A few people have written in to me personally expressing doubt as to whether or not assaulting a girl is grounds for punishment under Claremont McKenna's code of conduct. They ask in all seriousness, so to help to dispel some of the rumors that Wilner did nothing bad, I would point to the school's rules, which I note violations of here.
Enough people have also asked for this information for their own emails that they plan to send Pamela Gann asking why it is that she routinely intercedes on his behalf. These people rightly ask what the college is doing to protect them against someone accused of assaulting a girl.
So here are the alleged violations.
As I have detailed on this site, the evidence supports repeatedly violations by Michael Wilner CMC '11 of the school's rules. And the responsibility lies with President Gann to enforce the school's rules. I note the section of the school rules entitled "Summary Suspension"
It now appears as if we have one set of rules for one group of students and another for everyone else. This is disappointing, to say the least. I submit that the standards for officers of our student government ought to be higher than that of rank-and-file students, even if those officers are appointed, which Wilner, as editor of the CMC Forum is. I submit further that these standards of conduct should be especially high for students who the president has singled out for praise and award. So why aren't they?
If the college will do nothing, I am left with no choice but to widely publicize who Mr. Wilner is. Consider it the public service announcement we never got.
Enough people have also asked for this information for their own emails that they plan to send Pamela Gann asking why it is that she routinely intercedes on his behalf. These people rightly ask what the college is doing to protect them against someone accused of assaulting a girl.
So here are the alleged violations.
1. Actions which cause the personal injury or death of another, or which threaten or endanger
the personal safety or well-being of others. Such actions include, but are not limited to:
1. b. "Engaging in disorderly conduct."
1. f. "Physically abusing, threatening to abuse, or intimidating another person."
1. h. "Engaging in physical or verbal actions which injure, degrade or disgrace another person, or tend to cause such effects."
As I have detailed on this site, the evidence supports repeatedly violations by Michael Wilner CMC '11 of the school's rules. And the responsibility lies with President Gann to enforce the school's rules. I note the section of the school rules entitled "Summary Suspension"
Each College President or his or her designated representative after due warning to the person(s) involved, and subject to later review by the duly designated judicial body of the College concerned, has the power on his or her own campus to suspend students of any of the Claremont Colleges who are engaged in actions which endanger the safety and/or property of Members of the Claremont Colleges, which cause damage to the property of the Colleges or which result in disruption or obstruction of the operation of the Colleges. [Emphasis added]Unfortunately, President Gann, despite evidence that Wilner has violated school policies, has decided that he deserves not punishment for allegedly assaulting a girl, but the ability to go on a trip to Kuwait. That trip left yesterday.
It now appears as if we have one set of rules for one group of students and another for everyone else. This is disappointing, to say the least. I submit that the standards for officers of our student government ought to be higher than that of rank-and-file students, even if those officers are appointed, which Wilner, as editor of the CMC Forum is. I submit further that these standards of conduct should be especially high for students who the president has singled out for praise and award. So why aren't they?
If the college will do nothing, I am left with no choice but to widely publicize who Mr. Wilner is. Consider it the public service announcement we never got.


