Ward Churchill wins case, jury awards monetery damages

[masuki bance]

of $1.00.

DENVER — A jury ruled Thursday that Ward L. Churchill, a former University of Colorado professor who drew national attention for an essay in which he called some victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks “little Eichmanns,” was wrongfully terminated.

Ward Churchill, left, and his attorney David Lane after closing arguments in Churchill’s civil suit against the University of Colorado in Denver on Wednesday.


The jury found that his political views were a “substantial or motivating” factor in his dismissal, and that the university had not shown that he would have been dismissed anyway.

But the jury, which deliberated for a day and a half, awarded Mr. Churchill only $1 in damages.

The judge in the case, Larry J. Naves, is to determine later whether Mr. Churchill should be reinstated to his job teaching ethnic studies at the university’s Boulder campus. A reinstatement would likely draw a sharply negative reaction among many on the faculty, since a faculty committee was instrumental in his firing.

The judge ordered the packed courtroom to be silent as the verdict was read. Afterward, Mr. Churchill slipped on a pair of sunglasses and spoke to reporters outside the courtroom.

“I didn’t ask for money, I asked for justice,” Mr. Churchill said when asked about the $1 award, adding that he expected to get his job back because the jury had found he was dismissed for political reasons. “Reinstatement follows rather naturally, wouldn’t you say?”

Ken McConnellogue, a spokesman for the university, said that the $1 award was “some vindication” and that the university would oppose any reinstatement. Noting that the faculty committee had determined that Mr. Churchill had an “ongoing pattern” of academic misconduct, he said: “What happened with the jury’s verdict doesn’t change that at all.”

The university had said that Mr. Churchill plagiarized and falsified parts of his academic research, particularly on American Indians, and cited this as grounds for his dismissal in July 2007. Mr. Churchill brought a wrongful termination suit against the university, seeking monetary damages for lost wages and harm to his reputation. He also wanted to be reinstated....
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/03/us/03churchill.html?_r=1&hp

[imdjh]

1. Isn't there a small matter of several other reasons?

Lying about his military service?

He doesn't have a legitimate doctorate?

"the Investigative Committee of the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct at the University of Colorado concluded that Churchill had committed multiple counts of academic misconduct, specifically plagiarism, fabrication, and falsification."? - wiki

He lied about American Indian ancestry as a matter of political, social, and professional convenience?

[New Dawn]

3. Regarding his ancestry...

Was there actually a DNA test or something that proved he totally made it up, or does he just not have any genealogical documentation to back up his (or his family's) story?

[imdjh]

14. Here's his pedigree

http://home.comcast.net/~jackott2/ahnentafel2.htm

That was simply found through a google search, but it backs up or is the source of the report credited to the Rocky Mountain News.

Many people sincerely believe that they have American Indian ancestry, commonly something on the order of "My great grandmother was half Cherokee." or something like that, that a playful uncle told them, or that a family member who also believed it to be true repeated. It's actually not as common as people would like to believe, but a fairly harmless belief especially if it makes people more accepting of people who are racially mixed. It was, however, serious business in the past and census records are very reliable because the census takers were residents of the communities in which they worked.

I'd say that there is a huge difference between believing a family story, and building an identity which you exploit based on something like that. If I were going to claim to be sufficiently American Indian to carry the banner of the cause of "my people", I think I would do the work to nail down exactly the degree and source of my identity.

[Heidi]

42. Or worse, "My great-great-grandmother was a Cherokee princess."

The Dawes Rolls are the only standard for gaining a CDIB card. I have to wonder why Churchill makes such a big deal of his NA ancestry and then doesn't go to the trouble of authenticating his claims by the only recognized means: the Dawes Rolls. Further, you can be sure that if he truly brought anything to the table for the Cherokee Nation or UKB (which requires 1/4 BQ), there would be assistance to ascertain his claims, one way or the other.

In essence, I completely agree with you.

[druidity33]

4. it sounds to me...

like you have a problem with this Churchill fellow. I don't however see anything but unsubstantiated allegations on your part, and a jury verdict on his part.

