RA when he decided to tell the court how I thought the system was Mickey Mouse and that I was opposed to it. This, of course, was no big secret. When I ran for Student Legislature two years ago, it was one of my main cam paign issues. And I have editorialized in the DTH from time to time about the Mickey Mouse aspects of student govern ment. - Obviously I didn't think this was particularly relevant to my trial, but I didn't say anything. I remembered what my defense counsel told me. I didn't "make a fuss.- ji 1 - -- - f ' ; - After the. RA testified, the case was quickly wrapped-up. We left the court while they deliberated, and we returned to hear our sentences. n ..-. THE CHAIRMAN of the court read . the names of my co-defendents. He an nounced that they had been given residence hall probation, a fairly light, warning-type penalty of which no permanent record is made. But my penalty was different; it was harsher. I was given an official repri mand and informed that the offense would remain on my permanent record. To say the least, I was surprised. I had been specifically advised by my of ficial defense counsel that they couldn't sentence us separately. It had been the basis for my whole defense. After the trial, I told the court's chairman, Bob Taylor, that I didn't understand what had happened. We had all been charged with exactly the same crime. We had been tried collectively. How could they single me out for ex cessive penalty? I asked Taylor if it was because of my beliefs about the system. Taylor knew I was a journalist, and he knew I was looking for a quote. He finally asserted that it was because of my attitude. My attitude? I wondered what kind of baloney that was. I told Taylor that it sure looked as if I was sentenced not because of the shaving cream fight, but because of what I tfiought about the system. "You were sentenced more heavily than the others because of what you said and the way you said it," was hds reply. He told me if I didn't like it I could appeal, or write a column, or do whatever I wanted. I have chosen to write this column. SPECIFICALLY, I am leveling four charges against the student court system, four injustices that I encountered in only one case: THE 24 HOURS provision is used as a threat against defendants. If they don't turn themselves in, they are told, the court will be rougher on them. THE RIGHT TO speedy trial is a myth. - ' THE RULES OF procedure and the rights cf the accused are so obscure that not even the official defense counsels understand them.'' PERSONS HAVE been singled out for excessive penalty because of what they think of or have said about the system. Because the above four injustices ap peared in one single case, it is not hard to imagine that ethers have occurred and will continue to occur throughout the system unless steps are taken for reform. The time for reform is now, before this type of thing goes any further. The student court system is Mickey Mouse. The time has come to clip its ears. JLililill uiwa. Herein lie
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Feb. 14, 1968, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75