Filed under: Anonymous
Note from the editor: This is the first anonymous article that we have ever published in Buck Naked Bison. The only reason we are allowing this is because of the legal issues the author is facing, due to their pending case with JA.
Today I checked my post office box at Gallaudet. There was an ominous blue slip in there, a darker blue than the usual. As I brought it to the counter, and the lady grimaced as she walked off to get a letter and a square piece of paper. It said something like, if you sign this, you acknowledge you have received a letter from the Judicial Affairs office. Whoa. I looked up at the lady, and said, should I sign?
“I held the letters as long as I could. They were ready to go out yesterday, but I waited until today to put them in. I’m sorry. I don’t like it. I’m sorry. I didn’t say any of this, okay?”
I watched her with awe and sadness – here, this woman is one of the 800 staff members at Gallaudet that want so badly to support us. Intimidation and fear are so pervasive here, to the point where she actually sunk below the counter to sign these words. So no one behind me would see her say those things.
Is this the Gallaudet we want? Where people have to hide below counters to say what they want?
*tearing open the letter* *jumping on top of the counter*
This letter shall serve as a formal notice that the University disciplinary charges of Disruption of University Academic and/or Non-Academic Activities and Non-compliance with University Decision.
Nice to see that even the Judicial Affairs office is prone to ungrammatical sentences.
It is alleged that you participated in a campus demonstration that disrupted the normal operations of the University and infringed on the rights of other members of the University community.
Pardon me, but isn’t the Sixth Street gate always closed weekdays at 6 pm? This happened on Friday, October 13th at around 9 pm? How would I be disrupting normal operations and infringing on the rights of others if the gate was normally closed around this time? Heck, I should have been paid for my work patrolling the gate for you! The worst thing we might have disrupted was the slumber of the people that tend to sleep by the fence… ah, no, that was Irving’s fault. He was the one who ordered the spotlights to be directed in our faces… and on them.
It is also alleged that you intentionally obstructed the freedom of movement, either pedestrian or vehicular, on campus.
Frankly, I gotta agree. My movement was obstructed big time. It was hard for me to move, sitting down my seriously un-padded butt on the cold hard street, arms interlocked with people next to me. Try sitting down on the street, with your legs crossed for 3 hours straight. My hips and my 7 month old ACL screamed at me: Get up! Stand up! You’re too old for this! It was truly a blessing when they finally picked me and carted me off to their police van.
By the way, should I be charging Irving and Jane with intentionally obstructing MY freedom of speech? I, along with 133 other friends were trying to send a message to the world. Jane and Irving obstructed that.
It is also alleged that you did not comply with the directives of University officials.
Me? Oh no, no. Sorry, wrong person. I complied with every directive given from University officials. You see, the faculty run the University, therefore, they are my University officials. Wait a minute. Jane and Irving did not comply with the directives from EIGHTY TWO PERCENT of the University Faculty! They are the guilty ones!
If you wish to have witnesses appear on your behalf at your heating, you are responsible for informing them of the time, date, and location of the hearing.
No, that wasn’t a misspelling. The letter actually says ‘heating’. I guess they plan to give me some heat after all. Nice, after all, it’s kinda cold in Tent City.I can bring witnesses? Cool! The entire world witnessed the heinous acts of Irving and Jane on that Dark Friday in October. Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like to grant an invitation to every one of you and your friends to act as my witness at my hearing. I will let you know the time, date and location shortly.
Pending the resolution of your case with Judicial Affairs, you are expected to follow all policies and procedures as established by the University. Any further infractions of the University Code of Conduct will result in you being placed on interim suspension and persona non grata.
So, are you saying that if I continue participating in the protest (which is already a violation of several codes of conduct, including the guidelines of expressive activities), I’ll be placed on interim suspension and persona non grata-ed? Isn’t this a form of coercion? Aren’t I supposed to be innocent until proven guilty?
So there will be no misunderstanding, persona non grata status is defined as prohibition from entering the campus premises and attending Gallaudet University sponsored events on and off campus for any reason.
Oooh, now I’m feeling some heat. Hey, YOU. SO There will be no misunderstanding: JANE FERNANDES MUST RESIGN! Capisce?
Failure to comply would result in your removal from the premises by the Department of Public Safety or the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department and you could be arrested under the trespass-injuries to property statutes, title 22, chapter 31 of the District of Columbia Code.
Failure for YOU to comply will bring the University crashing down. Do you realize the University cannot function without the support of 82% of its faculty, 81% of its students and 82% of its staff?
Irving and Jane: This letter shall serve as a formal notice that you are to be arrested for the attempted murder of an University loved by many. There shall be no hearing, you both are guilty beyond any doubt with the world as your witness.
And your consequence: persona non grata from the Deaf-World. Until you both realize the ramifications of your lies and actions and apologize repeatedly. Then maybe we’ll let you visit and sob over the building that used to be named I. King Jordan Student Academic Center.
xxxx xxxxxx. Also known as #xxxxx, booked by the Metropolitan Police Department on the charge of “unlawful assembly incomding” (whatever that is).
(All italics above were copied exactly as is from the letter sent to me by the Office of Judicial Affairs on October 19, 2006)
16 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
I gotta say, though it’s a crappy thing to have, it’s only to be expected. Legitimately, from the takeover of HMB to the blocking of the campus on 10/11, the charges were pretty much accurate, though I’m sure someone should have checked them first.
