Student Suspended over Crude Video
Posted on 22. Oct, 2009 by Peter Katz in Campus
The following information is an account based on a phone interview with Robert Curnutte at 12:53pm on Thursday, 22 October 2009. All facts and opinions expressed – aside from the general, official statements made by the administration – are based on information from Curnutte’s perspective. All administration is bound by FERPA confidentiality, and must therefore officially decline to comment or acknowledge any case.
For intramurals, Robert Curnutte (sophomore) and his teammates named their team “Triple Thick Protein Shake.” According to Curnutte, when Coach Bob Paulson was in the process of examining the appropriateness of the teams’ names, he came across a video Curnutte had made in his Newton dorm room last year. In the video – which has been removed from the site – Curnutte talked about a prank involving a high school classmate, a milkshake, and bodily fluid. Curnutte maintains that the actual event never happened, and was merely capitalizing on a rumor that had circulated his senior year of high school.
As Curnutte tells it, Paulson first contacted the team captain, and then called in Curnutte. He allegedly conveyed that he found the video distasteful, and told Curnutte to expect a call from the deans. Curnutte met with the deans, who purportedly questioned him for approximately an hour. “It felt like I was going to get a slap on the wrist,” Curnutte says of the meeting.
Three days later, at 6:00pm, Curnutte says he received a call telling him to report to PUC’s Judicial Committee at 1:00pm the next afternoon. Curnutte reports feeling that “I didn’t have enough time to get an advocate,” and after the meeting, he felt that it would be “useless” to get one for the second, because he felt as though the only remaining question was “what should we do to punish you?”.
Curnutte says that the committee brainstormed punishments, and had him formulate a proposal for possible punishments. He proposed counseling, community service, and Bible studies, in an effort to, as he put it, “seem remorseful and try to come to some sort of conclusion.” At 9:00pm that night, Curnutte says he received an email sent at 7:30pm informing him that he had been suspended, and needed to vacate the premises for three days. According to Curnutte, his father had to “borrow money from my grandparents” to come and retrieve him and take him to their home.
In addition to suspension, Curnutte says that the Judicial Committee is requiring him to talk with the individual about whom the video was made. Curnutte says the individual has “never seen the video,” and does not attend PUC.
Dr. Lisa Bissell Paulson, head of PUC’s Judicial Committee this year, is by law not allowed to comment on any specific case, and officially declined to confirm or deny the existence of any judicial case at this time. She did give this statement: “For any judicial system that we deal with, we prayerfully deliberate and make decisions that are consistent with what we’ve done before, and that we hope will be right for the student and the college’s best interest.”
In the case of any judicial matter, she also directed all inquiries with this statement: “Every student has signed an agreement to abide by the expectations of the college, and that information and the whole process and procedure can be found online the student handbook.” Curnutte maintains that Judicial Committee informed him that he has violated the fourth responsibility in the Student Life Agreement found in the Student Handbook, which reads: “To maintain high standards of taste and decency in conduct, expression and citizenship.”
In addition to a Facebook group, there is circulating on campus a student petition that claims that Curnutte did not receive due process. Student judicial rights are on page 38 and 39 in the Student Handbook.
92 Responses to “Student Suspended over Crude Video”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Cara Tan, as a senator, I can tell you that we have been barred from discussing Free Robb! at student senate. Despite several senators being in support of Free Robb!, we have to maintain a separation between the cause and our senate meetings.
@ Geoffrey Brummett I think it is the responsibility of the President of the college to hold her VP’s accountable and if you have a problem take it through the appropriate channels first.
That being said i agree with the notion that there needs to be clearly defined and written out punishments for violations of PUC’s Student Handbook. Not randomly arbitrary assigned punishments based on ‘prayerful consideration’ especially when as good as all intentions and decisions can be they can ALWAYS be swayed by unconscious bias and as such cannot be enforced accurately or consistantly.
@ Stephanie Ward, That’s possibly the most disturbing thing i have heard of yet. While I can see from the Admin’s side not to comment or discuss things with legal ramifications behind them. It is undermining to the idea of Senate not to allow for an open dialog on any issue that affects student life.
The administrations fear over knowledge/power/discourse on this campus is terrifying. Since the student senate is unable to discuss this cause and this topic on campus, who can?
Looks like its time for a movement “From the ground up” if you catch my drift PUC. I think that is our theme this year yes?
@Timothy Widmer
YES! and it needs to be headed by the Students involved.
@ Erin: Who barred senate from discussing this topic? What would happen if someone has made a bill concerning the judicial committee? I agree that it is not senate’s place to discuss Mr. Curnutte’s actual case. I do think it is senate’s business to discuss bills that are proposed, including those that might revise the student handbook.
@ Tim: If you’re going to drag Foucault into the discussion, you’d better be prepared to explain what he meant by the terms “knowledge” “power” and “discourse” as well as how they relate and the framework in which all people manipulate and use them. I for one cannot say that I fully understand his theory, but I do know that if anything the administration is well versed in exercising all three components. They have presented a united front on this issue, and I don’t think students can say even half as much.
I’ve always wished that senate had more influence did. It seems to me that they’ve never been given the freedom to actually represent the students. For example…. being told what they can or cannot discuss…
@Cara: the administration is not as united on this subject as you might be led to believe. The organized are to be respected and we are becoming more and more organized by the hour. I appreciate your neutrality and a lot of what you say has merit but please don’t believe that we going to go about this in a rash manner. We will go by the rules and act accordingly.
