The remarks of Assistant Dean of the College Virginia L. Mackay-Smith, reported by Geoffrey Upton in his article about my client Michael Itagaki's pending lawsuit against the Harvard University Police and the College, demonstrate the same casual attitude toward facts and truth that characterized her behavior during this entire sorry incident--an incident which she was largely responsible for escalating to the point where some 20 lawyers became involved and many lives were dealt unnecessary injury.

Mackay-Smith says that outside lawyers (she's referring to me) "do not know very much about College procedures" and hence should not represent students in Ad Board cases. In fact, however, I am a criminal defense and civil liberties lawyer, and I do not generally represent students in Ad Board cases unless they are also facing criminal charges. In this case, I got involved initially in order to make arguments to the dean of the College that the matter should not be escalated into a complaint to the District Attorney but instead should be resolved internally and with a minimum of disruption to the lives of all concerned. I was not granted the courtesy of a meeting on this request before the Dean's Office and the HUPD reported the matter, and a criminal investigation of Itagaki and his roommates commenced.

Insult was added to injury when, in violation of its own rules and procedures, the Ad Board proceeded with its disciplinary hearing while the criminal investigation was still in process. Itagaki was forced to withdraw voluntarily in order to postpone his Ad Board hearing, because any testimony that he would have given to the Board could and would have been used against him by the prosecutor in the criminal case--a dilemma he would not have faced had the Ad Board adhered to its own regulation and waited until the criminal case were over.

Had Mackay-Smith not succumbed to the ridiculous sex harassment spin that was given to this case, and had all parties been afforded their appropriate share of due process, the truth would have come out. However, neither the Board nor Mackay-Smith were too concerned about the truth. They had their minds made up from the beginning.

As for University Attorney Richard J. Riley's claim that the HUPD officers did nothing inappropriate during their early morning raid of my client's suite and that "nothing was seized that they were not entitled to seize"--this is a documentable, outright lie. The HUPD are still holding--unlawfully--memoranda and correspondence exchanged between my client and me. Attorney Riley should apologize for lying so blatantly to The Crimson. --Harvey A. Silverglate