Desert Lamp is reporing that the Dean of Students has officially informed Evan Lisull that he will NOT face Academic Code of Conduct violation charges. No word yet on whether Jacob Miller has received the same notification. We hope to hear news of Mr. Miller as soon as possible.
Daily Wildcat now reports that ONLY Evan Lisull has been informed by the Dean of Students that his case has been dropped. The story cannot confirm whether Jacob Miller's case with the DOS too remains open or closed. We will remain on alert until we hear otherwise.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
An Open Letter to President Robert Shelton from Concerned Faculty
We, the concerned faculty at the University of Arizona, write to express our relief upon hearing of your decision to dismiss criminal charges against Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull, two UA students unjustly arrested on campus as they were exercising their right to protected forms of speech on September 24 and 28, 2009. At news of their initial arrests we were shocked and outraged, as they amounted to a direct violation of the freedom to organize and to express public opposition on a University campus. These incidents were acutely felt, particularly when the context for the Arizona for Education rally on the 24th was to protest the state budget crisis and the administration’s fiscal and educational decision-making, which thus also made it appear as an attack on the principles of accountable and shared governance at the University. Your decision on Monday, September 28, 2009, to dismiss the criminal charges against these students, as well as to reaffirm the UA’s “commit[ment] to defending, celebrating and hosting free expression” served to calm those fears, from students and faculty alike.
However, in the press release announcing this decision, you also state “that the best course of action is to handle these incidents as possible Code of Conduct violations through the Dean of Students Office.” What we understand by this statement is simply the transfer of unwarranted charges of “chalking” against student activists Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull from the criminal-legal to the administrative arena. In so stating, you continue to commit yourself to treating the actions attributed to these students as punishable, though now within the jurisdiction of the Academic Code of Conduct rather than under criminal law. The very fact that these students continue to be disciplined, even if under a different system, simply perpetuates the incursion by this administration on the principles of free expression, free assembly, and shared governance. We find, ultimately, that this decision does not constitute a resolution to this recent assault on free expression at this University nor is it a restoration of the full protection of civil liberties granted to every individual of this academic community.
Further, we find, this disciplinary transfer actually increases, not reduces, the jeopardy faced by students. Under the criminal system, the University would be required to present evidence and witnesses for rebuttal and would be required to meet the threshold of proving the guilt of these students “beyond a reasonable doubt.” To date, UAPD has demonstrated no evidence that even approaches this threshold. (As of yet, no evidence beyond “unnamed sources” as been presented to actually tie these students to said infractions.) We note that the standard of guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” does not exist for those charged in a Academic Code of Conduct hearing. Instead, the Dean of Students must merely determine that “it is more likely than not that a violation of a Student Code of Conduct has occurred” (5-403 (C) 6), and the students have no right during this procedure to challenge the purported witness(es) who are said to have contacted UAPD. The students only have the right to challenge these witnesses upon appeal to a University Hearing Board, but such appeals are limited to cases in which the Dean’s sanction involves “suspensions, expulsions, and degree revocations” (5-403 (D) 1). Thus, in transferring these charges to the Dean of Students, the administration has made it significantly more likely that these students will be found guilty and punished, whereas the criminal complaint would have most likely failed. This is no victory for sane or humane treatment of students.
Dr. Shelton, though we appreciate your decision to correct the course sparked by the incidents of last week, including the dropping of criminal charges against the students, as well as instructing the UAPD to “avoid citing individuals for criminal damage for similar future events,” we urge you also to reconsider the suggested administrative action against Mr. Miller, Mr. Lisull, and against any student facing a similar situation in the future. And finally, we ask you to renew in both speech and action your commitment to the principles of a truly public university, including freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and shared governance.
