Jesse Cheng announced on Monday that he would be stepping down as Student Regent of the University of California system. The announcement came just days before the final Regents meeting of his term.
The student conduct office at UC Irvine, Cheng’s home campus, ruled in March that Cheng had sexually assaulted a former girlfriend the previous fall. He appealed the finding, stepping down only after his appeal was rejected. (Cheng had admitted to sexual assault in an email to the woman, but later claimed that the confession was false, and written under pressure from his accuser. He was arrested in connection with the incident a few weeks after it allegedly occurred, but released without charges.)
In an era in which the University of California has pursued student activists with the aggressive use of both criminal and campus judicial sanctions, the mild treatment of Cheng — who, though he now denies any wrongdoing, both admitted to and was found guilty of sexual assault — stands out. In particular, it contrasts dramatically with how the university and local prosecutors have treated the “Irvine 11,” a group of students who are currently facing trial for allegedly disrupting a campus speech by the Israeli ambassador to the US.
I’ll admit that I’m ambivalent about the charges against Jesse Cheng. I know Jesse, and I’d like to believe that he’s not capable of what he’s been accused of. But whatever my personal thoughts on his case, the fact is that he was found by a student conduct board to have committed a sexual assault, and given his confession, it’s difficult to argue that the board’s conclusion was egregiously in error.
That Cheng received probation, and was allowed to keep his seat on the UC Regents until he himself chose to give it up, while the Irvine 11 saw the student organization to which they belong suspended and now each face the possibility of six months in jail? That’s not right. That’s not proportionate. That’s not legitimate.
And that disproportion, that illegitimacy, casts the whole University of California judicial system, as well as the UC’s relationship with law enforcement, into question.
Update | Read this post from Reclaim UC for more on the university’s recent history of bungling sexual assault charges. Seriously. Go read it.
studentactivism.net 
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 17, 2011 at 3:27 pm
Zot
The university only chose a quarter suspension on the Muslim Student Union as a result of the Irvine 11 incident. While I am not familiar if individuals received additional punishment, I know all of the students are still allowed to continue their education and graduate.
It is the Orange County DA that decided to push for more legal action, in which the university requested the DA to STOP. The DA ignored the university’s request. The professors on campus lead by a prominent Jewish law professor started a petition to do the same thing and stop the trial, but still the DA could care less about the university’s opinions.
This is the same DA office that chose not to press the charges on Jesse. This may be because they don’t have a good track record with prosecuting allege sexual assault offenders. The Jury of OC people just won’t believe the victim. That is where you have to say the problem lies in the OC.
May 17, 2011 at 4:28 pm
Angus Johnston
Zot, the suspension of the MSU was pretty much unprecedented. The fact that it was eventually reduced to a single quarter means less to me than the fact that it was imposed at all.
And unfortunately, I don’t think the university has any credibility at all on the question of whether its public statements on prosecution of student activists match up to what university officials are saying to the DA behind the scenes.
Also, the UC has shown time and time again that it is willing to use its power to arrest students as a tool for controlling peaceful, nonviolent protest. Claims that “We just wanted them arrested! We didn’t want them prosecuted!” ring spectacularly hollow to me.
May 18, 2011 at 12:24 pm
Zot
While it may be precedented to suspend MSU, the motive is more of a external pressure on UC Irvine admin and not the rest of the UC campuses. I know further consequences have happen to other students for their activism on campus. However, UC Irvine admin has to run the show differently because of the OC. If this campus was build anywhere else in California with the same people in charge, they wouldn’t have cared. The jewish/muslim conflict at UC Irvine is highly intense as you know. Its also coincidental that many donors are Jewish. The university also has a mark of being considered anti-semitic.
This was wrong, don’t misunderstand me, I really wish they didn’t prosecute them, but with emails that showed the intent of disruption your really left with little choice but to try some lame discipline to please a bunch of idiots. This incident had less to do with suppressing student activism and more to do with controlling the harsh Jewish/Muslim conflict.
Also, I have seen protest of a similar matter at UC Irvine 3 years prior to this incident, where the police did come in and arrested the protesters. It was between the Ayn Rand and Larouche organizations.
Are there cases of student activism suppression… yes. That probably comes from the fact that last year UC Santa Cruz took an admin hostage to try to negotiate the 32% fee increase.
Your comments on the university and the DA talking is pure speculation. Irvine of all campuses, HATES bad or controversial publicity. Yes, this come from the OC mindset which is they just don’t want to piss people off or rally them up. The DA’s motivation comes from the Jewish community. The ones who would donate bundles of money to his reelection. The ones who also feel that UC Irvine didn’t go far enough with MSU. Lastly, there is a thing call the UC ego, and that ego says we should be the only ones who are allowed to punish our students. This is a threat to that ego and they feel threaten over control of what happens on campus. In the CA constitution, the UCs are a literal 4th branch of government. What they pass at the regent level is equivalent to law. This is how they create and maintain their own police force. When local police are following a suspect, they have to stop at campus borders. When we had the 32% fee increase protest at UCLA. They called in UC police from all the campuses, and they called backup from CA highway patrol not LAPD. So unless its a murder case or rape, they usually control their own environment especially on their students.