DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | University of Iowa anti-war protests, January-April 1971 | 1971-02-05 Daily Iowan Article: ""DIA Defense Challenges Administration's Evidence""

Transcribe
Translate

University of Iowa anti-war protests, January-April 1971

1971-02-05 Daily Iowan Article: ""DIA Defense Challenges Administration's Evidence""

DI     2/5/71
DIA Defense Challenges Administration's Evidence
By Bill Meyer
Daily Iowan Reporter
Enormous leeway of procedural rules characterized the University of Iowa administration's "DIA 11" hearing conducted in the court room of the College of Law Thursday.
At the hearing seven students and three nonstudents were heard before retired Iowa Supreme Court Judge Theodore Garfield, the administration's hearing officer.
Those charged with violating sections of the Regents' Rules of Personal Conduct and the administration's Code of Student Life are Kirk Alexander, A2, Patricia Farrel, Richard Phillips, A1, Stephen Carl, A3, Gary Roemig, A3, Roland Schembari, John Tinker, A2, Norton Wheeler, A4, Bruce Johnson, and Patric Den Hartog, A3.
One of the original eleven, Bruce Ehrich, cancelled registration and refused to participate in the hearing.
The charges stemmed from the Dec. 9 demonstration in the hallway outside of the Union Placement Office in protest of a Defense Intelligence Agency recruiter scheduled to interview students in the office that afternoon. The university chapter of SDS sponsored the demonstration and has also been charged with numerous rules violations.
Prosecutors for the university are Assistant to the Provost Howard Sokol and John Larson, assistant to university Pres. Willard Boyd.
Sokol introduced the university's case by reading a university notice sent to those charged. The notice elaborated the complaints against the defendants.
Later, defense lawyers, who represent five of the ten defendants, pointed out that some sections of the codes the defendants were charged with violating are nonexistent and others were irrelevant to the Dec. 9 sit-in. In response the university amended its charges.
Defense counsel immediately entered not-guilty pleas.
A proposed postponement of the hearing because of the inadequacy of a tape recorder to keep the official transcript was denied.
The defense aimed its remarks at challenging the constitutionality of the hearing, specifically citing the due process guarantees in the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
When Garfield noted that his duty as hearing officer is to make a recommendation to university Pres. Boyd, Leonard Klaif, L2, for the defense, stated that since "the decision-maker (Boyd) is the evidence-gatherer and at the same time the prosecutor," the hearing procedure is unconstitutional.
All witnesses called to testify Thursday were called by the prosecution.
The first witness was William Binney, director of Campus Security. After the prosecution determined Binney's activities the day of the demonstration, cross examination followed the line that his testimony was prejudiced by his previous position as major in the U.S. Air Force and as head of the Air Force Reserve Officers Training Corps. The DIA is closely allied with U.S. military forces.
Next witness to testify was Elizabeth Erickson, assistant to the director of career counseling and employment, who was in the Placement Office Dec. 9. She, in her testimony, stated that the DIA recruiter, Robert Kravetz of Washington, D.C., had entered the Union, conferred briefly with student demonstrators and, instead of trying to force his way through the crowd, called from downstairs to say he had decided not to interview students.
Erickson testified that her telephone conversation with Kravetz revealed that he had just come from the University of Oregon, where the building he had recruited in had been bombed.
Cross examination of Erickson revealed that orders were given to her by Helen Barnes, Placement Office director, that Erickson was to use her judgment about locking doors and keeping the lights off in the event of a demonstration. Three university security officers were present inside the office Dec. 9.
William Mattas, a February graduate who had an appointment with a railroad recruiter in the placement office at 1 p.m. Dec. 9, testified that he was shoved upon entering the corridor leading the the office.
"People stood shoulder to shoulder, some locked arms," he said.
John WAuters, A4, a former employe of the Iowa City Police Department, claimed that he had been pushed by one of the participants in the demonstration in his attempt to keep a 1:20 p.m. appointment.
Cross examination of Wauters by defense counsel follows:
Q. Were you verbally abused?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you called pit, narc, cop?
A. Pig and narc.
Q. Do you like being called this?
A. I consider the source.
Q. Would you describe yourself as a narc?
A. No.
In the afternoon session, University Security detective Kenneth Saylor identified individual defendants from photographs presented by the prosecution. In his cross examination, defense attorney Philip Mause, assistant professor of law, argued that the pictures were inadmissable as evidence.
Saylor later testified that campus security had individual personal files on students identified in teh pictures:
Q. Do you give information to agencies outside the university?
A. Yes, practically every agency.
Q. Did you volunteer information to the FBI regarding the incidents of Dec. 9, 1970?
A. No.
Three defendants—Johnson, Wheeler and Carl—will be questioned at 9:30 this morning in the law school about their alleged participation in disturbances in Liberal Arts Dean Dewey Stuit's office Dec. 9
Stuit is also scheduled to testify.

