Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Cambridge Uni Students Burn Money in Front of Homeless Person Watch

    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Pembroke have said:

    The incident involving Ronald Coyne burning a £20 note in front of a homeless person is now subject to a University disciplinary investigation, according to a statement released today by Pembroke College.

    On the College's Facebook page, the statement reads: "We are aware of an incident that took place in the early hours of Thursday 2nd February 2017. This incident has been referred to the University's disciplinary process. We cannot comment further while this process is underway."



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Pembroke have said:

    The incident involving Ronald Coyne burning a £20 note in front of a homeless person is now subject to a University disciplinary investigation, according to a statement released today by Pembroke College.

    On the College's Facebook page, the statement reads: "We are aware of an incident that took place in the early hours of Thursday 2nd February 2017. This incident has been referred to the University's disciplinary process. We cannot comment further while this process is underway."



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I am clearly wrong on this.

    However, the University is going to have a job putting the square peg of this student's behaviour into either of the round holes of:-

    1 No member of the University shall intentionally or recklessly disrupt or impede or attempt to disrupt or impede the activities and functions of the University, or any part thereof, or of any College.

    This was never intended to catch the activities of persuading rich benefactors to give Cambridge money or of persuading poor teenagers to apply to study there.

    6 No member of the University shall engage in harassment in the course of an academic, sporting, social, cultural, or other activity either within the Precincts of the University or elsewhere in the context of her or his membership of the University or in circumstances where the victim of the harassment is a member, officer, or employee of the University or a College. Harassment shall include single or repeated incidents involving unwanted and unwarranted conduct towards another person which is reasonably likely to have the effect of (i) violating that other’s dignity or (ii) creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for that other.

    Was this behaviour in the course of a social activity or following a social activity? Was the behaviour in the context of his membership of the University? Clearly the Ordinance envisages a member of the University harassing within the Precincts of the University but not in the context of his membership of the University.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I am clearly wrong on this.

    However, the University is going to have a job putting the square peg of this student's behaviour into either of the round holes of:-

    1 No member of the University shall intentionally or recklessly disrupt or impede or attempt to disrupt or impede the activities and functions of the University, or any part thereof, or of any College.

    This was never intended to catch the activities of persuading rich benefactors to give Cambridge money or of persuading poor teenagers to apply to study there.

    No member of the University shall engage in harassment in the course of an academic, sporting, social, cultural, or other activity either within the Precincts of the University or elsewhere in the context of her or his membership of the University or in circumstances where the victim of the harassment is a member, officer, or employee of the University or a College. Harassment shall include single or repeated incidents involving unwanted and unwarranted conduct towards another person which is reasonably likely to have the effect of (i) violating that other’s dignity or (ii) creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for that other.

    Was this behaviour in the course of a social activity or following a social activity? Was the behaviour in the context of his membership of the University? Clearly the Ordinance envisages a member of the University harassing within the Precincts of the University but not in the context of his membership of the University.
    Isn't there a more general "behaviour likely to bring the university into disrepute"?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Isn't there a more general "behaviour likely to bring the university into disrepute"?
    If there is, I couldn't find it
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Unis are private charities. As part of enrolling you agree to abide by their rules and regs. Oxbridge have comprehensive rules and regs or rather the colleges do. If you behave in a manner which reflects badly on them, then they arent going to be pleased. They didnt ask to be dragged into it. Wait and see what action they take.
    Again, my point wasn't over the legal minutiae of what the university is legally allowed to do, but rather over what I think they ought to be allowed to do.

    Do I agree with his behaviour? No, but it wasn't criminal, it wasn't done in the context of his being a student (which is to say it wasn't done in his college, lecture hall, tutorial etc.). He was a private citizen who did something dickish. I think it is an overreach for any institution to punish him for that. I'm well aware that Oxford and Cambridge are famously controlling over their students personal lives, but I don't think we can draw an is from an ought. Just because these universities ARE this way doesn't mean they should be or that it is right for them to be.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by limetang)
    Again, my point wasn't over the legal minutiae of what the university is legally allowed to do, but rather over what I think they ought to be allowed to do.

    Do I agree with his behaviour? No, but it wasn't criminal, it wasn't done in the context of his being a student (which is to say it wasn't done in his college, lecture hall, tutorial etc.). He was a private citizen who did something dickish. I think it is an overreach for any institution to punish him for that. I'm well aware that Oxford and Cambridge are famously controlling over their students personal lives, but I don't think we can draw an is from an ought. Just because these universities ARE this way doesn't mean they should be or that it is right for them to be.
    It doesnt have to be criminal it just has to bring the college into disrepute, which he has done by dragging the name of the college into matters. It would be exacty the same for an employee doing the same outside their workplace. I have no idea what action is being taken, but will agree to differ with you and think its quite right he is sanctioned, even though you think he shouldnt be.

