Skip to comments.University mulls appealing Ward Churchill verdict
Posted on 04/04/2009 4:48:38 PM PDT by jasonmyos
BOULDER, Colo. (Legal Newsline)-The controversial University of Colorado professor who likened victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to a Nazi leader has been awarded just $1 in damages for wrongful termination.
(Excerpt) Read more at legalnewsline.com ...
The jury apparently didn’t like the fake indian very much.
Universities need to heed a very important message here. Don’t hire radicals like Ward Churchill or Bill Ayers.
Or Angela Davis, unshakeably tenured at UC Santa Cruz (aka Commie U).
Next on the “to do list” is the Cabinet Position and forgiveness of back Taxes.
Let’s get cracking on that whole dumbing down of our youth, we need this guy way up high in the Department of Education /s
dont spend it all on appeals
They should learn from this but they won't change on iota.
I think Ward got the buck.
The judge in the case, Chief District Judge Larry Naves, still must decide if the university must give Churchill back his $96,392-per-year tenured professorship, and whether the university must pay his legal fees.
Santa Cruz.... not exactly the same demographics as south central LA.
“.... awarded just $1 in damages for wrongful termination.”
That is just too funny.
“The jury apparently didnt like the fake indian very much.”
But they apparently like Fox and O’Reilly less. His attorney spent his time attacking O’Reilly and Fox instead of dealing with the actual merits (such as they are) of the case.
Actually they liked him a little to much to suit me. They should have told him to go pound sand.
Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it!
The disgrace is that they ever hired this charlatan in the first place.
Make that shameless, shallow, transparent charlatan.
sounds like one dollar too much to me!!!!!! But seriously, a jury awarding a buck is saying “technically your right, but we despise you”, which is pretty much the way I feel.
My case in point: Flag Burning; you should ABSOLUTELY be allowed to burn an American flag if that is your want, wish, desire, or whim; however if any past or present member of the Armed Forces decides to beat the dog-crap out of you for said burning, the beater will not be charged!!!!!!!! Thats the world according to Sweetwater!!!!!!!
He ripped off someone else’s ARTWORK and sold it as his own, also!!
Nothing BO does surprises me.
I haven’t kept up recently, but judges have been extremely hesitant to order universities to hire back fired faculty. Occasionally they have rewarded a year or two of salary if they determined that someone was wrongly fired or denied tenure, but they have not considered it to be their job to tell universities whom they should hire.
So, the question is what this judge will do with the jury’s decision.
“The judge in the case, Chief District Judge Larry Naves, still must decide if the university must give Churchill back his $96,392-per-year tenured professorship, and whether the university must pay his legal fees.”
Those are two very big items, especially the question of whether they have to hire back someone they don’t want. Hopefully this judge will do the right thing in that regard. The legal fees are less important.
A.K.A. "The Hammer on the Table Defense."
Some interesting tidbits at the NotMyTribe blog:
Churchill juror Bethany Newill explains
By Marie Walden
NOT MY TRIBE - 4/03/2009 10:14PM MDT - 17 Comments
A few interesting things about the Ward Churchill jury came to light today (a sigh of relief from Pirate Ballerina!). The jury thought right up until the judge gave them their instructions they were to determine whether Ward Churchill was guilty of academic misconduct. When they realized they needed only to decide only whether the 9/11 essay was a substantial motivating factor in his dismissal, they agreed very quickly that it was.
Although apparently the jury took their deliberations seriously, they didnt want to have anything to do with the damages portion of the process. They hoped the judge would do the job for them but when they found out that wasnt permitted, they gave it a half-hearted shot. This from Westwords interview with juror Bethany Newill:
Once Judge Larry Naves reiterated that the jury had to tackle this task, Newill confirms that the majority of us were in favor of giving him money, but they didnt know how much to award. We were given a four-page set of rules to determine the amount, and there was also an option that we didnt have to do it. And one of the rules said there needed to be a preponderance of the evidence to show the financial effect it had on Ward Churchill. And there was no real dollar amount other than the loss of wages.
Ultimately, the jurors followed the lead of David Lane, Churchills attorney. He said, What price can you put on a reputation? Newill remembers. And we all decided that theres not a price you can put on a reputation. And even though this was protected speech, there are still consequences to your actions and your words. When Ward Churchill wrote that essay, he had to think that people would be affected by that, negatively or positively, and that he would need to reap the consequences on his reputation. Still, she emphasizes that it wasnt a slap in his face or anything like that when we didnt give him any money. Its just that David Lane kept saying this wasnt about the money, and in the end, we took his word for that.
No doubt, a jury of peers! Just not Ward Churchills peers!
Tenure overall should be abolished.
There are many like this guy in every university.
Tenure rewards the do nothings.
I didn't catch that at first. The Jury actually awarded for this traitor. The judge could still send him back.
I imagine this “judge” will rule for Churchill in order to “send a message” to the colleges and universities not to go screwing around with the Marxist professors. These professors are redesigning Amerika.
.... awarded just $1 in damages for wrongful termination.
That’s the jury’s way of saying,
You know, if this guy said that at a real organization or company, there would be a civil right lawsuit against them...hey that’s an idea—stop complaining about it-and file one.
Newill’s version of what happened during deliberations is beginning to fall apart.
It does sound a bit too comic to be true. Thanks.
.............with back pay and legal fees.
Boy, I hope so. That's the most confused understanding of the issues I've ever read!
My son was required to take a diversity class at college (Temple University in Philly). He perused his choices for fullfilling the diversity class requirement and opted for a diversity class on Native Americans, figuring it would probably be the easiest one to stomach among the choices offered.
His professor was black (naturally - - these mandatory diversity classes are designed to provide employment opportunities for people who majored in African American Studies) and one of the books REQUIRED for the class was a book written by that famous Native American, Ward Churchill.
I kid you not.
The first native American was likely that simple traveler who first left his lasting mark along the dry, parched soil which he set about to put behind him.
I wonder about CO people and CO voters and CO jurors!
Most people who are against tenure do NOT have tenure! Such are the USA and her people.
Considering CO voting habits, Churchill is more powerful there than we realize. Maybe they think he is kin to the real Churchill!
You are totally correct about tenure. There are a lot of weirdos in our Universities. I am from Alabama and I know. It will be very difficult to overturn this long time tradition.
LOL, well if he says he is, he is!