It is time for Brown to come clean about the William McCormick affair. Five years ago, a female first-year accused McCormick, a fellow first-year, of rape. Banished from campus and pressured to withdraw from school, McCormick filed suit against Brown, senior administrators, the accuser and the accuser's father. The case has yet to go to trial.
McCormick's account of events — the only one offered by any party — paints a sordid picture of malfeasance, undue influence, unethical behavior and witness tampering.
The accuser's father, a generous donor to the University, was in regular communication with senior administrators, including President Ruth Simmons, about the case. McCormick, who requested but was denied the chance to speak with Simmons at the time, has accused University officials of being influenced by the father.
The father also appears to have sought to influence at least one witness in the case, the accuser's Residential Counselor, Shane Reil '09. According to The Herald, the father hosted Reil for dinner and indicated that he would mentor him. A week after emailing him "to express to you how grateful I am," Reil filed a witness statement alleging that McCormick had asked another, unnamed student to lie about his whereabouts on the night in question and further stated that he was "emotionally eccentric" and "prone to anger."
Rather than afford him a fair hearing, Brown handed McCormick a plane ticket home and ordered him never to return. He did not receive a hearing or the benefit of the neutral treatment by administrators to which he was entitled under Brown's own disciplinary policy.
Because there was never an internal hearing or criminal investigation, we will never know the veracity of the accuser's story. If McCormick's accusations are true, then senior administrators acted with shocking impropriety. The Brown community must know the truth about McCormick's claims.
The University's insistence that it has done nothing wrong is unconvincing. Only an independent investigation, afforded full access to University records, communications and personnel, will have the requisite credibility.
Simmons should appoint such an investigatory panel because, as she explained in her Sept. 4, 2001, Convocation address, it is our "sacred obligation to protect the light of the world. And that light is the never-ending search for truth." Thus far, she has refused to speak to the press about the affair.
Professor of Music David Josephson told the Editorial Page Board in an interview: "I can see no reason for Brown's rejection of such a commission unless we fear that we have something to hide. If we do have something to hide, all the more reason for an independent commission so that Brown can … restore its self-respect and honor."
There must be an independent search for facts. As Simmons knows, even if the truth might be uncomfortable or embarrassing, that is no reason to avoid it. She wrote of the Committee on Slavery and Justice, "Understanding our history and suggesting how the full truth of that history can be incorporated into our common traditions will not be easy." Simmons must ensure that Brown's "sacred obligation" to the truth is upheld.
Editorials are written by The Herald's editorial page board. Send comments to editorials@browndailyherald.com.
