Unlike pro-divestment encampments at peer institutions, Brown’s demonstration last April ended peacefully. But as negotiations between student participants and University administrators were underway, Brown and Providence’s police forces were drawing up contingency plans which included a mass arrest of students, likely within days.
Text messages obtained by The Herald show that before and throughout the week-long encampment, the Chief of Brown’s Department of Public Safety Rodney Chatman and the Chief of Providence Police Oscar Perez continually updated one another via text, sharing intel and offering logistical support.
After three days of negotiations, activists on College Hill dispersed in exchange for a promise that the University’s Corporation would vote on a proposal to divest its endowment from companies associated with the Israeli military at their upcoming October meeting.
“Brown, like other universities concerned about the potential for escalation, responsibly explored options for a range of scenarios,” University Spokesperson Brian Clark wrote in an email to The Herald. “As part of our fundamental commitment to protecting the safety of all Brown community members, we anticipated and explored various options, coordinating as needed with external partners the same way we do routinely for major events or issues with potential safety impacts on our campus.”
“Maintaining the safety and security of our campus and community was our top priority at all times,” Clark added.
Perez’s media representatives did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
On April 29 — the same day that negotiations began between University administrators and protesters — Chatman wrote to Perez saying “we are going to engage in operations planning for mass arrests at some point today.” Chatman added that DPS had secured barricades.
He also wrote that “we’re not doing anything different beyond planning,” but added that he was aware the encampment “will likely need to end at some point this week.”
Chatman proceeded to offer Perez an opportunity to include a representative of the Providence Police Department to join a planning conversation.
Perez then offered several representatives to sit in on the meeting before saying “we will need to prepare operations on our side.”
Throughout the negotiations, police action was not explicitly mentioned, according to protest negotiators Isabella Garo ’24 and Anila Lopez Marks ’26. But, both said there was an implicit understanding that Brown could leverage their law enforcement personnel.
“It was understood that they could use the police at any point,” Marks said in an interview with The Herald.
Garo and Marks said that University administrators repeatedly said, “we wouldn’t want something bad to happen, right?” throughout the negotiations. Both of them interpreted this as a reference to police action.
Prior to the encampment, Provost Francis Doyle sent an email to the Brown community stating that while an encampment itself is not an arrestable offense, “any encampments or offenses violating the law — including any point at which escalating circumstances dictate the need for encampment removal — may include law enforcement response and arrest.”
Brown’s policy is echoed in the text message exchange. Chatman told Perez the day before the encampment began that “Brown leadership is expressing the preference of addressing the policy implications rather than law implications.”
So long as there was not “threatening, intimidating or actual violence,” he wrote, “we will likely remain in a monitoring posture.”
During the encampment, members of DPS swiped the student IDs of participants. Students who had their ID information collected were subject to the University’s student disciplinary review process, The Herald previously reported.
The text messages also show that Brown DPS was aware that the encampment was set to be erected the night before students pitched the first tents. On the day before the encampment began, Chatman promised to send Perez “encampment info that just came in.”
“They are planning for tomorrow morning,” he wrote. When The Herald reported on the start of the encampment on the morning of April 24, DPS members were present and swiping student IDs.
The Herald was not able to verify what information Chatman obtained that allowed him to preempt the encampment.
The duo also continued to communicate throughout the duration of the encampment. On April 27, the fourth day of the encampment, Chatman said that his office had not seen “the uptick in participants that was feared,” calling it “status quo.”
Chatman also sent a screenshot of an Instagram post by the Brown Divest Coalition that invited outside community members to join their encampment, despite Brown’s disallowance. Perez responded, “let us know.”
“We were clear that we would ask unaffiliated individuals who came to campus to protest or counter-protest to leave, trespassing and arresting them as necessary if they did not,” Clark wrote, referring to instances of outside actors joining encampments at other schools.
Approximately 180 students were contacted by the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards about pending cases lodged against them over the course of the demonstration. Organizers said that, at peak participation, 112 students were part of the encampment.
“While our goal was to rely on appropriate codes of conduct to address violations of policy by Brown community members, our response to the encampment could involve law enforcement and arrest if circumstances warranted,” Clark wrote.
Brown has arrested student protesters multiple times in the past year on trespassing charges. During two sit-ins in University Hall calling for divestment in November and December, a total of 61 students were arrested after being repeatedly advised they would be charged as trespassers if they did not terminate their sit-in. None of these students currently face criminal charges.
“It’s essential to highlight that arresting students is not an action that Brown takes lightly, and it’s not something the University ever wants to do,” Clark said at the time.
Brown’s protest and demonstration policy states that “protest and demonstration are a necessary and acceptable means of expression,” and that “protests or demonstrations that infringe upon the rights of others … or that interfere with the rights of others to make use of or enjoy the facilities or attend the functions of the University are prohibited.”
Owen Dahlkamp is a Section Editor overseeing coverage for University News and Science & Research. Hailing from San Diego, CA, he is concentrating in political science and cognitive neuroscience with an interest in data analytics. In his free time, you can find him making spreadsheets at Dave’s Coffee.
