THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT 
              Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: Thursday, September 8, 1994            TAG: 9409080520
SECTION: LOCAL                    PAGE: B5   EDITION: FINAL 
SOURCE: BY KIRSTEN WILLIAMS, CAMPUS CORRESPONDENT 
DATELINE: CHARLOTTESVILLE                    LENGTH: Medium:   61 lines

CHAIRMAN OF U.VA. HONOR COMMITTEE DEFENDS HIS ACTIONS

Students and alumni Wednesday night criticized the student Honor Committee and its chairman for their handling of a controversial appeal in a cheating case. But the chairman defended his actions during an unusual open forum on the case.

Senior engineering student Larry Wright said, ``I am concerned that justice may not have been served in this second trial. I am very concerned about what I see as a political ramrod of a solution.''

But the honor chairman, senior Jimmy Fang of York County, said: ``It was our determination, and is still our determination, that the Honor Committee followed its procedures, its bylaws.

``I'll be the first to admit we didn't handle this perfectly. In hindsight, this could have been handled better, but hindsight is 20-20.''

In February 1993, a randomly chosen student jury found Christopher Leggett guilty of cheating on a computer science exam. In May 1994, Leggett, represented by the Washington law firm of Williams and Connolly, threatened to sue U.Va. if he was not granted a new trial.

In June, the executive committee of the honor panel granted him a new trial after confering with administrators, but not the full honor committee. A month later, Leggett was found not guilty of cheating.

The case has prompted questions about the independence of the student-run honor system, one of U.Va.'s deepest traditions. The criticism Wednesday night mostly followed two themes. First, students questioned whether the executive committee buckled under pressure from administrators in the face of a potential lawsuit.

Wright said: ``You relied heavily on the administration to advise you in this case.'' Fang responded: ``We made that decision'' to grant a new trial.

Fang also was questioned about the executive committee's decision to hear the appeal before it consulted with the full Honor Committee. ``I don't think I've ever seen an executive committee that could act in such a fashion,'' said Al Goodwin, a 1942 graduate.

Fang said the executive committee could have waited for the Honor Committee members to return from summer vacation, but ``the amount of time we were putting into this thing was getting ludicrous. We didn't see the point of delaying any further.''

Yet Fang acknowledged that the executive committee might have taken ``too much power into our own hands.''

Still others questioned Fang's effectiveness as leader of the Honor Committee. Last week, he withstood an attempt to impeach him, but received votes of support from only half the members of the committee.

``I wonder how you sleep at night,'' senior commerce student Gerry Rosales said.

Fang said: ``If my head were to roll as a sacrifice, I think we would be losing a good bit of insight. I still think there are productive things that can be done.''

Nearly 130 people attended the forum in the chemistry auditorium.

KEYWORDS: HONOR CODE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA by CNB