Burnham did not return calls to her officeyesterday, and Gertner is reportedly out of thecountry.

According to more than one Review staff memberinterviewed yesterday, they and some of theirpeers have reservations about Gants' methodology,which they see as imprecise and lacking instructure. One editor expressed concern that Gantsis continuing the investigation in the absence ofGertner, Schulman's attorney, who left townThanksgiving day and will return December 13.

However, the first editor interviewed said that"it seems to me very unlikely...that any rationalperson could come down on the side that Emily istelling the truth."

The current unrest at the Review began with acharge of racism made by a Black woman at aSeptember 30 staff meeting.

On October 4, the staff took an unprecedentedvote of "no confidence" in Schulman. The voteended in a tie, with Schulman voting for herself.

The accusations that are mostcontroversial--because Schulman has flatly deniedthem--involve racist and sexist comments sheallegedly made.

According to some third-year editors, Schulmansaid that allowing a Black woman to edit anarticle written by Assistant Professor of LawCharles J. Ogletree Jr., who is Black, "would be adisaster."

Schulman allegedly said that "this 3-L editorwould be the Black editor on the piece and youknow how complicated that would get."

Editors also alleged that Schulman discourageda female classmate from seeking to advance in theLaw Review hierarchy, because that would mean "toomany women in leadership positions."

Schulman has publicly and repeatedly denied thecharges.

The Law Review was at the center of anemotional debate over issues of race and genderlast spring when it published a parody of thefeminist writings of Mary Joe Frug, a New EnglandSchool of Law professor who was murdered inCambridge in the spring of 1991.

At the time, Schulman, who had just become thefourth woman president in the history of theReview, was praised for her handling of thesituation