A UNC graduate student facing discipline from the school for throwing blood and ink on the now-toppled Silent Sam statue walked out of her hearing over a conservative judge on her sentencing panel who once defended Confederate Monuments.
The university’s Daily Tar Heel newspaper reported that student Maya Little walked out of the second day of her disciplinary hearing after the presiding officer refused to remove student adjudicator Frank Pray, a law student who previously led conservative groups on campus and who posted on social media comments defending Silent Sam.
BREAKING: A MEMBER OF THE HONOR COURT JUDGING MAYA LITTLE, FRANK PRAY, HAS PUBLICLY HARASSED HER AND OTHER UNC ACTIVISTS, and openly supports Silent Sam and white supremacy. This is not an impartial court. https://t.co/J9x1LuVrYs #AbolishHonorCourt pic.twitter.com/gtRgdaUiv6
— Take Action Chapel Hill (@takeactionch) October 25, 2018
“Defacing a memorial that is for North Carolinians who lost their lives defending our state, no matter who the attacking force was, is really wrong,” Pray told a local media station about a previous vandalism of the statue.
UNC Honor Court panelist Frank Pray is *not* impartial on the issue of Silent Sam, and should not be allowed to participate in the trial of student activist Maya Little.
Here’s some of what we found so far showing just how strong Frank Pray’s opinions on Silent Sam actually are: pic.twitter.com/27AM4CHX5K
— Move Silent Sam (@Move_Silent_Sam) October 25, 2018
Presiding officer Amelia Ahern, the Daily Tar Heel noted, insisted Pray could remain impartial and sit on the panel because he did not specifically comment about Little’s vandalism of the statue.
In response, the student who threw the blood and ink on the statue during a protest held before its impromptu topping earlier this year said she was sure the adjudicator could not be impartial.
“I am going to walk out,” Little said.
BREAKING: At the second day of Maya Little’s honor court trial for pouring blood and paint on Silent Sam, Maya Little walks out after the court announces that they will not remove Frank Pray from the panel. pic.twitter.com/arvZJW8mbG
— Amy Cockerham (@amymcockerham) October 26, 2018
In a statement given after walking out, Little explained her decision to walk out.
“I was not informed of who was chosen to be on the panel to determine whether I can continue my studies until 4 pm yesterday when the panelists walked into the hearing after me,” she read from a prepared statement.
She went on to say that fellow students learned “within a few minutes of research” that Pray “has been a vocal and active supporter of Confederate monuments.” Little also claimed the adjudicator “publicly harassed” one of her witnesses, a professor Pray called “a disgrace.”
Maya Little gives a statement in the hallway after she walks out of her honor court trial pic.twitter.com/TY0JluEajs
— Amy Cockerham (@amymcockerham) October 26, 2018
Hours after Little left the hearing, the honor court gave them a letter of warning and 18 hours of community service, Raleigh News & Observer education reporter Jane Stancill tweeted. The reporter also noted that the grad student will not be required to pay restitution.
— Jane Stancill (@janestancill) October 26, 2018
Watergate’s John Dean thinks Trump wrote part of his legal team’s brief — because it’s so terrible
Former White House counsel for Richard Nixon, John Dean, explained that the legal brief out of President Donald Trump's White House was so bad that it had to have been dictated by Trump himself.
Saturday evening, Trump's legal team, chaired by Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow and White House counsel Pat Cipollone, filed their own form of a legal brief that responded to the case filed by Democrats ahead of Tuesday's impeachment trial.
The document called the proceedings “constitutionally invalid” and claims House Democrats are staging a “dangerous attack” with a “brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election.”
WATCH: Prince Harry explains why he and Meghan are leaving the royal family — but promises ‘a life of service’
Prince Harry posted a video from an HIV/AIDS fundraiser his mother once supported, where he explained his methodology for leaving his profile role as a royal.
"I will continue to be the same man who holds his country dear," said Harry.
He went on to say that he doesn't intend to walk away and he certainly won't walk away from his causes and interests. "We intend to live a life of service."
In the speech, he thanked those who took him under their wing in the absence of his mother
"I hope you can understand that it's what it had come to," he said for why their family intends to step back.
‘You cannot expect anything but fascism’: Pedagogy theorist on how Trump ‘legitimated a culture of lying, cruelty and a collapse of social responsibility’
The impeachment of Donald Trump appears to be a crisis without a history, at least a history that illuminates, not just comparisons with other presidential impeachments, but a history that provides historical lessons regarding its relationship to a previous age of tyranny that ushered in horrors associated with a fascist politics in the 1930s. In the age of Trump, history is now used to divert and elude the most serious questions to be raised about the impeachment crisis. The legacy of earlier presidential impeachments, which include Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, provide a comparative historical context for analysis and criticism. And while Trump’s impeachment is often defined as a more serious constitutional crisis given his attempt to use the power of the presidency to advance his personal political agenda, it is a crisis that willfully ignores the conditions that gave rise to Trump’s presidency along with its recurring pattern of authoritarian behavior, policies, and practices. One result is that the impeachment process with its abundance of political theater and insipid media coverage treats Trump’s crimes as the endpoint of an abuse of power and an illegal act, rather than as a political action that is symptomatic of a long legacy of conditions that have led to the United States’ slide into the abyss of authoritarianism.