[JamesDoherty]

http://www.dogstreetjournal.com/story/2211

http://www.dogstreetjournal.com/story/2100

http://flathat.wm.edu/story.php?issue=2004-12-03&type=1&aid=2

http://flathat.wm.edu/2004-11-05/story.php?type=1&aid=5



-----Original Message-----
From: W. Samuel Sadler [mailto:wssadl@wm.edu]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 5:16 PM
To: students@wm.edu; faculty@wm.edu; staff@wm.edu
Subject: [students] A Matter of Safety











As you all know, I try to provide you with information regarding anything to

do with campus security or the safety of our students. Such a situation

occured last night.







An incident at an off-campus party resulted in one of our students being

arrested for brandishing a firearm and for discharging a firearm within the

city limits. This is the first time in my memory one of our students has

been accused of being involved in such activity. The student was arrested

at the Law School and arraigned this morning. Since the incident originated

off campus, the Williamsburg Police Department is handling the

investigation. In the meantime, the student has been banned from campus.

When more information is available, I will share it with you.









Sam Sadler







Sam Sadler

Vice President for Student Affairs

The College of William and Mary

Williamsburg, VA 23187

Phone: 757-221-1236

Fax: 757-221-1240

[WMC]

This is no surprise. I am a con/libertarian student at W&M also and have had the admins (including the President) come after me this past year for speaking my views.

Funny how the school doesn't recognize self defense- Doherty had a nose broken at least (multiple confirmations of this) and it looks like the baseballers even lied to the police initially (Any chance that you'll post the documents Doherty?). Or maybe they just got together and 'remembered' different stories later. Of course, what can you expect from a school not only run by liberal ideologues, but with a total gun ban, including squirt guns and other facsimiles.

The good news is that this happened in VA, where gun owners have rights. That recent preemption bill should royally nail the school, if Doherty goes after them. I'm personally for coming at the school from every angle possible and (hopefully) getting the school's 'policies' on guns tossed out- it's worse than JMU to my knowledge. Hopefully the JMU case can give us a precedent (past VA law) to work with. Any idea where to start with this?

[Kharn]

Why did you leave the pistol in the trash can? :scrutiny:
Other than that, it seems like you did ok, I dont see how someone could get very far with a broken nose (due to blood flowing into the throat), especially not when being chased by varsity athletes. The basketball team at my college all towered over me, I doubt I could have defended myself against even just one of them, if they had the mind to do me harm.

Kharn

[only1asterisk]

James,

First: Welcome to The High Road.

Second: I'm not going to beat you over the head with how you messed up. I imagine you know by now. Also, I'm sure plenty of people will be along directly to do just that.

Third: Your gun may have saved you from a serious beating and only you know if it was worth it. I don't imagine the brandishing charges will stick if you have any kind of lawyer at all, but I'd say they are certainly going to work very hard at convicting you of something. I bet it'll be the discharge. I'd take that, because it is one of the things you screwed up. You're pretty much toast with the school if anything in those articles is true. Again, you did what you did. Accept responsibility for your actions and negotiate a suitable punishment with the university.


David

[Smurfslayer]

My STRONG advice to you ( the poster ) is to immediately cease and desist all disclosure about this incident, and let your lawyer do your talking for you.

Richard Gardiner: "Almost anything a person says will be used against them in court and that is the single biggest problem I face as a criminal defense attorney"...

If you haven't made contact with VCDL, I suggest you do so AFTER talking to your (new?) lawyer.

Good luck.

[WMC]

David- Isn't drawing blood a serious enough beating? No point in negotiating- Doherty was already expelled. The 'deal' they offered was an expulsion that wasn't permanent, if Doherty accepted that b.s. version of the facts that the school wanted. I don't see how he would be convicted of discharging if it's true that the players still came at him after he pulled the gun after fleeing. Discharging in this case would seem necessary to flee, so why would that be bad?

§ 18.2-280. Willfully discharging firearms in public places
D. This section shall not apply to any law-enforcement officer in the performance of his official duties nor to any other person whose said willful act is otherwise justifiable or excusable at law in the protection of his life or property, or is otherwise specifically authorized by law.

