Posted from an official source.
Non-Academic Disciplinary Procedures
Student Rights and Responsibilities
The Principles of the Brown University Community call upon community members to act with integrity in all facets of University life, including involvement with matters being addressed by the non-academic disciplinary procedures. Students and student organizations charged with offenses against the Standards of Student Conduct are afforded the following rights in University proceedings:
- To be informed in writing of the charge(s) and alleged misconduct.
- To be assumed not responsible of any alleged violations unless she/he is so found through the appropriate disciplinary hearing.
- To have an advisor during a formal investigation, a hearing before the University Disciplinary Council, an administrative hearing, or a student organization hearing. The advisor may be any person of their choice within the University community who is not an attorney.
- To have a reasonable length of time to prepare a response to any charges.
- To be informed of the evidence upon which a charge is based and accorded an opportunity to offer a relevant response.
- To be given every opportunity to articulate relevant concerns and issues, express salient opinions, and offer evidence before the hearing body or officer. (Students have the right to prepare a written statement in matters that may result in separation from the University.)
- To be afforded confidentiality, in accordance with University practices and legal requirements.
- To request that a hearing officer or member of a hearing body be disqualified on the grounds of personal bias.
- To have a timely determination of the charges.
- To appeal a decision.
- To refrain from providing information that is self-incriminating.
I'm also interested in numbers 5 and 10, because I saw neither one of those things. You see, I'm pretty sure that their only "evidence" against all her other crimes was Che's word, and I'm also pretty sure that were willing to be lenient when her only crime was busting into the science lab, because as previously mentioned, that was not that serious of a crime. Breaking and entering and theft? Yes. But it was of a bunch of rabbits, whose total sum value was probably under $50. Now, you could argue the cost of lost time and data, but didn't it sound like they recovered all the rabbits? (except Pancakes). So I don't know if they would even necessarily have to restart the experiment. So the bunnies got a few hours of freedom; would that really screw it up? And even if it would, well, I just don't think it was that damaging to the university has a whole. I don't think this should have warranted more than, say, deferred suspension. Probation, even, if they include a fine.
Oh, and notice the parentheses on number 6? I'll bet she could have consulted Sandy and come up with one hell of a written defense. Also, where exactly was the room for appeal (#10) when the dean crisply told her, "it's done"?
I'm in a twist about this because I figured Summer was only safe from character assassination as long as she was out of Newport. Bringing her back makes it that much easier for Josh to smash her up. Sigh. And yeah, I'm sure they used as many shortcuts as they could because they didn't really care about real-life policy (i.e., Che coming to tell her she was in trouble rather than getting an official notice), they just needed a way to get Summer out of Brown, but I care one determined heck of a lot.