---
6
Tuesday, April 26, 1988 / University Daily Kansan
Contra prosecutor exits case
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — An Iran-contra prosecutor withdrew from the case partly because he thought that he had been impermissibly exposed to the defendants' congressional testimony, independent counsel Lawrence E. Walsh testified yesterday.
During a lengthy grilling by a lawyer for Marine Lt. Col. Oliver L. North, Walsh revealed that associate independent counsel Christopher Todd had withdrawn from participation in the case.
Walsh said Todd withdrew partly because he believed he might be tainted by congressional testimony given by three of the four defendants under grants of limited immunity from prosecution.
"I don't know whether he was tainted or not." Walsh told defense attorney Brendan V. Sullivan
Todd, who remains on the independent counsel's staff doing unrelated work, didn't explain the possible exposure because "he didn't want to taint me." Walsh said.
Jr. "All I know about Mr. Todd, he chose to follow a certain course."
me". Waits said. "Walsh not say when Todd withdrew, but he was in the unit in most U.S. District Court when former National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane pleaded guilty to misdeemance charges of withholding information from Congress about covert Reagan administration aid to the contras.
covert Keagan admits infringements. The defense contends that forcing North, former National Security Adviser John M. Poindexter and businessman Alik Himan to go to trial on conspiracy charges would violate their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination
because they were forced to testify to Congress last summer.
last summer.
Arguing there was enormous taint of Walsh's staff as a result of unprecedented publicity of the three defendants' immunized testimony, Sullivan said: "This case can't proceed if I have any understanding of the Fifth Amendment."
understanding that no date has been set for the trial of the three suspects, with retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Richard V. S. Secord, are accused of conspiring to illegally divert U.S. Iran arms-sale profits to the Nicaraguan rebels. Secord testified on Capitol Hill without an immunity grant.
At the outset of yesterday's hearing, U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gessell barred any defense testimony on the ground that lawyers for the defendants had disobeyed his order.
ROCKHAWK BALLROOM presents
THE RED ZONE
"We have, of course, done no such thing," the unsigned order issued by the majority stated.
The North Carolina case, argued Feb. 29, now will be held over until the court's next term beginning in October. A ruling is likely in 1989.
Civil rights groups say the more limited 1964 law may not be a sufficient deterrent to harassment.
Arthur Spitzer, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington, said the court's action will have "enormous psychological impact."
evidently the court's majority said the dissenters were making the announcement appear as if the Court was overturning the 1976 decision.
In a separate dissenting opinion, Blackman said, "I am at a loss to understand the motivation of five members of this court to reconsider an interpretation of a civil rights statute that so clearly reflects our society's earnest commitment to ending racial discrimination and in which Congress so evidently has acquiesced."
Court
Voting to rehear the case were Chief Justice William H.
Continued from p.1
TUESDAY, APRIL 26 Last Band Before Finals
Rehphist and justice Byron R. White, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy.
"If the court decides to cast itself adrift from the constraints imposed by the adversary process and to fashion its own agenda, the consequences for the nation — and for the future of this court as an institution — will be even more serious than any other case of previously rejected forms of racial discrimination." Stevens said.
nation.
He was joined by Justicees William J. Brennan, Harry A. Blackmun and Thurgood Marshall.
ratterson still could charge racial harassment under a 1964 civil rights law. But the more recent law provides that those who win their cases in court may collect back pay, not potentially big awards as compensation for emotional and mental suffering.
O'Connor, Scalia and Kennedy were appointed by President Reagan, a critic of some high-court rulings he considers too liberal.
State governments also have been working to limit availability of dial-a-porn services. Last week the Federal Communications Commission fineed two California dial-a-porn companies $600,000 each for allegedly failing to prevent children from hearing their messages.
Brenda Patterson, a black woman, is attempting to use a post-Civil War war to force her employer, McClean Credit Union, to pay actual and punitive damages for alleged harassment.
Lower federal courts said the law, the Civil Rights Act of 1966, was designed only to ban racial discrimination in hiring, firing and promotion - not racial harassment.
The Supreme Court's action clearly put the ball in the phone companies' court, said Bradley Keirnes, vice president of Citizens for Decency Through Law Inc., a Phoenix, Ariz.-based public interest law
Dial-a-porn ban upheld by court
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court yesterday let stand an Arizona telephone company's ban on sexually explicit dial-up message services.
Mountain Bell, a US West company, was pleased with the decision, but the parent company is not considering extending the Arizona ban to the 13 other states in its territory, a spokesman said.
ine court's action came a week after Congress sent to President Reagan a bill that would ban all dial-a-porm services, which are available to callers through "976" exchanges and AT&T's "900" long-distance lines.
firm specializing in obscenity law.
States.
In its other states, US West is offering customers one-time, free blocking of 976 services.
In Arizona, dial-a-porn services "were particularly harmful to our reputation, so we felt that (a ban) was the most appropriate action for Arizona," said US West spokesman Blair Johnson. "But there are different circumstances in different states."
explain dear up message in
the first "dial-a-porn" case to
reach the Supreme Court, the
justices, without comment, declined to
hear arguments that Mountain Bell's
refusal to carry sexually explicit
message services violated free-speech rights.
Keirnes said phone companies now have a green light to pull the plug on dial-a-port services without fear of attack. The companies. First Amendment rights.
Rep. Thomas D. Byington IV who spearheaded the move in the House to approve a dial-a-porn ban, said the court's action bolstered his belief that such a ban would withstand a court test.