Smurf- All the info is public...I don't think Doherty plans on talking too much except through posting public info like those articles or statements by the school. I don't think we should cease and desist discussing this...there may be options left that Doherty doesn't know of. He has contacted VCDL. Know of any good lawyers in VA?

BTW, at least two of the articles that Doherty linked to are based off of just the baseballers' statements- Doherty didn't intially give a statement to the police when he was arrested. Notice the difference between the 'Doherty just pulled the gun and shot it' and the articles that actually have both sides of the story. Also interesting to note how the baseballers initially 'forgot' to mention to the police that Doherty was beat up.

And the story gets more interesting- one of the baseballers involved has a long criminal record- something like 13 arrests- for various misds and felonies such as assault, underage alcohol possession, b&e, fake ID, and larceny. Moreover, the baseballers wouldn't show up to the initial school judicial hearing in mid-Nov because they were afraid that their statements would lead to their prosecution by the Commonwealth.

[Yooper]

I agree with Smurfslayer, and this post should really be removed for the poster's benefit.

[only1asterisk]

A broken nose isn't what I call a serious beating. Without going into detail, the recipient of the last serious beating that I worked spent 3 days in the hospital being treated for his injuries.

As to the discharge, it isn't something I would have done. Like several other things Mr. Doherty did, it seems irresponsible. This is the highest crime Mr. Doherty is accused of and the only one that might get him jail time (if he has a clean record). I wouldn't let it get to trial. After hearing all the stupid things Mr. Doherty did both before and after the fact he'd be lucky to go unconvicted by a group of random THR members, much less a jury of people from Williamsburg.

As for the punishment from the school, there is always room to negotiate. I've worked for 4 universities and not one wouldn't cave when a student walked in with a decent lawyer. It appears that some time has gone by and the semester is almost over. Probably too late to do anything except to get him reinstated early.

David

[Augustwest]

I realize that you've been through a really tough experience, but I'm wondering if you might clarify how you were denied due process...

Though the earlier suggestion of clamming up is probably a good one.

[WT]

Let's see .......

Stunned by a blow to the head, eyes blurry, breathing impaired due to broken nose, in pain, chased by large multiple attackers, at night .......

Hey, maybe I wouldn't think straight under those conditions. Then again, I'm not John Wayne.

[only1asterisk]

I have already criticized James much more than I intended and since he really can't offer much in the way of a defense on public forum, there really is no sense in arguing over his actions. If he decides to post his account over on S&T after he is finished with the courts, we can have a proper discourse.

I hope he gets skillful legal counsel and this incident doesn't unduly damage his future.


David

PS Not John Wayne here either, just a guy that has decided against warning shots when not required by law. The warning shot may or may not have been the best course of action, but can you imagine the $#!+storm he'd be in if he had do everything the same and had actually shot someone?

[jnojr]

I smell BS.

Who pees into a cup and then carries it around? If I go to a party, and the toilet is stopped up, I'll pee in it anyway. If it's completely full, I'll find another one, pee in the sink, or go behind a tree outside. I just don't believe the OP on this. Strike one.

Second... firing into the air? ***? That's just plain stupid. If I'm holding a gun on someone, and they say "That's fake" and keep coming toward me, when I discharge my weapon it'll be into center-mass. Not in a direction where I don't know where the bullet is going. Strike two.

Then dumping the gun in a trash can??? Cocked and loaded??? I can't even begin to imagine what would pass for a "thought process" here. Strike three.

[Andrew Rothman]

I hope that James doesn't expect much sympathy here. Due process from the school is te least of his worries, but HE CHOSE NOT TO ATTEND HIS HEARING!!!!!

Justice declined is NOT justice denied.

Second, I wonder whether alcohol wasn't a factor in his judgement, or seeming lack thereof.

Third, this never would have touched his school life if he hadn't carried the gun onto the campus and dumped it in a trash can. What was he thinking?

Hey, everybody deserves their day in court, and James will get his. I hope he has a good lawyer -- because on the face of it, his actions don't look too good.