Faculty Signatures:
Abraham Acosta, Spanish and Portuguese
Jason Brown, Creative Writing Program
Maritza Cardenas, English
Jenn Croissant, Gender and Women's Studies
Adam Geary, Gender and Women's Studies
Roger Hartley, Government and Public Policy
Fenton Johnson, Creative Writing Program
John Paul Jones III, Geography and Development
Miranda Joseph, Gender and Women's Studies
Elizabeth Kennedy, Gender and Women's Studies
David Plane, Geography and Development
Marv Waterstone, Geography and Development
However, in the press release announcing this decision, you also state “that the best course of action is to handle these incidents as possible Code of Conduct violations through the Dean of Students Office.” What we understand by this statement is simply the transfer of unwarranted charges of “chalking” against student activists Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull from the criminal-legal to the administrative arena. In so stating, you continue to commit yourself to treating the actions attributed to these students as punishable, though now within the jurisdiction of the Academic Code of Conduct rather than under criminal law. The very fact that these students continue to be disciplined, even if under a different system, simply perpetuates the incursion by this administration on the principles of free expression, free assembly, and shared governance. We find, ultimately, that this decision does not constitute a resolution to this recent assault on free expression at this University nor is it a restoration of the full protection of civil liberties granted to every individual of this academic community.
Further, we find, this disciplinary transfer actually increases, not reduces, the jeopardy faced by students. Under the criminal system, the University would be required to present evidence and witnesses for rebuttal and would be required to meet the threshold of proving the guilt of these students “beyond a reasonable doubt.” To date, UAPD has demonstrated no evidence that even approaches this threshold. (As of yet, no evidence beyond “unnamed sources” as been presented to actually tie these students to said infractions.) We note that the standard of guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” does not exist for those charged in a Academic Code of Conduct hearing. Instead, the Dean of Students must merely determine that “it is more likely than not that a violation of a Student Code of Conduct has occurred” (5-403 (C) 6), and the students have no right during this procedure to challenge the purported witness(es) who are said to have contacted UAPD. The students only have the right to challenge these witnesses upon appeal to a University Hearing Board, but such appeals are limited to cases in which the Dean’s sanction involves “suspensions, expulsions, and degree revocations” (5-403 (D) 1). Thus, in transferring these charges to the Dean of Students, the administration has made it significantly more likely that these students will be found guilty and punished, whereas the criminal complaint would have most likely failed. This is no victory for sane or humane treatment of students.
Dr. Shelton, though we appreciate your decision to correct the course sparked by the incidents of last week, including the dropping of criminal charges against the students, as well as instructing the UAPD to “avoid citing individuals for criminal damage for similar future events,” we urge you also to reconsider the suggested administrative action against Mr. Miller, Mr. Lisull, and against any student facing a similar situation in the future. And finally, we ask you to renew in both speech and action your commitment to the principles of a truly public university, including freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and shared governance.
Faculty Signatures:
Abraham Acosta, Spanish and Portuguese
Jason Brown, Creative Writing Program
Maritza Cardenas, English
Jenn Croissant, Gender and Women's Studies
Adam Geary, Gender and Women's Studies
Roger Hartley, Government and Public Policy
Fenton Johnson, Creative Writing Program
John Paul Jones III, Geography and Development
Miranda Joseph, Gender and Women's Studies
Elizabeth Kennedy, Gender and Women's Studies
David Plane, Geography and Development
Marv Waterstone, Geography and Development
Monday, September 28, 2009
Charges Dropped, Academic Violation Looms
Some may already be aware that criminal charges against Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull were dropped by President Shelton this afternoon. However, the Star is also reporting that instead of issuing further criminal citations for chalking, culprits will now be referred to the Dean of Student's Office for a code of conduct violation. In short, speech acts at the UA will still carry with them punitive consequences. So though Mr. Miller and Mr. Lisull's criminal charges were dropped, they still face administratively governed ones. If reflected upon for moment, one can see the same insidious tactic is at play: students will continue to be targeted for speech act violations. This is not over, and I implore all colleagues not to let up on this issue; as it stands now, our students will no longer have the same right to speech as faculty.
