Honor Committee members discussed a proposal Sunday night to add at least one Committee member to all Honor trial juries.
Should the proposal be approved by the Committee and then the student body, accused students would retain the right to chose how many Committee members, in addition to the mandatory one, will serve on the jury panel.
Currently, accused students have three options for juries: all random students, all Committee members or any combination of the two. Eight to 12 students serve on the panels. The number of students on the panel would not change, according to the proposal.
The Ad-Hoc Committee for Jury Reform proposed the change to add consistency to verdicts and to eliminate an ambiguous Honor Committee role said Matt Miller, chair of the ad-hoc committee.
Miller added that a 2000 survey found students believed that a mixed panel could more fairly administer the single sanction.
Vice Chair for Investigations Lauren Ross questioned the intentions of the proposal.
"Are we proposing this for consistency's sake or because we didn't like the way past juries were voting?" Ross said.
She added that support officers' thoughts on juries do not always coincide with the views of the general student body.
"Everyone in support officer recruitment says a mixed panel would be great, but students almost universally request all-student panels," Ross said.
Special Assistant to the Honor Committee Nicole Eramo said a similar proposal failed by 40 to 60 percent the same year students indicated, on a survey, they supported mixed panels.
College Rep. Brock Saunders indicated support for the proposal because he said it would "help lead not guilty students to not guilty verdicts and guilty students to guilty verdicts."
Miller added Committee members would be able to help define vague ideas such as "reasonable doubt" and "seriousness."
Randal Warden, vice chair for education said he felt problems of consistency could be dealt with by better education of juries prior to trials.
Warden added that in our legal system, "we don't have judges serve on juries."
Two Honor support officers voiced their opinions during the community concerns portion of the meeting.
Honor Advisor Brian O'Neill said he does not support the proposal because it dilutes the sense of student ownership.
"If people feel like they don't have ownership, they will stop caring, and if people don't care, that's the end of Honor," said O'Neill.
Read More
Shots fired reported at 100 block of Harmon Street, no injuries reported
By Thomas Baxter | 3 days agoThis is the first community alert of June.
Full Board discusses financial aid challenges, medical research and entrepreneurship
By Thomas Baxter | 5 days agoBoard members discussed the Pan-University Entrepreneurship Initiative, a project that aims to help develop more entrepreneurial ventures at the University.
Finance Committee approves 2024-25 operating budget and Major Capital Plan
By Zackary Holt | 5 days agoThe proposed 2024-25 fiscal year budget for the Academic Division includes a 6.8 percent increase in spending over the previous year.