He missed his day in his college's court, because he decided not to show. That's his fault. He declined the college's deal, which may or not have been a good idea, but again, it was his choice.

Let this be a lesson to us all -- or a reinforcement of what we all should know:

1. Alcohol and guns don't mix! If youcarry, don't drink!

2. In the immortal words of John Farnham, "The best way to handle any potentially injurious encounter is: Don't be there. Arrange to be somewhere else. Don't go to stupid places. Don't associate with stupid people. Don't do stupid things."

3. If, heavens forbid, you do get into a defensive shooting situation, DON'T go on campus and dump your gun in a trash can.

(Did I really just type that? Does anyone need to be told that?)

Holster up, call the cops, and say "I feared for my life."

What was he thinking?

[WMC]

Congrats, your Monday Morning QB ratings are 150.0...

Are these the full facts? No...which is annoying to all of us, but we'll have to live with it for now. There are some things that need to be made clear, from what is public info and what I know. I was at the hearing that he didn't show up for, which was supposed to be public. The school told Doherty that afternoon that the hearing was changed from public to private, so when I and others showed to attend it to get the facts, we were cut off by a police barricade.

Yes, Doherty didn't show...so what? Would that actually have accomplished anything? No. The due process, I believe, refers to the fact that the school went against state law in kicking him out- the least the school couldve done would have been to wait to see if the criminal charges held before making a final decision, since simply bringing a gun onto campus isn't illegal. Dumping the gun in the trash can is also something that I wouldn't have done, and I don't know why Doherty would have done that, but I'm sure his lawyer or the prosecutor will ask him that and he will answer it in time. As for drinking...who said Doherty had been? He was at a party with alcohol, but that doesn't mean that he was anywhere near drunk (which would be illegal if possessing a gun), and the police didn't PBT him when he was arrested, so in terms of evidence, there is none that alcohol impaired his judgement.

But that isn't the issue here. Doherty is charged with 3x brandishing and 1 discharging, which are not felonies, despite what the retard at the Flat Hat printed. I don't think Doherty gives a ???? what YOU would've done, because you aren't him, and what he did can't be undone. The issue here is the legality of what he did. As far as I can see, nothing was illegal, refer to the VA code pasted above. Who begs to differ, and why?

[jnojr]

It really doesn't matter if this went down exactly the way he said it did... he showed extremely poor judgement at every step. You cannot carry a firearm and go off half-cocked. You can't dump a cup of piss on someone (or be "carrying it around" and have them "bump into you", causing it to "accidentally spill on him" :rolleyes: ). You can't fire "warning shots" off into the air. It's criminally stupid to throw your loaded, cocked pistol in a freakin' trash can. If somebody wants to start a fight with you, you apologize to them and back out of the situation, no get into a shoving match.

Sorry, but he has no business carrying a gun. Maybe in a few years when he matures. If he's lucky, he'll still be able to carry when that happens. But hotheads who pull stupid stunts like this are what costs all of the rest of us our RKBA.

[WMC]

jnojr- Thanks, it's always comforting to know that you're holier than us... :barf: perhaps you're just jealous of VA's shall issue? :p

If you live in CA, why are you such an expert on VA's negligence laws?...Why don't you do us a favor and copy-paste the VA statute that backs up your 'criminally stupid' claim, since you certainly wouldn't say 'criminally stupid' with only your opinion to back it up...

Yes, you can fire a warning shot. Maybe you wouldn't have...but would you have preferred that he continue to get beaten if he couldn't run away from them (and his gun taken by them) or would you rather he have just blown them away (because that would help his case :banghead: )? Your apologize strategy may have good intentions, but it sounds a lot like the 'dont resist' tactics that Brady et al. advocate if one is being raped...

If he's lucky he'll be able to carry? Would you mind backing up that claim with THE LAW? Because as it stands, it's reasonable self defense pretty clearly, despite your high-and-mighty know-it-all opinion. Like I said, we can all Monday Morning QB this easily, but that's not the issue. See previous post, if you didn't already.

[Andrew Rothman]

WMC,

First of all, since you seem quite new here, you should know that personal attacks against other members are not well tolerated by the moderators. So knock off the name-calling, would ya?

