The following case may be of interest to some of you. Professors Ron Sakolsky and Dennis Fox were arrested by campus police on March 15th for the serious crime of leafletting the audience before a mayoral debate at Sangamon State University in Springfield Illinois. Included below are status posts I received on April 12th and May 6th. -- John McPherson [ps - I received a final post June 13 1995 with the agreed-upon resolution statement of the matter, and I've attached it at the end.] =============================================================================== >From: Lisa Scrimpsher >Subject: CAMPUS FREE SPEECH/ACADEMIC FREEDOM ACTION ALERT!!! >Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:15:21 -0700 (CDT) >Cc: ca-liberty@shell.portal.com Forwarded message: > From: Dennis Fox > Subject: corrected Fox/Sakolsky transmission > To: radical-psychology-network@mailbase.ac.uk (Radical-Psychology-Network), > SPSSI-L@vms.cis.pitt.edu (SPSSI List), > PSYLAW-L%UTEPA.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu (Psychology/Law Forum) > Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 09:21:50 -0700 (CDT) > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > CAMPUS FREE SPEECH ACTION ALERT! > > Dennis Fox > > On March 15th Ron Sakolsky and I went to hand out leaflets on > the Sangamon State University (SSU) campus where we teach. Before we > knew it, the campus police had arrested both of us on a variety of > unfounded charges. We need your help. Especially Ron. > > Ron is a tenured associate professor of public affairs and labor > relations long controversial in Springfield because of his consistent > activism. For 23 years he has taught courses at SSU on everything from > Organizing for Peace and Justice to Workplace Democracy to World Music. > I've been here seven years, and am a tenured associate professor in > legal studies and psychology. I teach things like Law and Inequality > and, this semester, a seminar in Conservative Efforts to Reclaim the > Law. A few years ago Ron and I team-taught a course called the Columbus > Quincentennial: Hype and History From 1492 to 1992. > > Here's what actually happened last month to Ron and me. We went > to give leaflets to people going to a mayoral debate because one of the > candidates for Springfield mayor was State Senator Karen Hasara, who had > co-sponsored a recently passed union-busting bill. (As part of the > "restructuring" of higher education in Illinois, the legislature and > governor, on te Republican "fast track," had just passed legislation to > merge SSU with the University of Illinois system. The legislation > included a provision to destroy the SSU faculty's collective bargaining > rights.) The leaflets pointed out Hasara's role and the media's failure > to report the story, and we listed a few questions we hoped the audience > might ask during the debate. > > I was arrested when I refused to stop leafleting in the hallway > outside the auditorium. An SSU employee and someone from WICS-TV Channel > 20 instructed SSU police officers that no one was allowed to hand out > what they called "campaign literature" at what was characterized as an > "invitation-only" event (Channel 20, Springfield's only TV station, > reported later that night that we had been taken away "for violating a > ban on leafleting"). An officer ordered me to stop or leave the > building. He also grabbed leaflets out of the hands of a few people who > had taken one. After 15 minutes of intermittent warnings, he said I > couldn't even stand in the almost empty hallway with the leaflets > "visible." Then I was handcuffed and taken away, charged with criminal > trespass to state property (the cop told me I no longer had permission > to be there) and interference with a police officer (I never did find > out what that was about, since the police report didn't say I had done > anything disruptive). > > Ron Sakolsky's case went much differently. He was inside the > auditorium, quietly handing leaflets to people who had gotten there > early. When the police discovered him inside, Ron offered to leave the > auditorium and join me in the hallway, but the cop told him he'd have to > leave the building instead. So Ron stayed where he was, leaflets in > hand. Without telling him he was under arrest and without warning him > they would use force, the police grabbed Ron, twisted his arm, and began > to push him out. Ron says he then told the cop he would leave > peacefully, but the cop just twisted his arm tighter. In pain, as the > physical assault intensified, Ron tried to get loose. Now he's charged > with aggravated battery, a felony. > > I'm in pretty good shape legally. When the State's Attorney read > the police account of my actions, he decided not to file charges. That > police report makes interesting reading, by the way. It makes