\ 
     
    
   
   
    
     The Cadre, Apr. 1, 1975, page 2 
     
    
   
   
    
     Confidentiality 0i sin... Files Underfira ~ 
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
         
     
       
     
       
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
     tially raised by Mr. Bing toastudent files or for that writing the information had 
     
     W‘ Gallant on Universitx Maga_’ matter under what conditions never spoke to you before. 
     
     zine. He complained about they do have acceSs. The university is accumula— 
     
     being refused access to his \ 'The Registrar's Office is tingjinformetion about you: 
     
     own academic records, Mr. going to make a statement to which inmany cases is untrue 
     
     Hennessey, the Registrar, the effect that there is a \ Yet You are allowed n0 re— 
     
     denied the allegationin a difference between records cource by whiqh to make cor- 
     
     letter to the Cadre (March, ‘ and files. If you want your rections. . - _ , 
     
     25) and stated the Univer- academic records (grades), What has been shown by re— 
     
     sity policy in such matters. you can,_but they won't al— cent legislation in the case 
     
     Mr. Hennessey's first »low you to see your files of credit bureau records, is 
     
     6: statement was that "students (which includes sime very that people should have ac— 
     
     may view their records any interesting things such \ cess to any information that 
     
     time.All they have to do is as your reccomdations from is being kept on them. The 
     
     ask". When-a student attemp— \ your high school). . .Same type 0f idea was Promo‘ 
     
     ted to see his own file, he ' The case on pagersis an ted by the people who were 
     
     was not allowel to. The Reg— excellent example. The file conSidering drafting a 'Stu- 
     
     ~istrar's office will show contains a reference from a dent Bill of Rights' last 
     
     you such pertinent informa- high schoolcouncillor.The fall- It was suggested that: 
     
     tion as your grades (which councillor had never seen the 1) NO student files Shall be 
     
     i i J you already know) but that student in an official cap- / released without the consent 
     
     is all. icity yet he felt free to of the student involved, 2)‘ 
     
     In reponse to Mr. Gall— comment on the student's Students should have the 
     
     ant's alegation that 'any character, home life, and ' right to see their academic 
     
     faculty member had access tc academic capabilities. files and to make necessary 
     
     The question of whether his file' Mr. Hennessey‘s The university's policy V'CorreCtionS. 7 “ 
     
     students should have access stated "Faculty members do‘ is such that youushould not I I would Strongly suggeSt 
     
     to their files has abruptly. not have indiscriminate ac- be allowed to see this in— that the UniveISity adept 
     
     been brought to the fore as cess to students records". formation. This means that SUCh a P01iCyo If they re- 
     
     a result of a Variety of in- What does not having indis— you can not point out things fuse, the Student Union‘ 
     
     cidents in the past few wee criminate access mean? It ' that are incorrect, or bring ShOUld Put forth a Student 
     
     ‘ eks (see articles p.3). doesn't say that faculty to light information such as Bill Of Rights that will 
     
     ‘ The whole issue was inia— .members do not have access in this case that the person make it policy. / \ 
     
     ' ' ' | ' T II ' ' 
     
     Further lntnque Over The ROMP nterrogatlon ec mques. 
     
     . Since the RCMP training closed doors. 'She was 'The booklet was said to it is free to get all that 
     
     manual on Interrogation informed by Inspector only be used in'a course the public should know. 
     
     7‘ Techniques first came out DeKouchay that since the for senior officers with The auxiliary value of 
     
     ,h in the open, there have Charlottetown detachment 5 to 15 years experience. I the Pentagon‘papers was as 
     
     3' been some very contradict— was not a training depot, The reason for the RCMP ' a reminder to realists of 
     
     !; 'ory statements about it he could have no way of motto and crest on the just how little information 
     
     gjf by the RCMP. anowing if the document V cover was simply for ‘ the press usually gets 
     
     :t When the commanding officer were valid. , 'cosmetic reasons only.' from the government.' 
     
     of the P.E.I. headquarters 'The office of Supt. The RCMP admitted to the The situation applies here 
     
     of the RCMP in Charlottetown Moffat in Ottawa referred document at first, then , also. / 
     
     telephoned Superintendent this reporter to Inspector adapted a closed mouth  . v 
     
     Moffet in Ottawa, about J.R. Bentham, Laison Officer ‘ policy, and.finally admitted Th ‘ . , 
     
     . . r , ‘ i . _l d down the e Cadre is a member of the 
     
     the authent1c1ty of the RCMP Headquarters. Inspt. to it,,yet p aye _ . .. 
     
