With Student Council elections drawing near, the Honor Committee is working hard to pass on several proposed constitutional changes to be voted on by the student body. At a meeting last night, the Committee voted to include at least two proposed amendments as referenda items on the spring ballot.
The Committee considered four packages of changes based on suggestions by the Honor System Review Commission in its report released in November.
With little debate, Committee members voted to pass-on a proposal to remove the option of random student juries by a vote of 17-4, with one member absent. The Committee's constitution now allows accused students the option of having a jury consisting of either elected Honor Committee members, both Honor Committee members and random student jurors or only student jurors.
By a vote of 19-2, the Committee also voted to pass-on a proposal to change the composition of mixed panels and to require a two-thirds vote for a guilty verdict.
Now, at least four-fifths of a jury must vote in order to convict. This proposal also would require that all juries consist of nine members, instead of the current eight to 12.
"As it is, it's really confusing and hard to set up trials," said Committee Chairman Thomas Hall. "Logistically, nine is a good number" because it is easily divisible by two-thirds, he said.
The Committee also voted on a proposal to make academic cheating a "per se serious" offense. This amendment would remove consideration of seriousness in cases of academic fraud.
"The premise on which we would pass this is that there is no such thing as non-serious cheating," said graduate Education Rep. Jim Haley. Haley also suggested possible scenarios in which there might be non-serious cheating.
Proposals need a two-thirds majority of the whole Committee to appear on the ballot. But with 14 in favor, seven opposed, and one member absent, the Committee waited to finalize the cheating decision until it could hear from College Rep. Forrest Jones, who missed the meeting.
Committee members also discussed a proposal to remove oral advocates at trial. Members debated the role of counsel and whether accused students should be allowed to choose their counsel from the student body.
"The problem we have with counsel [from outside the trained pool] now is they're usually Law students who want to get up there and be Johnnie Cochran," said Vice Chairman for Trials Kennon Poteat.
The Committee decided to reword the proposal before voting on it.
Read More
Previewing the September meeting of the Board of Visitors
By Grace Little | 18 hours agoAll meetings will be held on Grounds with the exception of the Health System Board, which will meet at Boar’s Head Resort.
Honor Committee talks providing greater clarity for students navigating the case process
By Nicolas Biernacki and Bertie Azqueta | 20 hours agoThe Committee will reconvene Sunday for their third meeting of the semester.
Va. Senate Democrats ask that Youngkin ceases making appointments to the Board
By Nina Broderick | YesterdayThe Committee’s vote rejected James Donovan, John Harris, H. Eugene Lockhart and Calvert Saunders Moore.
