Discussion Amidst Antagonism Matthew Preusch Obee Landrum and other members of the Irvin Landrum, Jr. Justice Committee are seen here talking to a CPD officer on Wednesday. On Monday the LA County District Attorney’s office issued a report stating that the two CPD officers who fatally shot Landrum last January after a traffic stop acted in self-defense. The news that Officers Hany Hanna and Kent Jacks will not face criminal charges did not surprise many at this week’s rally, and the group intends to continue congregating weekly outside city hall, placing their hopes in a possible U.S. Department of Justice inquiry. The review by the DA’s office follows that of the LA Sherriff Dept and the CPD, which both concluded that the officers were acting within the law.

Study Abroad Rejections Reversed CMC Coronates President Gann Linguistics Department Centralized at Pomona Questions Raised Over Business Recruiting Digital Underground Brings Treats for Tricks O.E. in the I.E. Celebrity Death Match Politics: Biographer Brings Insight Sagehen Football Prepared for Homecoming Dougey on Rugby Volleyball Hopes to Finish Strong Broken Beer Bottles Present Tetanus Hazard Pakistani-American Embroiled in Coup Republican Congress Heralds the Apocalypse Smith Center Committee Is A Farce We Don’t Want Your Kind On Halloween TSL Poll Do you hang out at the Smith Campus Center: Just to get my mail ALL the time, I love it Only against my will When I want to flex some food with friends Results This text should be hidden!

A late night joyride on a school-owned golf cart by four Pomona students has left one student with the possibility of facing criminal charges, and raised some questions about the Claremont Police Department’s (CPD) role in campus security.

At 2:24 am on Sunday, October 10, a Campus Safety officer spotted four suspects, two male and two female, driving a golf cart by Frank Dining Hall. The officer chased after the suspects on foot and was slightly injured after falling off his bike in pursuit.

By the timeadditional officers arrived to assist all four subjects had already fled the scene.

Campus Safety later contacted the CPD for assistance after the subjects were spotted near the Claremont Graduate University (CGU).

"We may assume that they are students, but we can’t always tell," Director of the Department of Campus Safety Lena Robinson said. "The Claremont Police was later called because we thought that they might be going into the city."

According to police records, shortly before 4 am, the Claremont Police and Campus Safety spotted one of the male suspects on the property of CGU and took him into custody at gunpoint. Neither Campus Safety nor the CPD has commented on the specifics of the arrest at gunpoint.

The suspect, a Pomona student who did not want to be named, was arrested by the police and charged with count 148: "Resisting public or peace officers or medical technicians in the discharge of their duties." According to 148a, violators include "every person who willfully resists, delays, or obstructs any public officer, peace officer…in the discharge or attempt to discharge…"

"If someone is running from us, it isn’t unusual to charge them with this," CPD Lieutenant Stan L. Van Horn said.

The two female suspects, Pomona students, were apprehended but neither was charged with any criminal act. They were released shortly thereafter. According to Robinson, there is a good chance that the women were cooperative with the police in matters such as not fleeing or not refusing to disclose information. The other male suspect was able to escape apprehension by the police.

Campus Safety filed the mandatory Dean’s Report, and then followed standard procedure by contacting the dean on call, who at that time was Assistant Dean of Students Neil Gerard. Although unable to comment on the specifics of this case, Gerard mentioned that the theft or attempted theft of the college’s property violates the Pomona Student Code.

Depending on whether or not those involved admit to their actions, it is possible that they will have the incident reviewed by either the Judiciary Board or the Penalty Board.

The case of the student who was arrested, however, is currently being reviewed by the District Attorney’s office to see if there is ample cause to file an official criminal report. This process generally takes about four weeks from the time of the event.

Because only one of the students involved in the incident is being charged by the police, questions concerning the role differences between the Department of Campus Safety and the CPD have been raised.

According to Director Robinson, because of a good relationship with the CPD, Campus Safety is able to take responsibility for the handling of most minor crimes.

"We have a good, fair relationship with the police. They don’t have to allow us to do this [take control]," Robinson said. "There is an understanding that we are trained well enough to handle some things internally and they will give us their investigative experience or fire power when we need it."

The agreement between the two groups outlines certain offenses that require Campus Safety to call the CPD; these include crimes against persons, felony thefts (property value exceeding $5000), etc.

Also, CPD monitors Campus Safety’s radio frequency, and vice versa. Dean of Students Ann Quinley has said that CPD often comes to campus of their own volition after hearing of an incident over the radio.

President Peter Stanley questioned the necessity of CPD’s responding in this particular case.

"I don’t see why the CPD would be involved," Stanley said. "It seems like a Campus Safety issue. College procedure is to call CPD only if someone is seriously at risk."

According to Robinson, the reason Campus Safety and the Claremont Colleges have the opportunity to handle matters internally is to free up the justice system for more severe crimes, and because dealing with matters internally is often easier to accomplish.

Robinson does admit, however, that in some instances, students who commit crimes on the college campuses may tend to get off with less severe punishments than if they were to commit the same crime elsewhere. Had the students who stole the golf cart done the same thing at a local golf course, it is possible that they could have been charged with a felony, Grand Theft Auto, had the cart been valued at over $5000.

Despite this disparity in punishments, Quinley would prefer to keep on-campus matters within the college. "I would just as soon that they (CPD) are here very rarely," Quinley said. "In most cases, there isn’t much that they add by being here."
Both Gerard and Quinley say that they feel uneasy about having a student taken into custody at gunpoint in an instance such as this. "I think it’s incredibly bad," Quinley said, referring to the officers drawing their guns. "I certainly do not want somebody shot on campus for appropriating a golf cart."

Gerard agrees with Quinley, but also thinks that the police rightly know how to act in situations such as this. "I am very worried about an accident happening, and yet I am not in a position to second guess the Claremont Police Department," Gerard said. "You have to remember that the presumption here is that you are not dealing with a student. The presumption is that you have a felon who is not a student, because Campus Safety will not call CPD unless there are [certain] circumstances."

Although he could not comment on this specific case, Lieutenant Van Horn did comment on the department’s policy on drawing guns. "Generally we can draw guns when we have someone who has created a situation where we are unsure of their intent," Van Horn said.