@Cara I cant say that i know the full theory either, but from what i have studied its representation in literature and in the constructed forms of narrative, and especially in theater…
To explain it on here, would take more time an capacity than I have at this current moment, but everybody is capable of a little googling to get the basic concept, we are college students after all. VERY BASICLY: Those in power control the knowledge therefore the discourse. In most situations: those with the power are afraid of loosing it, and so they attempt to control the knowledge and discourse about the issues.
Those without power. (ie the students) will try to gain power and manipulate it by informing themselves with knowledge and with attacking with discourse. So yes, both sides do use and manipulate them.
The Silence on this campus and refusal to open discourse frightening And the refusal to allow discourse to open up in Student Senate (A group which is supposed to discuss the things that the students care about and feel strongly about to improve the lives of students on campus.) seems to me to fit this bill. I see fear right now at PUC on both sides of the coin and whatever you believe. This fear is not conducive to higher education and learning and teaching.
I do not think the concept of knowledge/power/discourse is a bad thing. But if it is used to commit injustice and then try to cover it up, it can be used for ill
(I hope that brief explanation can help to move the conversation forward. I agree that that administration is well versed in exercising all three components, but they ahve not given a united front. There are a lot of faculty that are supportive of Robb.
I would not begin to propose that I understand the full ENTIRE theory, its a huge concept, but I think that just understanding a little bit of it can be eye opening in this situation.)
@ JP: I’m glad you plan on acting in a well thought out and planned manner, however, you are not the only voice. I just want to challenge the students to maintain integrity in their conversations and not to talk about uncertainties as if they are facts. Using language and evidence that are completely understood by all parties is important, as it will force the administration to realize that the students are serious and not simply jumping on an emotional bandwagon. I hope that the students DO join together and support a rational plan of action towards change.
In my defense, I never said that the faculty were united with the administration on this issue. It is my experience that many of the faculty do not even agree with each other, let alone with the administration. I am not currently at PUC, so I cannot say what actual response the administration has given. From what I know nothing has been said that cannot be made officially public, and no member of the administration has come out against the judicial committee. This seems pretty united to me.
@ Tim: Thanks for the input. I always understood power as a sort of backdrop that is manipulated and used by all people, although I don’t know if even that definition is as ephemeral as Mukerji’s explanation. I don’t know if anyone can state things as ephemerally as she can. =D
Of course it was crude, and maybe it wasn’t a good team name, but being suspended for such goofy, age-appropriate behavior is senseless. The college should seek to develop students as best they can, not demand some purity standards for them to be admitted.
I do not usually get involved in these types of things. Even as I begin to write, a small voice says don’t do it. However, after reading most of the posts, stewing for quite some time, and after a good half-hour on the treadmill, I still cannot shake the feed-up feeling I have with the whole attitude displayed in this discussion.
I do not know Robert. I also do not serve on the disciplinary committee, and so really have no vested interest in either of these parties. On the other hand I do feel that if the people posting on this story really want to see a change on this campus then the only people they can change is themselves. You want a better system of justice then come up with one that is truly just and stop all your whining about how unfair life is. You want to be treated like adults and leave high school behind? Then stop acting like you’re still in high school where you feel you have the right to come in leave your crap all over the place, eat food you have not prepared and leave the house for some party where you are going to do things the significant adults in your life would not approve of.
From the posts it seems most people feel that the disciplinary committee overstepped their bounds and were so very harsh and unfair to Robert. If that is your feeling then you are welcome to it. I feel you are absolutely correct PUC can do better and if you want a part in that process then you had better start standing with your administration and working with them rather than throwing out these little temper tantrums and little digs on the people that were letting Robert know that his behavior was unacceptable.
If you want justice then why are most of the comments so one-sidedly related to how unfair this was to Robert? Why do I not see anyone crying out for justice for the person that this video makes the butt of an ugly joke? You want to free Robert, so do I? I want to free him so that he can go personally, and sincerely apologize to the person he publicly humiliated with this video.
Most seem to think this was some harmless little joke. Even Robert does not seem to be sorry he did it. According to the CC story, “Curnutte says that the committee brainstormed punishments, and had him formulate a proposal for possible punishments. He proposed counseling, community service, and Bible studies, in an effort to, as he put it, “seem remorseful and try to come to some sort of conclusion.” This seems to show to me that he has no idea that the person that he made a laughing stock has any human dignity that he should be concerned about.
The majority of posters to this story also seem to have no concern for the person that was the victim of this prank. Some even seem to think that because the person is not a part of our campus there was nothing to be viewed as out of line. So we only protect those that are on our campus?
I was not there so I do not know from first hand account, but I feel this is what the disciplinary committee tried to do, protect the dignity of a person that was publicly ridiculed. In addition, they tried to impress Robert with the idea that making harmful remarks in jest of another person is not what we want on this campus. In so doing they were trying, as I see it to protect each one of us that are on this campus.
What if you were the person that allegedly had this prank pulled on you and your friends concluded that this was true? How would you feel if it were you that was the one that was humiliated? How do you know that this person has not been the butt of people’s jokes all his life and this is just one more case of being mistreated by thoughtlessness? Even if this was the one and only act of emotional violence, does it make it all right? These things are always funny when it is someone else.
