University officials have charged members of Cuffs with assault. This is a serious accusation. Unfortunately, recent comments made by Dean of Students Pete Englin and Director of Judicial Affairs Bethany Schuttinga in the Daily reveal they are not very serious about applying principles of justice to this case.

First, Schuttinga said she did not have a bias when charging and judging Cuffs in this case, yet Schuttinga cannot avoid accusations of bias. She revealed her bias (or position in the case) when she thought it was prudent to bring charges against Cuffs. The process that led her to file those charges was fair, but her role in the same case as judge is clearly biased because her position is already known.

Second, Schuttinga correctly states the U.S. government allows officials in higher education to play multiple roles in a judicial process, but this does not mean Iowa State should adopt such a low standard of justice as its official policy. Iowa State is large enough to create a fairer judicial process that guarantees a separation between prosecutor and judge, and students expect more than a substandard judicial process even if the university can get away with one.

Last but not least, I am greatly troubled by Englin’s statement that, “This is not a court system. It is a university administrative process.” It seems Englin is implying that long-standing principles of justice that have characterized American court systems need not apply to cases at Iowa State, especially when a lesser “administrative process” can be substituted. That “administrative process” is unfair.

The administration’s comments on the Cuffs’ hearing have significantly strained their credibility. Englin has said the hearing was fair and impartial. There are legitimate reasons to believe otherwise. Englin can fix the situation by providing a hearing in which the judge is separate from the prosecutor.

Jason Stonerook

Graduate Program

Political Science

GSB Graduate Student Senator