No. The due process, I believe, refers to the fact that the school went against state law in kicking him out

Really? Is there a state law saying that a student cannot receive school discipline, including expulsion, regardless of legal claims?

Cheating on tests or failing to cite your sources in a term paper is not illegal in VA, is it? Nonetheless, you can get your cheating bee-hind kicked out of school for doing either -- `cause it's against school rules!

Doherty didn't show...so what? Would that actually have accomplished anything? No.

Simply sayin' it don't make it true, son. He was kicked out AS A RESULT OF THE HEARING HE DECLINED TO ATTEND!!!!!

Due process is getting a chance to have your side heard. He apparently gave up that chance. And now he's whining about not getting his due process? Give me a break!

Are we Monday-morning quarterbacking? You betcha. If you don't want to read that, you're probably in the wrong place.

There is very little question in my mind (nor, apparently, in the minds of other here) that, even giving him all the possible benefit of the doubt, James exercised incredibly poor judgement in this incident, and compounded it by not participating in the school's judicial process, leaving them to rule against him in absentia.

Sometimes people are victims, and sometimes they bring much of the pain upon themselves. I think that James lies somewhere between those two extremes, but there's no way to read the situation where he hasn't made it much, much worse for himself.

It sound like you're his friend, and I'm sure he's grateful for your support. But sometimes a friend is at his best when he tells his friend the hard truths.

[Art Eatman]

"Attack ideas, not people," is the rule here. Let's just say that if it happens again in this thread there well could be no charm. :)

I know of no court where one's failure to appear for a hearing leads to anything but a win for the opposition--whether a criminal prosecutor or a civil plaintiff. US v. Miller is the case best known to gun-folks...

At the very least in this instance, poor judgement was shown. We wish him luck, 'cause he's gonna need all he can get.

Art

[jnojr]

jnojr- Thanks, it's always comforting to know that you're holier than us... perhaps you're just jealous of VA's shall issue?

*** are you blathering about?

If you live in CA, why are you such an expert on VA's negligence laws?...Why don't you do us a favor and copy-paste the VA statute that backs up your 'criminally stupid' claim, since you certainly wouldn't say 'criminally stupid' with only your opinion to back it up...

OK, check... we can put you down in the column where throwing a loaded pistol into the trash is a good idea. Gotcha...

Yes, you can fire a warning shot. Maybe you wouldn't have...but would you have preferred that he continue to get beaten if he couldn't run away from them (and his gun taken by them) or would you rather he have just blown them away (because that would help his case )? Your apologize strategy may have good intentions, but it sounds a lot like the 'dont resist' tactics that Brady et al. advocate if one is being raped...

And we can put you down in the "hothead" column, too. You think firing "warning shots" is a good idea, and if you're carrying a firearm, you don't see a problem with getting into a fight.

So now we know there are two individuals on this board who need a few years of maturing before they should carry a gun.

If he's lucky he'll be able to carry? Would you mind backing up that claim with THE LAW? Because as it stands, it's reasonable self defense pretty clearly, despite your high-and-mighty know-it-all opinion. Like I said, we can all Monday Morning QB this easily, but that's not the issue. See previous post, if you didn't already.

I would refer you back to the accounts of this incident and ask you to read them again, but it's clear that would be fruitless. You're so concerned with nitpicking over hypothetical points, you've completely missed the basic issue in this incident. Maybe someone else will take the time to try to explain it to you.

[WMC]

Matt-
Alright, point taken about ad hominems. Please point out the same to jnojr for calling Doherty a 'hothead,' which is on the same level as my sarcasm. But my point still remains- point out where JD was criminally stupid. And he's replied again with a 'hothead' remark on me while I was typing this...even after your and the Admin's warnings.

Doherty showed to an initial hearing, and the baseballers wouldn't because they feared being prosecuted for giving a full statement. Doherty gave his side of the story. It didn't seem to matter whether or not he showed up- after all, it was made quite clear before the second hearing that the deal was still an expulsion with the possibility of reinstatement- that didn't leave many worse things for the full punishment.