High school for many people is a pond of piranha and at this first sign of blood everyone takes a little bit. You know what I am saying is true because we have all seen it. It seems to me that almost everyone that has posted here were the people on the top of the food chain because thus far it appears everyone is for the jock that made the joke. You know PUC, this is the high school scene that really needs to be left behind and these posts scream to me that it is alive and well. No one on this campus should be made the butt of these kinds of jokes and feel that a vocal group will call for the perpetrator to be free, elevated to celebrity status on campus by the CC. Shame on us all if this is the only progress this little diatribe gets moving on this campus.
Do not get me wrong Robert probably is a good guy. I am not trying to say anything other than what most of you have said, “He made a mistake”. This does not mean that we as a community let it go without comment and further use it to vent our anger over life’s unfairness on the people that are perceived to hold all the power. Which is was this seems to have turned into.
Many seem to think that suspension is unfair and over used. That this was an extremely harsh punishment, taking away an education that is paid for. All I can say is, then why is it that every day so many students skip classes that they paid for? It cannot be both ways; either this is a horrible loss and detriment to ones education, or it is something that happens on a daily basis that a lot of students do not take that seriously. The people posting may have a point, that this is an ineffective punishment because so many students take missing classes so lightly. If this is an overused, unfair practice then find a constructive way to work with the administration to find an effective way to educated people to behave better.
So far most of what I have read is tantamount to throwing stones at the good Samaritan because he defended the dignity of another person. We walk by as the priest and condemn the Samaritan because in this case one of the robbers was chased off and may have sustained a bruise. Thus far I am not seeing any call for justice for the injured man lying in the street. When it is you or I that shows up on You-tube as the fall guy will there be any call for our assistance or just insistence that the filmmakers not be reprimanded too harshly?
What would be a wonderful change resulting from these postings is that on this campus every person would take it upon themselves to protect the dignity of every other person. Not just the people of this community but everyone that they come in contact with. This may require you to stand up like the judicial committee did and confront others letting them know that on this campus treating people like this video did is not acceptable. When this becomes the culture on campus perhaps we will have seen the end of suspensions for making fun of others.
Another thread that seems to run through this is people drink on this campus, people have sex on this campus, people do so many things on this campus and only a few get caught or those that get into trouble are not the ones that should have gotten in trouble. Do you really thing that there is no consequences for those that do not get called before the judicial committee?
My bath-mate in college started drinking because another friend introduced him to having a relaxing drink after an exam. He seems to have been one of those that is instantly addicted to alcohol. The big bad administration never caught him. Last I had heard alcohol had destroyed his marriage and family. I can only hope that he finally realized that he needed to live without the alcohol in his life. I have wished that I had had the courage to turn him in to the administration in an effort to prevent what happened to him later. We all say this will never happen to us and there are just enough people who seem to do just fine that we are able to convince ourselves that we will be the ones that never have problems. We then go out and roll the dice. Perhaps if PUC was like the last place I worked and every weekend students were arrested, injured and sexually assaulted because of alcohol that would be enough to educate us to take advantage of the Adventist advantage and not complain that we are not free.
You want to talk about sex, many even want to have sex, some have sex. How many of us have abortions? How many have STDs? Again we all say this will never happen to me after all I have the almighty condom. Out we go to roll the dice. The last place I worked I presented at a talk in the dorm where condoms were handed out. Brightly colored, like party favors they gave the sense of invincibility. A baby was found in a dumpster. Several women were raped on campus. Perhaps if PUC had stories like this it would be enough to educate us to take advantage of the Adventist advantage and not complain that we are not free.
The judicial committee cannot change what choices you make, the administration is not following you around forcing you to make the choices they want you to, and the faculty do not determine the choices you make. For heaven’s sake even God does not control the choices you make. You are free. However, all of the above will try to influence our community to act like what it says it is, a Christian community.
It is in all of our hands to build this community from the ground up so that all of us are safe from ridicule, to have our dignity defended, to be free from alcohol influenced behavior and not to be used for the sexual gratification of selfish purposes. If this is not what you want then this is one faculty member that is not worried about losing your tuition in his salary. Better to be poor and alive than hit dead in the road by a drunk student flashing the finger at another student after having sex with a girl he didn’t really like all that much.
I think Duncan makes some good points. But we are not condoning what Robb did, at least I never have done so.
We should stand up for the injustice of everybody not just Robb, however Robb is something we can do, here and now. We can work to try to fix the system.
I wholeheartedly agree with you that there are some students who skip classes and to them attending the classes they pay so much for may not be a big deal. So for them the punishment is even less of a reformation tool. If we are concerned about stopping the problem before the the drinking destroys their life, the chances are they wont care about being suspended anyway. But some of us never would miss a class. The only reason I have ever missed classes is because of a conflict with Theater (my career choice) or because i never heard my alarm go off. Even if I feel under the weather, its good to be in class. And this is where the argument about principles of punishment comes in for me. I do hope that the school can find better, more productive ways to punish people who err. I think community service is always a thing.
I would be more than happy to work with an administration who had these kinds of goals instead of the goals that are in place right now. I do not see that from the current attitude, and i don’t see any desire to talk about it from the administration. Faculty and other students are proposing that the administration will listen and be open to bettering the system, and I truly hope they will. At the moment, I’m still optimistic.
I think Duncan makes some good points. But we are not condoning what Robb did, at least I never have done so.
