U-Wire
Arizona Daily Wildcat
October 22, 1997

Bill would broaden scope of campus crime reporting

(U-WIRE) WASHINGTON - A new petition to the U.S. Supreme Court pits privacy against protection in the case of student crime records. A 1991 federal law requires college administrations to release a number of campus security statistics, but some say it may not go far enough.

The law, called the Disclosure of Campus Security and Campus Crime Statistics Act, requires publicly funded colleges and universities to disclose crime-related campus policies, programs and statistics to the student newspaper and prospective students or employees upon request.

But the Miami University of Ohio student newspaper, fearing that discrepancies between campus security statistics and the combined statistics of all school departments could keep students from gauging actual safety risks on campus, requested more statistics than the law requires. The Ohio Supreme Court ordered the school to provide the records, but it refused after the U.S. Department of Education said the statistics were covered under a separate federal law protecting students' privacy.

The U.S. Supreme Court now must decide whether to review the Ohio ruling. If it decides to hear the case, the result could mean a national change in the process of reporting crime statistics.

In addition, a bill introduced in the House of Representatives aims to broaden the scope of the campus crime statistics law, as well as open campus judiciary hearings to the public except in the case of rape or sexual assault.

The bill has 59 co-sponsors from both parties, including five Pennsylvania congressmen and three from Wisconsin. It is expected to be folded into the major education re-authorization package this year.

In April 1996, the Miami Student requested documents outside of those regularly released by the administration. The newspaper was attempting to compile a data bank of student crimes for reporting and information purposes. The request did not ask for names, ages or any other distinguishing information about students involved in the cases.

"There is no central repository for campus crime information," said Ben Clery, president of Security on Campus Inc., a nonprofit student safety advocacy group aiding the Miami Student's case. The schools "have never collected these crime statistics," Clery said.

The school refused to release the information requested, citing a 1974 federal law requiring privacy for student records and educational documents. Failure to comply with the Federal Educational Right to Privacy Act is punishable by a complete withdrawal of federal funds,though the government has never exercised that right.

"It [FERPA] is now a cancer on an informed and vigilant campus community more than it is a reasonable privacy protection for individuals," Clery said.

In July, the Ohio Supreme Court ordered the university to turn over certain disciplinary proceedings to the student newspaper. The ruling was written specifically to avoid a conflict with FERPA, claiming judicial documents, because of their criminal content, are public, not educational, documents.

"We saw no reason to appeal at that time," said Richard Little, Miami University spokesman.

But shortly after the ruling, the Department of Education asked Miami not to comply with the court ruling so the university refused to provide the records rather than jeopardize its approximate $40 million in federal funding.

"It would serve the university and the public to make those records public," Little said. "There is a gross misconception that a lot of these records cover unreported crimes."

Some officials fear that increased disclosure may deter students from reporting crimes on campus.

"To open the undergraduate judicial system would probably discourage people from wanting to report things," said James Schwab, police captain at Duke University.

Schwab said the privacy provided to students by the campus judicial proceedings allows more freedom to resolve cases on campus.

But Clery said the privacy is more a boon to schools than students because it is the school that would be harmed by more extensive reporting of crime statistics.

"It's false advertising," said Ben Clery. "If [the university] misrepresents the magnitude of crime on campus, I have been denied information. That record helps establish a foreseeable crime."

Although university officials say student security is their top priority, some do express concern about the public disclosure of extensive crime statistics.

"The problem is not so much the information, but how is that information interpreted," said David Salter, director of public relations at York College of Pennsylvania. The problem with extending access to judiciary records is that the information becomes less focused in its representation.

"Each person is going to interpret the information differently and may cause alarm where there need not be," Salter said. "Strict numbers don't always tell the whole story. It could have a negative impact."