:shrug:

[imdjh]

15. The jury's finding negates the rest?

The jury found that his firing was politically motivated and that the university hadn't made the case that he would have been fired anyway. That's not the same as finding that the university's finding in his work were false, merely that the jury believes that the university was politically motivated and hadn't fired him before the controversy.

The situation for reinstatement is quite different. Even if the university fired him for his outrageous statements after WTC, a great deal about this man has come to light in the process. So the next question would be if he would be hired today even if he hadn't made the WTC remarks, given what is now known about him.

It's rather like the episode on Boston Legal where Betty White gets fired. She had been charged with murdering a client of the firm, which she admitted doing but was acquitted because of the nature of the killing. Shirley explained to her that even though she had been acquitted, she had still admitted to killing a client of the firm and could not remain employed there.

[druidity33]

27. where is this?

"a great deal about this man has come to light in the process"


Maybe you know something i don't. I bet though that they never would've dug up this "other" information had they not been LOOKING for a way to fire him. BTW, where is it i can read about this "great deal"?

I'm sure this Mr Churchill is probably an arrogant ass. But that doesn't mean that as a TENURED professor and head of a department, that he should've been fired. If we fired all the arrogant asses in Academia, there would be no Academia.

The Uni responded to public pressure. His firing was politically motivated.

What's tragic is that he was right. If during this financial "disaster" we can't see that there were "little Eichmann's" at work on Wall st, and have been for MANY, MANY years... then we are blind, blind, blind.


:shrug:

[notesdev]

32. Hard to complain about 'political motivation'

when the funding for his position came from politics to begin with.

It's a pretty straightforward principle - you take taxpayers' money, your situation becomes subject to politics. That's certainly the case with the banks, and it would be hypocritical not to apply that to all aid recipients. You want unfettered decision-making capability, do it on your own dime.

[druidity33]

37. that's actually bullshit

and you probably know it. Since when does the general public have a say in when a TENURED professor in university gets hired or fired? Let's try and base things on reality here, please...

:eyes:

[notesdev]

49. It's called you pay the bill

you call the shots.

This 'tenure' thing is ridiculous to begin with. In what other field can someone obtain ironclad job security no matter how much of an ass they become afterwards? It is a fantasy scenario, and I for one am tired of paying for this extreme luxury.

Anyone working for me, I want them to know that if they are not working on the job and doing the right thing that they can and will be replaced. Those are the terms I work under and I see no reason why someone who is living off my tax dollar has a claim to superior terms of employment.

[druidity33]

51. you're living in fantasy land...

that's just not the way things work, whether you want to believe that or not.

:shrug:

[a la izquierda]

39. Then you need to do some investigating

He's been shunned by the academic community.

Edit, for clarity: He shouldn't have been fired, as that is serious business when one has tenure. Political motivations have zero place in academia, but in fact, they often do. It is very messy and can end in lawsuits. However, he does very shoddy scholarship and probably wasn't entirely deserving of the position in the first place. That, combined with the whole ancestry fiasco, is really problematic. I have colleagues who are raked over the coals because they study Native American history or cultures, and who are not of Native descent...trumping up one's ancestry for career gain is so unprofessional.

[Heidi]

23. The United Keetoowah Band, of which Churchill claimed membership,

conferred an honorary associate membership to him in 1994, and that membership has not been rescinded. However, honorary associate memberships are not the same as regular UKB enrollment and those to whom these membership were conferred were not required to meet the UKB's rigorous enrollment standards.

He may very well have Native American lineage, but his honorary associate membership in the UKB did not require him to prove it.

[imdjh]

34. Elsewhere that reads that he got the honorary membership BECAUSE he couldn't prove his ancestry.

[Heidi]

41. The UKB has described Churchill's claims of UKB enrollment as "fraudulent."

However, it's my understanding that the honorary associate membership was conferred because of Churchill's promises to help the tribe.

Rocky Mountain News, 2005:

The chief said his tribe had decided to honor Churchill with the associate membership because Church-ill had promised to write the tribe's history and had pledged "to help and honor the UKB."