We should stand up for the injustice of everybody not just Robb, however Robb is something we can do, here and now. We can work to try to fix the system.
I wholeheartedly agree with you that there are some students who skip classes and to them attending the classes they pay so much for may not be a big deal. So for them the punishment is even less of a reformation tool. If we are concerned about stopping the problem before the the drinking destroys their life, the chances are they wont care about being suspended anyway. But some of us never would miss a class. The only reason I have ever missed classes is because of a conflict with Theater (my career choice) or because i never heard my alarm go off. Even if I feel under the weather, its good to be in class. And this is where the argument about principles of punishment comes in for me. I do hope that the school can find better, more productive ways to punish people who err. I think community service is always a thing.
I would be more than happy to work with an administration who had these kinds of goals instead of the goals that are in place right now. I do not see that from the current attitude, and i don’t see any desire to talk about it from the administration. Faculty and other students are proposing that the administration will listen and be open to bettering the system, and I truly hope they will. At the moment, I’m still optimistic.
Wow…. Um, yeah I know what I do was wrong and trust me I am remorseful about it. I honestly thought me telling them what punishments I should have is ridiculous because I have to do all that and get suspended? Then I had to put my dad through a lot by coming to get me. My grandpa had to get Money from his savings for taxes and my dad is still trying to get money together to bring me back . This wasn’t to my family especially because I had 24 hrs notice. As for the guy I made fun of, u should hear some of the things he said to me in high school. But yeah I’m going to apologize and he’s not going to care. He hasn’t even seen the video. He won’t be mad. I know this was a crude joke and I am sorry. I just dont want people basing my character on a “serious” joke. You can ask anyone who knows me and they will defend my character. Thanks everybody for your input and support. I don’t feel like I’m innocent but I feel like I was made an example of. The day I left there was no one around for me and my dad to talk to. I was going to make it based on his Conversation but there was no one to be found. I didnt wanna make my dad wait around forever either. As for a written statement for my suspension i got it in an email after I was long gone from school. I don’t know if I should be writig all this but whatever.
I meant I was going to make an appeal based on y dads conversation with someone but I couldnt find anybody
ah. I’m glad you posted Dr. Duncan. Finally some other thoughts.
You seem to be addressing a group of people that may not be the main contributors to this thread when you mention high school minded college students, class skippers, and partakers of drugs, sex, and alcohol. So on that note, sure. I agree with you that many folks are jumping the gun on blasting the admin without surveying their own level of maturity.
I would go ahead and say that many, if not most of the people in the “FREE ROBB” campaign draw their passion from their simple inner adolescent desire to “stickittotheman!!.” I can definitely see that this is the source of most of your frustration with the student response. But for many of us, our opinions of the situation have to do with our best wishes for PUC and adventist education as a whole (one of the biggest blessings of my life for sure).
I will also put my self out there in the heat of current PUC students and say that I do not feel that Bob Paulsen is an antagonist in this tale of student rights. Since I have not seen the video myself, I would not go as far as calling him a “good samaritan,” but from what I understand, he did something that probably should have been done. If I were in his shoes and saw something of that nature that was a horrendous infraction of a person’s rights, I would go ahead and chat with the person and tell him that though it may not be my business, nor may it be true, that it was disgusting and I would bring it to the attention of someone whos business it was. Give or take, it sounds like Bob did that.
Also, I did mention the obscurity in the role of PUC as the sole disciplinarian for something that was done to a non-student by a student that was not enrolled at the time. I’m not really informed about how the committee worked with other entities- but if it were me, I would have both families and the previous high school involved for sure. How about you? If the victim simply stated that this is not a true story and said that he is in fact friends with Robb, I’d say that a conversation about posting stuff online and the whole “don’t be an idiot” talk would have sufficed. If the kid(victim) had no idea of the joke, felt violated and wanted justice, I would say that he is entitled to it, and would want to work together with all parties to reach a solid conclusion.
From the side of PUC, the point of the matter should be simple (in my simple mind at least). The attitude should be this, “We produce quality students, and when students step out of line (or in this case, stepped out of line previously), we will help his/her heart get back in line with that of Christ. If you don’t like it, go to a school that doesn’t care about your personal growth.” (btw PUC admin, if you see this, yes, you can copy and paste it into the handbook). Tho some of the mob mentality folks may disagree, I feel that PUC admin/faculty certainly have this intention for all students. Do you feel that this was done by the punishment given?
And as far as the sincerity of Robb goes, I’m not comfortable making a judgement on the degree of his sincerity. Either way, if anyone were in a situation that they were indeed remorseful about, wouldn’t it be appropriate to desire to make the feelings of remorse apparent to the ones who have the power to hand out the judgement? Regardless, does it really make a difference? Nobody can draw a sincere apology from another by simple punishment (even suspension!), but only by bringing to light the results of their actions, in this case, the dignity of another person. Now what if the person persists and is clear on his/her refusal to be remorseful? Well, if the school has no interest in schooling such a sociopath, they certainly have the right to expel. The victim certainly has the right to work with all parties to seek justice. However, I am inclined to believe that in this case, some heart felt talking and perhaps some counseling would have done the job in correcting Robb’s disrespect for others (if it turns out that he did in fact do the grotesque act that was alluded to in the video).
