News

HMS Is Facing a Deficit. Under Trump, Some Fear It May Get Worse.

News

Cambridge Police Respond to Three Armed Robberies Over Holiday Weekend

News

What’s Next for Harvard’s Legacy of Slavery Initiative?

News

MassDOT Adds Unpopular Train Layover to Allston I-90 Project in Sudden Reversal

News

Denied Winter Campus Housing, International Students Scramble to Find Alternative Options

General Counsel Should Re-Open Investigation Into Ntshanga Arrest

TO THE EDITORS

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

University Attorney Allan Ryan is correct in his letter in the April 13th Crimson, concerning the reasons for the delay in conducting the reasons for the delay in conducting the investigation into how the Harvard University Police department (HUPD) treated undergraduate Inati Ntshanga. However, my client and I object not to the length of time that the investigation took, but rather to its methodology and conclusions.

Mr. Ryan's letter does not point out, for example, that a few days after Mr. Ntshanga postponed his appointment, my office sent Mr. Ryan a list of additional witnesses who could corroborate Mr. Ntshanga's prior confrontation with Sergeant Stanford--a confrontation that, if true, would demonstrate that the HUPD obviously knew when it arrested Mr. Ntshanga that he was a student and not a homeless "trespasser.

At no point during his 10-month investigation did Mr. Ryan contact these witnesses, one of whom was interviewed by The Crimson. Yet, Mr. Ryan concluded, without benefit of this very pertinent evidence, that he "neither believe[d] nor disbelieve[d] Mr. Ntshanga and Sergeant Stanford in their conflicting account of what did or did not happen at the prior encounter."

Your story does make one further point that cries out for response. In keeping with Harvard's misguided notion that operating in secrecy is for the protection of the student (rather than, as one suspects, for the protection and convenience of Harvard's administrators), HUPD Lt. John Rooney is reported as saying that administrators are not supposed to be informed of student arrests so as to protect the privacy of the student!

Are we to conclude that HUPD could not contact an administrator to check on Mr. Ntshanga's student status or get him some assistance, because to do so would invade his privacy, and he was therefore arrested? What Orwellian thinking!

With such protectors as the HUPD, Harvard students don't need enemies.

Perhaps the office of the General Counsel should re-open its investigation. Harvey A. Silverglate   Harvard Law School '67

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags