Dygert cleared on 3 charges of swan teasing

Kiley Mackie
Staff Writer
April 15, 2004, Page 1

Sophomore Andrew Dygert, accused of provoking the swans while videotaping them for a class convergence project, was acquitted on three of the four charges against him at a formal hearing Wednesday.
Dygert was acquitted of the following charges:

1. Conduct that threatens or endangers the health or safety of any person on college premises or at college-sponsored or college supervised functions or conduct likely to result in property damage.
2. Disorderly Conduct.
3. Providing false information to staff.

Dygert says he plans to appeal his only guilty charge: Failure to comply with directions of college officials or their designees acting in performance of their duties, based on insufficient evidence.
Russ Hewitt, director of Residence Life, informed Dygert of the charges during an informal hearing last Thursday after initially questioning him during an unrelated interview the day before.
Hewitt said the initial interrogation resulted from an anonymous student e-mail stating he/she had seen Dygert provoking and video taping the swans on April 6. Additional complaints received after the initial interview prompted Hewitt to continue investigation and summon Dygert to the informal hearing.
During questioning, Dygert offered his own account of the event.
On April 6, he and freshman Tosha Rae Long went down to the pond behind Hansen Hall to film the swans for a convergence project they had been assigned in class, Dygert said.
While filming the swans from the walking path, Dygert said the swan flew across the pond toward him.
Both he and Long said they had not provoked the swan in any way prior to the attack.
Dygert said after he was attacked, he retreated from the swan while the camera was still rolling and both he and Long left the area.
After hearing Dygert’s account of the event, Hewitt sent an e-mail to Dygert requesting the tape be viewed to either confirm or deny Dygert’s initial claim of being more than 50 feet away before the swan attacked.
Dygert, the news editor of The Owl, forwarded the e-mail to the The Owl staff, who denied Hewitt’s request, saying the tape was The Owl’s property and that turning over research material would be in violation of its policy and would set a dangerous precedent that any research material could be accessed upon anyone’s request.
Dygert agreed with The Owl’s decision.
“What’s actually on the tape shouldn’t matter,” Dygert said. “If I get assigned to write a paper for a class, should I get charged for what I write in it?”
Long, who was there while Dygert was filming and has seen the footage, also said she thought the tape would only provide circumstantial evidence.
“It (the tape) could have helped Andy’s case or hurt it,” Long said. “It just depends on who’s watching it and what point they’re trying to prove.”
Though Hewitt said that all procedures fell within the scope of the student handbook, he agreed that cases with such few consequences should not have to be dealt with formally.
“With the amount of complaints we receive, we’re much too busy to be having formal hearings when we could just get a damn video tape,” Hewitt said.
Regardless, the tape was not viewed in the investigation or at the formal hearing and did not affect the outcome of the formal hearing.
Though Dygert said he was somewhat pleased by the decision, he said he still disagrees with the single guilty charge and the way the matter was handled.
When Dygert complained of several procedural discrepancies in the investigation, Hewitt denied them using the Student Handbook.
Hewitt also said that if any student were to claim procedural problems as grounds for dismissal of a case, he would direct them to pg. 87 of the Student Handbook which states: “Doane College, as a private college, is not required to provide due process in its response to student discipline matters.”