In a public Administrative Board hearing peppered with in-jokes about law, eight Harvard Law School students defended themselves against charges of violating portions of the Rules and Regulations during their participation in a 25 hour sit-in in Dean Robert C. Clark's office.

The Dean, represented by Bemis Professor of International Law Detlev F. Vagts '49, accused the six women and two men of interfering with normal work-day proceedings, of obstructing freedom of movement and of refusing to leave when requested to do so.

But Professor of Law William F. Fisher Ill, the students' lawyer, argued that the students did not interfere with normal workings of the office since engaging in discriminatory hiring practices is not "normal," nor is it in accordance with the Rules and Regulations.

The eight Law School students being charged are third-year Charisse A. Carney; second-years Jill R. Newman, Marie-Louise A. Ramsdale, William Anspach, Jodie I. Grant, Lucy H. Koh and Derek J. Honore; and first-year Julie A. Su.

The nine-hour hearing before more than 400 people included testimony from numerous secretaries in Clark's office, Harvard police officers called in the handle the situation, students, administrators and faculty members as well as each of the eight students.

Clark did not testify, nor did he attend the hearing, which was restricted by the Ad Board to members of the Law School community and The Crimson.

The Ad Board, chaired by Cromwell Professor ofLaw David L. Shapiro, will decide the outcome ofthe case this Friday, according to Dean ofStudents Sarah Wald. The decision, which couldresult in a warning, reprimand or suspension, willbe made by majority vote.

Both sides had different views about whatconstituted the crucial issues.

Third-year Peter M. Cicchino, cocouncil for thedefendants, said he thought "the crucial issue isthe way in which the Law School would respond to acompletely non-violent expressive act of dissentmotivated solely by legitimate concern for thisinstitution's treatment of women and minorities."

But Vagts said he thought the issue centeredaround whether the students had, in fact, violatedthe specific parts of the Rules and Regulations.

"Obstructing access was a problem. If DeanClark had really tried it might have escalated,"Vagts said. He added the students admitted theyhad refused to leave when asked to do so.

Several hours were devoted to the treatment ofthe secretarial staff and the relationship betweenseated students and administrators trying to enterthe offices, who included Clark and Vice DeanDavid N. Smith. A diagram of the Griswold Hallarea was used throughout the proceeding.

The relationship between police and studentswas mixed, although the students said theyattempted to establish friendly relations.Sergeant John M. Francis said he chatted withstudents about his ethnic name. But Officer RoccoE. Forgione appeared angry and did not offer tospeak with the students, according to students'testimony.

A brief cross examination of Forgione by Fisherrevealed that Forgione had "reasonably closerelations" with one of the protesters, leadingFisher to suggest the officer had reasons for hisreticence.

Officer Frank Laminate also testified at thehearings.

Blocked Access?