The tribe said that all of Churchill's "past, present and future claims or assertions of Keetoowah 'enrollment,' written or spoken, including but not limited to; biographies, curriculum vitae, lectures, applications for employment, or any other reference not listed herein, are deemed fraudulent by the United Keetoowah Band."
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2005/may/18/tribe-snubs-prof/

[western mass]

25. The academic misconduct case was bulls***

I read the document of the University committee in full. IN FULL, not just the headlines and talking points spread around by the media. It was tenuous at best and most of the accusations were simply spurious. I don't know if Ward Churchill is a good scholar or not, but that's immaterial. It was a witch hunt.

[Heidi]

43. While I think he's a liar and a plagarist, I agree that this was a witch hunt. (nt)

[mitchtv]

50. kinda like OJ

they framed the right person?

[aikoaiko]

2. Its true that his politics were a motivating factor to look at him with amore critical eye, but

what was dredged up were legitimate reasons to shitcan him.

[Chulanowa]

6. He shouldn't be reinstated

But none of this would have been dredged up if the university hadn't tried to shitcan him, as you put it, for his political views.

[aikoaiko]

10. Yes, but if his work were properly conducted, tenure would have protected him.

As I said in another post, he really shouldn't have thrown stones when he lived in a glass house of his own making.

[EFerrari]

7. That's usually known as a witch hunt. n/t

[aikoaiko]

9. No, its not a witchhunt. Its the simple case where someone shouldn't have thrown stones when

he lived in a glass house.

If you want tenure to protect you for saying stupid, bomb throwing shit, then you had better live up to the responsibilities of tenure.

[EFerrari]

11. If they had to "dredge up" material to justify his prosecution

you bet it was a witch hunt. The process matters.

More than anything, I have to wonder about how his department is managed. Not very well, apparently.

[imdjh]

16. I think he was the chairman of that department n/t

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

20. He drew the attention to himself.

[Raineyb]

33. That's not a good excuse for what happened to him

So what's the lesson, keep your nose down, don't have controversial views and you too can keep your job? That's a rather disgusting precedent to set.

Regards

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

54. No the lesson is if you lie about your credentials you may not want to become famous.

[EFerrari]

47. What is this, the old Soviet Union?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

55. No, just a place where lying about credentials will get you fired.

[scarletwoman]

19. It was indeed a witch hunt. See my post #18 below. (nt)

[H2O Man]

31. Yes, indeed.

It was a witch hunt.

[druidity33]

52. Mr Waterman...

I see a lot of people calling Churchill's scholarship, ancestry and integrity into question here. I know only about the piece Churchill has written that garnered the ire of the Media, nothing about the man himself. Is there anything you can offer that might shed light on this man's character? I ask only because i know you have an interest in Native affairs... and i respect your opinion.

I need to admit that to some extent i feel he has been vindicated... the "little Eichmanns" he was talking about are exactly the people who have crippled the global economy, so i have a tendency to want to defend his point of view. Beyond that, i'm open to hearing substantiated claims of his "failings" as an Academic.

Definately a witch-hunt though, no doubt about that...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. When I opened this, I was hoping it was a late April Folls post

With professors like this is it any wonder the university budgets are getting cut. The faculty found against him for academic reasons...

[EFerrari]

8. University budgets are not being cut because of faculty behavior

but thank you for posting right wing crap to DU.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. Actually Ward Churchill was cited as an example of why the public is losing faith in public

universities. That and other exemplars were cited as why it was getting harder and harder to maintain funding for the university system. This was during a faculty meeting at a UC campus. Certainly not a right wing event.

[imdjh]

17. I recently had a discussion on tenure with a prof from UC Davis

She (and apparently many others) seem to think that universities are some how bullet proof from the people who pay the bills, which at state colleges include the state taxpayers as well as the federal taxpayers who fund scholarships and grants and studies etc... The American people like to joke about things, but it turns serious at some point and at that point it's advisable to pay attention.

A lot of people tend to be very practical in their expectations of colleges. It's all well and good if someone CHOOSES to send their kid to a certain private college best known for costing a fortune and turning out graduates who aren't really qualified to do much, but most people, most parents, want to see student graduating with degrees that have a street value and that can be achieved on time. Studying the finer points of nonmarketable disciplines is a luxury, and as a rule people paying the bills for others don't choose luxury.

A lot of people also see tenure as a smokescreen for a level of job protection for what they often consider to be an overpaid occupation, and again, if they are the ones paying for it are not impressed.