So here is where my frustration is placed: the genuine intention of PUC policy/admin, and their choice of their use of suspension as a corrective act, do NOT add up. I agree that Adventist education is not about being “free” like state institutions may be, but it is about having an environment where Adventist values may be indoctrinated into the students. But I also believe in the desire of Adventist education to effectively help those off track.
I feel that this is an extremely important case where the effects will be lasting and eventually widespread (directly or indirectly). I completely understand your feelings that this is mostly a dumb, passionate wave of desire for student freedom, it seems to me that some very serious questions are being forced to be asked by the situation.
Dr. Duncan, I realize that I am bringing up points that you didn’t really address in your entry, since much of it had to do with your frustration at the hasty response of may students. But I would certainly like to hear your thoughts. And I hope that other faculty have the courage to write on here as well. (and that those who are passionate about this case really intelligently analyze the situation)
Well, I have more to say on the matter, especially on the involvement of the other 2 fine gentlemen that are PUC students. But due to my tiredness, my fade of proper grammar as the morning draws near, and the fact that I’m going to church tomorrow, I’ll end here and eagerly wait for the responses that your (Dr Duncan) and my responses provoke!
And I must say, this is quite the the nice break of the usual and recent stuff that I’ve been working to cram in my brain and toss around.
@Dr. Duncan: I sincerely appreciate your thoughts on this matter and I would encourage you to join the Facebook group FREE ROBB! if you have not done so already. I agree with you on many points but I can not say that you are aware of all the facts. One, Robb has told the judiciary committee that when the joke originally came out (high school) Robb talked within days with the individual who was the “butt” of the joke. The individual asked if it was true and Robb denied it vehemently saying that the whole thing was a joke overblown. The joke was crude and in poor taste and as one of his best friends I can speak for the rest of us in that we were not light on him for even suggesting something like that. But the individual has known for a long time that it simply a tasteless joke.
Also, please believe me when I say that there will be no rashness in anything that we will do in appealing and protesting this matter. We are thinking very deeply on every decision we make and while we appreciate the energy and enthusiasm shown by PUC students we will act as the mature adults that we are.
I am not sure that you aware of the situation of [other students involved]. They are being punished for simply being in the same room and laughing while the joke was being told. Granted it was on [one of the student's] computer. They are now being punished and have this unfortunate incident on there records which may be detrimental to their chances at med school.
As I stated earlier I sincerely appreciate your thoughts and on the whole I can honestly say that I agree with you. But as a current student of PUC all I ask from the judiciary is to give fair and CONSISTENT punishment when wrong happens. I am not against Robb being put through counseling but his entire punishment is nothing short of ridiculous. The judiciary did not follow due process in giving Robb a written statement as to why he was being punished as well as ignored his request to meet them with his father. I would love to hear more from you.
Sincerely with much respect,
JP
[Edited by C2 staff for privacy]
Dr. Duncan, honestly most of the people in the free robb group don’t even know him. As someone who is friends with him, and friends with those who went to high school with him, I can say that those of us who started the group, and were in the know since the beginning only think that those in the judiciary committee went to far with their choice of punishment, not that he didn’t deserve any at all. To be suspended from campus would only foster a feeling of resentment towards those who decided on the punishment, and only hurt him in the long run. We are not trying to break down the administration, but to change the way that it operates. The judiciary committee sets rules, yet it did not follow the due process. They denied him the right of an appeal, and written statement of why he was suspended. Also they gave him less than 24 hours notice to leave campus. Yes, he deserved punishment, but did he deserve it to the extent that the judiciary committee decided upon? Also, is it ok to punish 2 pre med students just for being in the room/laughing at a story, by placing this black mark on their med school apps. My room mate is one of the pre med students being punished, and the other was my fusion leader last year and good friend. The judiciary committee is around to protect the rights of students by giving them a fair trial to decide upon punishment, rather than to have one all powerful administrator decide upon punishment, yet in this case, it seems that it has only hurt the students involved.
We are only asking for the committee to look at the situation again, and consider that they over reacted with the punishment.
Respectfully,
Jordan
[Edited by the C2 staff for privacy]
How many of the voices above actually know what happened in the video? If you do know, then talk about specifics. Otherwise stop making rumors of what did or did not happen in the video.
One thing to point out about this, beyond the issue of how wrong it was, is to realize that this is a contractual issue. PUC must abide by its side of this unilateral contract, otherwise bindings cannot be held firm. Students step into this contract upon entrance to this school and in doing so have contractual duties and obligations to conform to as does the school and this binds all of its faculty and staff.
In response to Dr. Duncan’s argument. Dr. Duncan, first of all please know that this response is in the utmost respect; however, none of your arguments pertain to anything about the core purpose of the Free Robb! group.
We as a core group believe that the judiciary committee went too far in their punishing Robb. Additionally, I personally do not believe that PUC has the right to regulate an act that did not take place on this campus; nor did it take place while Robb was enrolled in this institution. Regardless, you claim that we are whining about having an unjust system of regulation. I respectfully would like to propose that this argument holds no water. Dr. Duncan, you claim we should all grow up and consequently, “play grown up.” If by this you mean we should cease and desist all “whining,” you are in effect attempting to strip our 1st amendment rights as adults and as citizens of America.
One of the great things about America is that we have the right to complain about authority. Granted, one would have to be an extremist to argue for the sole purpose of “fighting the machine.” This is not the stance taken up by the Free Robb! group. We as a collective see an injustice in this particular sentence, and not in the process of going through the judiciary committee.
