Students' Opinions Mixed on Woodward Verdict

In the wake of a surprising conclusion to the Louise Woodward murder trial, opinions about the reduction of the au pair's murder verdict to involuntary manslaughter are sharply divided on campus, as in the world.

Harvard affiliates were tangentially related to many aspects of the case. The father of Matthew Eappen, the 8-month-old victim, is an instructor at Harvard Medical School. The judge who reversed the jury's murder verdict, Hiller B. Zobel '53, is a Harvard graduate, as was one of the main prosecutors in the case. Frank-furter Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitz played an active role in the post-trial defense. And Woodward defense attorney Harvey A. Silverglate has been involved in litigation against the University on behalf of students.

Students expressed strong opinions on the unusual reversal of the murder verdict, with some believing Woodward's release was justified by her youth and innocence, and others finding the judge's decision--in which he acknowledged that Woodward played a role in the infant's death--overly lenient.

"It's a big topic of discussion on campus," Katy S. Gladysheva '01 said.

Some students said they were pleased that Woodward's sentence was reduced to involuntary manslaughter, but felt she should nevertheless serve more jail time.

"It seems like that's a little lenient and she should serve some kind of punishment," Lynda A. Yast '01 said. "But then I see that she's so young."

Yast said Woodward demonstrated neglect and lack of judgment.

"I'm younger than her, and I know how to take care of a baby," she said. "That's something she should know as an au pair."

Rea V. Kyriakopoulos '01 agreed.

"I don't know if she really killed him," she said. "It was an unfortunate accident, but she shouldn't have been shaking the baby."

"I think she should go to jail for a little bit," Kyriakopoulos said.

Rachel Perez '99 said she did not quite see how the sentence fit with the judge's ultimate decision in the case.

"If he thought the jury was wrong he should have overturned the decision," she said. "But by saying it was manslaughter and not giving a punishment that fit, I don't think that was right."

The vast amount of media attention the case inspired caused some students to question the impartiality of the verdict.

"I think it sets a terrible precedent," Aisha C. Simpson '96 said. "It's obvious the media had a grand influence on this case. What are we saying about the judicial system?"

Simpson said she questioned whether Woodward's supporters were motivated by genuine concern for her.

"No one cared about Louise Woodward when she was initially charged with this crime," she said. "Where were they 200 days ago?"

Elise S. Jang '97-'98 also said the case was influenced by the press.

"I don't think the judge would have overturned [the verdict] if there was no media attention, if there was no pressure," she said.

But others defended the media's interest in Woodward's case.

"I think it shows a very important potential flaw in the justice system, that people can get a murder conviction without definitely committing a murder," Jesse L. Margolis '99 said.

Margolis pointed to a Massachusetts legislator's decision to vote against the death penalty, made in part because he doubted Woodward's guilt, as proof of the case's enormous effect on other legal issues.

Tim T. Daub '01 said he was not surprised that the case attracted such publicity.

"It's always a good ploy in horror movies that the nanny does evil--she's a trusted figure," he said. "It's just shocking to people."

But Daub said that, like a lot of his friends, he had not followed the case despite the national coverage.

"I called my mother and she said everything on the news was 'Cambridge, Cambridge with the nanny case,'" he said.

For two Harvard affiliates involved in the case, the verdict proved a mixed blessing. "I am very pleased with the judge's decision, although I think it probably should have gone further," Dershowitz said. "Under the legal principles of reasonable doubt, there was reasonable doubt about her guilt in this case."

When asked about Woodward's plans to appeal her conviction, he said: "If you're absolutely innocent, you don't accept a guilty verdict of manslaughter."

Silverglate and Woodward's defense lawyers plan to appeal to secure a notguilty verdict. Silverglate said: "Given the fact that she's innocent, I would say that the sentence was nine months too long," he said.

--Jamie H. Ginott contributed to the reporting of this article.

But Daub said that, like a lot of his friends, he had not followed the case despite the national coverage.

"I called my mother and she said everything on the news was 'Cambridge, Cambridge with the nanny case,'" he said.

For two Harvard affiliates involved in the case, the verdict proved a mixed blessing. "I am very pleased with the judge's decision, although I think it probably should have gone further," Dershowitz said. "Under the legal principles of reasonable doubt, there was reasonable doubt about her guilt in this case."

When asked about Woodward's plans to appeal her conviction, he said: "If you're absolutely innocent, you don't accept a guilty verdict of manslaughter."

Silverglate and Woodward's defense lawyers plan to appeal to secure a notguilty verdict. Silverglate said: "Given the fact that she's innocent, I would say that the sentence was nine months too long," he said.

--Jamie H. Ginott contributed to the reporting of this article.