Skip to main content

View Diary: Ward Churchill wins lawsuit against Colorado (177 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The plagiarism allegations existed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and were ignored prior to this getting blown up in public in 2005.  After Churchill's comments became common knowledge and the University had a reason to want him gone, they decided that they would look into the allegations that they had been previously ignoring.  In the course of that investigation, they accumulated enough evidence of misconduct that they felr justified in firing him.  

    According to an article at the Denver Post, the legal question was : After all, the primary legal inquiry posed to the jury was whether, for a majority of the nine regents, the essay was a "substantial or motivating factor" in the dismissal.

    The University never presented any evidence to explain why they did not pursue the allegations against Churchill immediately or any evidence showing that Churchill's misconduct was similar to that of other professora who were terminated.

    It seems to me like a type of profiling.  I think Churchill is guilty of misconduct (though I am not sure if it rises to the termination level).  But had the essay not caused controversy, nobody would have looked at the previously made allegations and Churchill would not have been fired.

    So it sounds to me like the jury got it right when they decided that the regents were affected by his 9/11 essay and that it was a factor in their decision

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site