Daily mu Trojan
C®Oi m i »o'^ r
vol. Ixv
no. 22
University of Southern California
los angeles, California
thursday, october 19, 1972
Dean Ingle supported by University Senate
STATING HIS CASE—President John Hubbard appears briefly before the University Senate, asking them to withhold criticism on his handling of the School of Dentistry controversy. DT photo by Terry Ross.
PULITZER HISTORIAN GIVES VIEWS
By Loren Ledin
staff writer
The University Senate adopted after considerable debate yesterday separate motions calling for support of John Ingle, dean of the School of Dentistry, and for support of academic freedom of all deans and faculty members in the future.
One motion, proposed by McCormick Templeton, professor in the School of Dentistry, had the senate supporting a statement made by President John Hubbard Oct. 10: “USC will continue to make its own academic decisions and will not be coerced, dictated to or yield to any pressure groups.”
The motion asked that this principle include faculty and deans and “that unsubstantiated charges and allegations should not be given credence.”
A lengthy session of debate arose over the motion’s final phrases, that the charges not be “transferred to another body as a fact-finding entity. We believe
Death penalty—is repeal valid?
that it is incumbent upon the president to respond immediately to such charges with an expression of support.” Henry Reining, dean of Von KleinSmid Center, argued that the phrases had the appearance of a censure of Hubbard.
“I am not incluned to vote for a measure that has the appearance of a censure of the president,” he said.
Hubbard has referred the dental controversy to a special committee.
After the lines were deleted the motion was passed by a comfortable margin.
Templeton responded to the passage of his amended motion by proposing another motion.
“I am deeply gratified for the endorsement of the general principle of the resolution,” he said, “but the School of Dentistry needs a basic motion of confidence.”
Motion supports Ingle He proposed a motion: “We resolve to affirm the academic integrity of the School of Dentistry and its dean, John Ingle.” The motion passed by a slight margin after an amendment to include support for Hubbard was defeated.
Terrence Polin, associate pro-
fessor of management, whose motion to include Hubbard was defeated, was upset.
“I am dissappointed,” he said. “I think we do owe some measure of support to the president of the university.”
Hubbard appeared briefly before the senate. He asked the members to withhold criticism of his plan to turn the dental controversy over to an advisory committee until after it has made its report.
“I do not think it is very scholarly to pass any kind of judgment on the situation at this point,” he said. “If it fails I will be the first to admit it.”
Hubbard left the meeting before the formal debate began, however.
Romney slated to speak today
George Romney, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, will speak today at 3 p.m. in the Student Activities Center.
Romney, the former governor of Michigan, will talk about President Nixon and his policies. The speech is sponsored by the Young Voters for the President.
By Peter Wong
associate editor
The reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court in outlawing the death penalty as it is currently imposed in the United States is confusing and contradictory, a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian said here Tuesday night.
“Of the five justices in the majority in this case (Furman v. Georgia), no two of them agreed entirely on why the death penalty should be outlawed,” Leonard Levy, Clary professor of history at the Claremont Graduate School, told some 200 people in Hoffman Hall.
“Two ofthe justices said there could be cases in which the death penalty would be constitu-tional, two others said it is unconstitutional in all cases, and one objected to it because it is selectively applied against the poor.”
First in lecture series
Levy, who won the 1969 Pulitzer Prize in history for his book Origins of the Fifth Amendment was the first speaker in a lecture series sponsored by the Law Center, the Graduate School and the School of Public Administration, and named for Shelden D. Elliot, Law Center dean from 1947 to 1952, who died in March.
Justices Potter Stewart and Byron White based their opinions on the argument that the death penalty today is imposed so infrequently, and holds little value as a deterrent to crime, that it has now become “patently excessive and cruel and unusual,” in White's terms.
But Stewart’s and W'hite’s reference to the 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, forbidding cruel and unusual punish-
they wrote in their opinions, Levy said, because they are actually saying that juries should not be selective in imposing the death penalty.
Mandatory death penalty?
In fact, they are arguing for a mandatory death penalty, in which a defendant’s fate is not left to the jury’s discretion, and he is automatically sentenced to death if found guilty of a particular crime, he said.
“They mean that the 5th Amendment (insuring due process of law) should be applied—but they didn’t say so,” Levy said.
Justices William Brennan, Jr., and Thurgood Marshall also are
incorrectly basing their opinions on the 8th Amendment, Levy said, because the death penalty is constitutionally permissible, since it is referred to in the 5th and 14th Amendments.
These justices said that the death penalty is unconstitutional in all cases.
5th Amendment valid
In McGoutha v. California (1971), the court ruled that juries’ selective imposition of the death penalty was constitutional, so the reason the court should have based its ruling in Furman v. Georgia would be the due process clause of the 5th Amendment, thereby overruling its 1971 decision, the historian said.
Minority students ask for weekly DT insert
The Journalism Council will discuss a proposal for a weekly insert to the Daily Trojan about minority students today at 1 p.m. in Student Union 406.
Representatives of the Black Students Union, Asian-Ameriean Tutorial Project, and MECHA (the Chicano student group), have asked for an endorsement of a plan for university financing of a 4-page insert produced by minority students.
This plan stems from a previous proposal by black students for a university-funded twice-weekly newspaper about the black community. President John Hubbard rejected that plan because of lack of funds.
The council is composed of an equal number of Daily Trojan staff members and School of Journalism faculty, the university editor and two ASSC representatives.
Bugliosi speaks on DA campaign platform
By A1 Flores
staff writer
“After the Tate-LaBianca trial Charles Manson sued me for obstructing his human rights. Now Ralph Williams is suing me for claiming that he is getting special favors from the district attorney’s office. So you can see one ofthe reasons I’m running for district attorney—I’ve got to get a better paying job.”
Vincent Bugliosi, prosecuting attorney in the Tate-LaBianca murder trial and candidate for district attorney of Los Angeles spoke on campus Wednesday as the guest of a Political Science 100 class.
“I don’t promise to completely stop crime in the streets, pollution, drug traffic or consumer fraud because those problems will always exist, but if I'm elected district attorney I’ll certainly use all the resources of the office to take a positive direction in reducing the present level of those crimes.” No special favors
Bugliosi vowed to eliminate special favors to large corporations. He claims that Joseph Busch, the present district attorney, has given special favors to several of his big contributors.
“Mr. Busch is supported by every large corporation in L.A. County,” claimed Bugliosi, “including the large oil companies. And all his big political contributors are on a direct line to the DA’s office.”
“The incumbent DA says we shouldn’t prosecute industrial polluters”, said Bugliosi. He believes in using friendly persuasions. But if I’m elected I’m going to go after those polluters. We’ve got to start reducing our smog because not only is it killing our plants but also limiting our lives.” Marijuana issue
Bugliosi believes possession of marijuana should be tried exclusively as a misdemeanor.
“The present DA says that if a person has 6 or more marijuana cigarettes in his possession that it’s a felony, yet Lockheed is being tried on a misdemeanor charge for the death of 17 people in the Sylmar gas explosion.
“I support the death penalty,” he said, “but I would agree to a substitute like life imprisonment without parole. Presently a person convicted on life imprisonment can be paroled after 7 years. Now Manson’s not going to get out after 7 years but if he is I've got a lot morp to worry about.'
VINCENT BUGLIOSI