The whole thing was run like a kangaroo court...public until the afternoon of, people entering we searched and wanded, we were instructed by the Dean not to print anyone's name who was there (under penalty of the Handbook and/or FERPA). It was certainly the first secret court that I had witnessed.

I think that failing to cite sources could fall under plagiarism, which I believe is illegal. As for cheating, that is a world different from a right enumerated under the VA and US Constitutions as well as specifically protected by VA law § 15.2-915.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+15.2-915

jnojr- I never said throwing it into the trashcan was a good idea. In fact, I said the opposite in a previous post- it is dumb, from the facts that we have seen about this event. Maybe Doherty had some sort of logic...we won't know til trial. All I asked you was whether it was legal or not- a good distinction to make here, since I have said over and over again that the issue is simply to debate the legality of what happened, given the information posted. I've been working on this a lot longer than the two hours you've had to cynically type your remarks about the two of us, so don't even start down the path of 'read the baseballers biased statements for the whole truth' remarks.

I said that he COULD fire a warning shot, not that I would have or that I agree with it. Because I recognize it as a valid means (without agreeing or disagreeing at this point) does not make me some immature moron running around with a gun. I don't see a problem with getting into a fight if I have a gun? It's not exactly easy to avoid a fight when it's your vs. 3 or 4 guys who want a fight. You'll note that he ran away for a while before pulling the gun- I wouldn't exactly call that being the hottest head on the block. The law school is blocks away from the party house. You seem to just like criticizing without giving us 'the way.' So what's your advice on 'the right thing' that should've been done? But I'll be honest- give us your take, but since you've basically just made a number of false and hasty generalizations against myself and JD, I won't exactly use your advice by itself as my Confucian words of wisdom, but I will at least think about it.

This is a discussion of legality, so when I ask you what the law says to see if something was indeed illegal, such as tossing the gun in the can, and you reply with your 'put a check in the hothead column' bologna, it is you who has completely missed the point. Take your cynical generalizations elsewhere- they do no good here.

[Art Eatman]

Welllll, as a descendant of the folks who helped start William & Mary College way back when (The Witherspoon branch of the family softwood) and this whole deal is within the realm of Virginia law, I ask that those conversant with said state's laws chip in, and other sorta chip out for a while.

:), Art

[El Rojo]

Simply amazing. Regardless of whether he was drinking or not, lets make it clear that you should not drink and go to parties while packing heat. That is the only thing I could think of that would alter someone's judgement so far as to make such an incident possible. Man that sure makes young CCW holder's look responsible. :(

[DelayedReaction]

Honestly I can't sympathize with the guy in this case. If was going to a party, he should have left his handgun at home. His actions after the incident seem to suggest that his judgement was severely impaired.

[Art Eatman]

Somewhere around age 11 or 12, I ran across a set of rules about guns. One was, "Alcohol and gunpowder don't mix."

Being below the age of Budweiser, it took a while to puzzle it out. I was a literal-minded little kid, and I just couldn't understand why somebody would take some perfectly good gunpowder and a bottle of rubbing alcohol and go to mixing...

:D

I reckon that rule hasn't changed a lot in almost 60 years...

Art

[The Undertoad]

Will-

I know I don't have all the info. But it looks to me like James ditching the weapon (cocked & locked!) in the trash was just plain idiocy. But hey, that's my opinion. :confused:

I don't know the relevant laws or case law re: warning shots, so I don't feel like I should comment on that.

I do think the whole incident has likely given gunnies a bad name around campus. :(

[JohnBT]

"I ask that those conversant with said state's laws chip in"

I'm not going to spend my morning researching specific laws pertaining to Virginia colleges, but I have some experience with campus regulations having completed a B.S. at Virginia Tech, an M.S. at Virginia Commonwealth and 30 years(and counting) as a state employee who has been involved with numerous clients attending a wide variety of state colleges.

My conclusion? He's up the creek and not just because W&M is one of the state's liberal hotbeds. He violated school policy and got caught. It can be fought, but who knows how long that will take. Months? Years?

