Nordenberg finally reacts to protests

From Timothy McNulty

Pitt Chancellor Mark Nordenberg released a long statement today on the G-20 events in Oakland last week entitled "The G-20 and Other News: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly."

Regarding the 100+ arrests on Friday night, he largely follows the reaction from the Ravenstahl administration, saying arrests were made after people failed to disperse, that the city has promised an internal review of police actions, and that people were free to make complaints to the Pittsburgh Citizen Police Review Board.

He promises the university will be looking "judiciously" at student misconduct, but does not directly address allegations about police entering student dorms and libraries, and targeting young female arrestees, or what, if anything, the university will do in response. The closest he gets is this: "To acknowledge the truly serious challenges that existed, of course, does not mean that every effort to meet those challenges was conducted in the most appropriate way."

The DA's office announced today that it has dropped charges against four of the 51 Pitt students arrested Friday, and is reviewing other student cases.

From the Nordenberg statement:

As the events of the evening progressed, police directed the large crowd that had assembled at Schenley Plaza to disperse. That group, by all accounts, included a combination of curious onlookers and peaceful protesters, as well as demonstrators bent on destruction. Distinguishing between those subgroups was difficult. In fact, at one point during that evening, black-clad anarchists retreated to an area near the Cathedral to change into collegiate attire so that they would blend in with our students. When repeated orders to disperse were ignored, the police utilized smoke canisters and other crowd-dispersal techniques and began making arrests.

A similar pattern of activity occurred on Friday night at what had been profanely promoted-by non-students, we believe-as an anti-police rally in Schenley Plaza. Prior to that demonstration and after discussions with student leaders, a "secure zone," located in the residence hall quadrangle off Fifth Avenue and controlled by University police, was created. That zone was designed to give students seeking to disperse in response to police orders a safe destination, which we believed had been a problem for some students on the prior night.

On Friday evening, the University's emergency notification system also was employed on two separate occasions. At about 7:30 p.m., all subscribers to that system received the message, "G-20 Disturbances May Continue Tonight. Be Careful. Exercise Good Judgment. Safety Tips at My.Pitt.Edu." Shortly after 10 p.m., when it became clear that a problematic situation was developing, a second message was sent. It stated: "Conditions May Be Deteriorating In Oakland. Students Are Advised To Remain Near Their Residences." On Friday night, property damage was greatly reduced, if not eliminated entirely. However, an even larger number of people were arrested, principally for failure to disperse or disorderly conduct. On Saturday evening, a much smaller, but similarly promoted, anti-police protest ended peacefully, with no property damage and with no arrests. The emergency notification system also was used on that evening.

To acknowledge the truly serious challenges that existed, of course, does not mean that every effort to meet those challenges was conducted in the most appropriate way. The City, which had authority over the security force (subject, almost certainly, to national direction and advice with respect to the safety of Summit delegates), has said that it will assess the policing practices employed in Oakland as a part of its overall review of the Summit. Those wishing to file complaints have been invited to do so with the Citizen's Police Review Board.

Representatives of the City have expressed a further desire to work with Pitt to ensure that our students, particularly those caught up in crowds and unable to disperse as ordered, are treated fairly in the legal process. That is a joint undertaking that we welcome. Similarly, it is the University's intention to employ its own judicial processes judiciously, given the unique set of circumstances facing students last week, circumstances that almost certainly never will recur.