Charges were filed last month against ASSC president, Ray Paren­ti-Kurttila.

The charges were that Parenti-Kurttila publicized academic records in detail to executive officers, the ASSC Senate, and members of the public.

Thomas Wong, the former In­terim of Commissions, filed charges against Parenti-Kurttila seeking his impeachment from office, expulsion from campus, and to face federal charges. Wong claims that President Parenti-Kurttila was in possession of Wong’s confidential student records, and read it to others.

According to Wong, the publiciz­ing of his records came about during an ASSC meeting to discuss Wong’s qualification for Commissioner of Activities.

“He basically told the rest of the council that ‘he can’t qualify [for commission of activities] he’s over on his banner,” Wong said,”[Parenti-Kurttila] said ‘I sat down with [Amory Cariadus, Coordinator of Student Activities], and we counted line by line the classes he’d taken, the grades he got.’ He was able to list all these things, and I’m the only one who noticed because they were my records.”

Parenti-Kurttila has gone on record saying that he did no such thing, while Cariadus has stated that she did not give him any personal information regarding Mr. Wong’s academic records.

Wong states that his records were only verbally publicized and that this happened towards the end of the meeting.

“[Parenti-Kurttila] said it after the meeting.” Wong said. “The entire meeting was on recording, and all this blew out at the end after the tape recorder was turned off.”

Aside from this, their only form of confrontation was when they both ran against each other for the posi­tion of President of Student Council last year.

The complaint was first brought to the attention of Cariadus, who interviewed students and eventually forwarded the complaint to Sherri Hancock, Dean of Admissions and Records, who led a preliminary investigation.

“From conversations that I had with students on the Student Coun­cil, the records were not shared or published in any way, shape, or form,” said Cariadus. “My under­standing is [Hancock] looked into it, met with the appropriate people, and then she basically did not find anything to prove the allegations.”

According to Hancock, her in­vestigation did not have a single student corroborating what Wong claims, and although according to Hancock information regarding re­cords of anyone looking at Wong’s records are confidential, there are no grounds for expulsion.

In addition, both Hancock and Cariadus have found no evidence to suggest that Parenti-Kurttila had looked at Wong’s records.

“There is no evidence, as far as I’ve been told, that he would’ve been able to access that information,” Cariadus said, “there’s no way he could have obtained the informa­tion through the Student Activities office at all.”

Hancock also made the point that the only way for one student to look at another student’s private records is that he or she would first have to give them permission.

Investigation records concern­ing Wong’s allegations have been closed, and currently Parenti-Kurt­tila has not received any form of punishments regarding what hap­pened.

“The Dean of Admissions and Records investigation has found Tom’s allegations invalid,” Parenti-Kurttila said.

Wong has stated that, if neces­sary, he will bring in lawyers to handle his case, in which case indi­viduals, or even the school, would be at risk of being sued.