A victim in the recent Greenough thefts said that one of the students being investigated by the Harvard University Police Department (HUPD) tried to frame him for faking the theft of his own computer.

Brian M. Wan ’05 and Michael D. Wang ’05 were questioned by HUPD officers last week regarding several thefts, including the theft of a laptop computer and palm pilots, from Greenough Hall this spring.

Wan has since left Harvard and Wang remains on campus but has moved out of his Greenough residence into a room in Canaday, according to several students.

No charges or arrests have been made, as the victims and Harvard weigh whether to press criminal charges or deal with the matter through the College’s Administrative Board.

Wang and college administrators declined to comment on the allegations. Wan could not be reached for comment.

The victim, whose IBM T-22 laptop was stolen on March 13, characterized his relationship with Wan, who lived in his dorm, as somewhat brotherly—it wasn’t unusual for Wan to play practical jokes on him, he said.

As recently as a week-and-a-half before, Wan left his Greenough residence with HUPD officers, the victim said he spent two hours helping Wan to prepare for a math exam.

The victim, who requested anonymity, said that he and Wang —whom he called Wan’s “sidekick”—were acquaintances.

The Computer Incident

In an interview this week with the Crimson, the victim said that he believes the string of thefts began on March 13.

Wan, a member of the varsity tennis team, was rushing to the subway station to travel with the team to Alabama, and asked the victim if he would pay Wan’s phone bill.

The victim agreed to help Wan and the two left Greenough together. When the victim returned from paying the bill several minutes later, he said he noticed his laptop computer missing.

The victim said he saw Wang playing video games in Wan’s room, and, when asked, Wang said he had not noticed anyone take the computer.

He said he never suspected that Wan and Wang played a role in the theft.

The victim filed a police report, and waited for his new computer to arrive on April 1.

When the victim’s replacement laptop arrived on April 1, Wan offered to pick up the computer from the freshman mail center and to set it up so that it would be ready when the victim returned from class, the victim said.

The victim said he happily gave Wan his key, ID, and mailbox combination.

That night, the victim said he noticed that his computer was missing expected components—both the DVD drive and the T-23 label were missing.

Three days later, the victim said he noticed an IBM Thinkpad T-23 on Wan’s desk. He said he did not suspect anything because Wan had always told him that he had a Thinkpad at home, and now said that his parents had shipped it to him.

But on April 26, the victim said Wan asked their proctor to check the laptop on the victim’s desk, because he believed the victim had faked the theft of his own laptop to commit insurance fraud, even though the victim had not yet filed for insurance money.

Wan and the victim’s proctor, Steven J. Mitby, declined comment yesterday.

When the proctor examined the victim’s laptop, the computer actually contained files from a date prior to the new computer’s purchase.

Further investigation indicated that it was not, in fact the expected T-23 computer but instead was the same T-22 computer the victim had originally reported stolen.

The victim said the proctor then proceeded to question him for three hours, believing that he had faked the theft of his own computer.

“I was saying ‘I want to know where my new computer is,’ but then I realized that all evidence was pointing against me,” the victim said.

The victim said he became distressed and decided to stay with family for the weekend. When he returned, he spoke with his proctor again, trying to convince him that he had been framed.

On April 28, the victim said, his proctor obtained a confession from Wan, and found the victim’s replacement computer—the T-23 earlier spotted on Wan’s desk—in Wang’s room upstairs.

Other Incidents

The computer incident was not the only one about which Wan and Wang were questioned by HUPD last week.

Two weeks before the computer story unraveled, early on the morning of April 17, the victim was returning to his room but was unable to enter because the lock had been jammed with plastic pieces.

The victim said he waited four hours—until 7:15 a.m.—as a security guard, locksmith, and engineer worked to open his door.

The same lock was jammed a total of five times that week, the victim said, and he remembered that Wan offered to help him remove the plastic from the lock on several occasions.

On April 21, the victim said he fell asleep in the Greenough common room, and awoke to find one of his flip-flops missing. An HUPD officer later found it on top of a vending machine in the Greenough basement.

A similar event occurred on April 24 when the victim woke up on the Greenough common room to find one of his sneakers missing.

The victim said the proctor found the sneaker in the bathroom, covered with paper towels, several days later.

Another time, the victim borrowed Wan’s Social Analysis 10 sourcebook. When Wan asked for it back, the victim could not locate the sourcebook.

Wan them told him that he needed the sourcebook, so if the victim could not find it, he could buy one from Wang for $55, who happened to own an extra sourcebook.

The victim said he later found out that Wang was not even enrolled in Social Analysis 10.

—Staff writer Jenifer L. Steinhardt can be reached at steinhar@fas.harvard.edu.