se ati n mug
Eighty-one years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

A ttica: Where

rJ
,
,
,;
q b e y

r

+rt rr+ -fn
d" Y:,l.... 1
Yt 3
.fi t icy
'Fit :'"r.

v
Uilt

4

420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 764-0552

Editorials orinted in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1971

NIGHT EDITOR: LYNN WEINER

y notl, the titter has surey vbeen removed(, and soon rain
will wash the blood away. Quiet too will be our voices briefly
raised in protest. Yet for some of us, Attica will be etched - like
Kent State, Jackson State. Fred Hampton, and George Jackson-
unforgettably on the gravestones of ottr conscience.
But Wtorst of all, as we face the silent guns of these still reign-
ing citadels, is the knowledge that of ficially there is no guilt. How
outrageous to think that the deaths of these men could disappear
in th S d>p s of our government like a few drops of water in the
Jin Beattie

Setting up the new judiciary

4

STUDENTS, FACULTY members and ad-

ministrators labored for years before
the Regents approved a new University-
wide judicial system last spring.
Although not perfect, the new judiciary
is an innovative plan that largely fulfills
the requirements of fairness, practicality
and acceptability to all segments of the
University community.
Five months after it was enacted, how-
ever, the new system is still not in effect.
Nor will it be before Christmas or even
later unless the student, faculty and ad-
ministrative groups charged with setting
up the judiciary take some quick action.
The problem is that at present the new
system lacks rules for trying cases and
personnel to staff its courts. In b o t h
areas, progress since regental approval of
the judiciary has been inadequate.
University Council, a tripartite body
of faculty members, administrators and
students, prepared a draft of the propos-
ed rules last spring.
However the UC draft was in effect
branded as too lenient by Senate As-
sembly - the faculty representative unit
-- and too strict by Student Government
Council.
Areas of contention include the use of
expulsion as a penalty, the jurisdiction
of the judiciary in relation to civil and
criminal courts, and the extent of penal-
ties for disruption of classroom activities.
EACH OF these controversial issues is
emotional, bearing on student de-
mands for the opportunity to dissent
without undue consequences and on fa-
culty fears that the freedom of the class-
room might suffer and criminal behavior
go unpunished.
Expulsion is too harsh a penalty, how-
ever, for those areas of misconduct that
will be covered by the UC rules - theft,
damage to property, sit-ins, use of phy-
sical force and so forth. Serious crimes
could be taken directly to civil authori-
ties.
In such cases, Senate Assembly balked
at a provision of the UC rules against
bringing charge both in the University
judiciary and the civil courts.
Such a rule seems necessary, though,
to prevent double jeopardy - a defend-
ant facing trials and possible punishment
on two levels for the same crime.
AS FOR disruption, members of the Uni-
versity community should have the
opportunity to concisely present their
views on urgent issues in classrooms or
administrative offices without punish-
ment.
Editorial Staff
ROBERT KRAFTOWITZ
Editor
JIM BEATTIE DAVE CHUDWIN
Executive Editor Managing Editor
STEVE KOPPMAN . Editorial Page Editor'
RICK PERLOFF Associate Editorial Page Editor
PAT MAHONEY .. .. Assistant Editorial Page Editor
LYNN WEINER.......Associate Managing Editor
LARRY LEMPERT Associate Managing Editor
ANITA CRONE. .. Arts Editor
JIM IRWIN...............Associate Arts Editor
JANET FREY ................ . .Personnel Director
ROBERT CONROW ... Books Editor
JIM JUDKIS .............Photography Editor


