BREAKING NEWS: The Administration revealed that they are starting an investigation into possible class disruptions by Rally Committee during the Axe Rally.

When the Daily Cal does a story on this, keep in mind that Calstuff broke it.

I'm not surprised by this, although I'm sure many are. It's the logical extension of the University's maybe/maybe not zero tolerance policy, as was noted by Mano in his account of yesterday's forum.

Anyway, the only question one should now ask about ZT is whether or not its a ZT for SJP, or a ZT for disruption of classes in general, as the University maintains. Folks at the forum talked some about Rally Com. From the reaction, my guess is SJA will go after Rally Com (Berdahl left that option open and made it seem likely) to make themselves look consistent. I still contend that the logical inconsistencies in the new code (the professors did a really good job pointing these out), the harsh enforcement by the administration (they are already punishing roberto and he hasnt been found guilty, and this is one example of many) and the acknowledgement of outside pressure on the administration (urging a crack down on the pro-Palestinian message) is more than enough to suggest that ZT was aimed - originally - at hurting SJP.

However, important note: Dean Kenney argues that there hasn't been a shift in policy at all, and that disruption of academic yahda yahda has always been harshly prosecuted. The main difference with the SJP case, in her view, is the severity of it and that the University had a chance to warn the participants beforehand. In saying there was a new policy, 'Berdahl misspoke.'

Of course, it's very possible that the investigation won't result in charges. There are several differences between the two incidents that could hold weight in a hearing. First, Rally Comm sought permission from the University beforehand, and was operating under the assumption that this was an 'approved presentation,' if that means anything. Heck, berkeley.edu has a positive writeup of the rally. In contrast, SJP was acting knowing that they were breaking the rules. They may also get credit for lesser severity of possible disruptions, and even unstated credit for this being historical. Politically speaking, prosecuting Rally Comm for displaying the axe would be an absolute disaster in terms of alumni and PR.

They could also drop the investigation for lack of evidence: unless Professors both come forward and name names, it'll be difficult to accurately identify exactly who entered lecture halls.

Of course, all these things could also be ignored. Who knows?Email This Post!