To the Editors of The Crimson:

Letters in The Crimson and the Law School Record have raised questions about the adequacy of precautions for Adolfo Calero's appearance at the Law School on October 2. This may have left an impression that Law School and University officials did not take seriously the need for security for this event. Accordingly, it may be helpful for me to review briefly some of the steps directed toward making it possible for Mr. Calero to deliver his address at the Law School. These included the following:

--21 University police officers and five guards were in or just outside the room where the speech was to be given.

--Law School officials had met several times prior to the day of the speech with the police, HLS Republicans and with those who wished to protest Dr. Calero's views, to plan for various contingencies.

--The event had been shifted to a more secure room prior to the day of the speech and was shifted a second time a few minutes before the time scheduled, because of a bomb threat.

--The building in which the speech was to be held had been sealed off and secured by the police several hours prior to the event.

--Arrangements had been made for the searching and checking of bags and for showing Law School and other student identification before anyone could attend the event.

I believe the precautions that were taken were reasonable. As with any event involving as many people with such strongly held views, it is possible that some of the decisions made and precautions taken before or during the event could have been improved upon. The steps we took did not prevent the frightening lunge at the speaker, although the deployment of the police did prevent a Tufts college undergraduate from reaching or harming Mr. Calero. Maybe more police officers deployed differently would have discouraged or prevented Mr. Laub's lunge, but I doubt it. Obviously Law School and University officials will draw on this experience the next time they face a similar situation.

The principal reason I have appointed a working group to develop guidelines to deal with such situations is to seek a set of ground rules that everyone in the Law School can rely on before and during a highly charged situation like this one. I am determined that Harvard Law School be a place where the right to hear and be heard will not be in doubt. Sincerely,   James Vorenberg   Dean, Harvard Law School