Saving...

DI 2/5/71 DIA Defense Challenges Administration's Evidence By Bill Meyer Daily Iowan Reporter Enormous leeway of procedural rules characterized the University of Iowa administration's "DIA 11" hearing conducted in the court room of the College of Law Thursday. At the hearing seven students and three nonstudents were heard before retired Iowa Supreme Court Judge Theodore Garfield, the administration's hearing officer. Those charged with violating sections of the Regents' Rules of Personal Conduct and the administration's Code of Student Life are Kirk Alexander, A2, Patricia Farrel, Richard Phillips, A1, Stephen Carl, A3, Gary Roemig, A3, Roland Schembari, John Tinker, A2, Norton Wheeler, A4, Bruce Johnson, and Patric Den Hartog, A3. One of the original eleven, Bruce Ehrich, cancelled registration and refused to participate in the hearing. The charges stemmed from the Dec. 9 demonstration in the hallway outside of the Union Placement Office in protest of a Defense Intelligence Agency recruiter scheduled to interview students in the office that afternoon. The university chapter of SDS sponsored the demonstration and has also been charged with numerous rules violations. Prosecutors for the university are Assistant to the Provost Howard Sokol and John Larson, assistant to university Pres. Willard Boyd. Sokol introduced the university's case by reading a university notice sent to those charged. The notice elaborated the complaints against the defendants. Later, defense lawyers, who represent five of the ten defendants, pointed out that some sections of the codes the defendants were charged with violating are nonexistent and others were irrelevant to the Dec. 9 sit-in. In response the university amended its charges. Defense counsel immediately entered not-guilty pleas. A proposed postponement of the hearing because of the inadequacy of a tape recorder to keep the official transcript was denied. The defense aimed its remarks at challenging the constitutionality of the hearing, specifically citing the due process guarantees in the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. When Garfield noted that his duty as hearing officer is to make a recommendation to university Pres. Boyd, Leonard Klaif, L2, for the defense, stated that since "the decision-maker (Boyd) is the evidence-gatherer and at the same time the prosecutor," the hearing procedure is unconstitutional. All witnesses called to testify Thursday were called by the prosecution. The first witness was William Binney, director of Campus Security. After the prosecution determined Binney's activities the day of the demonstration, cross examination followed the line that his testimony was prejudiced by his previous position as major in the U.S. Air Force and as head of the Air Force Reserve Officers Training Corps. The DIA is closely allied with U.S. military forces. Next witness to testify was Elizabeth Erickson, assistant to the director of career counseling and employment, who was in the Placement Office Dec. 9. She, in her testimony, stated that the DIA recruiter, Robert Kravetz of Washington, D.C., had entered the Union, conferred briefly with student demonstrators and, instead of trying to force his way through the crowd, called from downstairs to say he had decided not to interview students. Erickson testified that her telephone conversation with Kravetz revealed that he had just come from the University of Oregon, where the building he had recruited in had been bombed. Cross examination of Erickson revealed that orders were given to her by Helen Barnes, Placement Office director, that Erickson was to use her judgment about locking doors and keeping the lights off in the event of a demonstration. Three university security officers were present inside the office Dec. 9. William Mattas, a February graduate who had an appointment with a railroad recruiter in the placement office at 1 p.m. Dec. 9, testified that he was shoved upon entering the corridor leading the the office. "People stood shoulder to shoulder, some locked arms," he said. John WAuters, A4, a former employe of the Iowa City Police Department, claimed that he had been pushed by one of the participants in the demonstration in his attempt to keep a 1:20 p.m. appointment. Cross examination of Wauters by defense counsel follows: Q. Were you verbally abused? A. Yes. Q. Were you called pit, narc, cop? A. Pig and narc. Q. Do you like being called this? A. I consider the source. Q. Would you describe yourself as a narc? A. No. In the afternoon session, University Security detective Kenneth Saylor identified individual defendants from photographs presented by the prosecution. In his cross examination, defense attorney Philip Mause, assistant professor of law, argued that the pictures were inadmissable as evidence. Saylor later testified that campus security had individual personal files on students identified in teh pictures: Q. Do you give information to agencies outside the university? A. Yes, practically every agency. Q. Did you volunteer information to the FBI regarding the incidents of Dec. 9, 1970? A. No. Three defendants—Johnson, Wheeler and Carl—will be questioned at 9:30 this morning in the law school about their alleged participation in disturbances in Liberal Arts Dean Dewey Stuit's office Dec. 9 Stuit is also scheduled to testify.