Statement of Faculty Support for Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull
September 28, 2009
Dear University of Arizona Community,
We, the undersigned faculty and graduate students at the University of Arizona, write to express our outrage at the recent surge of student arrests by the UAPD over the matter of chalking, a form of symbolic expression protected by our First Amendment right to free speech. These arrests violate the core values of academic freedom and the principle of free speech inherent to every University setting. We also hold that these escalating arrests irreparably damage the image and legitimacy of the University of Arizona as a public institution of higher education. We insist that these oppressive tactics stop immediately.
On Thursday September 24, Jacob Miller, first year Master’s student in the School of Geography and Development, was arrested for chalking during the Arizona for Education rally. Most recently, in the early morning of September 28, Evan Lisull, Senior in Political Science, was also arrested for chalking in a symbolic protest to the previous week's crackdown. Both have been charged with “criminal damage” and “disturbing an educational institution” for their exercising of protected forms of speech. This is a disturbing escalation of events that should deeply concern us all.
We maintain that the chalking of pavement––for publicity, for art, for speech––is a common practice at almost all University settings. Here at the University of Arizona, one walks over instances of chalking on a frequent basis. As is well-known, chalking effects absolutely no damage to existing structures, and washes away easily, making it an ideal form for all types of social expression. This should be particularly the case at any world-class university setting, where all such symbolic expression is tolerated, welcomed, and appreciated, not because one approves of it, but because it is protected. This is not the situation at the University of Arizona, where these arrests display instead a betrayal of the University’s fundamental missions.
Chalking, in and of itself, does not constitute “criminal damage,” and further, its prohibition has never been enforced, and even less so with the criminal charges and fines both Mr. Miller and Mr. Lisull now face. We hold that this is an arbitrary application of the law whose objective is to inhibit and even silence speech in the wake of rising public opposition to the current UA transformation plan. We the undersigned hold that regardless of one’s position on this or any issue, assaults on free speech by the UAPD, such as those witnessed here on Sept. 24 and 26, will not be tolerated. We, instead, are bound by a democratic and intellectual responsibility to not only foster speech, but to the aggressive and tireless safeguarding of those spaces from which we all can speak. This responsibility includes safeguarding everyone’s constitutional freedoms from the institution itself.
Unfortunately for all of us, word of this incident has already made itself known nationally. The on-campus arrest of a university student on charges related to the censoring free speech is itself a story that cannot and should not be silenced. But we will not lie nor mislead our colleagues at peer institutions about the facts of this case. They must be made known. Tarnish to this institution’s image has already been accomplished from the first arrest, however, the full extent of it, stemming now from this second, might not be known for years. But we do know that the damage to the UA by their unwarranted arrests of Mr. Miller and Mr. Lisull can be either exacerbated or minimized only by subsequent actions from University administration.
We, the undersigned, therefore insist to both President Shelton and the UAPD that all charges against Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull be immediately dropped, and further, that all police action against acts of free speech by students, staff and faculty at this University cease.
(Corrections, suggestions welcome. To sign-on to this statement please leave name and dept in the comment field)
Faculty and Grad Student Signatures:
Abraham Acosta, Spanish and Portuguese
Jake Harwood, Communication
Dee Hill Zuganelli, Sociology
Louise Roth, Sociology
Mariel Watt, Anthropology
Seth Wright, Sociology
Dear University of Arizona Community,
We, the undersigned faculty and graduate students at the University of Arizona, write to express our outrage at the recent surge of student arrests by the UAPD over the matter of chalking, a form of symbolic expression protected by our First Amendment right to free speech. These arrests violate the core values of academic freedom and the principle of free speech inherent to every University setting. We also hold that these escalating arrests irreparably damage the image and legitimacy of the University of Arizona as a public institution of higher education. We insist that these oppressive tactics stop immediately.