you wonder > why SSU's campus police force thought anyone could be arrested for what > they say I did. > > Ron's in greater danger. He's scheduled to appear in court on > April 20th to find out what the state has in mind for him. If he goes to > trial, he faces possible prison time if convicted; at the very least, he > faces mounting legal fees. That seems pretty excessive, considering the > whole incident began when the university's poorly trained police force > improperly prevented us from handing out leaflets. (Perhaps not > coincidentally, Ron and I led the opposition on campus a year and a half > ago when the President decided to replace the campus security guards > with armed police. Also disturbingly, although two years ago the > Administration promised the campus community that there would be a > police review committee with well-defined complaint procedures, that > promise was not kept. There are no still campus procedures to > investigate police actions. The Administration's decision to refer the > matter only to the State Police for investigation clearly does not > fulfill the earlier commitment to campus-based review.) > > We think this incident relates to a number of disturbing trends > across the United States and elsewhere. Infringement of free speech and > academic freedom. Efforts to hamper labor union organizing. > "Restructuring" of higher education. Unleashing the police to prevent > dissent. One-sided mainstream news coverage. > > This could happen to you next. > > HERE'S HOW TO HELP > > PUBLIC PRESSURE IS URGENTLY NEEDED BEFORE RON'S APRIL 20TH COURT DATE! > > (AND AFTER THAT IF THE STATE AND UNIVERSITY PURSUE FURTHER ACTION!) > > SSU President Naomi Lynn has the power to get the State's Attorney to > drop charges. Sangamon State is on the verge of becoming the University > of Illinois at Springfield--a controversial transition that provides the > context for much that happens here these days. A show of support from > around the country and beyond, for Ron in this specific case and for the > broader right to free speech on a college campus, would help. > > PLEASE SEND E-MAIL MESSAGES ENCOURAGING SSU TO DO THE RIGHT THING! > Send to: > > Naomi Lynn, SSU President lynn@eagle.sangamon.edu > > CONSIDER SENDING COPIES TO: > > Stanley Ikenberry sikenber@uiuc.edu > (current U of I System President) > > James Stukel James.J.Stukel@uic.edu > (soon-to-be U of I System President) > > Doug Anderson, SSU's Lawyer danderso@eagle.sangamon.edu > > PLEASE ALSO SEND ME A COPY SO THAT WE CAN KEEP YOU POSTED! > > Dennis Fox fox@eagle.sangamon.edu > > FOR MORE INFORMATION FROM ME OR OUR NOW-FORMING SUPPORT GROUP, > MY E-MAIL ADDRESS IS fox@eagle.sangamon.edu > > > PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO APPROPRIATE E-MAIL LISTS!!!! > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Dennis Fox (217)786-6535 office > Associate Professor of Legal Studies (217)786-7279 fax > Associated Faculty, Psychology > Sangamon State University > Springfield, IL 62794-9243 fox@eagle.sangamon.edu > ----------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================== >From: Dennis Fox >Subject: Sakolsky/Fox Update >Date: Sat, 6 May 1995 10:46:27 -0700 (CDT) [...] Yesterday, the State's Attorney filed charges against Ron. We will put out another update during the week. [...] Dennis Fox fox@eagle.sangamon.edu Re: > Hello Dennis and Lisa, > > Can you provide me with an update on the case of Prof. Ron Sakolsky? > I just started up a mailing list for libertarian/classical liberal > professors, and I'll bet they'd be quite interested in hearing the current > status of the case. RESPONSE TO IKENBERRY'S STATEMENT DENNIS FOX AND RON SAKOLSKY 5/4/99 University of Illinois President Stanley Ikenberry has issued a statement about our being arrested at Sangamon State University on March 15, 1995. A number of the claims he makes are in error. Moreover, the fact that SSU, as Ikenberry notes, "has begun to prepare more detailed policies than existed heretofore with regard to the use of campus space by outside organizations" supports our view that it was partly an administrative breakdown that led the police to prevent us from handing out leaflets in a campus building. Ikenberry's comment that UI has no standing in the incident because UI has not yet taken control of SSU is technically correct. However, if SSU becomes the University of Illinois at Springfield on July 1 as planned, Ikenberry will have a role in determining how to respond to the situation. Although we hope that there is nothing left to resolve at that point, if intermittent negotiations on campus fail, criminal charges and lawsuits extending past July 1 are likely. Of course, it was Ikenberry's insistence that he would allow SSU into the UI only if our faculty union was busted in the process that ultimately