"It indicates the thinking of the court, which is that this kind of speech is not protected by the First Amendment," he said.
It Could Only Happen at THE HAWK 1340 OHIO Since 1920
The latest in desktop accessories
for Secretaries' Week, April 25-29.
Give your secretary a Teleflora Butterfly keepsake Mug or Basket Bouquet and you can register to each win separate vacations for two in Tahiti via Continental Airlines. Each pretty and practical ceramic flowers-in-a gift keepsake features a colorful springtime motif. They can be displayed at home or the office, even after the flowers are gone. Call or visit us today
Tahiti Beachcomber
CONTINENTAL AIRLINES
Owen's Flower Shop Inc.
9th & Indiana 843-6111
reuter!
boot & shoe repair
½ PRICE ON SOLE GUARDS
& HEEL SPECIAL
8 West 9th
841-4729
STORY IDEA?
CALL 864-4810
Thomas M. Studiham, Conductor
Thomas J. Ashworth, Brombonist Solon琴
8:00 p.m. April 26, 1988
Craffton-Preyer Theatre
Free and Open to the Public
Famely funded by the KI Student Action Fee
JUST SAY “NO” TO PLUS/MINUS
On March 2, 1988, The University of Kansas College of Liberal Arts and Sciences College assembly passed a resolution to implement a plus/minus grading system in the fall semester of 1988. At a time when budget limitations demand a more streamlined system at the university the plus/minus grading system will multiply the amount of time spent computing grades, thus increasing the expense of computing grades. It will help. While some students will be able to turn for example. a C into
this increasing the expense of computing grades. This decision will hurt as many students as it will help. While some students will be able to turn, for example, a C into a C+, an equal number will see their C turn into a C-. Student incentive will be affected. While a student will work much harder to raise a grade from a C to a B, a student may be less inclined to put out much effort if it is felt that the difference between a C+ and a B- will have little effect on their overall GPA.
A C+ and a B- will have little effect on their overall GPA. The plus/minus grading system will allow faculty to justify grading students on test scores only. This will place a greater distance between teacher and student because teachers will not have to know their students as people to assign grades. Class participation will become less important. This is significant when considering the fact that, under the traditional grading system, students who don't test well but know their subject can demonstrate their abilities through effective class participation.
participation. No provision has been made to reward an A+ to those who show outstanding performance in class. This makes it harder for the A student to maintain an A average and produces a situation where the only way an A student's GPA can go is down. These students may have a tendency to be too grade-conscious already and certainly do not need added pressure.
pressure.
Proponents of the plus/minus grading system say that it will enable them to differentiate students' scores to a greater degree. However, who will benefit from this unnessary decision? Resultant grade compression will produce fewer A's and fewer F's for the student body as a whole. In effect, this system will reward poor academic performance at the expense of those who work hard to maintain a high GPA. This is inconsistent with the Board of Regents' efforts to impose stricter entrance requirements for the university.
entrance requirements for the university.
Lower GPA's will place KU students at a disadvantage in job market and professional school application when competing against students from schools that use the traditional grading system. For instance, the plus/minus grading system will make it so a student from a school that uses the traditional grading system will have a better chance to get into the KU School of Law than a KU student of comparable academic performance. Is it in the best interests of Kansas University as an institution to enact a decision that will benefit the graduates of competing universities.
as an institution to obtain a course for the graduates of complying university. The College Assembly's lack of foresight is apparent in their vote to impose a policy that has not been completely formulated. Pertinent details had not been agreed upon at the time of bailing. If all teachers in a given multi-sectioned class do not opt to use the plus/minus system, students will not be graded in a standardized manner. This difference will be reflected in their GPA's. Will teachers have to announce their intentions regarding their choice of grading systems at the beginning of the semester? Even so, policy will not be formulated by the Committee on Undergraduate Studies and Advising at least until the third week of classes of the fall semester of 1988. By then it will be too late for teachers to announce their intentions with any degree of certainty at the beginning of the fall semester. Students' options to change sections or add/drop without penalty will diminish. This is not a situation students bargained for when they enrolled at the University of Kansas.
The resolution to implement the plus/minus grading system for the fall semester of 1988 by the College Assembly will have long-term effects for the student body. The student body will be affected, but it was not consulted. The best thing that can be said about the plus/minus grading system at this point in time is that it needs a lot more consideration before it is implemented-if it should be implemented at all. To this end, input from all affected parties is necessary and justified.
TO ALL LIBERAL ARTS STUDENTS:
If you are one of the many who have signed the petitions against the plus/minus grading system, thank-you!
If you haven't signed a petition, MAKE A STATEMENT THAT WON'T BE INGORED with the petition below. Limited funds means that this ad may only run once. This could be your best chance to MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD. Volunteers please call 841-3658 or 749-2893
To The University of Kansas College of Liberal Arts and Sciences College Assembly: I am a student in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. I wish to register my objection to the passing of a plus/minus grading system for the College. I do not feel the Assembly accurately represented my opinion and I request that the issue of plus/minus grading be placed back on the agenda of the College Assembly as soon as possible
NAME:
STUDENT NUMBER:
Submit completed petition to the Undergraduate Services Office of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, 106 Strong Hall, Lawrence, Kansas 66045. Disclaimer:The College of Liberal Arts and Sciences maintains a position of neutrality, it does not endorse the petition and is not involved in its circulation.
Sponsored by STUDENTS AGAINST THE PLUS/MINUS GRADING SYSTEM
---