Opinion
Administrative silence in the face of drug arrest
By Will Kaback ’20
December 1, 2016
Tags opinion
By now, most of the Hamilton community is aware of the discovery and seizure of controlled substances in a student dorm last month. We’ve read the email from the administration as well as the breakdown of the event in The Spectator’s Nov. 3 issue. Now, nearly a month later, there are still many more questions than answers as to what exactly is going on. On our small, isolated campus, news like this spreads quickly and becomes the source of endless gossip. In this case, the relative uniqueness of the situation has prompted many to imagine a Narcos-esque tale of hard drugs and bountiful cash playing out within our humble student body. Speculation abounds, and with only the thinnest straws of factual information available for grasping, there’s no sign of it stopping anytime soon. The administration owes it to us to be as transparent as legally possible about this incident, so as to reduce the proliferation of harmful rumors and ensure that the magnitude and scope of the ongoing investigation is properly realized.
I understand that this is not a typical occurrence. While there have been previous narcotics investigations by outside agencies at Hamilton, they are by no means par for the course. The College has a duty to comply with law enforcement as they conduct their inquiry, and they have indicated that they will. If certain information is deemed not appropriate for public release, so be it, but I have a hard time believing that what has been released is all that can be shared. There are many overarching questions that do not pertain to the specifics of the incident that would be beneficial for all to know the answers to. For instance, what is the relationship between the administration and the local police, as well as the narcotics team conducting the investigation?
I reached out to the Kirkland Police Department with this question but received no response at press time. The administration has said it will “cooperate fully with the state’s investigation,” but what exactly does this mean? How much information regarding the student(s) in question are they required to hand over, and do they plan to protect their students in any way in these cases? Additionally, how invasive is the investigation expected to be? Should the student body be expecting DEA agents to swarm our campus or a crackdown on the possession of substances? It may sound far-fetched, but the point is, we don’t have any idea if these measures are plausible or not.
Students should not have to repeatedly ask for these details, they should be actively provided by the administration to whatever degree they are able. While Dean Thompson’s preliminary email was a start, it opened the door to a countless amount of stories and gossip. Most of these, I suspect, are fabricated, but with nothing to base them against, there’s little that can be done to refute even the most outlandish suggestions. The lack of transparency seems to suggest a highly guarded approach by the administration that fails to account for the harmful side effects of such a strategy. I can understand playing it safe to a certain degree, but utter lack of a meager update on the situation in subsequent weeks seems to be indefensible. To do so is to ignore an important opportunity for learning while also leaving members of our community vulnerable to baseless speculation.
In the immediate days following the incident, Dean Thompson said, “the safety of our students is our primary concern,” indicating that this occurrence should serve as a lesson for others on the consequences of drug possession. Her point rings true, but has grown ever more hollow as the days have stretched on without any follow up, while the silence has become ever more deafening. In building on her statement, the administration should take this opportunity to address issues surrounding this isolated event that could prove instrumental to preventing it from happening again in the future.
While I don’t believe Hamilton has a drug problem by any stretch of the imagination, that doesn’t mean that our campus is bereft of drug addiction or dependence issues. Through greater transparency and taking an active role in the aftermath of this occasion, the College can capitalize on a chance to highlight its efforts to curb drug addiction and aid those it affects. This situation is one with high visibility around campus, and that enhanced role is one that the administration should not take lightly. Staying silent achieves nothing, and reinforces a status quo that enabled this situation in the first place.
We must also remember that the spread of rumors is not a victimless crime. Those implicated in this event are still members of our community—they are friends and classmates and it’s hard to imagine what going through this would be like if any of us were in their position. Why allow false accusations and speculation to pile on top of an already awful situation? The college should do all that it can to dispel unfounded stories and establish the basic facts around what has happened and what is going to happen. What harm can come of this? It seems reasonable and straightforward and would be a further indication to students that the administration values all members of the College. Those with access to information must broadcast it as much as possible.
With all this being said, I know that the College is in a tough position. Law enforcement can be notoriously stingy with information release in the name of their investigation and there are obviously many complex issues at play. But I maintain that pure silence benefits no one and only serves to harm those that could be helped by this event. I also find it hard to extend much sympathy to the administration given its often outdated and lackadaisical positions on certain drug issues. I have previously written on the illogical marijuana policy currently in place, and I am not the first to do so.
I believe the College has a strong foundation for support of students on issues of drug dependence, but how accessible are these institutions and how beneficial are they when they are contrasted with perplexing drug policy? Perhaps our current situation can be utilized to answer some of these questions. Without a doubt, it’s worth a shot. But the guarded, uncommunicative approach currently being employed represents a failure on multiple levels. Fortunately, there’s still time to remedy any damage that has been done. There is a clear path forward, one that I hope the College can venture down as a more unified body, rather than a disjointed coalition. As students, we are encouraged to take initiative, be vocal on tough issues, and support one another. It’s high time the administration practiced what it preaches and adopts a policy of transparency.