Churchill: Not quite the martyr he wanted to be

Breaking recent news from CU's review of Ward Churchill.

While they have concluded that his reprehensible remarks about 9/11 are in fact "protected speech" - meaning, IF he is fired, it won't be about the controversy he WANTED it to be about.

Instead, and more troubling for Ward, the university will begin a committee review into charges of academic fraud and fraudulent claims about his American Indian ancestry.

From the article:

He said a faculty committee would review allegations that Churchill plagiarized the work of other researchers and claims that he falsely claimed to be an American Indian.

Churchill has repeatedly denied both allegations and has said he would sue the university if he is fired.

"We have concluded that the allegations of research misconduct, related to plagiarism, misuse of others' work and fabrication, have sufficient merit to warrant further inquiry," said DiStefano.

He said that review could take up to nine months.

So, another nine months drawing from his $90,000 plus salary, that should be proven he doesn't have the right to draw from. No wonder government employment is so lucrative - you can't really be fired...not in the way most of us might be used to. You have months of pay coming while an investigation is done, and then, MAYBE...you can be fired. But there is also an appeals process, where you can STILL be paid while that takes place.

No wonder taxpayers in Colorado are frustrated.

UPDATE: I received the following email this evening from the chancellor at CU:

SUBJECT: CHANCELLOR'S EMAIL TO PREVIOUS WRITERS

FROM: Office of the Chancellor

SENDER: Collect@Colorado.edu

DATE: March 24, 2005


Dear Friend:

You were one of many citizens who wrote or called the University of Colorado at
Boulder concerning the controversial essay about 9/11 written by Professor Ward
Churchill. Because of your interest, I am writing to share with you the
outcome of our review of allegations concerning Professor Churchill's conduct
and scholarship.

In short, our review team found that Professor Churchill's controversial essay
on 9/11 and other public comments are protected by the First Amendment, but
that other allegations of plagiarism, misuse of others' work and fabrication
may constitute research misconduct.

The report also points to possible research misconduct related to allegations
that Churchill misrepresented his ethnicity to gain credibility and attract an
audience for his scholarship. Research misconduct, if proven, is subject to
university sanctions.

We take these allegations very seriously and will address them through
established university procedures that require due process. I have determined
that the allegations of research misconduct should be referred to the campus's
Standing Committee on Research Misconduct for thorough investigation.
Appropriate action will be taken upon completion of the committee's work.

More information and a copy of the full report are available on the campus web
site at www.colorado.edu/news.

Thank you for your continuing interest in the University of Colorado at
Boulder.

Sincerely,


Chancellor Phil DiStefano