Comments on: Rule of Law?

By: “Some People Pushed Back” « Dan Cull Weblog

“Some People Pushed Back” « Dan Cull Weblog — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 03:19:50 +0000

[...] Marc Tyrrell ‘Rule of Law?’ (an anthropologist comments on the legal implications of the trial for [...]

By: JKNalgon

JKNalgon — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:19:59 +0000

I think the Confrontation Clause is also a deterrent to the admission of hearsay into the proceedings of a court.

In the SCRM’s “quasi-court” we see a most unusual chain of hearsay – that is, “Marje” tells the Committee that Prof. Brown told her that Prof. Cohen implied that Prof. Churchill plagiarized her work.

This bizarre chain of hearsay, rumor, and innuendo would never link up in an actual civil proceeding.

On another note, the Committee members were acting as “quasi-prosecutors” in the matter. Prof. Brown might want to contemplate the fate of an accuser who secretly conspires to prosecute a crime that wasn’t committed.

By: JKNalgon

JKNalgon — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 16:02:56 +0000

It is the 6th, specifically the Confrontation Clause. The accused has the right of cross-examination of the accuser.

By: admin

admin — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 21:09:21 +0000

It does make one wonder, doesn’t it? I had thought that, in the US, there was a legal right to face one’s accusers… Under the 6th Amendendment if I’m not mistaken…

By: JKNalgon

JKNalgon — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 21:00:37 +0000

“…the committee was bound by CU policy to keep complainants anonymous.”

Ah, the anonymous accuser.

How intriguing, and . . ., Stalinesque.

By: Maximilian Forte

Maximilian Forte — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:46:56 +0000

That’s right, Ward Churchill plagiarized himself, making use of his own words without proper self-attribution.

He really should be fired for such an egregious frontal assault…indeed, let’s join Thomas Brown (and the others who have made a personal career of destroying Churchill’s) by screeching “RAPE!” at the top of our lungs at the unruly, ill mannered little Indian.

By: Thomas Brown

Thomas Brown — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:14:46 +0000

You should really read the SCRM report:

http://www.colorado.edu/news/reports/churchill/churchillreport051606.html

If you need more, see my two articles in Plagiary.

The notion that the IC report plagiarized me is absurd, and is typical of the tu quoque arguments repeatedly deployed by Churchill’s defenders. I submitted my work as a complainant, and the committee was bound by CU policy to keep complainants anonymous. In other words, Marjie was forbidden from citing me. She did her own research anyway, partially in my footsteps, and came to the same conclusions that I did — as has everyone else who’s done the primary source research.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:23:11 +0000

Tom,

Just out of interest, have you lodged a plagiarism complaint against Professor McIntosh yet? I’m wondering since according to this document (http://www.wardchurchill.net/files/research_mIsconduct_complaint_against_mcintosh_and_invest_cmte_for_plagiarism.pdf) it certainly appears that you have a case.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 01:54:37 +0000

Tom,

I will admit to getting most of my news about the trial from Max’s posts, but he is usually quite accurate (even if we disagree on a lot of things). Here is the post about the supposed infractions – http://openanthropology.wordpress.com/2009/03/21/news-from-days-9-10-of-ward-churchills-lawsuit-against-the-university-of-colorado/

Do you have a particular source for the plagiarism and “fabrication and falsification” that goes beyond what was reported?

By: Thomas Brown

Thomas Brown — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:50:08 +0000

Marc, you’re misinformed re Churchill’s infractions. He plagiarized two entire articles. His excuse is that someone else mistakenly gave him credit for the purloined works. Repeatedly. You may or may not buy his defense, but the alleged offense is significantly more serious than you acknowledge. There are also the issues of Churchill’s fabrication and falsification. I shudder when scholars say that such infractions are “minor”. What does that say about the reliability of your own work?