In short, the group only desires to see a consistent standard from which to judge and carry out sentencing on a student. This argument, although may seem counter-intuitive, not only is attempting to help Robb but is also meant for all students who may potentially fall subject to this kind of inconsistency.
Lastly, you said, “You want to be treated like adults and leave high school behind? Then stop acting like you’re still in high school where you feel you have the right to come in leave your crap all over the place, eat food you have not prepared and leave the house for some party where you are going to do things the significant adults in your life would not approve of.” Again, I honestly mean this with the utmost respect for you, and it is not my purpose to insult you. However, I truthfully have absolutely no idea what this has to do with anything.
Albeit, I do understand and can relate to the first sentence of this quote, I do not know the intent of the rest of it. You truly believe that we are acting like this is high school? I am curious to know how else you propose to go about handling this situation. You say are not arguing for either side, but it does not seem to me as though you have looked through the eyes of the defendant. How much more civil, or mature, could a peaceful protest be? We signed a petition; is this not an action that is taken up by “mature adults?” We made a facebook account for this group and monitor it regularly for obscenities, profanity and any other offensive material; is this an immature act? Are we really whining? Are we really emulating a high school attitude? I respectfully disagree. If this was high school, there would be much more tears, tantrums, and vandalism. You can not truthfully tell me that you have not ever said to yourself that “life is not fair.” You would be a liar and a coward to make this claim.
I end with this… I mean not to accuse the judiciary committee or any of the members, but as Edmund Burke said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing.”
As far as my last comment goes, I meant to say “I mean not to accuse the judiciary committee or any of the members of being evil…”
I have personaly known Rob off and on for the last 7 years. While legitmatly watching him come to age and grow from a child to a young man. I can honestly say truthfully and honestly, that while he did indeed make a mistake previously. I can’t understand why he is being punished in the now. I do agree that he needs to be assigned some sort of communtity service as to reinforce that his behavior wasn’t Christ like. As well as made to appolgise for his previous miss givings. Being a follower of the lord myself. I do understand the importance of making a person grow spirtutaly as well as educationaly. It is time Rob comes to understand that his action represent more than just himself but the body of christ (the church) as a whole.
Simply put, I would never judge a campus on the acts of it’s students from there past. As we are all Christains and are to forgive as we have all fallen short of the glory of God. An Example must be made in both parties. One that the campus is here to promote growth and that past misgivings are to be corrected. As well as by Rob to show that he is truly on this path to purse his life after the Lord. There must be a conclusion that is Christ like for all of those involved. As it is now I don’t feel that the commity is following the spirit in this situation and should do some soul searching of there own. As well ROB, You too should start searching and do as God would have you do as Christ would want you to do in this situation.
I understand that I am not a member of the campus, and that my opinion will probably be null and void however, I will be praying for all parties invovled in this matter that it’s God’s will that will be done and not that of men.
Wilbur F. Duncan III
number1huskerfan@hotmail.com
Not being on campus anymore this doesn’t have the same effect on my life as you students who are currently at PUC, but at the same time, having been a part of PUC before I can’t help but feel that what is happening is very wrong (based on what I have read and not knowing all of the facts) and it makes me embarrassed to have invested so much into PUC and then have something happen like what is happening to Robb. I do not know Robb, but I support him and you other students who feel strongly about this and I want to help show the administration that what they did seems very wrong. If I was the guy that the video was about I would be much better off not knowing at all… I think that people should talk more about this as well… is PUC doing this other person any good by making sure that he knows that some of his classmates may have played a disgusting prank on him? How would that make someone feel true or not? Is Robb being punished for talking about something that may have happened while he was in highschool??? I hope that you (students and staff/faculty) are all successful with this whole situation. One word of advice from someone who has gone through the grievance process at PUC before… go through the proper channels because if it gets out of hand then PUC will not listen… but it sounds like you are all doing a great job already. Good luck Robb!
Has everyone forgotten the original issue which subsequently required attention from the Judiciary Committee? It wasn’t the video, it was the inappropriate team name, appropriately addressed by Coach Paulson…
For starters, there are two sides to every story. Unfortunately, the ignorant public has only heard one side. While the Judiciary Committee remains mutely bound, Curnutte has been able to plead juvenile innocence of an act from high school? His choice of a team name is certainly indicative of how much he’s matured since attending college…
Curnutte, poor grandpa and poor dad, but, you made your bed, now lie in it… Your grandfather was put out financially and your father was involved because of your shortsightedness and your actions, not because of the actions of a committee. Accept responsibility and show the public that you are making genuine gestures.
Your team name was inappropriate, regardless; especially in light of your “oops” history in high school…
Your advantage in this situation is due to a mute Judiciary Committee, who remains silent, and though I’m certain wishes to comment, cannot.
Dr. Duncan, thank you for articulating sentiments I also share as a PUC student.
Administration, thank you for honoring FERPA.
Curnutte, you should be sorry your sorry choice of a team name resulted in more than a simple slap on the wrist, including the involvement of two other decent and intelligent students…
Widmer, not all in life is drama and theater.
‘Nuff said.
@”What?!?”
Thanks for you opinion. But its just that. My opinion is my opinion too, but I have a right to share it just the same as you. I think there has been injustice committed. I’m sorry if you don’t feel that way and you disagree.