led to our leafleting in the first place. There is clearly a dispute about the role of WICS Channel 20 in this affair. Ikenberry claims that Channel 20 sponsored the debate and hired the police and that the candidates agreed there would be no campaign material distributed in the auditorium. This parallels the SSU administration's position that the event was "private" rather than public, thus apparently rendering the First Amendment irrelevant. Of course, this flies in the face of one of the charges the police lodged against Ron Sakolsky: Interference with a Public Institution of Higher Education. The terms under which Channel 20 obtained control of the auditorium, and the degree of control they had, are in dispute. The SSU administration has not released the contract between SSU and Channel 20 and other documents that would clarify their agreement. (There is no evidence, for example, that Channel 20 paid any rent for the auditorium. There is no evidence that the event was not paid for, and "sponsored," by the university). This evidence, or lack thereof, may have legal significance in determining who in fact was in charge. Regardless of who was technically in charge, we believe it clearly inappropriate and probably illegal for a public university to allow a political "debate" to take place with such an undemocratic censorship policy. And although the content of our leaflet should be irrelevant, the material we distributed was not campaign material. The leaflet criticized State Senator Karen Hasara, who had just co-sponsored the legislation merging SSU into UI. The fact that she was running for mayor had little to do with our seeking to raise the union-busting issue. The leaflet did not urge people to vote for the other candidate, with whom we have no connection. Additionally, Ikenberry's assertion that Channel 20 hired the police officers that night only leads us to other questions. Can any private group bring armed police onto campus for use as bouncers? Were the police acting that night as Sangamon State University police, as emblazoned on their uniforms, or were they Channel 20 police? Whose orders did the police believe they were following that night? What were those orders? On the details of the incident inside Brookens Auditorium with Ron Sakolsky, Ikenberry's version of the facts comes straight from the police report, which, of course, is designed to justify the police actions. Ron has acknowledged that he attempted to free himself from a painful grip and escalating physical force and that consequently a struggle ensued. The police version of the altercation, however, is filled with errors and false information making it appear that it was Ron that initiated the physical contact rather than the other way around. In the face of conflicting accounts, however, two things remain undisputed: Ron was peacefully handing out leaflets, disrupting nothing. And things escalated only when the police arrived on the scene and ordered him to leave. Even if the police version actually happened--something we strongly dispute--Ron's right to distribute leaflets was infringed the moment the police officer told him to stop. In the other case, Ikenberry claims that Dennis Fox was arrested when he "refused repeated requests to move away from the registration table." This is a remarkably misleading version of the facts. It is not even supported by the statements of the police in their arrest report. The police clearly reported that they ordered Dennis several times to leave the building, not just to leave the area near the table. The table, by the way, was not a "registration table," which implies there was some kind of registration going on. The table was empty of any kind of registration materials. Two Channel 20 employees sat there, one of whom collected tickets from people who were arriving. By the time Dennis arrived at the scene, most audience members were already inside (which is why Ron had gone inside to leaflet). There was no line at the table, no group of people waiting to go in. Nothing. When Dennis was arrested, he was not even giving anyone a leaflet. An officer had just told him he could not stand in the hallway with the leaflets "visible." When Dennis then asked where the officer wanted him to stand--after being told numerous times to leave the building or be arrested--the officer finally pointed to the end of the corridor, over 100 feet away, where the corridor bent into another building. Since standing there would have made it impossible to hand leaflets to any audience members who might come from the two corridors in the other direction, Dennis refused to leave. Before anyone else showed up, the officer arrested Dennis, who at the time was standing in the middle of the hallway. At no time did Dennis block anyone's access to the auditorium or interfere with anyone