Only when disruptions are unreason-
able - involving harrassment or physi-
cal force - should they be considered
violations.
The faculty, however, insists on a rule
against. disruption and making it pun-
ishable with suspension. Such a penalty
is too great for an offense that many
believe is not an offense at all, merely
the exercise of political dissent.
Some types of compromise should be
worked out soon so the judiciary can have
a framework of rules within which to
operate.
A LESS TROUBLESOME but equally im-
portant problem is the appointment
of the judicial officers necessary to oper-
ate the system. President Robben Flem-
inf, SGC, Senate Assembly and University
Council should expedite naming qualified
individuals to these posts.
It is desirable that when the UC rules
are finally approved the judicial system
be ready to start operation as soon as
possible, although the judiciary might be
put into effect sooner using present Uni-
versity conduct rules.
Some might ask what's the rush. The
simple answer is that the University is
operating under an intolerable set of
Interim Rules and Disciplinary Proced-
ures unilaterally imposed on the com-
munity by the Regents in April, 1970.
These rules, providing for trials by a
hearing officer appointed by Fleming, are
of questionable fairness and impartiality
and provide only the barest protection of
the constitutonal rights of the defend-
ant.
WHILE THE judiciary might begin
functioning under the I n t e r i m
Rules before an agreement is worked out
on the new UC rules, it is important that
the rules dispute be settled.
The Interim Rules do not list different
punishments for different offenses, but
merely give the hearing officer a range
of penalties from a warning to suspension
for each offense.
Such a set of rules and punishments,
tacked on to the structure of the new
Judiciary might be a stopgap measure,
but in the long run it would be fairer to
set specific penalties for different of-
fenses, as is the case under civil a n d
criminal courts.
In adition the new rules would pro-
bably be more acceptable to the differ-
ent constituencies of the University than
the Interim Rules since they would be
agreed upon by their representatives
rather than imposed from the outside.
THE UNIVERSITY has an opportunity to
try an innovative set of judicial pro-
cedures agreed upon in a spirit of re-
spect and cooperation.
Any further delay in bringing the new
judiciary to life would be unacceptable.
It is essential that students, faculty mem-
bers and administrators agree as soon as
possible on the University Council rules
and make appointments to the new judi-
cial system.
-DAVE CHUDWIN
Managing Editor

4

-As ociated Press

-Associated Press

--Associated Press
Covernor Nelson Rockefeller

Ai

-Daily-Tom Gottlieb

*
.

rising atAttica
Editor's Note: This article represents the position, of the
Human Rights-Radical Independent Party on the police actions
against the prisoners at Attica Correctional Facility on Monday.
THE RADICAL Independent Party condemns the actions of Governor
Rockefeller and New York State Corrections Commissioner Rus-
sell Oswald in the recent massacre at Attica State Prison in New York.
RTP supports all the cemands of the prisoners, including amnesty for
all inmates involved in the rebellion and removal of Warden Mancusi.
The demand for amnesty follows justifiably from the fact that
frequently actions such as those undertaken by prisoners at Attica
are necessary in order to obtain needed change within some reason-
able "time period. Earlier this year, the New York State Senate Com-
mittee on Crime and Coriection said in a report, "any penal system
which falls short of affording its prison inmates the fundamental
dignities to which all human beings are entitled, demeans our society
and threatens its future safety."
Yet the New York state legsature has since then done nothing to
improve conditions in the state's prisons. In fact, several measures,
including a bill to insure speedy trials, have all been defeated in re-
cent months. New York State Corrections Commissioner Oswald ad-
mitted that the twenty-eight demands which he agreed to were need-
ed. Yet no one had taken steps to enact such measures until the pri-
soners themselves forced Oswald to do so.
In light of all this. the prisoners' actions were clearly necessary.
Given the inequities of the present system, the taking of hostages was
unfortunately necessary to give the prisoners power. The hostages
were well-treated by the inmates. The deaths among them, as well
as the deaths and injuries of many more prisoners, were a direct result
of the activities of the governor and corrections commissioner of New
York. Rockefeller and Oswald are responsible for the murders at' At-
tica.
AE SUPPORT the demand for the firing of Mancusi because we
believe that everyone has a democratic right to participate in the
decisions which affect their lives. If the prisoners felt that Mancusi
was not creating a situation in which they could achieve dignity, then
clearly he does not belong in the position of warden.
The rebellion at Attica is not an isolated incident. It is part of
the general phenomenon which is taking place in prisons all over the
country today: prisoners are realizing that they. like everyone else,
have a right to dignity and to Tead constructive, fulfilling lives within
the community. Demands such as better prison food. payment of the
minimum wage for work done in prison, useful vocational instruction,
-F . .- --. +n 1-1- +1l*nt ttt 43.,-. .-. ., ,Vtho,-.,-. ,r .-.f nrlnCt1 P'C

4

-Dn ii--r-oam Gottlieb

Protesting Attica at the Washtenaw County Jail

9 U~?N
s g

#1

N<;

MMIMIMI=