Weinstein '09: Wang '10 led 'witch hunt'

Weinstein contacted former senior elections manager Braeden Kepner-Kraus ’10 Wednesday and asked Kepner-Kraus to “pressure” Jin to reverse her decision, said one USG member who learned of the incident from Kepner-Kraus and asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitive nature of the situation.

Kepner-Kraus said he could not remember whether Weinstein asked him to contact Jin. “[Weinstein] did sort of ask me to do what I could to cancel the revote but certainly not in an aggressive way,” he added, noting that he personally thought the February revote was a “bad idea.”

He added that he did not contact Jin.

Jin said she decided to hold the revote after a month-long investigation determined that several USG members, including Weinstein, could have accessed the results of the original vote between when they were certified by the Registrar and when the USG Senate met to overturn the previously scheduled December revote.

Jin confirmed Thursday that Kepner-Kraus has not contacted her about the February revote and added that she would not, under any circumstances, reverse her decision.

Weinstein said he did ask Kepner-Kraus to talk to Jin but maintained that there was nothing inappropriate about the request and that he was not trying to pressure Jin to change her mind.

“I talked to [Kepner-Kraus], and I suggested that he reach out to Sophie and give her some background [and] his perspective,” Weinstein said. “Whatever advice [Kepner-Kraus] was going to offer, whether it was in favor of the revote or against the revote, I thought that it would be beneficial to the process as a whole.”

Weinstein criticized the investigation, which was led by Jin, USG vice president Mike Wang ’10 and Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Thomas Dunne.

“It’s a shame that Mike Wang, Dean Dunne and [Class of 2011 Senator] George Tsivin are hijacking the process by manipulating an inexperienced elections manager in the form of Sophie Jin,” Weinstein said.

He added that Kepner-Kraus had not known about the February revote before they spoke and that one of the reasons he called Kepner-Kraus was because he believed Wang had been “wrongfully telling various members of the Senate that [Kepner-Kraus] had been involved in the investigation and the decision to have a revote.”

U-Councilor Jacob Candelaria ’09 said he had heard about Weinstein’s discussion with Kepner-Kraus from a third party and that he believes it represents a conflict of interest and a “serious ethical violation,” especially since Weinstein was being investigated in the process that led up to the revote.

“We have an independent elections manager to make decisions that are isolated from the wants of the USG,” Candelaria said. “Any attempt to violate that is something serious. It represents a serious lack of judgment. If this indeed did happen, I think [Weinstein’s] actions … need to be reviewed by the Senate.”

The February revote

Jin announced her decision to hold a February revote in an e-mail yesterday to the student body, sent from Dunne’s account.  The decision was made following an investigation of the integrity of the December elections conducted by Jin, Dunne and Wang.

The investigation was initiated by Tsivin when he expressed concerns about the integrity of the elections process to Wang at a Senate meeting on Dec. 9, 2008.

Weinstein made repeated accusations on Thursday that Wang, Dunne and Tsivin had “hijacked” the election process with this investigation to determine whether Weinstein and other USG officials might have accessed the original results of the December elections before they voted to cancel the December vice-presidential revote.

Weinstein said Wang’s involvement in the investigation stemmed from Wang’s support of Nick DiBerardino ’11, who lost the original December election for vice president to Mike Weinberg ’11. Weinstein’s e-mail endorsing Weinberg was criticized by many members of the USG and ultimately resulted in a complaint that led Kepner-Kraus to call for the aborted December revote.

Tsivin and Candelaria both publicly supported DiBerardino in the election.

Weinstein said that Wang has demonstrated biased behavior throughout the elections process, citing that Wang allowed DiBerardino to submit, review and vote on an elections complaint. These actions were against elections rules, and the Senate cancelled the revote after recognizing the violations.

Wang acknowledged that there was “procedural sloppiness” during that complaint hearing but added that Weinstein’s allegations that the investigation was improperly conducted were entirely unwarranted, calling them “not only spurious and odd but also impossible.”

“This election investigation was performed under the aegis of Dean Dunne and in consultation with [OIT senior policy advisor] Rita Saltz, and it was done to maintain the fundamental integrity of the December elections,” he said. “Our response comes as an effort to be as transparent and honest a student government as we can be. We understand that honesty is not always the most convenient response but it is the right response.”

According to the investigation report, the Office of Information Technology (OIT) confirmed that some USG members were able to view election results once they were verified by the Registrar’s Office through a USG e-mail account, usg@princeton.edu, which is accessible to Weinstein and several other USG members. Usg@ is a separate account from usgvote@, the latter of which only accessible to the senior elections manager and USG IT committee chair.

The report also said that, because OIT performed a scheduled maintenance deletion of access records on Dec. 16, it could not determine whether Weinstein actually accessed the records.

“Given that Mr. Weinstein was actively involved in Mr. Weinberg’s campaign, there is concern that prior knowledge of the election results may have been influenc[ing] the integrity of the interactions and motives that led up to the Senate decision on December 9, 2008,” the document states.

Weinstein, for his part, said he believes the investigation is personal and that he thinks the people who initiated it “knew without a doubt” that he did not access the results of the original vote, based on their knowledge of his “ethical standards.”

“It’s a complete witch hunt,” Weinstein said. “Any sense of ethics and sanity has been completely thrown out the window.”