Three University students subject to disciplinary actions resulting from last November's CIA on-campus recruitment protest said they will defend their actions as "active expressions of political and educational convictions."

Undergraduate Student Government Executive Assistant Travis Parchman, Jessica Stern (sophomore-liberal arts) and Tim Fasnacht (junior-labor studies) said at a news conference on Old Main's steps, that the assault and unauthorized entry charges against them are entirely groundless. They intend "to present witnesses and other evidence discounting these absurd allegations," Parchman said.

"At this time, I'm willing to accept that I participated in disruptive activity. But (the charges) are unfounded," he added.

University officials refused to comment on the specific allegations.

By the end of Fall Semester, each student received a letter from the Office of Conduct Standards informing them of conduct code violations resulting from the protest at McAllister Building. The letters also said each would appear before the University Hearing Board concerning those violations.

The students had 10 days to respond to the allegations, with failure to do so resulting in automatic disciplinary dismissal.

Paul Sample, a protester who also received a letter from OCS, did not respond before the deadline and was suspended for at least one year. Sample said he had already planned not to return this semester.

The other students responded before the 10-day period expired.

Parchman and Stern received their hearing notices the morning of Jan. 24. The hearing is scheduled for Jan. 31 at 1:30 p.m. in 135 Boucke. Fasnacht has yet to receive a hearing date.

The news conference was intended to be held in the lobby of Old Main, but University officials said the lobby was not conducive to such an event.

In addition to denying the use of Old Main, University police locked the building's doors just before the news conference and opened them after the participants dissipated.

Parchman said he expects the worst in regards to what discipline the hearing board will hand down.

"What the University does depends on its conscience and I have little respect for the University's conscience," he said.

If the hearing calls for their suspension, Parchman said they will appeal the decision immediately through University channels. If the appeal attempt fails, Parchman said they will pursue formal legal channels.

"We've started the process of obtaining an attorney and a law firm, but I can't give you specifics because the details haven't been worked out yet," he added.

Donald T. Suit, director of the Office of Conduct Standards, said students can appeal the hearing board's decision to the University's Appeals Board on three grounds -- failure to provide due process during the hearing, unduly harsh sanctions or insufficient facts to support the case.

The board hears the students' support for the appeal and reviews the report from the original hearing. If the board accepts the appeal, the case goes back to the University Hearing Board and a new hearing is granted, Suit said.

If the appeal is denied, the case goes to the vice president for student services to render a decision. Only in instances of suspension or more severe rulings do cases go to the vice president for student services, Suit added.

Parchman said the methods of the Office of Conduct Standards have unjustly prosecuted and sanctioned many students in the past.

"We are currently in contact with the Center for Constitutional Rights and other legal firms in New York, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia regarding their involvement in a possible lawsuit against the University for its rampant violation of students' constitutional rights," he said, making a general reference to OCS.

Parchman categorized the violations as hampering the due process guaranteed by the Constitution's fifth amendment.

"The University screens what individuals can be witnesses, we are not permitted to tape record the proceedings to ensure accuracy and the number of witnesses can be declared excessive," he said.

Parchman claimed the allegations and disciplinary proceedings were not a personal attack against him or the other students.

"I'd describe it as a social attack on political demonstrations at this University," he said. A crowd of about 10 supporters applauded after Parchman's comment.

Steven Roy, USG legal adviser, said he will serve as legal adviser to Parchman and Stern during their hearing. He could not provide specifics on how he will advise the two students.

"I'll do what I can with a system that is unfair to its students," he added.

Parchman said Roy is serving as an adviser because it is part of his responsibility as being a member of the USG Department of Legal Affairs.

"It has nothing to do with me being a member of USG," he added.

In their defense, Parchman said students who participated and observed the protest will serve as witnesses. Parchman and Stern have received an overwhelming amount of support from the protesters, he added.

"I guess if you're looking along the lines of a star witness, Mr. Seth Williams will be there," he added.

Suit said board hearings are open to members of the University community, indicating that the hearing room can seat nine or 10 spectators in addition to witnesses for the students.

"Students must present their University ID and the seats are on a first-come, first-serve basis," he added.