Assault
Article Misleading
To
the Editors:
I write in response to Zachary Pretzers article, Sexual
Assault Charges Dismissed, published in The Oberlin Review
of Nov. 2, I fail to understand why the Review staff chose to assign
one of their sports editors to write an article of this nature,
one that has no connection to sports whatsoever. In addition, the
coverage of last weeks trial was incomplete, in that it included
almost no discussion of the Oberlin College sexual offense policy.
For instance, the last sentence of Pretzers article stated
that the defendants are currently awaiting reinstatement, and that
how quickly they can return to campus depends on the manner
in which the administration handles the issue. While this
is technically true, it is also misleading; it gives the impression
that their reinstatement is somehow inevitable, involving a mere
shuffling of papers. This is not the case. The College sexual offense
policy outlines a process of investigation and disciplinary action
that is completely separate from the criminal proceedings in Oberlin
Municipal Court. The possible reinstatement of Mr. Eremic and Mr.
Tomasevic, by no means guaranteed, is not affected by the ruling
in last weeks court. Rather, it depends on the outcome of
the independent investigation conducted by the College. While it
is true that the article was focused on the court proceedings, a
thorough discussion of the College policy is critical to fully understanding
the issue. The court proceedings may be over, but the College investigation
is not. This issue is by no means resolved, and without including
the full story, the Review does a disservice to the Oberlin Community.
Michelle Sharkey
College sophomore
|