On Thursday September 24, Jacob Miller, first year Master’s student in the School of Geography and Development, was arrested for chalking during the Arizona for Education rally. Most recently, in the early morning of September 28, Evan Lisull, Senior in Political Science, was also arrested for chalking in a symbolic protest to the previous week's crackdown. Both have been charged with “criminal damage” and “disturbing an educational institution” for their exercising of protected forms of speech. This is a disturbing escalation of events that should deeply concern us all.
We maintain that the chalking of pavement––for publicity, for art, for speech––is a common practice at almost all University settings. Here at the University of Arizona, one walks over instances of chalking on a frequent basis. As is well-known, chalking effects absolutely no damage to existing structures, and washes away easily, making it an ideal form for all types of social expression. This should be particularly the case at any world-class university setting, where all such symbolic expression is tolerated, welcomed, and appreciated, not because one approves of it, but because it is protected. This is not the situation at the University of Arizona, where these arrests display instead a betrayal of the University’s fundamental missions.
Chalking, in and of itself, does not constitute “criminal damage,” and further, its prohibition has never been enforced, and even less so with the criminal charges and fines both Mr. Miller and Mr. Lisull now face. We hold that this is an arbitrary application of the law whose objective is to inhibit and even silence speech in the wake of rising public opposition to the current UA transformation plan. We the undersigned hold that regardless of one’s position on this or any issue, assaults on free speech by the UAPD, such as those witnessed here on Sept. 24 and 26, will not be tolerated. We, instead, are bound by a democratic and intellectual responsibility to not only foster speech, but to the aggressive and tireless safeguarding of those spaces from which we all can speak. This responsibility includes safeguarding everyone’s constitutional freedoms from the institution itself.
Unfortunately for all of us, word of this incident has already made itself known nationally. The on-campus arrest of a university student on charges related to the censoring free speech is itself a story that cannot and should not be silenced. But we will not lie nor mislead our colleagues at peer institutions about the facts of this case. They must be made known. Tarnish to this institution’s image has already been accomplished from the first arrest, however, the full extent of it, stemming now from this second, might not be known for years. But we do know that the damage to the UA by their unwarranted arrests of Mr. Miller and Mr. Lisull can be either exacerbated or minimized only by subsequent actions from University administration.
We, the undersigned, therefore insist to both President Shelton and the UAPD that all charges against Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull be immediately dropped, and further, that all police action against acts of free speech by students, staff and faculty at this University cease.
(Corrections, suggestions welcome. To sign-on to this statement please leave name and dept in the comment field)
Faculty and Grad Student Signatures:
Abraham Acosta, Spanish and Portuguese
Jake Harwood, Communication
Dee Hill Zuganelli, Sociology
Louise Roth, Sociology
Mariel Watt, Anthropology
Seth Wright, Sociology
Escalating Arrests
Reports are circulating that yet another chalking arrest of a student took place this morning. sallygradstudent reports that political science senior, Evan Lisull, was arrested for chalking in response to the previous week's crackdown. This is a sign of escalating incursions upon the exercise of free speech on campus. The previous letter of support for Jacob Miller now has to account for what seems to be a larger repressive strategy by the administration. I hope to put up another letter/petition informed by both incidents. I will not presume that since you sign-on for the first letter that you will sign-on to the next one, but hope you do, and hope you indicate that to me.
Statement of Support for Jacob Miller
September 28, 2009
Dear University of Arizona Community,
We, the undersigned faculty and graduate students at the University of Arizona, write to express our disbelief and shock at reports of the arrest of Jacob Miller, first year Master’s student in the School of Geography and Development, after the Arizona for Education rally on September 24. We feel the circumstances surrounding Mr. Jacob’s arrest violate the core values of academic freedom and the principle of free speech at a University setting, and irreparably damages the image and prestige of the University of Arizona as a top research institution in the nation.
