Amid the muffled roar coming from student protesters gathered below, the full Faculty yesterday voted to dismiss D. Drew Douglas, Class of 2000, by a vote of 119 to 19.

"The vote was extremely decisive in favor of dismissal," said Lawrence Buell, chair of the English department and Marquand professor of English. "It was a lopsided verdict and rightly so."

Douglas pled guilty in Middlesex Superior Court on Sept. 24, 1998, to a charge of indecent assault and battery--a lesser charge than rape. A rape charge against Douglas was not pressed at that time, but could be at a later date.

The Faculty vote was a response to an Administrative Board finding that a rape had occurred in the case. The woman assaulted by Douglas had brought her case before the Ad Board before pursuing legal action.

During a closed portion of yesterday's regularly scheduled full Faculty meeting, Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 moved for dismissal on behalf of the Ad Board.

The decision effectively ends Douglas' career at Harvard. In order to return to Harvard, Douglas must petition the full Faculty to reapply for admission.

As a result of his court conviction, Douglas is serving 18 months of house arrest and is barred from returning to Harvard or contacting the woman he assaulted for five years. But even after that, his dismissal will likely be permanent.

"Dismissal is a separation from the College that is expected to be permanent. There are no circumstances foreseen today under which this student will be readmitted," said a Harvard statement released yesterday.

"Dismissal is the strongest sanction that has been voted in modern times for disciplining a student," the statement continued.

The Faculty did not consider the more severe punishment of expulsion, which would mandate that Douglas could not ever petition to return to Harvard. In recent decades, expulsion has only been used as punishment for admissions fraud.

One Faculty member said after the meeting that expulsion--called for in spite of tradition in recent weeks by the Coalition Against Sexual Violence--was not considered as an option during yesterday's meeting.

The Faculty rejected a proposal put forth by five members of the Faculty Council--an 18-member body that reviews proposed policy changes before sending them to the full Faculty--which recommended a "requirement to withdraw" for five years.

If the Faculty had approved this motion, Douglas could have returned to campus in five years, after petitioning the Ad Board and meeting any conditions it set. Withdrawal is considered a lesser punishment because the Ad Board traditionally is far more open to re-admitting students after their term of withdrawal.

One Faculty member said yesterday that the motion for dismissal carried an important message to students in addition to its concrete effect on Douglas.

"Many people believe that what we did was symbolically important for the institution," said the member of the Faculty.

Following the Faculty's decision, Associate Professor of Government Louise M. Richardson and Associate Professor of Computer Science Margo I. Seltzer '83, two of the five who had recommended withdrawal, said they were not disappointed by the Faculty's decision.

"The Faculty have spoken," Richardson said. "We were not in any doubt that a rape occurred in this instance. Where we disagreed was on the appropriateness of the sanction of dismissal for this particular case."

In a letter sent to The Crimson and other organizations, the five Faculty members, which also included Professor of Psychology Daniel T. Gilbert, Mallinckrodt Professor of Applied Physics William Paul and Professor of Greek and Latin Richard F. Thomas, stressed that their decisionwas based on specifics of the rape that were notavailable to the general public.

"If we felt that the student in question poseda threat to the Harvard community upon return infive years, we would not have made the motion,"the letter said. "From our reading of thematerials, we do not believe that this studentposes a threat."

Seltzer said that when the issue first camebefore the Faculty Council this fall--withoutdetails available from Ad Board proceedings--thevote was 14 to zero in favor of the Ad Board'srecommendation of dismissal, with threeabstentions.

After obtaining and reading the specifics ofthe case, the Faculty Council took another vote.The council's last vote was 12 to five in favor ofdismissal, with one abstention.

These Ad Board transcripts were not distributedto the full Faculty, according to one Facultymember who was in the meeting.

Instead, members of the Faculty Council who hadread the transcripts presented theirinterpretations of events, which were not uniform,the Faculty member said.

"The accounts of the events stressed somewhatdifferent things in the record," the Facultymember said.

Despite these varying accounts, the Faculty'sdebate centered not on the classification of theevents as rape, but on the proper punishment forDouglas.

"There wasn't a single Faculty member who spokethat thought this wasn't rape," the Faculty membersaid.

Instead, the Faculty member said the debatefocused on "what kind of rape this was and whatkind of institutional response was warranted."

President Neil L. Rudenstine and Dean of theFaculty Jeremy R. Knowles declined to commentafter the meeting.

Lewis said last night that the Faculty decisionreinforced College policy.

"Rape is one of the gravest forms of assault.The Faculty is now on the record affirming that inpractice, as is already stated in the handbook forstudents and the Ad Board user's guide," he wrotein an e-mail message.

The Faculty debated the two proposals forapproximately an hour and a half yesterday beforedeciding on dismissal.

"People weren't screaming at each other. Peopleweren't angry. It was calmer than many otherdiscussions in the Faculty," said one member ofthe Faculty who attended the meeting.

The Faculty did not discuss the case of JoshuaM. Elster, Class of 2000, in yesterday's meeting,according to Seltzer. Seltzer said Elster's casehas not yet come before the Faculty Council,either. In February 1998, Elster raped a femaleundergraduate. Last September, he pled guilty tothree counts of rape, two counts of assault andbattery and one count of indecent assault inMiddlesex Superior Court.

The Ad Board has demanded that Elster withdrawfrom the College and has recommended hisdismissal. The former Kirkland House resident iscurrently serving three years probation but nojail time.

The Open Meeting

During the open portion of the Faculty meeting,Benjamin O. Shuldiner '99 read a statement onbehalf of the Progressive Student Labor Movement(PSLM) about sweatshop labor.

Shuldiner's statement came during the sectionof the meeting reserved for open questioning ofRudenstine. When Shuldiner rose to speak, thecrowd that had been audible through the archedwindows of the Faculty room fell silent.

Shuldiner reviewed negotiations between theUniversity and PSLM over the past year regardingsweatshop labor. He ended his statement by askingfor a direct response from Rudenstine about theUniversity's position on disclosure of thelocations of factories producing college apparel.

"We feel that public disclosure of factorylocations is an especially important andindispensable provision for any Universityanti-sweatshop policy," Shuldiner said. "One ofthe primary reasons for the existence of today'sglobal sweatshop problem is the extent to whichmanufacturers can hide their subcontractingoperations from human-rights groups and thepublic."

As Rudenstine began his response, theprotesters again began to chant, nearly drowningout his reply.

Rudenstine told Shuldiner that he did notbelieve a "long-term policy is ultimatelyeffective without such disclosure."

Following Rudenstine's comment, the Universitydistributed a press release that stated itssupport for public disclosure of factorylocations. (Please see related story, page 1.)

The chants of the protesting students at timesmade it difficult to hear inside the meeting.

Some Faculty members supported the students'desires to voice their opinions.

"This reminds me of the late Sixties. This isgreat," said Henry Louis "Skip" Gates, chair ofthe Afro-American Studies department.

"The students were exercising their right tomake their voices heard," Buell said.

Faculty members seemed at first amused by thecoordinated yells of the crowd. When Knowles roseto speak at the start of the meeting, the crowdoutside erupted in cheers.

"I could get used to that," he quipped.

As the meeting progressed, however, Facultymembers became visibly annoyed by the loud chantsand drums, which at times seemed to rattlespeakers.

"I was disgusted by moronic Harvard studentschanting political slogans," said Kenan Professorof Government Harvey C. Mansfield Jr. '53 afterthe meeting.

In other business, the Faculty unanimouslyapproved a new joint Ph.D. program in Government,Sociology and Social Policy.--Jenny E. Heller contributed to the reportingof this story.