The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 68, No. 22, Ed. 1 Thursday, February 5, 1981 Page: 3 of 16
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Texas Digital Newspaper Program and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Rice University Woodson Research Center.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THRESHING-IT-OUT
Clarifying honor
To the editor:
As members of the Honor
Council and the student body, we
think certain topics, which were
touched upon in the editorial, "A
matter of honor," beg clarification.
The ombudsman is not the sole
guardian of the rights of the
accused. As Honor Council
members, it is our responsibility to
the Honor System to protect the
rights of the accused, which are an
integral part of the system.
The ombudsman is present to
alert the council and the accused to
procedural error and defects in
deliberation. Can the ombudsman
both advise the accused during the
trail, and remain an objective
procedural advisor to the council?
Where does the advice of the
ombudsman stop? Should the
ombudsman tell the accused what
to say and what not to say? How
can equitable advice be given to all
so that the talents of various
ombudsmen do not become a
factor in deliberation?These
questions have not been resolved
to the satisfaction of the council as
a whole. The ombudsman as a Rice
student has been oriented to the
Honor System. However, we agree
there should be a specific method
by which the ombudsman can be
familiarized, to a greater degree,
with Council prodecures. The
Council is open to concrete
proposals "by which...ombudsmen
can be adequately trained."
The statement that "Few
students have given the system any
thought since few are directly
affected by it," is inaccurate.
Although few students come into
contact with the Honor Council,
all students and faculty members
are "directly affected" by the
Honor System. It affects our
examination procedures, our
academic relationship with fellow
students, and our image as "pillars
of justice and integrity." The
students who sit on the Honor
Council are not the only students
who assume responsibility. Every
student at Rice who chooses to
respect the Honor Code makes our
system work. Most students and
faculty members at this university
agree that academic honesty and
integrity are not too much to
expect from a Rice student.
The editorial, "A matter of
honor," states that "a myriad of
procedures and secrecy rules"
prevents students from finding out
how the council works. With such
limited knowledge, the editor's
assertion that the Honor System's
"constitution is only casually
related to the actual mechanisms
and procedures the council uses,"
is an incredible feat. The
procedures for investigation,
hearing, trial, and appeal are
clearly delineated in The Honor
System booklet. Fortunately,
Honor Council members do not
have Richard Dee's imagination in
interpreting these rules of
procedure. Furthermore, abstracts
of all hearings and trials are on
reserve in Fondren Library, for the
scrutiny of the student body.
We hope in the future the
Thresher will not settle for broad
general statements which have
little basis in fact, but will present a
more focused analysis and thereby
stimulate a more constructive
discussion of specific issues.
Discussion of these more
specific issues would greatly assist
the University Council subcom-
mittee in their evaluation of the
Honor System. We strongly urge
students and faculty to address
their thoughts and concerns to Dr.
Sydney Burrus, electrical
engineering department.
Charles Mays
Senior Representative
Deborah A. McCanby
Junior Representative
Constant attacks
To the editor:
One of my major considerations
in coming to Rice was its Honor
System. For four years I have
enjoyed the benefits of the system.
It is certainly not perfect, but it's
damn good. I'm getting sick and
tired of seeing it constantly
attacked in the Thresher. Most of
these attacks seem to be last
minute page, filler. Last week's
editorial was the worst because of
its consistently incorrect
statements.
Mr. Dees attempts to make four
points: 1) the role of the
ombudsmen needs much more
definition; 2) the Honor Council
must fail anytime its members are
not "pillars of justice and
integrity"; 3) the Honor Council's
secrecy is destructive; 4) the
students have no way of obtaining
foreknowledge of the Honor
<^bance tjawi hewd out ai tfie-
^alentine/S/ ^baw^bancey
maui /4, L)p.m. to I a.m.
<efx<md Wak, cmnce
c?3ancJ: 'C€allacj)e
c$eei, CS ojt SS tin As
$2 sAc (mission
Council's mechanisms and
procedures. Mr. Dees is wrong on
all four points.
