What do you think about how Harvard U has treated Prof. Ronald Sullivan and his wife?

Parents Forum
41

“And so exactly WHY do students feel they are not safe? Are they afraid he’s going to let criminals into the house?”

I didn’t say that the students felt unsafe or that they are afraid he was going to let criminals into Winthrop House. What I said was:

“So given that special relationship between House Master and student, it’s not hard to imagine that a young woman who has been sexually assaulted might wonder whether the Master’s advocacy for her welfare might be a little less vigorous or a little less sincere if at the same time he is out there defending a notorious public figure who stands plausibly accused of dozens of sexual assaults by dozens of young women.”

I think what the students at Winthrop sense is a potential conflict of interests between Prof. Sullivan’s two roles, one of which is very personal to them. What we have is something similar to Minerva McGonagall publicly battling on behalf of Voldemort. And in those circumstances I think it would be perfectly reasonable for for Harry Potter to question her leadership of Gryffindor House.

42

I don’t think Sullivan’s job would be to represent the attacked student or personally counsel her/him, but to make sure she/he had good representation and whatever services (counseling, medical, academic) were needed.

43

The question is then, did removing Sullivan help or hurt Harvard’s reputation? I contend that it hurts its reputation.

44

^^It certainly confirms that Harvard doesn’t allow any disagreement. First the whole sorority and fraternity thing and now even respected faculty has to toe the line or they are out.

45

Agreed.

To be clear, once again: he is a tenured faculty member at Harvard Law, so he is not “out.” He won’t, however, be a Faculty Dean.

46

I certainly hope none of these students in this house plan on being lawyers!

47

Except, a dorm isn’t your own house. It’s owned by Harvard, not you. That’s why students can’t keep deadly weapons in their dorm rooms.

48

@Scipio McGonagall actually taught some evil Slytherin students advanced magic skills they could use against good guys. Imagine that for feeling unsafe!

49

A dorm is a leased rental property so it is a house under the law. I have a D who graduated from Harvard. The dean of a house often gets involved in counseling women who are victims of date rape. Someone who represents individuals who committed probably hundreds of date rapes is not a good person to counsel or supervise the counseling the victims of date rape. He probably makes hundreds of thousands of dollars as a professor at Harvard and i am sure he is getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for this case. He can afford to pay his own rent.

50

Not having a lawyer who represents people accused of sexual assault as a Dean or a House Master is a legitimate policy. However, it is not something that you can choose to enact retroactively. You can either hire people who will never be in that situation, or you can have them sign an agreement not to do so, so long as they hold that position. In fact, that would have been the smart thing for Harvard to do - require that lawyers who work in positions that interact with students not work as a defense lawyer, so long as they hold that position.

However, since they did not do that, and Harvard hired Sullivan knowing very well that he was also working as a defense lawyer, they cannot decide to fire him for engaging in his job, because there are students who do not feel comfortable with the notorious person who Sullivan publicly chose to defend in court.

I understand the students, but that’s Harvard’s problem, not Sulliuvan’s.

@hebegebe It only hurt Harvard’s reputation among people who do not send their kids and their money to Harvard. The majority of the people who matter to Harvard either agree with this, or their opinion of Harvard is not effected by this.

To be entirely cynical, this is possibly an action designed to reduce the bad publicity that will be the result of the fallout from the next famous faculty member who turns out to be a sexual predator. “You see, we didn’t turn a blind eye, we really didn’t know what was happening, and the Sullivan case proves that we take these things seriously”. With any luck, this can be a counterweight to four or five years of ignoring multiple complaints about the world renown faculty member who was bringing fame and money to the university.

51

I wonder how much of this is motivated by racism? If Sullivan were white, I bet he would still have his position.

52

You are assuming all those needing help are the victims. It’s likely half of those needing help are the accused - accused of assault, of rape, of bullying, of cheating, of other crimes around the campus. Maybe they’d like a Dean on their side, with a little experience in criminal law?

I really disagree that a defense attorney can’t separate the representation of client with thinking those crimes are okay, or not understanding how a victim suffers. Weinstein is ONE client. We don’t even know what Sullivan’s role is. He may be the technical adviser, the researcher, the motions guy.

Sullivan seems to have had other problems as Dean over the last 10 years. He has had a lot of turnover of personnel, much more than the other houses.

53

The accused need the deans help? That is a form of victim shaming. Maybe Harvey Weinstein can blame the victims for his conduct with Sullivan’s help of course

54

@twoinanddone I was assuming absolutely nothing. The problem that was raised was specifically that kids who suffered assault, wanted to report assault, etc, would not be comfortable speaking to a person who is represented somebody who is accused of sexual assault. I expanded on that, and assumed that anybody who was a victim of any crime would have difficulty interacting with a deal who is defending a person accused of that crime.

