January 13, 2019

Page 1

The Chronicle

See Inside

Tre leads the way against Wake Forest Page 6

T H E I N D E P E N D E N T D A I LY AT D U K E U N I V E R S I T Y

MONDAY, JANUARY 13, 2020 DUKECHRONICLE.COM

ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTEENTH YEAR, ISSUE 33

DPD QUIETS OFF-CAMPUS PARTIES

Selena Qian | Graphics Editor

By Matthew Griffin University News Editor

For years, Durham residents have had to deal with disruptive parties held by Duke students. A Durham Police Department initiative aims to change that. The initiative, which began at the beginning of the academic year, lays out guidelines for officers dealing with off-campus parties, according to DPD officer John Wagstaff. While officers have discretion in how to respond to a call, students who live in a house that is the site of a noise complaint or other violations will be given a warning on their first offense, be enrolled in Durham’s misdemeanor diversion program on the second and get cited or arrested on a third violation, or if they fail to complete the program. The idea is to “keep students clean from having a record, but ultimately change behavior,” said Wagstaff, who developed the program. Before the initiative, officers would typically give residents a warning, which might not change their behavior, or cite them for a noise, alcohol or other violation, which residents consider harsh because it leaves students with a record. Wagstaff, who developed the initiative, suggested using the misdemeanor diversion program to address the problem. According to a document summarizing the initiative provided by program coordinator Kelly Andrews, the program allows first-time, non-violent offenders to complete a “community diversion program based on individual needs and the referral reason”—such as some community service, Wagstaff said—instead of facing prosecution. The program takes individuals between the ages of 18 and 26—now that 16 and 17-year-old individuals are no longer

charged in adult criminal court in North Carolina—with older adults participating at law enforcement discretion, Andrews wrote in an email to The Chronicle. The initiative came after DPD officers met this summer with members of Durham Neighborhoods United, a group formed by residents in 2013 to coordinate their response to disruptive parties. At the meeting, DNU members expressed frustration about an increase in disruptions over the past year, said DNU acting chair Alicia Johnson. Johnson emphasized that the diversion program is “educational, not punitive.” While residents “want the parties to quiet down, and they basically want them to stop,” she said, “they’ve not been particularly excited about doing anything or starting any kind of process that could be damaging to the future of students.” After DPD developed the initiative, DNU rewrote their protocol for residents who report off-campus parties. The protocol tells residents that they can “express [their] desire for enforcement action and encourage the use of the Durham County Misdemeanor Diversion Program” when they talk to police officers. It also encourages them to talk to students before they call the police. DPD officers visited locations with a history of disruptions early in the semester to tell them about the program and ask for feedback, and officers met with representatives of Duke Student Affairs, including Dean of Students Sue Wasiolek and the Interfraternity Council, to discuss the program. “DPD and [Duke University Police Department] have worked together over the years to respond to complaints about See PARTIES on Page 4

DHS reports no hacking in Durham for 2016 election By Maya Miller Contributing Reporter

A report from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security closed the door on a multiyear saga of speculated foreign interference in Durham’s 2016 presidential election. The DHS’ Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency concluded that hacking was not to blame for the technology malfunctions in certain Durham County precincts in the 2016 general election. Instead, according to a joint news release from the North Carolina State Board of Elections and the Durham County Board of Elections, investigators found that the issues were most likely the result of Durham County staff and poll worker error. An unfamiliarity with the electronic poll book (ePollbook) functions used for voter check-in—combined with a lack of adequate staff training and quality control by the technology provider, VR Systems—caused the malfunctions. The federal investigation found “no artifacts suggesting malware on or remote access to” the ePollbooks and USB drives. The report is “compelling evidence that there were no cyberattacks impacting the 2016 election in Durham,” wrote Philip Lehman, chairman of the Durham County Board of Elections, in the statement.

Inside the findings

DHS

investigation’s

The ePollbooks, lists of eligible voters used by poll workers to check in people, presented poll workers at certain precincts with See HACKING on Page 4

“Keep students clean from having a record, but ultimately change behavior”

Special to The Chronicle Staff error, not malicious hackers, likely contributed to snafus in the 2016 election.

Who are the Young Trustee semifinalists?

The transfer portal is open for business

Doing the devil’s work

The world may never know, as the nominating committee chose not to release the list this year. PAGE 3

Two key Duke football players will likely not return to Durham for the next football season. PAGE 7

Columnist Annie Yang has American Grand Strategy and Hacking for Defense in her crosshairs. PAGE 10

INSIDE — Content that won’t break its unbeaten streak vs Clemson | Serving the University since 1905 |

@dukechronicle @dukebasketball |

@thedukechronicle | © 2020 The Chronicle


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.
January 13, 2019 by Duke Chronicle - Issuu