UPDATE - FALSE ALARM: Integrity: The Child Scott Walker Left Behind

[treeman]

64. SOLID STORY

The article by WCMCOOP.COM about Dr. Gillick’s direct experience with Scott Walker while they were at Marquette University is well researched and presented with sensitivity to the alleged birth mother of Walker’s child. The article was simply written as a report of one woman’s account of her direct experience with Walker. WCMC received information about Dr. Gillick’s statement made through her lawyer. The coop’s team of researchers looked into this story to verify that both Dr. Gillick and her attorney (Mike Fargione) were indeed who they claimed to be. After direct conversations with Dr. Gillick and Mr. Fargione, the researchers assessed their credibility and checked out the facts surrounding their assertions. In discussing their findings, all members of the coop found this story to be solidly supported by additional information that was withheld to protect the birthmother and the child. Withholding this information showed sensitivity, and coop members would not have given voice to Dr. Gillick’s story if they had any reason to doubt its accuracy. Researchers for the coop continue to compile more evidence to support Dr. Gillick’s report of her direct personal experience with Walker. The birthmother has reportedly denied that Walker is the father of her baby that was born at that time. However, she admits that she was Dr. Gillick’s roommate at the time of her pregnancy, and she claims that Dr. Gillick is confused and that there was “another” roommate that was pregnant in the following year. Gillick and her subsequent roommate deny any “other” pregnant roommate. It is not surprising that the birthmother may want to deflect attention from herself and her child (it would be horrendous to deal with the aftermath of such an admission, or her child may not even know, or the deep pockets of Walker’s allies may have even lead to some sort of nondisclosure agreement in the past). If this is the case, it is easy to see why she would have to deny such a claim when she was suddenly put on the spot. But this is not only her story. Dr. Gillick has her own direct experience with Walker and his behavior at Marquette. After she watched the debate where Walker bragged about his own integrity, Dr. Gillick feels that it is her moral obligation to share her story related to a man who has already caused great harm to his state, a man who could be reelected based on his claims of integrity and be positioned to inflict even more harm. I admire Dr. Gillick’s courage to share her story. She has nothing to gain and everything to lose if it were not true. I also respect the WCMC for their courage to publish a controversial story that they have thoroughly investigated, and continue to pursue.