Page One

Rachel Odes, Michael Smith and Snehal Shingavi—the three UC Berkeley students found responsible Oct. 13 for violating two counts of the UC Berkeley student code of conduct during an anti-war protest—have refused to acknowledge any wrong-doing and have announced plans to run a full-page ad in the Daily Californian protesting their convictions. 

Within 24 hours of the announcement, the ad had gained over 500 signatures—including those of such well-known figures as Green Party gubernatorial candidate Peter Camejo and academics Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky. 

According to Todd Chretien of the ad hoc Committee to Defend Student Civil Liberties—created to defend the students—the numbers continue to grow. 

“We’re putting UC Berkeley on notice that we are not going to let them railroad these students,” said Chretien, an anti-war activist who recently graduated from San Francisco State. 

“This is an attempt to intimidate students at Berkeley at one of the most active campuses in the nation.” 

Among the concerns Chretien cited is what he calls a violation of the trio’s due process rights, stemming from the insufficient time he says they were given to prepare a defense before the hearing. He said the signatories also worry that punishing the students would set a precedent, allowing other universities to begin prosecuting students for anti-war activities. 

“If the students are convicted, it will send a message across the nation that universities can get away with this,” said Chretien. 

The three students still don’t know what penalties they might receive at the Oct. 28 sentencing hearing because the university has refused to comment. Before the hearing the school had offered a plea-bargain that included community service and a letter in their student file. But the students declined, saying that accepting the bargain would have sent the same message: that universities can target student anti-war activists. 

Peter Camejo, one of the signers who Chretien says has been particularly supportive of the students, knows UC discipline first-hand. He was arrested and eventually expelled from Berkeley in the late 1960s for anti-war activism. 

According to Camejo, who was 27 at the time of his arrest and an outspoken participant in the anti-Vietnam war movement, his run-in with UC officialdom began when he spoke at an open mike at Sproul Plaza at midnight after the Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to ban students from holding a meeting as part of an event called Stop The Draft Week.  

When students who were not allowed into the meeting—which was being held on campus—rallied at Sproul Plaza, word spread over the radio, drawing thousand to the event, which lasted until 5 a.m. 

Camejo said that, as with the recent protest, hundreds of people showed up but only a handful were charged. He was then suspended, along with 10 or 11 other leading campus anti-war activists. 

Camejo and the others then ran as a slate for the campus’s student government elections, but at 3 a.m. on the day before the vote, police appeared on his doorstep, arresting him for a charge he says neither he nor the officers could understand.  

Though the charge was dropped a day later, news of the hearing spread around campus, and students rallied around Camejo’s slate.  

Camejo and his colleagues won the election, but eventually he was officially expelled and was unable to finish his degree. 

“This is the same thing that happened,” Camejo said, referring to the three students not awaiting word of their fates. “People have this image that Berkeley is progressive, but the administration was hostile and paranoid toward the anti-war movement. 

“These students were protesting, so the administration wants to take these three leaders and make them the symbols. It’s an immense error. They should be cheering these students.” 

Camejo said he is particularly angry about the charges the three students face because the protesters continue to be right, just as during Vietnam, when students also protested what they saw as an unnecessary and unauthorized invasion.  

“[The students] are fighting for respect of the rules of the world, and for this they are being threatened,” said Camejo. 

Snehal Shingavi, one of the convicted students, agrees, calling the current proceedings “absolutely ludicrous. The fact of the matter is that the students were right, and this speaks a lot to how this trial is being used as a cover.” 

The students say that they will publicize the letter right up to the time of the sentencing, saying they refuse to let the convictions hold them back from continuing to organize. 

“We are genuinely excited that people see this as an important issue and encouraged by the outpouring of support,” said Shingavi. 

The statement is available online at: http://www.notinourname.net/police_state_restrictions/berk-students-16oct03.htm