I was a member of the University
Court two years ago. One of our
jobs was to interview and choose
ombudsmen. Prior to our choice
the role of the ombudsmen was
carefully defined to me by the
council's chairman. I was also
impressed by the degree of
familiarity with candidates for the
position had. Mr. Dees also
implies that the ombudsmen
should act as a defense attorney in
a proceeding with no prosecutor.
All that exists is a panel of jurors
trying to establish guilt or
innocence. It is not an adversary
proceeding and should not be
equated with one.
Point two also fails miserably.
People are only human. Every
individual is capable of errors.
However, the Honor Council
requires a unanimous vote for a
conviction. I would contend it is
tougher to get nine Rice students
to agree on a conviction than to get
nine perfect pillars to agree. Thus if
anything, their fallability protects
the accused even more than a
system of saints would.
Point three tumbles next. It
seems to call for public lynchings.
It assumes that all accused
students are guilty. Strangely
enough, better than 50% of these
"criminals" are acquitted.
Unfortunately, in our society
acquit'al can not erase the scars of
continued on page 4
D00HESBUBT
let's go back 70 the begin-
ning of your captim shall
Me, mr. puke? atlastreport
ywmbre facing a pre-pawn
firing squad.
okay rALD look fellahs, i
onebacktd peally think you're
tup rmf overreacting. why
, me w UAR
US OVER ONE LOUSY
TUB NEXT DAY ALL
the months
vrag6ep.
ay..
GUARD'
actually, poc, looking back
on rtnouj, i think the worst
part of the whole ordeal
was the excruciating
boredom.
right. at that point negotiations
hap kinp of bogged down. i
mas forced to make a last-ditch
offer of *250.000, which it turned
our luasthe going rate for a stay
of execution. /
' v=V-
i mean. if you'resobent L_
0n creating an interna-
tional incident mhy don't
you just seize the whole
united states
tts your way pay, bald
one. we've been told to good plan.
Keep you alive as a youimnt
bargaining chip ' regret
keep it
x thought you
'down,'bald
one1 tm get mb some
busy'
cigarettes!
70 keep myself entertained, i
used to fei6n various diseases
during the medical check-ups.
the doctor ujouldinvarjably
prescribe- something^
and tp save IT
doctor. mhat physically,
sort of condition he seems
is the 53*dh0s- to be ==
| ta6e in7 fine., mi
n mas an incredible rip- off,
but i figured, what the hell,
iv be long gone by the time my
check bounced. unfortunately,
they locked me up in a hotel as
INSURANCE. /
& ^
HfTlf
mhat do you meanquiet~>
xsaid. i tm>those cigarettes
quietis m now! and where's that
trying 70 new picture7imsjckof
study' this damn icon! do you
hear me,
guard7
then, every six weeks or
so, i'p have a papty. it
never failep to scare
the hell out of the
guards. /
ps/cholo6icaw there appear v
be some problems. mhat is not
clear. however is how many OF
them existed prior tv his cap-
, --z 7jvity. „
doc, has as a matter of fact,
he called i think he mas plan
his family ning on phoning ms
. yet 7 loved ones this morn
" !ng..
okay, bald
one, back jo 1 can't
the roof understand
i tt. they must
have frozen
(c0 IjMjtkOA-
YOU SAIP
WHAT? I MS JUST
kipping, for
GOO'S SAKE:
SffSSSs 1punno.
they negotiate? ffggge
beer-?
get me some-
for crying thing classy.
out loup. bald okay7 youknow
one'. i've got likbaleroynei-
finals to- man sporting
morrow' print'
ncan? 1 pont think
, so. he just
' giggled
puke. the
game mas
'wo weeks
ago where
you been
r-,
*1000 ON
OAKLAND
GOT IT-
The JRice Thresher, February 5,.1981, page 3
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Dees, Richard. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 68, No. 22, Ed. 1 Thursday, February 5, 1981, newspaper, February 5, 1981; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245462/m1/3/?q=%22%22~1: accessed July 6, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.