A campus bondage and sadomasochism group found guilty of assault and sanctioned by a university judicial decision claims the judgment was unfair.

Cuffs filed an appeal Monday with the dean of student’s office regarding a decision made March 8 by Director of Judicial Affairs Bethany Schuttinga. Earlier this month, Schuttinga ruled Cuffs was responsible for assault — a violation of Student Disciplinary Regulations and the Iowa Code.

In her decision, Schuttinga wrote: “The leadership of Cuffs planned, encouraged and knowingly allowed actions at a [Nov. 10 Cuffs meeting] that consisted of one person striking another with various instruments and with the intention to cause pain.”

However, the group’s president, Harlan “Duane” Long Jr., said there was not substantial evidence to support that conclusion.

“I’m not optimistic of much on anything with this process anymore,” Long said. “We’ve now presented several times with the information they needed, and so far, they haven’t reached an appropriate conclusion. It’s my belief that any reasonable person with the facts presented would have found Cuffs innocent.”

He said Schuttinga was misguided in stating pain occurred during demonstrations at the meetings because both members of the demonstration — Long and the voluntary woman demonstrated on, identified as “Lynn Smith” — testified there was no intent to cause pain.

“To conclude that there was intent to cause pain, Schuttinga would have to claim to know the intentions of the participants better than, one, the participants themselves and, two, the attendees of the meeting,” Long said.

Schuttinga disagreed.

“The striking of another person to educate members about sadomasochistic activities is a sadomasochistic activity. Although the participants in the activity may have a different personal and emotional reaction to the activity when it is performed at a meeting in front of a group than if the same activity had occurred in a private location, the activity itself is still sadomasochistic in nature,” she wrote in her decision.

Cuffs also complained the charges in the case discriminate against the group because similar charges have not been brought against other student organizations whose activities involve physical contact and the possibility for harm.

“Although members of those sports related student organizations would physically contact another person … the activities of those clubs fall within the specific exemption in the assault statute,” Schuttinga stated. “Since Iowa law created the distinction that excludes sadomasochistic from the exception … it is permissible for the Office of Judicial Affairs to treat Cuffs differently than other student organizations on this issue.”

Long said he disagrees.

“There is no … exemption in Student Disciplinary Regulations. Therefore … Cuffs is being singled out in a discriminatory manner due to content,” he said. “There is no difference between Cuffs and [sports clubs on campus]. If these groups are not committing assault, neither is Cuffs.”

The sanction means Cuffs isn’t allowed to hold any demonstration or sponsor events or social functions that involve acts that violate Student Disciplinary Regulations or Iowa law. It’s a decision Long said restricts Cuffs from holding any demonstrations or events — a violation of the group’s First Amendment right to freedom of expression.

“A complete listing of restricted activities should have been included,” he said. “To leave the restriction as it is allows arbitrary and discriminatory future determinations of what acts are sadomasochistic.”