University of Iowa denies fraternity appeal of hazing suspension

IOWA CITY — The University of Iowa has denied an appeal from a fraternity it placed on interim suspension in November for alleged hazing — rejecting the organization’s argument that only two members were responsible and those two have been kicked out.

“The information gathered by our office, while somewhat consistent with the information you have received, does not end with the conclusion that only two individuals were solely responsible for the incident in question,” according to the UI Office of Student Accountability’s Dec. 10 denial of Alpha Delta Phi’s appeal.

The university placed its year-old Alpha Delta Phi fraternity chapter on interim suspension after police were dispatched to the house at 703 N. Dubuque St. early Nov. 15 for a fire alarm and found “56 fraternity pledges in the basement, blindfolded with food thrown on them,” according to an arrest report.

Given multiple indications that individuals were being hazed, the university launched an investigation and placed Alpha Delta Phi on interim suspension pending the outcome — barring the organization from participating in any sponsored meetings or programs, social activities, recreation intramurals, or related events.

“This decision was based on information available to me to date regarding the reported concerns, the nature of the concerns, and concerns for the safety and well-being of members of the chapter,” UI Associate Dean of Accountability and Care Angela Ibrahim-Olin wrote in her November interim suspension letter.

She outlined three potential violations of the UI Code of Student Life including hazing, misconduct on organizational property, and failure to comply with a university directive.

“Additionally, officers noted the condition of the chapter house stating that there were possible violations of the municipal fire code,” according to the letter, noting Alpha Delta Phi’s right to appeal.

The appeal

The UI chapter on Dec. 4 took advantage of that appeal opportunity by spelling out measures it has taken following its own “internal third-party investigation” that found the incident was the “sole responsibility” of two people — the names of whom were redacted in documents provided to The Gazette in response to a public records request.

“Through personal statements of admission, the final report states that these two individuals came up with the event, carried it out, and acted outside the directives of chapter leadership and the official plan for our initiation events,” according to the appeal. “Their actions are both disappointing and harmful to the chapter.”

Reporting disciplinary action against the two “resulting in their memberships being revoked,” the UI chapter shared confidence “that this will send a strong signal to the rest of our chapter that we will not tolerate hazing of any kind, now or in the future.”

“These swift actions show that we are taking this situation seriously and we’re eager to move forward while growing and learning from this experience,” according to the appeal. “We are asking to have the suspension lifted so we can continue our regular day-to-day business operations while we tackle these together as a chapter.“

In addition to removing the individuals it blamed for the alleged hazing, the UI chapter committed to a list of other responsive measures — like mandating hazing prevention workshops; conducting a safety inspection to address fire code issues; and requiring leaders to complete training on culture, conflict resolution, and policy enforcement.

In urging consistency in how the university handles hazing allegations, Alpha Delta Phi cited allegations of “serious and physically harmful activities” against another fraternity chapter that the university treated with a five-day interim suspension.

“Since the allegations against Alpha Delta Phi are similar and arguably not as severe, we respectfully ask for the same opportunity to address these concerns and make changes,” according to the appeal. “We respectfully ask that this matter be handled in a fair and consistent manner, with consideration of how similar cases have been addressed in the past.”

Alpha Delta Phi asked to continue business operations under probation or limitations.

“The ‘one-strike policy’ uniquely created for Alpha Delta Phi puts our organization at a significant disadvantage,” according to the appeal. “We believe this policy creates an unequal standard and respectfully request that we be given the same chance afforded to other organizations.”

In denying the appeal, the university rejected the idea that it’s treating Alpha Delta Phi differently.

“There is no ‘one-strike’ policy, as you indicate in your appeal,” according to UI. “Hazing is a serious concern that endangers student health, safety, and well-being, in ways that are both physical and psychological. Interim suspension is an appropriate response when we receive allegations of hazing that we can investigate and potentially substantiate through the collection of evidence.”

And, so far, the university has not uncovered enough evidence to “materially change the decision to interim suspend the chapter.”

‘Private property’

During the November incident, officers arrested former fraternity member Joseph Antonio Gaya, 21, who was at the house and repeatedly stood between witnesses and police, telling them, “You can (expletive) leave, how about that?” according to his arrest report.

Gaya was charged with interference with official acts, a simple misdemeanor, and his case has a hearing upcoming in January. During that hearing, the court will hear arguments on a motion he filed to suppress evidence against him — accusing officers of violating his rights in their investigation.

“Upon arrival, law enforcement was never given consent to be on the premises,” according to Gaya’s motion to suppress. “Rather, during the near hour long stay within the dwelling, law enforcement was informed various times that the residence was private property.”

Accusing police of failing to get a search warrant, Gaya said they, “conducted a full investigation, opened various doors, and interrogated the defendant.”

“The questioning went well beyond the scope of ascertaining if there was a fire hazard on the premises.”

Later that day, Gaya said in court documents, police showed up at his home and questioned him extensively — without reading him his Miranda rights.

“(Gaya) respectfully requests the court suppress (his) statements given to police on Nov. 15, 2024, as well as any derivative evidence subject to the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ doctrine.”

Vanessa Miller covers higher education for The Gazette.

Comments: (319) 339-3158; vanessa.miller@thegazette.com