I fear that there are some misperceptions and inaccurate language in the recently printed editorial: "Student judicial process impeded by new rules." Allow me to elaborate: Our judicial process is focused on being fair, consistent, educational and developmental. As I've told students in the past, ours is not a "trial", but a hearing. There is no courtroom. There are no juries. This is not what we have been, nor ever will be, about.

During a hearing we do not allow students to "counsel" or "advocate" for other students, but we do allow our students to have advisors to assist them through the process. We do not have "plaintiffs" nor "defendants", but instead there are student members of the community who act as accusers and the accused.

There should be three primary "players" in a hearing: the accused, the accuser and the chairperson. Brandeis students are very intelligent and well spoken, and they have a right to be heard and to have an opportunity to present their cases before a board of their peers; as much as others would at times like to do that for them.

Despite the opinions of a few, our judicial process has not changed. Indeed, we have only put in writing what had been practiced for a long time. It was only recently, when hearings were becoming more litigious in nature and less educational, did we think that having a statment in Rights and Responsibilities made sense.

We continue to believe in a peer judgment process, in educating the community about appropriate conduct, and in protecting the rights afforded all Brandeis community members.

I hope this was helpful. Thank you.

Shawn McGuirk
Director- Student Development & Conduct