In the wake of a surprising conclusion to the Louise Woodward murder trial, opinions about the reduction of the au pair's murder verdict to involuntary manslaughter are sharply divided on campus, as in the world.

Harvard affiliates were tangentially related to many aspects of the case. The father of Matthew Eappen, the 8-month-old victim, is an instructor at Harvard Medical School. The judge who reversed the jury's murder verdict, Hiller B. Zobel '53, is a Harvard graduate, as was one of the main prosecutors in the case. Frank-furter Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitz played an active role in the post-trial defense. And Woodward defense attorney Harvey A. Silverglate has been involved in litigation against the University on behalf of students.

Students expressed strong opinions on the unusual reversal of the murder verdict, with some believing Woodward's release was justified by her youth and innocence, and others finding the judge's decision--in which he acknowledged that Woodward played a role in the infant's death--overly lenient.

"It's a big topic of discussion on campus," Katy S. Gladysheva '01 said.

Some students said they were pleased that Woodward's sentence was reduced to involuntary manslaughter, but felt she should nevertheless serve more jail time.

"It seems like that's a little lenient and she should serve some kind of punishment," Lynda A. Yast '01 said. "But then I see that she's so young."

Yast said Woodward demonstrated neglect and lack of judgment.

"I'm younger than her, and I know how to take care of a baby," she said. "That's something she should know as an au pair."

Rea V. Kyriakopoulos '01 agreed.

"I don't know if she really killed him," she said. "It was an unfortunate accident, but she shouldn't have been shaking the baby."

"I think she should go to jail for a little bit," Kyriakopoulos said.

Rachel Perez '99 said she did not quite see how the sentence fit with the judge's ultimate decision in the case.

"If he thought the jury was wrong he should have overturned the decision," she said. "But by saying it was manslaughter and not giving a punishment that fit, I don't think that was right."

The vast amount of media attention the case inspired caused some students to question the impartiality of the verdict.

"I think it sets a terrible precedent," Aisha C. Simpson '96 said. "It's obvious the media had a grand influence on this case. What are we saying about the judicial system?"