While it is Dartmouth students Kevin Engel and Roan V. Wade facing charges of criminal trespassing, it is Dartmouth President Sian Beilock who stands trial in the court of public opinion. Here is the case against Beilock thus far:

In an email to the entire campus late last fall, Beilock justified the decision to have Engel and Wade arrested for their sit-in on the lawn of Parkhurst Hall as a necessary response to the “threat of violence.” However, the first witness in the trial (which began Monday, Feb. 26 in Lebanon District Court), Dartmouth Safety and Security Director Keiselim Montás, testified that Engel and Wade had made no threats of violence. Montás further testified that the students had not acted violently when they pitched and inhabited a small tent in a call for Dartmouth to disinvest from companies with ties to Israel.

In initial testimony, Montás emphasized that Engel and Wade were arrested because they refused to comply with campus policies that empower the administration to limit the time, place and manner of demonstrations and that prohibit activity interfering with access to campus buildings. On cross-examination, however, he conceded that Engel and Wade in their sit-in had not blocked building access. Moreover, he acknowledged he was unfamiliar with the actions Dartmouth policies outline should be taken in cases of violations. According to the policies, violations are to be adjudicated by the college’s Committee on Standards, not by calls to the Hanover Police.

While the Dartmouth administration has tried unsuccessfully to fight a subpoena requiring Beilock to testify in the trial, claiming that she “has no relevant testimony that she can offer,” Montás further revealed on cross-examination that Beilock was present in the meeting of top administrators that resulted in the decision to pursue arrests.

Although Beilock, citing an illness of undisclosed nature, absented herself from the trial’s first day, her testimony is indeed relevant to justice in this case. Questions Beilock needs to answer include whether she is or is not familiar with the due process Dartmouth policies outline for alleged violations, her role in the meeting of administrators just before the arrests, and why she failed to respond to a peaceful protest, which posed no urgent threat to the campus, by bringing the matter to the Committee on Standards in accordance with the policies she claims to uphold.

Of course, Beilock has another option if she wishes to avoid the witness stand when the trial reconvenes: to advise the district attorney that Dartmouth no longer wishes to pursue criminal charges nor to provide witnesses for the prosecution. By doing so, she would be defending college policies, the integrity of the Committee on Standards, and the future for nonviolent campus dissent and advocacy, including for Palestine. By calling publicly for the cases against Engel and Wade to be dismissed, she might also find herself acquitted in the court of public opinion.

Nancy Welch is a member of Upper Valley for Palestine. She lives in Hanover.