I have two family members with degrees from very fine universities which aren't worth a warm bucket of spit. I didn't have a vote on what these two majored in, but suffice it to say that the only thing they are qualified to do is teach in their major. In a way, that's like multi-level marketing where you never actually sell anything, you just recruit more salespeople to work under you and buy the kit.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. I am not a cynical as you are...but clearly in these times the public university systems do not

need any more negatives in the media.

I am a non-tenure track prof (by choice). I could be let go at any time, no pension, no benefits. However, since I am already retired from industry, that is fine by me. My preference is to teach the 200 level course where students are in the mode of figuring out if the field is where they want to be. IMO its the most exciting part of university, but its no place to be if one is seeking tenure. Even those with tenure are not making bags of money, though in some fields being a prof is about the best paid job out there.

I agree that some fields are only for academia, be it at the university or in high school. Not a lot of market out there for sociology and anthropology majors. In the HS arena, much is made about how much teachers don't make even though they by and large have master degrees. I argue that an MA in History or Sociology is not comparable to an MS in Physics, Math, or Comp Sci, and any attempt to equate then for purposes of compensation is silly at best. It doesn't sell well in many quarters. However I believe that eventually we will see subject differentials.

[druidity33]

29. and who cited them?

The point is, you are disseminating a RW talking point. They are the ones you are citing.

[EFerrari]

46. By whom? What is your source? Thanks.

[MichaelHarris]

12. I support academic freedom

I don't support Ward Churchill. In the transcript from the trial he tells an attorney to call him either Dr. or Professor, he is neither. I've studied history on and off my entire academic life, I'm back in school at 51. I'm taking a Native American Law class right now from a Professor who has dedicated his entire career on helping Native Americans have their day in court. He has played a role in many court decisions regarding Native Americans all over the Pacific Northwest. He's worked with Ward Churchill, he knows this man's work, or lack of it. The type of "work" Churchill does for tribes actually destroys the good work other historians do. Praise him all you like but his type of history has no place in scholarly work.

[scarletwoman]

18. I support Ward Churchill. Most people don't know shit about him except what the corpomedia reported.

For example, how many detractors are aware of the fact that he was the co-author of an important book about how the FBI infiltrated and destroyed activist groups in the 60s and 70s?

http://www.southendpress.org/2004/items/COINTELPRO

The COINTELPRO Papers
Documents From the FBI’s Secret Wars Against Dissent in the United States
Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall

Reproducing many original FBI memos, the authors provide extensive analysis of the agency’s treatment of the Left, from the Communist Party in the 1950s to the Central America solidarity movement in the 1980s. Ward Churchill’s substantial new preface to this South End Press Classics edition updates the cases of several incarcerated Black Panthers and analyzes the events at Ruby Ridge and Waco, as well as the wars on drugs and terrorism. Churchill makes a compelling argument that US law enforcement has become thoroughly militarized, with devastating consequences for all those who work for social justice.

“Churchill and Vander Wall document the contunuing war, real and symbolic, which the FBI waged against a variety of protest groups during the early 1970s and since then as well. Chapter by chapter, we are saddened to learn that the agency was truly an equal opportunity offender.”—American Indian Quarterly

“In this detailed review of the subversive activities of the national political police over many years, the authors show that the commitment to undermine free association and independent thought is deeply rooted in national policy and subject to only superficial challenge. Their harrowing and extensively documented study lends much credibility to their supposition that ‘COINTELPRO lives on,’ and efforts to organize poor and oppressed people and dissident movements will be targeted for destruction by state power.”— Noam Chomsky

Other books by Ward Churchill or Jim Vander Wall

Agents of Repression (paper)
The FBI’s Secret Wars Against the American Indian Movement and the Black Panther Party
Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall
Released 2002-09-01
Featuring one of the best histories of the FBI siege of Wounded Knee—the 1973 attack that devastated the American Indian Movement and resulted in Leonard Peltier’s imprisonment—Agents of Repression also provides a well-written synthesis of FBI efforts against the Black Panthers and an overview of the Bureau’s history.

