I went back to look at all of the media reports covering the UCD scandal to try to understand this "school ordered" mandatory community service that was reported.
Ray posted this link to the University of Pennsylvania Almanac. Check out the portion about Penn police. http://www.upenn.edu/almanac/v48/n34/Com-Relations.html We know little about the community service program except for the UCD, CCD and Penn web site info. We know that individuals wear orange jumpsuits when they are on our streets that have, "Property of Philadelphia Community Court" printed on them. There is simply no information that suggests that the Office of Public Safety conducts a separate system to adjudicate "non-criminal" complaints for things like the "cow in the library" being asserted on the listserv. In fact, it clearly states that the Penn police participate in the Municipal Court community service program. Internal ethical review programs or adjudicating bodies handling non-criminal matters would not be expected under the authority of the Office of Public Safety. I was very confused about the reports of a "school ordered" mandatory service under this municipal court program. And I was confused at the report that the Office of Public Safety was apologizing to the Penn students for something that was done through Municipal Court and UCD. If Penn police refer arrests to Community Court, why would they be apologizing? Of course I'm questioning and speculating about what exists behind a wall of secrecy but I'm troubled about these confusing reports and web sites. Are some arrests made by the Penn police being referred directly to Municipal court while arrests of Penn students are being diverted to another internal system? We don't know what is going on here. There is nothing to suggest that this Municipal court community service program has been opened up to punishments given through a non-criminal disciplinary system. It's actually absurd to conclude that University students caught cheating on an exam are assigned to a work detail with prostitutes, petty thieves, and under age drinking probationers at 51st and Pine. Why would Municipal Court be involved with non-criminal internal discipline of Penn students? Isn't it likely that offenders are being charged with quality of life crimes in the same categories as others referred to this program like theft, graffiti, minor drug possession etc? I'm glad the students' privacy has been respected, but these reports make no sense. I would like the Office of Public Safety to explain the contradiction. If the Penn police are referring some arrests directly to community court and other arrests to their own internal community court we may have another Constitutional problem with 14th amendment rights concerning "the equal protection of the laws." Are Penn students getting a special privilege when accused of minor crimes that non-Penn students do not receive when arrested by the University police? That would be one possible answer to the contradictions in the known information and the news reports. I'd certainly like to know more about "school ordered mandatory community service" and how it connects with this Municipal court probation. How can we in the community know what goes on with a wall of secrecy and cover-up? In this case speculation is all we have so let the insults by the cheerleaders begin. Here is an example that might explain the contradiction: West Philly kid is charged with breaking into 3 apartments after being arrested by Penn police. He gets a record and community service. Penn student breaks into 3 rooms in his dormitory. He pleads guilty to the Office of Public Safety. He gets no record of a crime but is sent to UCD community service with no questions asked. Now that might explain these two systems and the confusion? If Penn and UCD would stop stonewalling at every opportunity, then speculation could easily be countered and the listserv could get back to criticizing me. However, I think these contradictions raise more serious questions. Glenn
