Len Audaer checked his e-mail last Friday and discovered he is under investigation for harassment. 

‘I have received a charging statement from a student against you and have begun an investigation of the charges. The charges are extremely serious,’ read the e-mail from Gregory Germain, an associate professor of law at Syracuse University’s College of Law.

On Monday, Audaer, 24, a second-year law student focusing on national security and counterterrorism law, found out in a meeting with Germain and Tomas Gonzalez, senior assistant dean for Student Life, that the college officials suspect he is the author of a satirical blog, which some have deemed offensive, about the College of Law. 

SUCOLitis, a WordPress blog, began publishing online at the beginning of October. A group of second- and third-year law students write on the website with the goal of entertaining those in SU’s College of Law, according to the blog. But some officials and students at the law school are calling for the site to be removed and for legal action to be taken against the author.

A disclaimer on the blog states it is a satirical publication, not a news blog, and no actual news stories appear on the site. The site will not show up in search engines, so students do not need to worry about potential employers finding their names associated with the site, according to the disclaimer.

But the site has gained a large amount of interest from those aware of its existence. The law school has about 1,000 staff and students, and the site has had over 9,000 visits, according to the website’s counter.

‘Everyone at the College of Law has read the site, people outside the College of Law have read the site,’ Audaer said.

Now the College of Law alleges Audaer is the author of the blog — something he will neither confirm nor deny — and what is written on it is harassment. Audaer said the College of Law said SU’s Office of Judicial Affairs would also likely start an investigation.

Audaer said he is the only student being investigated but would not be surprised if he was asked to name conspirators. He said he has been told computer evidence will be used, but this could be faulty if one of the other law students he lives with used his computer to access the site.

Since SU is a private institution, the school has its own policies regarding free speech and does not have to legally uphold the First Amendment, meaning SU needs less evidence to make a case against Audaer. Although he does not think the case could survive in civil court, Audaer said he is disturbed by the situation. Audaer is only allowed to have a lawyer with him during the College of Law’s hearing and, should the issue escalate, he could potentially be expelled and deported back to England, because he is in the United States on a student visa that requires him to be a full-time student. 

Audaer believes he is under investigation because, as the leader of the College of Law’s Parliamentary Debate Society, he set up a student debate for Wednesday on issues like College ACB, the Rutgers University student’s suicide and SUCOLitis. The debate will still feature students from the College of Law but will be held by the Tully Center for Free Speech and SU’s American Constitution Society. 

Chancellor Nancy Cantor is not involved with the SUCOLitis matter, as it is a matter within the law school, said Kevin Quinn, senior vice president of public affairs. Quinn said he has heard several law school students have filed complaints about the site with the law school and with the Office of Judicial Affairs.

Germain, the professor involved in investigations, said he was unable to comment on the specifics of the investigation, but said a formal student complaint caused the law school to begin investigating the issue. As the faculty prosecutor, the member appointed to handle violations of the code of ethics, Germain has the job to resolve whether or not Audaer broke the Student Code of Conduct.

He said the situation is not normal and described the website as ‘designed to be offensive.’

‘Is it normal for blogs to be put up that ridicule certain students’ character?’ Germain said.

The blog features topics like ‘Class of 2013 Named Most Attractive in History’ and ‘Senate President Elected SU’s Sexiest Semite.’ Fake quotes and content are used throughout the blog entries and generally are attributed to students or faculty of the law school. Some posts include made-up names. 

This is not an issue of free speech, Germain said, because the site is libelous and there are limitations to individual rights.

‘‘My right to swing my arm ends where your nose begins,’ is the old saying,’ he said.

But without proof, there is no basis for the investigation, said Adam Kissel, vice president for programs at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. He said offending someone is not enough to prove the website had caused harm.

‘Show me the bloody nose,’ Kissel said in response to Germain’s proverb.

The abuse of sexual harassment claims is a widespread problem, Kissel said. He said many schools have sexual harassment policies that are unconstitutional or violate the institution’s own policies on free expression.

He said just because someone is offended by a sexual joke, it does not necessarily qualify as sexual harassment. 

‘Even if a drawing on a white board is offensive or in bad taste, it’s very far from harassment,’ Kissel said.

Kissel considered driving between four to five hours from Philadelphia on Wednesday to attend the debate and support free speech. 

Germain was unaware of the debate on Wednesday about free speech, he said. It is a shame for an academic event to focus on this website, Germain said. But it is also an opportunity to talk about the issues through something the law school supports, he said.

The law school should lighten up, said David Rubin, professor and dean emeritus of the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications. If students are not being harmed, the law school does not have the right to become involved.

‘You cannot have libel without a false statement of fact,’ Rubin said.

Rubin has viewed the website and said he did not see the site as anything other than satire, something people experience every day with comedians like Jay Leno or David Letterman. He referenced the Supreme Court case of Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, which deemed a parody of televangelist Jerry Falwell to be within the law because readers would not have interpreted the parody as fact.

If the College of Law wishes to make a stand about the website, Rubin suggested it use speech and create its own blog aimed at whoever is authoring the site.

Peter Bell, professor at the College of Law, was included in the story about the Class of 2013 with a phony comment on the attractiveness of first-year students. Bell, who teaches a class of 85 first-year students, said he thought the post could potentially make students feel uncomfortable around him.

Bell said he has never seen the blog, but said Gonzalez spoke about the blog last week with him. He said Gonzalez said the issue had arisen after a post identified a first-year female as promiscuous.

First-year students are already under enough pressure, Bell said, and there is no need to add to that with the blog.

‘Whoever’s doing it should stop doing it and definitely not say the nasty things that they are saying — even if they aren’t true,’ Bell said.

Should the matter not be resolved, Audaer said he has thought about suing the school. He also said he believes furthering the investigation would be an issue that would internally harm the school, with professors voicing opinions against the university’s actions.

Ideally, the investigation will be dropped, he said. 

‘I don’t really want to sue Syracuse University,’ Audaer said. ‘I like Syracuse University.’

dkmcbrid@syr.edu