However, Next time personally attack Mr Curnutte and myself, at least please have the decency to post your name instead of an anonymous name “What?!?!”
Thanks!
Big man throwing around all them words without leaving your name
Thanks so much Dr. Duncan for your input. As an alumnus I find myself in a strange position – 1) I do not feel that the judicial committee was in any way at fault for their decisions concerning Robb, 2) I do feel that certain policies need revision, 3) as I am no longer on campus, I question my grounds for pushing for change. I agree that many of the comments on this board have resulted more from venting than any semblance of rational thought, and I also agree that if students are so passionate they need to stand up and work with the administration. Unfortunately, because I am no longer at PUC I cannot participate in this action, but I do feel it is my duty as an alumnus to the current students and the administration to support positive growth.
As I stated previously, I do not think the judicial committee was in any way out of bounds or acting against the current contracts. Because of this, I believe that the students are far too focused on the particular case at hand, and not thinking about the big picture. Every month many students are brought before the judicial committee, Robb’s case is not a new thing. If anything, this has become a mountain out of a mole-hill.
I do believe, however that this could be an opportunity for the school to grow. It appears that the contracts that the judicial committee are upholding could use some revision and clarification. Personally, I would love to see the students acting together with the administration to revise the student handbook so that punishments are both clearly laid out and “fit the crime.” So although I am not currently at PUC, I have been using this forum and the Free Robb page on facebook to encourage a positive and rational reaction, hopefully leading to some good discussion between students and administration.
I had so many thoughts come to mind as this is becoming such an issue at PUC. I find it absolutely embarrassing that at a liberal arts college in CA the students voices have been silenced. This is only going to create more problems than there already having been concerning this issue. I myself do know Robert, and know that he made a mistake, but is far from deserving being barred from PUC for something he did before he was ever a student up here.
Bob Paulson needs to back off. Quite frankly, he’s lucky Robert isn’t a little more well to do and hasn’t hired a decent attorney. At the very least, his attempts at doing this for the right reasons is an embarrassment for the student body. Instead of handling an issue quietly and appropriately, Bob Paulson has a lot of very disappointed PUC students, not a very bright way of delegating. We can all see what is going on here, and how inappropriately the situation is being handled by administration. I do not condone Rob, but do see the injustice that is happening here. Voices are being silenced, and this needs to stop, now. As a student of PUC who has grown over time to love this place despite it’s many quarks, I am incredibly disappointed with Bob Paulson a P.E. teacher who thinks he runs the school, because of what?, his seniority. His actions of attacking Rob are pathetic, and quite frankly make me sick.
I urge you, fellow students of PUC, let not your voices be silenced any longer. They can change your routines, modify your habits, and tell you what is right, but they will never change your minds, or your hearts. Stand up for your fellow brother, a fellow student, and stand up to this idiocracy.
It does not take a majority to prevail… but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.
@What?!?!
You don’t know any of the facts, and your comment only hurts the other side of argument due to its ignorance. Also, don’t hide behind anonymity. It wasn’t the team name that caused a judiciary hearing to take place. If that was the case, then how come last year’s “R KELLY’S GOLDEN SHOWERS” didn’t get called in, or “MICHAEL VICK’S DOGHOUSE”.
Truth, regardless of what face and name are put to it, are irrefutable and having them, is a moot point.
Widmer: you are indeed correct, opinion is opinion, no argument there.
Higa: what facts are you informed of? My arguments are ignorant? I have yet to hear Curnutte say, yes, it was my actions that caused my father and grandfather to be put out, not the actions of the Judiciary Committee. Ownership. Heard of it? Curnutte’s one sided view isn’t biased? You guys want due process and equal opportunity, yet, you are choosing a forum which only represents the rants and raves of one of the parties involved? That’s certainly equitable… Have you heard both sides? The team name was the trigger and catalyst. If that name was not chosen in the first place, no further action (presumably) would have been taken… So, because Curnutte was held accountable, are you wanting action to be sought for the two other team names last year? Or, are you saying, “Look, they got away with it, so Curnutte should as well?” Only a single plaintiff in this current issue, last year’s two are irrelevant. You’re going to tell a police officer that pulled you over for speeding that the 10 cars in front of you who were speeding as well got away with it, thus, you should as well? Give me a break…
Curnutte: I can see you’re the bigger man for choosing to perpetuate your alleged innocence by making the assumption I am a man. Secondly, seek a path of genuine remorse and take this incident as a learning lesson. If due process was not granted, utilize the system in place through the Student Senate and appeals to seek attention for the issue. Don’t make this personal. It’s not all about you. You chose to come to PUC. You chose to adhere and respect the policies and procedures and bylaws of PUC. You play, you pay. Curnutte, if you were so remorseful and wanted a bible study or prayer, why don’t you seek those same routes to seek justice instead of a mob-ish mentality approach. Also, think about your two peers who should be “freed” versus “free Robb.”
Last but not least, why do some of the student body feel like they are being silenced? Did a faculty member, staff or administration ask you to withdraw your comments, ask you to not comment? Please don’t confuse your perception as reality.
I have yet to see in this forum alone, evidence of any silence demanded upon the student body.
Yes, I have not published my name. I will immediately, once the system of posting comments is a process requires a verification process, so all will see who the true face behind the name.