“Disruption of University Academic and/or Non-Academic Activities” – That is clear cut. School (the reason for being there) was disrupted or cancelled solely because of the actions of student protesters. The “they made me do it” argument is flawed on many levels, most importantly that of free will. But for the actions of the protesters, academic and non-academic activities would have occured as usual. Certainly there was displeasure at the selection, and the failure to change their minds, but the actions of the protesters were still voluntary. Likewise was the decision to stay in (or move into) a position in which they knew they would be arrested.
“and Non-compliance with University Decision. ” – On how many occassions were the protesters asked or ordered to move, allow free access, etc? Again, there were numerous chances to avoid this from happening.
That said, I know people who have stood up for what they believed in, and been arrested for it. Several blocked access to an abortion clinic, they were warned and arrested within an hour. I don’t say this to compare issues, but both groups stood for what they believed, knew what they were in for, and were arrested for it. Due to the nature (and publicity) of these recent arrests, it seems only logical that that letter would come in. I’m sure that except for the typo, they are giving worst-case scenarios. If you’re late on returning a movie (tremendously, not a day or two) they send you a note that threatens your credit report, but I doubt you find many people that find $3.99 to Blockbuster on their report. Likewise, while the arrest will stay on until/unless expunged, it will probably be insignificant in the Judicial, or maybe not, depending on the stance of the members who decide.
Comment by Hawk October 22, 2006 @ 1:06 amOoo.. The dead man say.. Gallaudet have sent you the judicial letter, the best thing for you is to pack up with smile on your face and leave.. The university is all messed up.. you will SURE get a better education in other college.. Chin up and leave with big smile on your face!
Comment by Death Man October 22, 2006 @ 2:08 amBEST WAY TO GET THE LAWYER THAT YOU ARE NOT FAIR ABOUT CLOSED GATE SCHEDULE AFTER 6PM. POSSIBLE YOUR CASE WILL BE DISMISSED. JUST TRY YOUR BEST.
Comment by DRR October 22, 2006 @ 2:58 amAmusing but cynically humorous article but….
Irving and Jane: This letter shall serve as a formal notice that you are to be arrested for the attempted murder of an University loved by many. There shall be no hearing, you both are guilty beyond any doubt with the world as your witness.
*tsk-tsk* Is this how we would deal with disaffected or stubborn people by arbitrarily declaring them guilty without a formal hearing and sentence them to die? IKJ and JKF aren’t “terrorists”, you know?
)
Comment by Bobby October 22, 2006 @ 4:03 amAny cruel, vindictive or mean comments will be deleted.
Comment by buck naked October 22, 2006 @ 7:30 pmIf cruel and vindictive comments will be deleted then you should take down the picture at the top of the page. Physician heal thyself.
Comment by Jay October 23, 2006 @ 3:58 pmWe ain’t your momma’s newspaper. IKJ and JKF are political bedmates so it’s a valid connection, not to mention the fact that they’re PUBLIC figures, unlike our poor protester who wrote the article above.
Comment by Buck Naked Bison October 23, 2006 @ 4:09 pmsorry, but by publicly protesting and knowingly putting him/her self in a position to be arrested the individual became a defacto public figure.
Comment by Jay October 23, 2006 @ 6:34 pmand by the way, this is not a newspaper. please tell me you do not really consider yourself a journalist??? by using that picture you lose any shred of credibility you might imagine that you have.
From Wikipedia-
The phrase underground press, especially underground newspapers (or simply underground papers) is most often used in reference to the alternative print media, independently published and distributed, associated with the countercultural movements of the late 1960s and early 1970s.
We are independently published and distributed. We never claimed to be the NY Times. We don’t WANT OR NEED credibility. Does MAD magazine have credibilty? Please reason your arguments better. We are a publication of OPINIONS. Generally, well-written opinions, with their facts checked by editors.
Plus, if you’re saying that by protesting you become a defacto public figure, then by that logic, the majority of people are public figures?! If I march in a peace march I’m a public figure? That’s almost as absurd as IKJ saying that the protesters WANTED to get arrested.. yeah, just as much as MLK WANTED to get shot.
Please reason your arguments better, and maybe you’ll have a point.
Comment by Buck Naked Bison October 23, 2006 @ 7:40 pmIf you don’t want or need credibility then congratulations. If you are a paper of opinions then where does fact checking come in? You can’t fact check opinion.
Comment by Jay October 23, 2006 @ 9:47 pmJay,
Comment by Buck Naked Bison October 24, 2006 @ 1:46 amYou can write an editorial and use facts to support your opinion. Great writers around this country do this all the time. You just revealed your arrogance and ignorance.
now that I know who you are Mr. Stern, I realize that I have wasted my breath posting here.
Comment by Jay October 24, 2006 @ 3:15 pmFYI, Bren Stern is not involved with b.Naked in any way. He has asked to be “kept out of it.” I am the EIC and if you must know who I am, feel free to check out our staff profiles.
Comment by Buck Naked Bison October 24, 2006 @ 3:53 pmyou may not be Stern, but I don’t believe for a minute that he isn’t behind this site. still not sure how you figure I revealed my arrogance and ignorance. since we are clearly not getting anywhere with this argument I will move on to other blogs
Comment by Jay October 24, 2006 @ 4:34 pmHe isn’t behind the site. You can email him yourself at udkovich@aol.com and ask.
Comment by Buck Naked Bison October 24, 2006 @ 4:37 pmWhen posting these opinions, make sure all arguements are backed you up. I have seen a plenty supporting arguements there and anyone objectc to that credbility of arguement was surely a born childish. Let your anger go to somewhere else like in the toilet.
Comment by Mac November 6, 2006 @ 1:55 am