Spring Break
Students' names remain private in security reports
Issue date: 2/14/08
A threat that comes from outside the campus community does not, by and large, enter into the insular student consciousness. But would Hopkins pay more attention to a student-on-student crime?
If such a crime were to happen at the University, a recent ruling by a federal appeals court would allow campus security to publish the name of the alleged perpetrator in its alerts.
The First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Johnson & Wales University after a former student filed a defamation lawsuit.
Accused of assault and identified in a security alert, Christopher Havlik was later cleared by a jury.
The lawsuit raised questions of the University's participation in the federal Clery Act, a piece of legislation stating that universities receiving federal financial aid must record and disseminate information about crime on or near their campus.
"Though we abide by all Clery requirements to report crimes on and around campus ... we do not relinquish any student identifiers ... to protect the confidentiality of the students," Lieutenant Steve Ossmus of Campus Security said.
Ossmus had no comment on Hopkins's future policies in light of the ruling, stating that he would have to confer with the Hopkins General Council before he could make any other comments.
The incident Havlik was involved in was a fraternity-related altercation with fellow student Donald Ratcliffe. Ratcliffe ended up in the hospital with a concussion and a fractured skull. Witnesses also reported that Havlik threatened Ratcliffe at knifepoint, an allegation that Havlik fervently denied.
Four days after the incident, the Johnson & Wales student conduct board called for Havlik's dismissal from the University but dropped the charges of knife possession. However, the subsequent campus crime alert, which named both Havlik and his fraternity, contained mention of the knife.
Havlik's attempt to appeal the board's ruling failed, and he found guilty of assault in state district court. He was later acquitted in May 2005 and promptly sued the U.S. District Court for "defamatory publication of false information [namely, mention of the knife] by means of the crime alert."
If such a crime were to happen at the University, a recent ruling by a federal appeals court would allow campus security to publish the name of the alleged perpetrator in its alerts.
The First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Johnson & Wales University after a former student filed a defamation lawsuit.
Accused of assault and identified in a security alert, Christopher Havlik was later cleared by a jury.
The lawsuit raised questions of the University's participation in the federal Clery Act, a piece of legislation stating that universities receiving federal financial aid must record and disseminate information about crime on or near their campus.
"Though we abide by all Clery requirements to report crimes on and around campus ... we do not relinquish any student identifiers ... to protect the confidentiality of the students," Lieutenant Steve Ossmus of Campus Security said.
Ossmus had no comment on Hopkins's future policies in light of the ruling, stating that he would have to confer with the Hopkins General Council before he could make any other comments.
The incident Havlik was involved in was a fraternity-related altercation with fellow student Donald Ratcliffe. Ratcliffe ended up in the hospital with a concussion and a fractured skull. Witnesses also reported that Havlik threatened Ratcliffe at knifepoint, an allegation that Havlik fervently denied.
Four days after the incident, the Johnson & Wales student conduct board called for Havlik's dismissal from the University but dropped the charges of knife possession. However, the subsequent campus crime alert, which named both Havlik and his fraternity, contained mention of the knife.
Havlik's attempt to appeal the board's ruling failed, and he found guilty of assault in state district court. He was later acquitted in May 2005 and promptly sued the U.S. District Court for "defamatory publication of false information [namely, mention of the knife] by means of the crime alert."
Be the first to comment on this story