Student Sharone Hopkins (center) looks on as SGA President-elect Darwin Butler has words with Vice-President-elect Carrie Mowen on the U Center patio after Tuesday's grievance hearing. The conversation, which became animated at times, centered in part on the grievance Mowen filed against Butler late last month. The Student Court is expected to rule on the issue early this week. photo by Stephanie Platt

The Student Court is expected to issue a ruling by Tuesday on Student Government Association vice-president-elect Carrie Mowen's grievance alleging campaign rule violations against president-elect Darwin Butler.

The Court held an open hearing on the grievance, Tuesday. At times, the hearing became testy as Butler exchanged verbal barbs with both the Court and Mowen.

Butler first argued that due process was not followed with the hearing. Butler said he never received any of the documents he needed to build a defense.

"You are going to have to dismiss this on a technicality. You did not present me with the proper evidence at a proper time," Butler said. "How am I supposed to form a defense when you don't present the evidence to me until the day of the hearing?"

Butler then asked the the Court's justices if they knew anything about due process. After the justices said yes, Butler then asked if this was a violation of due process. The justices asked if he was informed of the allegations and Butler said no. Then Chief Justice Steven Bartok said that Butler was informed of the allegations.

Butler said that he was starting to see biases in the proceeding, saying he felt that the papers containing the allegations should have been sent to him by certified mail and that he was continuing under protest.

Butler then asked where the official stenographer was and was told that all of the justices keep their own records.

"You bring me here with these allegations, you throw due process out the window, and then you are going to tell me that there's nobody keeping a record of what transpired here?" Butler said. "If you didn't want me in [office], then you should have told me this from the start. Now let's carry on with this nonsense because that's what I believe it is."

Mowen began to present her case. Mowen said that Butler's flyers did not contain their source of funding, which she said is a violation of the election rules.

Mowen said Butler handed one of his flyers to a comic at a University Program Board event on Apr. 17 and that the comic proceeded to go on stage and endorse Butler without the proper paperwork being filed.

Mowen also said that Butler addressed his classes without the proper paperwork on file.

"I don't know how [the alleged violations] affected [the election] or what they did," Mowen said. "I feel that if you are handed a set of rules and regulations, you need to abide by them, and I don't feel that Mr. Butler abided by the rules in any way, shape, or form."

Butler said that his flyers were printed up before the election rules were handed out.

"At [the March SGA meeting] I specifically stated . . . that three weeks isn't enough time for a candidate to put together a campaign," Butler said. "[The Monday after spring break] . . . Jim Avery told me I can begin my campaign, so I had my literature already made [before the rules were handed out]."

Butler said the comedian at the event on Apr. 17 was a friend of his and that the comedian learned of his campaign through a conversation backstage.

"[He said], 'Darwin, what [are] you doing here?' [I said], 'Well, I'm going to school here, and I'm running for president.' Black man trying to do something, that's what he said," Butler said. "I didn't coerce him; I didn't pay him; I didn't do nothing of the sort."

Butler also argued against the validity of the formal endorsement forms. Butler said the forms only apply when the candidate uses another's name for their campaign, not when an individual or group endorses a candidate on their own.

"If you read [on the endorsement form], it states that I won't use no one's name to endorse me, and I didn't use their name to endorse me," Butler said.

Butler said that he never spoke to his classes, but his professor took it upon herself to address the class.

Josh Stegeman, co-chair of the election committee, then addressed the court. Stegeman said that if violations have been found, then the Court should consider disqualifying a candidate instead of holding another election.

Bartok said that the request would be noted.

The Court now has seven days from the hearing to issue a verdict. Bartok said deliberations will center around two things.

"One, if a violation did occur, and two, how severe was it?" Bartok said.

Butler said he feels he is a victim of racial discrimination.

"I think that if it was any other person, it wouldn't have went this far," Butler said.

Mowen said she will try to serve the student's best interests, despite her differences with Butler.

"I was elected by 400 some-odd votes," Mowen said. "Obviously, the students want to see me in the vice-president's position. I am willing to fight for the students. I will be in my office . . . as much as I can be there. I will be there to speak out for the students because I am the voice of the students, as I was elected by the students."