in any way, and there is no such allegation in the police report. The only person who blocked the doorway was one of the police officers, who refused to allow people into the auditorium while holding the leaflets they had just received. The police officers' report makes it clear that they believed Dennis Fox could and should be arrested merely because he insisted on remaining in the hallway to distribute leaflets after they told him to leave. Regardless of who told the police what to do, the fact that they didn't immediately recognize such an order as illegal and unwarranted is frightening. The report also calls into question their account of what happened inside the auditorium. Ron Sakolsky told the officers he would leave the auditorium to leaflet in the hallway. When they told him he'd have to leave the building instead, he said he would continue to leaflet until he was told what university rule he was violating. The fact that the officers told Fox to leave the building--as they acknowledge in their report--confirms the view that the officers had no intention of allowing us to leaflet anywhere in the building. Ikenberry's statement is also incorrect in claiming that all charges were dropped against Dennis Fox. In fact, the charges against Fox were never filed, and the State's Attorney has said he does not expect to file charges, but until the statute of limitations runs out, charges are still pending. In an effort to make available some of the documents related to this case, several World Wide Web sites have been established around the country. We're still in the process of setting things up here at SSU, but we should be in pretty good shape shortly. This is what we have so far: SSU Free Speech Support Committee (under construction) http://www.sangamon.edu/~howillia/ssuhome.html Dennis Fox's Home Page (under construction, slowly) http://www.sangamon.edu/~fox/home.html In other locations, some sites point to our own. Others have additional information. You might check out Peter Miller's site at UIUC, which as of today is the most current (Thanks, Peter!): http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/peterm/ And thanks again to all who have sent messages of support! If you have any additional questions, we can be reached as noted below. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dennis Fox Ron Sakolsky Legal Studies Program School of Public Affairs Sangamon State University Sangamon State University Springfield, IL 62794 Springfield, IL 62794 217/786-6535 217/786-6310 217/786-7279 fax 217/786-7279 fax fox@eagle.sangamon.edu (Ron has no e-mail) http://www.sangamon.edu/~fox/home.html (under construction) --------------------------------------------------------------------- ==================================================================== ==================================================================== ----------------------------------------------------------------------- AGREEMENT REACHED BETWEEN SAKOLSKY/FOX AND SSU ADMINISTRATION 6/14/95 [Please distribute to anyone to whom you sent the April Action Alert.] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- What follows is the formal text agreed to by all parties to the negotiations concerning the March 15th incident at Sangamon State University. First is a statement that I agreed to issue in relation to the Internet e-mail campaign we began in April (and thanks again to the 400 of you who responded!). Next is the full verbatim text of the public statement jointly issued by all parties. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Statement of Dennis Fox to be issued on Internet There has been public attention to incidents that occurred on the campus of Sangamon State University on March 15, 1995, resulting in the arrests of associate professor Ronald Sakolsky and myself. I initiated a public campaign in which I brought to the attention of various discussion groups and individuals on INTERNET my version of incidents that occurred on the campus of Sangamon State University on March 15, 1995. The charges against Ronald Sakolsky have been dropped and the charges against me were not filed. As part of a process to resolve differences arising from the incidents of March 15, I have agreed to issue the following statement on INTERNET to those discussion groups and individuals to which I had issued my prior statements. As is often the case following incidents with many witnesses, descriptions of what happened inside Brookens Auditorium vary. Obviously, in my statement on the Internet and elsewhere my description of Ron Sakolsky's arrest was consistent with Ron's account, my interpretation of the police reports, and the statements of some witnesses. The police officers on the scene as well as other witness have a version that contradicts the one I presented. Our purposes in conducting a public campaign on the Internet and elsewhere were to gain support to pressure the President to have criminal charges against Ron Sakolsky dismissed and to correct what we perceived as a violation of academic freedom and First Amendment rights. We regret that in the process we had to cause embarrassment to the President and the University. We believe the incident of March 15 was idiosyncratic in nature with regard to this administration's previous record. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- PUBLIC STATEMENT There has been public attention, both on campus and elsewhere, to incidents that occurred on the campus of Sangamon State University on March 15, 1995, resulting in the arrests of associate professor Dennis Fox and associate professor Ronald Sakolsky. Charges against Dennis Fox were not filed and charges against Ronald Sakolsky have been dropped. As part of a process to resolve their differences arising from the incidents of March 15, the university administration and the professors have agreed to issue the following joint public statement. ************************* The Administration of the University acknowledges that as of March 15, 1995, the campus lacked specific policies, procedures or guidelines for leafleting or the dissemination of information, and that the campus governance committee responsible for police review had yet to establish procedures for responding to complaints regarding police behavior. The Administration will continue to encourage appropriate governance bodies to review, develop and recommend necessary policies, procedures, and guidelines regarding the dissemination of literature, and will continue to encourage the Security Force Review Panel to develop and recommend policies, procedures, and guidelines for the review of police actions. The Administration of the University expresses regret that incidents which led to violent interaction between employees occurred and states its intent to take specific steps to minimize the likelihood that such incidents could occur in the future. The Administration of the University expresses regret that Dennis Fox's arrest on March 15, 1995, occurred and expresses regret for any embarrassment or inconvenience caused as a result of the incident. Members of the University community should not, as a matter of general policy, be prevented from leafleting in University hallways. Given the state of SSU policy at the time, Professor Fox had the right to distribute leaflets outside Brookens Auditorium. Professor Dennis Fox acknowledges that as is often the case following incidents with many witnesses, descriptions of what happened inside Brookens Auditorium vary. In his statement on the Internet and elsewhere his description of Ron Sakolsky's arrest was consistent with Ron's account, his own interpretation of the police reports, and the statements of some witnesses. He acknowledges that the police officers on the scene as well as other witnesses have a version that contradicts the one he presented. Professor Ronald Sakolsky apologizes to all the members of the University Community for any actions he took on March 15, 1995 that involved his use of physical force in responding to the police as they attempted to physically remove him from the auditorium. He personally feels bad about this whole event and wishes it never would have happened. Further, Professors Fox and Sakolsky acknowledge that their purposes in conducting a public campaign on the Internet and elsewhere were to gain support to pressure the President to have criminal charges against Ron Sakolsky dismissed and to correct what they perceived as a violation of academic freedom and First Amendment rights. They regret that in the process they had to cause embarrassment to the President and the University. They believe the incident of March 15 was idiosyncratic in nature with regard to this administration's previous record and not reflective of the record, tone and principles of the University Administration. They acknowledge that the Sangamon State University police officers were fully trained and certified as police officers, although they had not had a one-week course related to being a police officer in a college setting. (signed) Naomi B. Lynn, President Dennis Fox, Associate Professor Ronald Sakolsky, Associate Professor -------------------------------------------------------------------- THANKS AGAIN! We appreciate your support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dennis Fox (217)786-6535 office Associate Professor of Legal Studies (217)786-7279 fax Associated Faculty, Psychology Sangamon State University Springfield, IL 62794-9243 fox@uis.edu (new e-mail address-- SSU becomes University of Illinois at Springfield on July 1) http://www.sangamon.edu/~fox/ssuhome.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- --