     V . 7 Canadian Univer31ty Press 
     
     document, he stated that Bentham stated that the ImportanceOf the document- (C U P ) .The o inions ex res" 
     
     it was currently used as document could not have 4' If this document is, as ' ‘ ‘ ‘ p p 
     
     . . . . . . 7 . sed are those of the authors. 
     
     a training manual Wlthln I been verified over the a the RCMP attest, Simply All ,b . b 
     
     . . f the . _ contri utions must e 
     
     the force. _ telephone but must be a small Portlon O Signed in order to be accept_ 
     
     When it was inquired examined before an assess- material used in teaching ed for consideration although 
     
     into by Martha Pratt, a ment of its validity would\ interrogation techniques, pen names will be printed if 
     
     writer for the local Guard- be given.’ the rest of their interrog— re , ‘ 
     
     . . . . . quested. Please address all 
     
     ian, she only ran into A disclosure of the , ation techniques should ,__ , p. 
     
     - r , . . contributions to Cadre, UPEI, 
     
     document was\then made in be reViewed by an independ- Charlottetown WAT POC Phone. 
     
     Parliamentby David MacDonald ent scrutinizing board. If 2_7341 " ' ' 
     
     - ' ' t f th .train- ' ‘ 
     
     (PC Egm‘?“t)' Mr' Ann?“ this ls Part ° .6 Editor: Richard Willis 
     
     the solic1tor Genral said ing and it Justifies, 7 _ , , . _ 
     
     that he was not aware of 1 in brainwashing and Managlng Edltor' Loulse Mould 
     
     the document but he abrigging of civil libert- Ass't Managing Editor: Paula 
     
     , - Foley 
     
     . f i h- 
     
     would get a copy of it.\ a ies: it may be QUite ryg Typist: Rita Jackson 
     
     The RCMP spokesman said . tening to see what else . 
     
     th t h 1d mak the aavocate Sports Editor: Mickey Place 
     
     a 6 won e no 'y ' Photos: U.P.E.I; Photo Club 
     
     statement until after the Whenever such a governm— . , A 
     
     K Solicitor—Genral had cut document is exposed 3:2:zibUt3252 3:8ff; giliee: 
     
     '* r bl a' o les ’ ' era ’ c ea 
     
     a answered questions. t: fiherpuk 16:1 P: P , Hartshorns Joanne lugs, Art 
     
     David MacDonald attempted r g t to DOW s a ways Laffin Ra Ma , 
     
     , y, cDonald, John 
     
     unsuccessfully on Wednesday questioned. People have Underha Albert MacDonald 
     
     to delay the Parliamentary been shocked to see some , Wend Szaer Ki Puiia \ ’ 
     
     break in order to clarify of the RCMP techniques y ’i fipke . +A.,v 
     
     the issue, since Mr. Allinond that are employed, but F Y?!) F5170 r“; 3 ’n 15 p 
     
     was nowhere to be found. what else d? the RCMP do ‘ fuLbUSfj5$LE$Um .‘,/;?1V4P?afi 
     
     Inspector John Bentham that we don t know about. -~ C6fl$x e( k ,a‘ 
     
     then came out and stated, As Robert Sherrill said, ' Mare— ' ' 
     
     that it was 'not official 'The moral 0f the New York 3".“wow , 
     
      RCMP policy.‘ Hewswtated Times printing of the : 533,3“ 5, 
     
     3 that it was, 'Just part Pentagon Papersfies only vhtgvcra" 
     
     ‘* of a broad body of litera- that the press ls free to ongiafifi , x - _ 
     
     ture on the subject of int- print What it can get by phi-ov‘ayt‘    
     
     erviewing techniques.‘ luck and stealth, not‘that Lawn! P!“\ - Jfinhes rhea. - 
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
     9