Churchill’s many books include Marxism and Native Americans, Fantasies of the Master Race, Struggle for the Land, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens, From A Native Son, Critical Issues in Native North America, The COINTELPRO Papers, Indians R Us?, Agents of Repression, Since Predator Came, and A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas. In his lectures and numerous published works, Churchill explores the themes of genocide in the Americas, racism, historical and legal (re)interpretation of conquest and colonization, environmental destruction of Indian lands, government repression of political movements, literary and cinematic criticism, and indigenist alternatives to the status quo.

Now, how hard is it to imagine that a person with his views just MIGHT be subjected to a concerted smear campaign?

sw

[ProgressiveProfessor]

21. That does not explain why the faculty committee agreed he should be dismissed

I don't see them going along with an FBI conspiracy

[ConsAreLiars]

24. I would guess that most professors there were swayed by the propaganda

just like most Americans, according to the polls, thought mass murdering Iraqis or Afghans was a good idea, or slaughtering Gazans, as you support, was a good thing, or, if the Corporatist Media are to be believed, once gave the Chimp very high approval ratings and the Presidency twice. In other words, many professors, despite their self-assessments, are neither progressive nor particularly well informed.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

36. You clearly do not know know many academicians

[druidity33]

38. i do actually

and in many cases they are just as narrow minded as "regular" people. Especially when someone encroaches upon their domain...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

44. Firing a tenured professor is serious enroachment, but yet the faculty supported it

[druidity33]

45. see #28 please... nt

[EFerrari]

48. And anyone who does or who has been one knows that these events are mediated

by departmental or divisional politics of the moment.

[western mass]

26. Did you read the university misconduct report?

I don't mean the talking points spread in the media, I mean the FULL report? I'm not a historian, and I don't know if Churchill is a good one or a bad one (actually, what I'm gleaned about his work did not particularly impress). But as an academic I can judge a case of academic misconduct, and this one was tenuous at best...and some of the accusations were just ridiculous, red flags of a witch hunt.

[scarletwoman]

28. Oh you poor naif. I'm sure you simply can't imagine how it might be possible for subtle pressures

to be brought to bear on a University administration ("Be a shame if you lost this funding, wouldn't it?"), and passed down through the ranks of the faculty.

If someone has been marked as an undesirable by powerful forces, legitimate sounding excuses can always be found to mask the true reason for their persecution, as well as the true instigators.

[H2O Man]

30. Yep.

People should read some of his work, then reconsider why he was a target. I'm not saying that I agreed with him on all issues (nor would I expect him to), but he has done some impressive work. He challenged students to think for themselves in a manner that might result in their investing their energies in activities beyond the realm of bright lights, loud music, and intoxication.

[scarletwoman]

53. Thank you for speaking up.

Ward Churchill offends the shallow two-dimensional thinkers. They will never forgive him for challenging their comfortable worldview.

sw

[Djinn]

57. all tinfoil scarletwoman

all those freaks who wailed that good ol' Joh Bjelke (don't expect anyone here will know who he was but worth a google for a modern day fascist) was spying on them and infiltrating their activism were insane deluded lefties...except of course they weren't.

anyone who speaks truth to power (particularly when that power is so thoroughly corrupted by filthy lucre) faces censure, bizarrely the people seem to cheer it on loudly.

[Raskolnik]

35. Probably the right decision, but that doesn't make Churchill any less of a tool.

Someone that fakes Indian ancestry to put on airs of "authenticity" deserves a punch in the back of the head.

[ensho]

40. I'm glad he finally got Justice - more power to him

nt

[Krashkopf]

56. Thank you to Churchill's LAWYERS - and to the JURY!

Congratulations to David Lane, and the team at Killmer, Lane & Newman, for their outstanding victory in the Ward Churchill case. I want to thank the for preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution. They are PATRIOTS in the truest sense of the word.

This is SO MUCH MORE than just a victory for Ward Churchill. It's a victory for every person - famous, like Bill Maher and the Dixie Chicks, and not famous like you and me - who were "shouted down" by the right-wing noise machine. It was a victory for the CONSTITUTION!

Thank you, also, to the Denver Jury, who saw through the bullshit, and who saw Churchill's firing for what it was - a ham-handed effort by the government to punish a person for expressing an unpopular decision.