I have a word of advice for anybody attending a party during this holiday season who decides to urinate in a cup and carry it outside. Sink.

John

[Andrew Rothman]

I think that failing to cite sources could fall under plagiarism, which I believe is illegal.

Nope, I'm pretty sure it's not. Academic dishonesty is despicable, but not illegal.

Violating a copyright is not criminal, but it is actionable, but that's a horse of a different color.

What I was trying to illustrate is this: a school may have rules above and beyond state law, unless specifically forbidden by preemption laws.

As for VA law § 15.2-915: I read it, and it refers to "localities." I don't think that includes public universities, but I Am Not A Lawyer. Any legal beagles wish to chime in?

[WMC]

Just for reference, I'll paste the whole code here and talk about it below.

§ 15.2-915. Control of firearms; applicability to authorities and local governmental agencies.

A. No locality shall adopt or enforce any ordinance, resolution or motion, as permitted by § 15.2-1425, and no agent of such locality shall take any administrative action, governing the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying, storage or transporting of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof other than those expressly authorized by statute. For purposes of this section, a statute that does not refer to firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof, shall not be construed to provide express authorization.

Nothing in this section shall prohibit a locality from adopting workplace rules relating to terms and conditions of employment of the workforce. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a law-enforcement officer, as defined in § 9.1-101 from acting within the scope of his duties.

The provisions of this section applicable to a locality shall also apply to any authority or to a local governmental entity, including a department or agency, but not including any local or regional jail or juvenile detention facility.

B. Any local ordinance, resolution or motion adopted prior to the effective date of this act governing the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying or transporting of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof, other than those expressly authorized by statute, is invalid.



Ok, there are two options here as I see it: the school is a locality, or it is an arm of the state govt.

The College has its own police force and issues its own campus-wide trespass warnings to those who it doesn't like (often local high schoolers) who are caught on campus. Ignoring that the campus is public property, this seems to lean towards the College acting as its own locality, in which case, they can't regulate guns past what state law says.

On the other hand, I've heard it referred to as an arm of the state gov't by a state delegate. In that case, it would seem to be that the College, as a part of the state, needs to be in compliance with state law. To my knowledge, the precedent for this would be the state parks after the preemption law took effect last summer- the parks tried to keep gun bans/restrictions up, but as an arm of the state govt, were ordered by the Atty Gen to stay in line with state law. If this is the case, the College loses.

Something else interesting is that if neither of these apply as I see them, the code states that "[t]he provisions of this section applicable to a locality shall also apply to any authority..." This being the case, the Judicial Council of the College (and administration and police) would certainly seem to fit the definition of an authority, in which case, the College loses.

[only1asterisk]

New students are often required to sign contracts promising to abide by university policies. If you agree to be held accountable to a higher standard than the law permits, it's your own fault. In addition, while I don't agree with restrictions, property holders have the right to limit carry on their premises. I don't know that VA preemption can be applied to the school. It would seem to only IF the school were seen as a goverment or authority.


David

[WMC]

asterisk-
You bring up a good point. However, it explicitly states in the Student Handbook the following:
"Students, faculty, and administrators (hereinafter the "members of the College community") shall enjoy all rights, privileges, and immuniities guaranteed to every citizen of the United States and the Commonwealth of Virginia...The institution and those who administer its affairs have a special responsibility to ensure that, in pursuance of its functions, the rights of all members of the College community are preserved...No rules, regulation, policy, or procedure which is incompatible with or which contradicts this document may be enacted...
I
The members of the College community, as individuals, shall enjoy all rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed every citizen of the United States and the commonwealth of Virginia."


Seems pretty clear to me. It was written by our current VP for Student Affairs. Considering that RKBA is just that, a right, the College loses by its own Handbook.

The full handbook can be found here. I quoted from p. 47 of the PDF file.
http://www.wm.edu/deanofstudents/handbook/stuhb0405.pdf

[only1asterisk]

WMC,

It appears you haven't yet read page 71. The pretty text of the page you quoted is belied by what follows. Most of your "rights" are curtailed (at least where the university policy and its enforcement is concerned, your LEGAL rights remain the same) when they are enumerated here.

