The MSU student accused of posting a racially offensive flier in Shaw Hall pleaded guilty today to charges of misdemeanor harassment in front of East Lansing 54-B District Court Judge Richard Ball.

During a pretrial meeting, prosecutor Marie Wolfe made David Powder aware of his possible options and gave him time to decide what he wanted to do.

"I have decided that the entire procedure is annoying me," the materials science and engineering senior said, adding he wanted to get everything over with.

After discussing his options with Wolfe, Powder said he decided to plead guilty to see what kind of sentence he would get.

He told the court he was not trying to be offensive, and he did not include the names as a direct attack on character of Shaw Hall Black Caucus leaders.

He added the purpose of the flier was "a political statement expressing an opinion about black caucus."

"I was commenting on the belief that black caucus is a racist organization," he said. "I chose the wrong venue for my expression, in the fact that it was offensive, not that it was a flier."

The flier, which pictured a naked pregnant woman, was found Jan. 11 by a mentor during rounds.

Ingham County Prosecutor Stuart Dunnings III said prosecutors recommended six months probation, and they were not looking for jail time.

Powder is required to write letters of apology to the students named on the flier and present them at his sentencing date.

"We wanted him to acknowledge what he did was wrong and apologize to the victims," Dunnings said.

The terms of the plea agreement specify Powder can change his plea if the judge sentences Powder to jail, Dunnings said.

Powder told the court he made the flier "to provoke debate."

"It did stir debate, just not in the right way," he said.

Henry Silverman, president of the Lansing branch of the Michigan American Civil Liberties Union, said the case raises questions of how to define protected speech, which falls under the First Amendment.

"If one views what he did as political protest or political parody, it falls under protected speech," he said.

Silverman said Powder contacted the ACLU regarding representation, and the ACLU reviewed the case, but Powder decided to go a different way, Silverman said.

"I was not using much foresight at the time," Powder said in court. "In retrospect, I can see how they might be offended."