On Thursday September 24 between the 12:30 and 1pm, mere minutes after the peaceful conclusion to the Arizona for Education rally, Mr. Miller was approached by UAPD officers and arrested in connection with the chalking of the pavement surrounding the Administration Building earlier that morning. Mr. Miller has subsequently been charged with “criminal damage” and “disturbing an educational institution” for his involvement with the rally. Police also warned that further arrests from this incident may follow. Mr. Miller is due in court on October 14 to face these charges.
The chalking of pavement––for publicity, for art, for speech––is a common practice at almost all University settings. Here at the University of Arizona, one walks over instances of chalking on a frequent basis. As is well-known, chalking effects absolutely no damage to existing structures, and washes away easily, making it an ideal form for all types of social expression. This is particularly the case here, in a world-class university setting, where all such symbolic expression should not only be tolerated but welcomed and appreciated.
Chalking, in and of itself, does not constitute “criminal damage,” and further, its prohibition has never been enforced, and even less so with the criminal charges and fines Mr. Miller now faces. We feel that this is an arbitrary application of the law whose objective is to inhibit speech and silence public opposition to the current UA transformation plan. We the undersigned hold that regardless of one’s position on this issue, assaults on free speech by the UAPD, such as the one witnessed here on Sept. 24, will not be tolerated. We, instead, are bound by a democratic and intellectual responsibility to not only foster speech, but to the aggressive and tireless safeguarding of those spaces from which we all can speak. This responsibility includes safeguarding everyone’s constitutional freedoms from the institution itself.
Unfortunately for all of us, word of this incident has already made itself known nationally. The on-campus arrest of a university student on charges related to free speech is itself a story that cannot and should not be silenced. But we will not lie nor mislead our colleagues at peer institutions about the facts of this case. They must be made known. The damage to this institution’s image has already been done, the full extent of which, however, might not be known for years. But we do know that the damage to the UA by the unwarranted arrest of Mr. Miller can be either exacerbated or minimized only by subsequent actions from University administration.
We, the undersigned, therefore insist to both President Shelton and the UAPD that all charges against Jacob Miller be immediately dropped, and further, that Mr. Miller be provided written assurance by the President that continuation of his graduate studies and employment will not suffer any negative consequences resulting from the events of September 24, 2009.
(If you wish to sign-on to this statement, please leave comment with your name and dept.)
Faculty and Grad Student Signatures:
Beth Alvarado, English
Patrick Baliani, English
Laura Briggs, Gender and Women's Studies
Jason Brown, English
Kari Boyd McBride, Women’s Studies
Maritza Cardenas, English
Andrew Carnie, Linguistics
Malcolm Compitello, Spanish and Portuguese
Adam Donaldson, History
Suzanne Dovi, Government and Public Policy
Javier Duran, Spanish and Portuguese
Elizabeth Evans, English
Larry Evers, English
Caryl Flinn, Gender and Women’s Studies
Mika Galilee-Belfer, Grad Student, Higher Education
Carlos Gallego, English
Adam Geary, Women’s Studies
Beth Grindell, Arizona State Museum
Laura Gutierrez, Spanish and Portuguese
Roger Hartley, School of Government and Public Policy
Jake Harwood, Communication
Dee Hill Zuganelli, Sociology
Asli Igsiz, Near Eastern Studies
Fenton Johnson, Creative Writing
Miranda Joseph, Women’s Studies
Elizabeth Kennedy, Gender and Women's Studies
Frederick Kiefer, English
Jenny Lee, Education
Adela C. Licona, English
Ken S. McAllister, English
Kari McBride, Women's Studies
Judith McDaniel, Women’s Studies and Political Science
Yaseen Noorani, Near Eastern Studies
David Robinson, English
Andrea Romero, Mexican-American Studies
Sally Stevens, SIROW
Laura Tabili, History
Erec Toso, English
Alexandra Tracy-Ramirez, Grad Student, Law/Women's Studies
John Ulreich, English
Adam Ussishkin, Linguistics
Amy Williamsen, Spanish and Portuguese
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)