At UVA’s School of Architecture, being in the wrong place at the wrong time can certainly be costly.

That’s what third-year Emily Bauer found yesterday as her seven-month honor infraction ordeal ended in an open trial where she was found not guilty of lying and cheating.

In the “trial room” in Newcomb Hall, a panel– 12 randomly selected student jurors, three from the “A-school,” and a trial chair– sat facing three student lawyers representing Bauer, and three representing the community. Ticket-holding observers sat in the back of the room during UVA’s first open honor trial since 2005.

Bauer’s alleged infraction involved the A-school’s only firm deadline– the deadline just before the final review of students’ small “site models.” While due dates are fluid because of the evolving nature of their work throughout the semester, the A-school has a firm “pencils down” policy at 6pm before the day of the final review. In Bauer’s case, the deadline fell on December 6, 2007.

“It’s pretty easy to tell what is cheating in other classes,” Bauer told the Hook before her trial, “but in the A-school, it’s less clear. If your model breaks after the deadline and then you fix it, that’s cheating.”

Heather Fisher, the “reporter” of the possible honor offense, was present via conference call. She testified that she saw Bauer at her desk working on something around 1am, hours after the Architecture 201 Final Review 6pm deadline.

Fisher testified that she asked Bauer if she was working on something for the studio, and Bauer said no.

Architectural design chair Jen Sumaka, with whom Bauer was acquainted, testified that later that night she asked the student the same question, and Bauer said yes.

Every A-school student who testified characterized the time period before the 6pm final review deadline as “very taxing,” and that’s why some said Bauer’s work on an architecture project at 1am after the 6pm deadline seemed suspicious.

Bauer testified that she was in the A-school building that night to help a friend. Her friend– who was unnamed because her earlier honor trial resulting from the same incident was closed– had cut her finger but refused to go to the hospital for fear she would not be able to finish her project. As her friend was feeling weak, Bauer testified, she urged her to seek permission to get dinner and then pin up her work later.

Evidence against Bauer was not strong enough to prove her guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the jury found.

Bauer criticized the die-hard mentality of the architecture school. “In the A-school, you are seen as weak if you are sick,” she said. “And the medical policies they do have in place are not well advertised.”

“I think she did the right thing,” says her mother, Mary Bauer. “At the architecture school, there’s a very individual mentality; they want you to leave others hanging.”

Under UVA’s single sanction policy, if Bauer had been found guilty of either lying or cheating, she certainly would have been left hanging. UVA’s one-strike-you’re-out honor code would have dictated expulsion.

Update-

At UVA’s School of Architecture, being in the wrong place at the wrong time can certainly be costly.

That’s what third-year Emily Bauer found Sunday, July 20 as her seven-month honor infraction ordeal ended in an open trial where she was found not guilty of lying and cheating.

In the “trial room” in Newcomb Hall, a panel– 12 randomly selected student jurors, three from the “A-school,” and a trial chair– sat facing three student lawyers representing Bauer, and three representing the community. Ticket-holding observers sat in the back of the room during UVA’s first open honor trial since 2005.
Bauer’s alleged infraction involved the A-school’s only firm deadline– the deadline just before the final review of students’ small “site models.” While due dates are fluid because of the evolving nature of their work throughout the semester, the A-school has a firm “pencils down” policy at 6pm before the day of the final review. In Bauer’s case, the deadline fell on December 6, 2007.

“It’s pretty easy to tell what is cheating in other classes,” Bauer told the Hook before her trial, “but in the A-school, it’s less clear. If your model breaks after the deadline and then you fix it, that’s cheating.”
Sitting before the jury with trembling hands, Bauer told them she would prove that she was on trial because of “an unfortunate series of misunderstandings backed by honorable intentions.” She contended that based on the three elements that decide whether an act qualifies as an honor offense– act, triviality, and intent– she was innocent.
Heather Fisher, the “reporter” of the possible honor offense, testified via conference call that she saw Bauer at her desk working on something around 1am, hours after the Architecture 201 Final Review 6pm deadline.
Fisher testified that she asked Bauer if she was working on something for the studio, and Bauer said no.
Architectural design chair Jen Sumaka, with whom Bauer was acquainted, testified that later that night she asked the student the same question, and Bauer said yes.
Every A-school student who testified characterized the time period before the 6pm final review deadline as “very taxing,” and that’s why some said Bauer’s work on an architecture project at 1am after the 6pm deadline seemed suspicious.
Bauer testified that she was in the A-school building that night to help a friend. Her friend– who was unnamed because her earlier honor trial resulting from the same incident was closed– had cut her finger but refused to go to the hospital for fear she would not be able to finish her project. As her friend was feeling weak, Bauer testified, she urged her to seek permission to get dinner and then pin up her work later.
A student lawyer for the community stressed in her closing remarks, “Bauer cheated by working past deadline and lied in more than one way to more than one person.”
A student lawyer for the accused maintained in his closing remarks, “The purpose of an honor trial is not for a student to prove her innocence.”
After the trial– which lasted from 10am to 3:30pm– the jury deliberated for another hour before deciding that the evidence against Bauer was not enough to prove her guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Bauer criticized the die-hard mentality of the architecture school. “In the A-school, you are seen as weak if you are sick,” she said. “And the medical policies they do have in place are not well advertised.”
“I think she did the right thing,” says her mother, Mary Bauer. “At the architecture school, there’s a very individual mentality; they want you to leave others hanging.”
Under UVA’s single-sanction policy, if Bauer had been found guilty of either lying or cheating, she certainly would have been left hanging. UVA’s one-strike-you’re-out honor code would have dictated expulsion.
#