I do not understand what you are trying to say. That we SHOULD put active defense attorneys as deans, so that kids who are accused of crimes feel more comfortable?

Basically you are implying that all accused are innocent kids who need to be protected by the Dean from hordes of psychopaths who spend their time in college inventing stories of bullying, sexual assault, racism, just because they get joy from ruining some poor kid’s life. Otherwise, your claim that the Dean should be always on the side of the accused makes no sense.

55

The only people who have no choice whom they defend are public defenders. These are the people charged with ensuring an accused‘s right to a defense counsel is met. (I assume Mr Weinstein is free to use this service, if he were so inclined and he could not afford or find a lawyer willing to take his case. It appears he is doing fine finding and paying counsel on his own.)

You can make a case, as @twoinanddone has made, that lawyers working for a criminal defense law firm or independent lawyers struggling financially, may be economically compelled to take on clients in order to survive professionally.

I understand that none of these apply to Sullivan. He has freely chosen to represent a celebrity client whose case more or less started a whole new global debate about sexual harassment and assault in the workplace, whose name has become almost synonymous with sexual harassment and assault in his particular industry.

If you are a criminal defense lawyer, you represent no one but yourself, or it could be said, if you are a celebrity criminal defense lawyer, you represent the institution of criminal defense. No one would fault you for representing Weinstein. You are doing your job, just like public defenders. That job will entail casting doubt on the veracity and mental health of every single female witness in the case. Accusing women of lying, of immorality, of fabricating stories about sexual harassment and assault. An unsavoury job, but someone’s got to do it.

If you are the dean of a residential college or house of an educational, you represent that educational institution, and the way that institution organises residential and campus life, and you happen to be part of a national debate about sexual harassment and assault in colleges which is about as vicious and controversial as the debate in the entertainment industry. You must represent the institution‘s impartiality - towards the accuser, toward the accused. You choose to defend the most high profile celebrity accused, you have chosen a side. Perfectly compatible with being a criminal defense attorney. Not compatible with being a house dean.

I am sure there is a clause somewhere in his contract that he has to refrain from behaviour incompatible with being a house dean. Expecting the administration to write „in the case that at some time in the future, a celebrity will be accused of hundreds of cases of sexual assault which starts off a global debate about the matter, none of which any of us anticipates, you may not choose to defend him“ is probably a bit much.

56

The core problem appears to be that students claim they do not feel safe living near someone they disagree with. No one really believes the Dean is going to attack them; they find his views scary. How far Harvard and its students have fallen, and what a shock these students will be in for when they graduate. They brought it on themselves.

57

Sad times when people are considered unfit due to association. Person X is not responsible for person y.

Don’t lawyers take an oath to protect the constitution? And isn’t one of the most fundamental rights fair representation? While I am no fan of the defendant you are in innocent until proven guilty.

Defending a criminal does not make one not compassionate. Actually it may make them more compassionate as they have seen the ugly. Not only that they have expertise in the law not just from the defendants perspective but can provide legal expertise to a victim.

For those who think this man is bad solely for defending a person accused of a crime i sincerely hope the tables are never turned on you.

58

As I mentioned earlier. Do those who support his ouster really believe this would be a problem if he were part of the defense team for a terrorist? or a young urm accused of rape in a southern state?

I just don’t think so. And both could make somebody uncomfortable I guess. Or if you say ok to these as well. Where does it stop.

The safe space card, like most useful concepts, get warped and used for political expediency.

He’s not the campus police or sexual abuse hotline. He’s a glorified ra.

Lastly I think he should move on. But couldn’t it have been handled over the summer and not renew his contract.

59

If terrorism were a regular occurrence on college campuses, with one half of students potential terrorists, the other half potential victims, a quarter of which will say that they already have been a victim of terrorism and there being a national debate about whether terrorism as a problem even exists or if the problem has been made up by the victims they do not accept are even victims?
And the accused symbolising the whole debate, because his case was the one who started it off in the first place, and the alleged scale so egregious? You bet.

Safety is not just about whether a person in charge will commit a crime. It can be a person in charge ranting about a vulnerable group, and a member of that group being attacked later.

If you’re in charge, you set the tone.

If it’s so important to you to be a defense lawyer in such a high profile case that is intricately connected to a national debate on the safety of college campuses for a specific group of students, by all means be that defense lawyer, but expect that members of that group might not be able to believe you’d be impartial in your position as an administrator in college residential life.

You do know what defense lawyers in sexual assault cases do, don’t you? You have to immerse yourself in that mindset. Can you handle the cognitive dissonance of being impartial? Can you still be a believable example of impartiality?

60

Harvard knew the decision was between an important societal civic position and capitulating to students and coddling students to make them feel better. I think it is a sad position for a leading educational institution to take but so indicative of the issues in education these days. But I am sure there are parents patting themselves on the back because they chose such a safe intellectual space for their kiddos.