    I am now looking at the previous posts which appear to identify the rules he may have broken.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    If there is, I couldn't find it
    I'm surprised there isnt a more general disrepute rule. Thanks for posting what you found. I wonder if the person in question is busy scouring the rules? I will wait and see what the uni decide to do, its old news now.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    I'm surprised there isnt a more general disrepute rule. Thanks for posting what you found. I wonder if the person in question is busy scouring the rules? I will wait and see what the uni decide to do, its old news now.
    Interestingly Pembroke has a much more apt rule:-

    "In practice, alcohol consumption, to excess, produces more social damage thanany other factor. Routinely, we impose sanctions for this when it extends to
    the level of infringing the liberty, or well-being, of others. These sanctions can
    be quite severe. It is only logical, therefore, if we impose sanctions upon other
    forms of substance abuse."

    I suspect academics are wary of the "bringing into disrepute" type charge because of the concern that it may be used to limit academic freedom.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Interestingly Pembroke has a much more apt rule:-

    "In practice, alcohol consumption, to excess, produces more social damage thanany other factor. Routinely, we impose sanctions for this when it extends to
    the level of infringing the liberty, or well-being, of others. These sanctions can
    be quite severe. It is only logical, therefore, if we impose sanctions upon other
    forms of substance abuse."

    I suspect academics are wary of the "bringing into disrepute" type charge because of the concern that it may be used to limit academic freedom.

    I misread. I missed the fact the rules were from the Uni. I thought Pembroke were in a much better position to issue any sanction. I do feel it is yesterdays news, but will be interesting to see how it pans out. Surely all the attention on the student concerned must have a massive impact on his studies? Maybe he could do with the extra time? I dont think it will have a long lasting effect on his career.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    I misread. I missed the fact the rules were from the Uni. I thought Pembroke were in a much better position to issue any sanction. I do feel it is yesterdays news, but will be interesting to see how it pans out. Surely all the attention on the student concerned must have a massive impact on his studies? Maybe he could do with the extra time? I dont think it will have a long lasting effect on his career.
    Pembroke are in a better position to act but it appears from what
    Doonesbury posted the university is taking the lead.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Pembroke are in a better position to act but it appears from what
    Doonesbury posted the university is taking the lead.
    I dont know the way these things are handled. I had assumed it would be Pembroke, but if the uni is dealing, then wouldnt that be even more serious? They must have an idea what they are looking at. It is still a strange thing to do unless it was for a bet/ initiation. Also odd that he spent years working at a homeless charity, which i'm assuming now that was just to pad his PS out. Would he get legal representation for something like this?.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    I dont know the way these things are handled. I had assumed it would be Pembroke, but if the uni is dealing, then wouldnt that be even more serious? They must have an idea what they are looking at. It is still a strange thing to do unless it was for a bet/ initiation. Also odd that he spent years working at a homeless charity, which i'm assuming now that was just to pad his PS out. Would he get legal representation for something like this?.
    Only if he or his parents pay, but there is a law faculty members scheme for assisting students charged with disciplinary offences.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    And now Pembroke is in a stew of trouble!

    http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...-over-12658564

    LOL
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doonesbury)
    And now Pembroke is in a stew of trouble!

    http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...-over-12658564

    LOL
    Without seeing the Pembroke recipe, it is impossible to offer an opinion but there are plenty of Jamaican beef stew recipes all over the internet, some of which are from sites with an impeccable Caribbean pedigree. Once one takes into account that all "ethnic" food is adapted for the consumers' market (an English breakfast or afternoon tea outside England with have different ingredients to those traditionally found at home), I remain to be convinced.

    Actually Pembroke seem to be seriously foodie

    http://thepembrokekitchen.blogspot.co.uk/
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doonesbury)
    And now Pembroke is in a stew of trouble!

    http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...-over-12658564

    LOL
    Why do the people complaining about this think everyone cares so much about the cultures they think they own for some reason?

    Nobody was interpreting 'Jamaican stew' as a faithful representation of Jamaican culture because (a) people are generally aware that 'foreign' foods produced in England won't necessarily represent the dishes they're derived from (cf. every Indian or Chinese restaurant) and (b) nobody really cares. Ordinary students who ask for a 'Jamaican stew' aren't thinking 'gee, this will really enlighten me about an interesting culture'. They're thinking 'oh, that sounds vaguely exotic, maybe it will taste somewhat interesting'.

    As with most student controversies, the problem here is basically the narcissism of the complainants.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    that is really---------------------????
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.