characters—a character who was to berntied by her hair to a ceiling fan, tortured,rnmutilated, sodomized with a hot curlingrniron, and eventually killed in the story.rnAs for why he chose the name of this particularrngirl, with whom he shared arnJapanese class the previous term, Bakerrnhas only stated, “because she was anrnattractive young woman and I needed arnname for the story I was writing.”rnThe story, entitled “Pamela’s Ordeal,”rnwhich even Baker admitted was “sickrnstuff,” drew little fanfare until a Universityrnof Michigan alumnus in Moscow sawrnthe story and contacted university officialsrnon January 19. The following day.rnDepartment of Public Safety (DPS) officersrnquestioned Baker about the transmission,rnand he admitted, after waivingrnhis Miranda rights, to writing and postingrnthe story. On January 23, Baker wasrninterviewed at University Hospitals in anrnattempt to evaluate his mental state.rnFollowing the interview, a letter was sentrnto the Vice President for Student Affairs,rnMaureen A. Hartford, which stated thatrnBaker’s status at the university should bernrestricted. Yet, as one of Baker’s attorneys,rnDavid Cahill, pointed out, “Theyrndidn’t ask that he be suspended.” Nevertheless,rnas Baker left his 9:00 A.M. class onrnThursday, February 2, he was taken intorncustody by three DPS officers and notifiedrnthat he had been suspended indefinitelyrnby University President James J.rnDuderstadt.rnDuderstadt was able to suspend Bakerrnby invoking his powers under Regent’srnBylaw 2.01, which gives the president thernpower to maintain “health, diligence,rnand order among the students.” As isrncustomary with students suspended underrnthis bylaw, a hearing was scheduledrnto determine the guilt of the accused, inrnthis case for February 9. On that day,rnhowever, Baker was arrested by FBIrnagents and taken to a U.S. District Courtrnin Detroit, where he was charged withrnone count of interstate transmission of arnthreat to injure or kidnap another person.rnHe was then held without bond in arnWayne County jail; pleaded innocent inrncourt on February 17; and was moved tornthe federal prison in Milan, Michigan,rnon February 23. He was finally releasedrnon March 10, after posting a $10,000 recognizancernbond. Baker’s attorneys werernconfident that the entire case againstrntheir client would eventually be thrownrnout. As one of them, Douglas Mullkoff,rnsaid: “I don’t think this case will go torntrial.”rnThe reason for the federal chargernstems from the fact that not only didrnBaker use the name of a real person in hisrnstory, but he had also exchanged “threatening”rne-mail messages with a man inrnOntario named Arthur Gronda. In therncorrespondence between Baker andrnGronda, which was found in Baker’s dormitoryrnroom by DPS officers, the twornmen discussed plans of torture, rape, andrnmurder. Indeed, in one message Bakerrnstated, “just thinking about it anymorerndoesn’t do the trick. I need to DO IT.”rnAnd in another, he wrote, “I have comernupon an excellent method to abduct arnbitch.” Gronda responded to one ofrnBaker’s messages by writing, “I have beenrnout tonight and I can tell you that I amrnthinking more about ‘doing’ a girl. I canrnpicture it so well… and I can think of nornbetter use for their flesh. I HAVE tornmake a bitch suffer!” Also confiscated byrnDPS officers was an unfinished story ofrnBaker’s, in which he wrote: “I plan it well.rnIt will be my first kidnapping, my firstrnreal rape of a pretty young girl. My firstrnexperimentation with all of the devicesrnof pain I had thought up before. I obsessedrnabout my target more than anyrnother girl on campus.”rnJudge Thomas A. Carlson, whornpresided over Baker’s detention hearing,rnstated that the messages discovered byrnDPS officers were of prime importancernin the court’s decision to charge Baker.rn”If we only had a story of rape and torture,rnwe would have the issue of the FirstrnAmendment here,” Carlson said. “Butrnthere are at least two additional elementsrnto the case. Mr. Baker named an individualrnat the U-M as a subject of his storyrnand had a discussion with another personrnabout where and how an assaultrncould be carried out. This is more thanrnjust writing a story.” On the strength ofrnthis evidence, the one federal chargernagainst Baker was changed to five countsrnof threat to kidnap; “Gronda,” which policernbelieve to be a pseudonym for a manrnstill at large, has been indicted as a codefendantrnin three of the charges. Thernfederal case against Baker was slated torngo to trial on May 22.rnAs for reaction to the Baker case onrncampus, opinion was mixed. ThoughrnBaker’s story was roundly denounced asrngruesome and sick, many people werernconcerned by the treatment he receivedrnfrom the university as well as the federalrngovernment. The Student Civil LibertiesrnWatch (SCLW), a student grouprnunaffiliated with the ACLU, stated in arnpress release that it “denounces the actionsrnof both the University of Michiganrnand the Federal Bureau of Investigation.rn[T]he SCLW affirms that in order to reservernour liberties, we must often defendrnreprehensible choices made by individualsrnwith questionable judgment exercisingrnthose rights.”rnThe Michigan Review, an independentrnstudent publication, took a similar stand.rnAs it stated in a March editorial: “Afterrnconsidering in detail what Baker wrote inrnhis stories, one may contend that whatrnBaker did is, in fact, criminal. . . . Nevertheless,rneven if one determines that thisrnargument does have merit, it still doesrnnot justify the decision of Duderstadtrnto suspend Baker. If one faces criminalrncharges, as does Baker, one has a right torntrial by a jury of one’s peers, as guaranteedrnby the Sixth Amendment. Additionally,rnone is innocent until provenrnguilty beyond a reasonable doubt—arnlong-standing aspect of American jurisprudence.rnBy acting to suspend Bakerrnimmediately, Duderstadt, the presidentrnof a public university, circumventedrnthese standards in the legal process. Inrnthis sense. Baker did not receive his rightrnto due process under law.”rnMichael Paul Goldenberg, a graduaternstudent, voiced a similar opinion in a letterrnto The Michigan Daily, the other majorrncampus publication. Goldenbergrnstated, “Without debating the wisdomrnor taste exercised in making his internetrnentry, I suggest that neither foolishnessrnnor vulgar taste are crimes; that Mr.rnBaker has not received due process underrnthe code because the administrationrnpanicked, and that his case highlightsrnexactly why wc need a university run byrnthe laws and constitutions of Michiganrnand the United States.”rnThe Michigan Daily officially offered arndifferent point of view: “While therntechnical questions remain about thernprocess, it is now clear that suspendingrnBaker was a prudent decision. Baker’srnmessages are indicative of a dangerousrnperson. In naming a specific individualrnas his target, detailing how he wouldrnharm that person, and having accessrnto that person. Baker gave Duderstadtrnample reason for quick action. Duderstadtrnacted correctly in suspendingrnBaker.”rnYet the harshest criticism of Baker emanatedrnnot from his fellow students butrnfrom the participants in the very forumrnin which Baker posted his story. Indeed,rnBaker has been a target of attacks inrn44/CHRONICLESrnrnrn