David

[Andrew Rothman]

Yeo. Although page 47 looks great, there's lots of weasel language on page 48...

...Right, when charged or convicted of violation of general law, to be free of
College discipline for the same conduct, unless such discipline by the College
community is determined to be for the protection of other members of the College
community or the safeguarding of the educational process. Such determination
shall be made by the appropriate College authority designated by the
President.

Bummer. You have rights -- unless we decide you don't.

[big poppa]

if he was a ccw holder he,s not supposed to go anywhere their serving alcohol while carrying,shooting in the air, baseballers or not is a no-no.and as one of the more liberal collages in virginia,i think their going to make an example outta this kid :cool:

[JohnBT]

We can carry where alcohol is served as long as it isn't a place with an ABC license. For instance, I can attend my neighbors' XMAS parties.

Back to the debate: He left a loaded gun in a trash can? This should make for interesting testimony. I wonder what a jury will think if the case is pushed that far.

John

[JohnBT]

Okay, so I went the Commonwealth's Adminstrative Code site and did a search on William and Mary. The first result I clicked on provided some useful info.

"The board of visitors or other governing body of every state-supported institution of higher education in Virginia is authorized to establish rules and regulations for the acceptance of students; for the conduct of students and the suspension and dismissal of students who fail or refuse to abide by such rules; for the rescission or restriction of financial aid; for the employment of professors, teachers, instructors and all other employees; and for parking and traffic on property owned by the institution. In addition, the board of visitors or other governing body is authorized to establish programs to promote compliance among students with laws relating to the use of alcoholic beverages and to establish guidelines for the initiation or induction into any social fraternity or sorority. Code of Virginia, Title 23, Chapter 1.

Regulations may be obtained from The College of William and Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23187. Internet address: http://www.wm.edu/"

[SUE ROVR]

Repeat after me:

I felt my life was in jeopardy. I was out number, physicaly assaulted and battered. I tried to retreat, but they chased me and caught me.

This is probably a defense to both the discharge and brandishing.

GET A GOOD LAWYER NOW! NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW!!!!!

Listen to him/her. SAY NOTHING SAY NOTHING. You should not have said anything when you were first caught.

Personally I think you could have legally shot them. You were outnumbered, beanten, tried to retreat, whats left . . .

The lawyer will make it clear to William and Larry that any action they take adverse to you WILL result in a civil suit to the university AND the to the individuals involved.

As far as I can tell you did not violate anything in the schools rules as you were off campus, while there is that weasel provision, if the charges get dropped, as they should, I would push the issue. Remeber SUE and ???? happens, complaints only fall on deaf ears.

BTW should have went to W&L

[SUE ROVR]

The depravation of due process was the elimination of an OPEN hearing.

I am sure the reason he did not attend was it was closed, he may have been denied represenation and especailly the hired recorders were denied access.

I have been in some of these hearings as an advocate and I will tell you they are designed to screw the student.

Stop screwing around and file suit.

Push to get the charges dropped. Self defense is a defense to brandishing and discharge and on the facts it seems pretty clear it applies.

[tyme]

Look at the bright side. Nobody got killed or seriously injured, and you're not facing serious charges like aggravated assault or some variety of homicide.

I've seen the results of college (and highschool, for that matter) disciplinary hearings. They are a joke. I've never seen a private college apply its disciplinary procedures fairly for anything other than typical problems like underage drinking. I'm sure colleges manage to dispense justice occassionally, but all the instances I've seen have been unjust. You have to treat a college as a creature. It's concerned that it will be hurt from bad publicity or perhaps even lawsuits if it doesn't do something to punish you. Consider working from that frame of mind. I believe it's the only way to convince a college of anything.

Even if you can do something about that hearing, it may not be resolved quickly. I'm sure you're focusing on the criminal charges, and you should be.

Good luck. Keep a positive attitude.

[Andrew Rothman]

As far as I can tell you did not violate anything in the schools rules as you were off campus,

I think, Sue, that you missed the part where James entered the campus and left his autopistol in a garbage can in a lavatory.