Letter to the editor

From Pandora Freeman | New regulations around pranking go too far, criminalizing students.

Dissent over the prank rules isn’t about the rules – it’s about the consequences. The Bethel student handbook states that in certain situations regarding pranks, “[students] will be held accountable whether by fines or penalty of the law.” 

A core presupposition we make about pranks is that pranks are intended to be lighthearted, funny, or fun. The nature of pranking, as per the rules, is not meant to cause harm. An intentionally harmful “prank” isn’t a prank, and non-prank rule violations are covered in another section of the handbook – one emphasizing restorative practices.

 If Bethel presses charges against pranksters, they could face jail time or fines that can cost between $500 to $2500. These punishments could be dealt out for the crime of a poorly thought-out prank.

With the introduction of more police presence, Bethel is moving away from restorative justice, and towards criminal penalties. The fact that these rules are at the back of the handbook, separated from the segment on restorative justice, places emphasis on possible criminal and financial charges for pranks. 

In the student conduct process, a strong emphasis is placed on restorative justice procedures rather than police or punitive justice. The focus is placed on righting your wrongs. Sanctions such as probations, fines, apologies, housing reassignments, mental health referrals, and more are provided as solutions. The only mention of involvement of law enforcement is for violations of public law. But, pranks aren’t violations of public law. Why do they carry the threat of legal punishment?

Pandora Freeman