Spend the same amount of time and diligence expended on this forum as in your studies, you’ll be amazed as the results…
The truth never needs defending. It is only the guilty or untruth who shall forever proclaim their innocence.
Address your pious comments or whatever, but this is the last time I will comment on this issue. Not for the sake of the lack of an argument, but to not further embroil an issue which has gotten way out of hand and has evidently lost its perspective.
Last comment, instead of creative team names, why not simply denote the teams by alpha or numeric characters, like Teams A, B, C or 1, 2, 3.
You want to hold off judgment until the whole story can be revealed? Yet, you pronounce judgment about What?!? being disrespectful about speaking his/her opinion? I think What?!? was trying to show that this forum so far has been one sided… Their diatribes have not been addressed in anyway, shape or form by the members of the Judiciary Committee, nor have they been asked to shut up by faculty/staff/administrators in this forum…
Please, if you want to hold off judgment, don’t be subjective by picking and choosing the one that’s more convenient, which is shameful.
The case of Robb is singular incident that is exploding and wraught with emotions. I think the Judiciary Committee has no choice but to address each situation they face on a case by case basis in terms of meting out consequences. I also don’t really see why Coach Paulson is being blamed… He reported conduct which occurred in the dorms (on campus) to the Deans. Quite a propos. Is it the Deans, who took the next step to take this matter to the Judiciary Committee?
I find it interesting that Curnutte was not bound by a gag rule, as applicable to the judiciary committee… Or, if he was, he voluntarily chose to break it. Whatever the case, perhaps the judiciary committee should consider gag rules in the future, or video recorded sessions to protect themselves from further allegations of slander, misconduct or otherwise.
Wonder how many hits this article has had thus far? Glad the readership of C2 is apparent by the comments, but not thrilled about the comments posted.
Next stirring topic?
@whoo hoo
Next stirring topic?, really?, nice attempt at practicing avoidance. Even if this issue becomes closed online, and this article is blocked from having comments it doesn’t change the fact that you have a lot of realy pissed off people wanting simply to state what is on their minds. This is something however we are being denied of here at PUC. This issue is being handled at PUC in a near fascist way, and this needs to stop. Open student discussion on campus is necessary.
Concerning gag rules, those will only cause bodies of people to rise up to the injustice even harder, don’t believe it?,just wait, this issue is far from over.
If all of our secrets were revealed about things we did before we came to PUC, Ellen White would roll over in her grave, but it’s just unfortunate that Robb’s is online.
My own experiences with the Judiciary Committee has left me with a deep understanding of the philosophy and thinking that is involved when they make a decision. The biggest thing that I have learned is that the punishment never fits the crime. To punish a student by suspending them does not accomplish anything. Each time I was suspended my thought process, actions, or character were not changed.
If the committee really wanted to make a difference in lives they should punish/help a student in a manner that is befitting of an Adventist school. The person who is in meeting with committee should be allowed to stay in school, unless it was an academic infraction. Otherwise they are punishing a student academically for nothing academic. Instead they should work with the student to instruct and mentor the student in a manner that will be change to the undesired behavior. Just like jail does not usually change a criminal, a suspension hardly stands a chance to truly change a student. It might make them more carefully or smarter about how to circumvent detection, but I have never heard of someone changing because of their suspension and I know plenty of people who have been suspended.
It is to the shame of PUC and the Adventist principles they try to represent by suspending students for non-academic infractions.
Opportunity to speak, PUC!
WASC – All Student Invitational
Start Date/Time: October 27, 2009 5:00pm
Location: Dining Commons Side Room
When an institution, such as a college, takes an action like suspending students, it stirs up a lot of feelings and thoughts. Perhaps, in a way, it is a good thing that thoughts and feelings are stirred, even though it is messy.
Christian education is a precious thing.
Christian community is, perhaps, even more precious. In reality we humans need each other more than we realize. Especially in American culture we emphasize the individual out of proportion to our emphasis of community. Sometimes we forget about the things that are most important.
“I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.” from Ephesians 4:1-3.
I remember vividly when I was a PUC student. I was premed and inordinately worried about getting accepted into medical school. As it looks to me now, I was way too worried about it. As it happened, somehow I did get accepted into medical school, and even graduated from there, with the degree I hoped for.
From my perspecitive now, I can say that a person (or persons) COULD possibly get into medical school, even after having been suspended as an undergraduate. If the person started living in a very positive manner, and worked hard, did well on the MCAT and demonstrated a lot of pluck and desire to serve the community as a medical practitioner, it could definitely happen. Sometimes the things that seem the worst turn out to be helpful. Getting suspended, could, help a person rethink his priorities and start walking in a better direction.
To the students who feel that they were left out of the process of decision making regarding the “punishment” of other students, maybe it is better that way. If you are not involved in that process you can put all your energy into loving and restoring and healing anyone who is willing to be loved, restored, and healed. Getting to be involved in discipline decisions is not as much fun as it might appear. There is still plenty to do. Keep on praying. Keep on thinking about what is important. Keep on loving each other. Keep on reasoning things out. And remember to keep the most important thing the most important thing.
p.s. Getting into medical school is NOT the most important thing.
Peter, Jonathan, Thank you for your idea of making people post their real names, novel idea.
Thank you Dr. Duncan for a well though-out and articulate posting. It was a welcome change from some of the, no doubt, well intentioned, empassioned postings of those whom I shudder to call “fellow students.”