Spirit of the Law vs. Letter of the Law

Cadets, Regimental Commander discuss possible changes, solutions for problems with NUCC Rules and Regulations

Editor's Note: This is part two of a two-part series examining the room search policy, due process, and appellate authorities sections of the Norwich University Corps of Cadets Rules and Regulations.

By Amanda Tracy
Norwich Guidon Managing Editor

While many students may lack confidence in the Corps of Cadet Rules and Regulations, some are confident that the "spirit of the law" is upheld.

John, an upperclass cadet who requested anonymity, said, "the one thing I've learned from my experiences is that from now on I will follow only the exact letter of the law, regardless of what I think the spirit may be."

John said he felt that often the passages in the cadet Rules and Regulations are "vague," and "confusing." He said he didn't want to fall victim to "interpretations that differ."

Susan, a corps member who requested anonymity, agreed, explaining that the application of the rules is "twisted depending upon whether [those applying them] like you or not."

Cadet Colonel Scott McKay, a 21-year-old senior chemistry major from La Plata, Md., doesn't agree. "People need to understand that the commandant's office is not out to hunt people down and throw them on CMC (Closed Military Confinement). They've got better things to do."

"If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about," McKay said.

McKay explained that many students incriminate themselves during the course of a disciplinary investigation. According to McKay, cadets are occasionally unaware that they are divulging actions which are against the rules and regulations.

"What people don't understand is that, when you go in [to the commandant or investigating officer's office] to give a statement or answer questions about a particular incident, you may validate other peoples' claims or incriminate yourself," McKay explained.

Paul, a cadet who wished to remain anonymous, said that the commandant's office is "definitely not out to get anyone," adding that his peers are to blame for the disciplinary problems.

"I totally agree with what the president said," Paul said. "I've watched my friends turn in the people they say they hate, but look the other way when their rook buddies do something wrong. You can't blame the commandant's office for taking action on incidents that get reported."

Jennifer, a cadet who requested that her identity not be divulged, agrees with Paul, in part.

"While I think the students are partly to blame, and I don't want to think that the commandant's office is out to 'get' anyone, the lack of fairness in the punishments that get handed out makes me wonder sometimes," Jennifer said.

Jennifer declined to speak about specific cases, but said "not all cadets are held to the same disciplinary standard. Some even have punishments for severe infractions commuted awfully quickly."

"A lot of people here don't see the big picture," McKay said. "They see just what's influencing them, their friends, and their rook buddies. They don't see the whole of the university."

McKay explained that often when applying the rules and regulations or the disciplinary sanctions for infractions the average cadet does not see the "extenuating circumstances" that are part of the decision-making.

McKay also explained how mistakes occasionally happen in the enforcement of the Rules and Regulations.

"Sometimes, the investigating officers don't get all the information they need to make a good decision," McKay said, explaining that in such a case the cadets involved often do not divulge all of the information in a timely manner.

"They try to conduct a thorough investigation, but if people don't cooperate, they have to make a decision based on the information they have at the time," McKay said. This, according to McKay, can result in a punishment that "appears unfair."

McKay stressed that sometimes, although not in a majority of the cases, cadets are not adequately charged, sanctioned, or investigated for all infractions. However, he said, "if [the students] had come forward with more information, that wouldn't happen, and the cadet would have received a harsher punishment."

He said that if cadets have information about any pending investigation, they should "come forward as soon as possible."

Col. Mike McKean, Commandant of Cadets and Vice President for Student Affairs, agreed. "It's called extenuating, mitigating circumstances," said McKean. "We can't divulge those in a particular case, because we need to protect the privacy of the student.

"All I would ask is that when something happens, people question it first, and 'complain up,'" McKay said. He said that when cadets complain to peers or others who are not their superiors in the chain of command, misinformation is spread, and the decisions of the people applying the system are undermined. "One of my biggest problems is that people are 'complaining down.' Gripes go up, not down."

Jennifer agrees with McKay, but often doesn't feel that her complaints will be heard or dealt with. "If I don't feel like I will be treated fairly by my superior officers or by the commandant's office for disciplinary action, why would I think that I'd have any impact on the problems with the system?" Jennifer said, adding that she didn't "bother to talk to anyone" about her complaints.

"I think it's stupid and sad if people are just giving up," said Chris, a cadet who requested anonymity and who doesn't agree with Jennifer. "We aren't taught to give up when the going gets tough here at Norwich." Chris said that cadets should "obey the Rules and Regs until they're fixed."

"If they think something needs to be changed, then they need to tell me," said Col. McKean. "I'm going to re-write the Rules and Regs this summer. There's a lot of stuff in there that needs to be changed."

McKay said that if cadets disagree with the rules and regulations, they should work with their chain of command to have them fixed.

"If they've got a problem, I can try to work with the commandant's office to fix the problem, but I need to know about it, first," McKay said.

Susan would like to see more formal communication required by room searches. "I think it's sneaky that you can have your room searched and not even know about it until you either find something missing or [you find yourself] in the commandant's office being charged with a violation."

She proposed a form, like the ones offered by the commandant's office for the appellate process and formal infraction charging process, which would document the cadet's room search.

Susan also proposed that cadets be notified within a reasonable amount of time of the search with a copy of the document. "A reasonable amount of time to me would be what they give us for appeals, 48 hours," said Susan.

Others agreed. "It would be nice if we knew (about the room search) before we got to the Commandant's office," John said.

McKean said that he was open to any constructive suggestions about rules and regulations and investigative procedures, but that he wasn't going to change the room search policy.

Norwich President Richard Schneider agreed. "At first blush, that doesn't sound like a bad idea. However, in order to make changes, we would need to go through all the proper channels to add it to our policies.

"Students, however, need to begin these changes for us," Schneider said. "We can't do everything by ourselves. That's what leadership is all about."

Back to Guidon index