VIDEO: WARD CHURCHILL VERDICT

FORMER UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO PROFESSOR WARD CHURCHILL REACTS TO THE JURY VERDICT AGAINST HIS FORMER EMPLOYEE FOR HIS FIRING

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• WARD CHURCHILL
• PROFESSOR
• BOULDER
• COLORADO
• 911
• FIRING
• JURY
• VERDICT
• UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO

[gleefulsabotage]

of course he was gonna win, it was a clear shakedown of academic lucidity that took him out.

congratulations mr. churchill,.. a hero for the ages!

[iwiwla22]

The judge almost has to order reinstatement, he said.

Robinson guessed that CU would also owe Churchill somewhere in the mid six-figures for legal fees.

Members of the jury declined to talk to reporters after the verdict Thursday

But a woman identifying herself as juror Bethany Newill called the Caplis and Silverman show on Denvers KHOW radio Thursday evening, and said the $1 award wasnt intended to send a message that Churchill was a fraud.

[j267699]

Why would this "Indian" want to go and work/slave for the white man at an elitist university funded by corporate donors and big business?

[joe018687645]

churchill youre a shhhcccumm bag!

[iwiwla22]

The verdict came after a 3½-week trial that saw testimony from 45 witnesses, including dozens of professors, a handful of regents, two past CU presidents, the former Colorado governor, and Churchill himself.

The university was not vindicated, and Im not certain Ward Churchill was exonerated, said Scott Robinson, a Denver defense attorney and legal analyst.Robinson agreed that Churchill will likely be reinstated on the Boulder campus.

[azrael8585]

Is he going back to being a phoney professor or a fake indian?

[BenjaminLaird]

right on

[TheAntiV]

How about this. Instead of blindly claiming that these so-called scholars are criticizing the trial, why don't you at least try and give their names to me so I can confirm the actually exist. Maxin, your doing the exact thing Churchill is in trouble for.

[maximilianforte]

You wish to repeat one side of an old story. The trial produced at least a dozen scholars critical of the report. I did not invent that fact, but you can choose to ignore it if you like. The jury didn't it, so it's a moot point anyway. He was not fired because of his scholarship.

[TheAntiV]

Which scholars? Maybe the ones who agree with Churchill's politics maybe. The controversy attracted increased attention to Churchill's research, which had already been criticized by legal scholar John LaVelle and historian Guenter Lewy. Additional critics came forward, including sociologist Thomas Brown, who had been preparing an article on Churchill's work, and historians R.G. Robertson and Russell Thornton, who claimed that Churchill had mischaracterized their work.

[maximilianforte]

...and the story did not end there: ever since then, numerous scholars have lambasted that report as an example of falsification and research misconduct itself. It contained numerous critical contradictions, a rush to conclusions, an overly simplified debate about methodologies and interpretations...and, most critically, none of it supported a case for firing and most of the committee members did NOT recommend firing. So it's always back to the politics, the politics that started all of this.