From the President and Provost
Statement on Campus Copy Investigation Report
April 23, 2001
The past three weeks following the altercation at Campus Copy have been
challenging for the Penn community. Issues of violence and race have been
raised and debated, students have been active, and many voices have been
heard. As troubling as these issues may be, however, the serious manner
in which they have been taken up and examined has been very encouraging.
We have begun to have conversations with members of our community on issues
of great importance to all of us, and we intend to continue the dialogue.
Today the Division of Public Safety has issued the final report of its
investigation of this incident. It confirms that Gregory Seaton's account
of the incident, and the account of the Campus Copy witnesses, are irreconcilable,
and there is not sufficient testimony or evidence from any other quarter
to confirm one account over the other.
So it will be up to Mr. Seaton and Campus Copy to decide whether they
will pursue further private legal action of any kind. We can only hope that,
whatever decision they make, the "after-life" of this incident
will not be prolonged.
This does not mean we should forget or push aside the issues that have
been discussed so vigorously on campus. Everyone must enjoy respect and
feel safe. We are personally committed, and the University must be committed,
to ensuring that the Penn community is safe and welcoming-to everyone.
We do need to move ahead as a University community. To help us do that
we will take the following steps. Many of these suggestions are a result
of the conversations that have been held during these past three weeks:
- The University will add additional Programs for Awareness in Cultural
Education (PACE) training for Resident Advisors and Graduate Advisors.
- Penn will review New Student Orientation to ensure that its diversity
initiatives are fresh and relevant to the needs of our community.
- Penn's Division of Business Services will develop a code of conduct
for vendors that clearly articulates the University's expectations of how
they will behave towards customers.
- Administrators will continue to hold regular, informal discussions
with students to discuss and address concerns and issues related to diversity
- Penn will continue to work with the Pluralism and other existing committees
to continue to develop and implement suggestions that have been made by
students and others in the campus community as a result of this incident.
| Judith Rodin, President
||Robert Barchi, Provost|
University of Pennsylvania Police Department
Investigation of Disturbance at Campus Copy
April 23, 2001
On April 3, 2001 at 4:25 pm, the University of Pennsylvania Police Department
responded to a radio call regarding a disturbance at Campus Copy, a privately
owned and operated business which is located at 3907 Walnut Street.
As a result of the initial investigation by the responding officers,
it was determined that a disturbance had occurred before the arrival of
the police involving a customer and store employee. Both asserted that the
other had physically assaulted them. There was no evidence of any serious
injury to either party, and further investigation by the responding officers
properly concluded that, since no police officer personally witnessed the
assaults and since the conduct appeared to constitute a simple assault,
no arrests were permissible under Pennsylvania law. Both parties were accordingly
advised, as Pennsylvania law provides, to seek Private Criminal Complaints
through the Philadelphia District Attorney's office at 1421 Arch Street.
On April 7, 2001, Chief of Police Maureen Rush became aware of the e-mail
in which Gregory Seaton, a University of Pennsylvania Ph.D. student, raised
concerns about the treatment that he received at the hands of the staff
of Campus Copy. Chief Rush immediately initiated a supplemental investigation
of the incident that occurred at Campus Copy on the afternoon of April 3,
Between April 7, 2001 and April 18, 2001 the University of Pennsylvania
Police Detective unit interviewed eighteen (18) individuals-specifically,
three Penn Police officers, four UCD Safety Ambassadors, one Allied-SpectaGuard
security officer, one University of Pennsylvania professor, seven Campus
Copy employees and the two complainants. None of the Police, UCD Safety
Ambassadors or the Allied-SpectaGuard Officer witnessed the altercation;
all arrived after the event in response to the radio call.
As a result of these interviews, the final determination of this investigation
shows that each complainant believes the other party assaulted him first.
Since the University of Pennsylvania Police officers did not personally
witness the assaults, and there were no substantial physical injuries to
either party or evidence of intent to cause serious bodily injury, both
complainants were advised, in accordance with the Pennsylvania law regarding
simple assault, to seek further resolution through the Philadelphia District
Attorney's Private Criminal Complaint process.