Patterico's Pontifications

2/13/2015

Tulsa University to Student: Because of Someone Else’s Facebook Post, You Are Suspended And Can Never Receive a Degree From Us in Your Chosen Major

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:15 am

I have no idea why anyone would ever go to the University of Tulsa when they are willing to do things like this to their students:

In a triple blow to free speech, due process, and freedom of the press, the University of Tulsa (TU) arbitrarily banned a student from campus until 2016 for Facebook posts that someone else admitted to writing and then attempted to intimidate student journalists who were trying to cover the story.

. . . .

TU suspended student George “Trey” Barnett last October for three Facebook posts published by his husband that criticized another student and two TU faculty members. None of the Facebook posts came from Barnett’s account; the statements were posted by his husband, who either tagged Barnett or posted them directly to Barnett’s Facebook page. Barnett’s husband later submitted a sworn affidavit attesting to his sole authorship of the posts. Nevertheless, shortly after TU professor Susan Barrett filed a complaint against Barnett arguing that Barnett could not “avoid responsibility” because someone else was responsible for the posts, TU Senior Vice Provost Winona Tanaka imposed eight restrictive interim measures against Barnett. The sanctions included suspending his participation in certain courses and activities and even barring him from speaking about certain individuals.

. . . .

Less than two months before Barnett was set to graduate, Tanaka not only suspended him until at least 2016 but also permanently banned him from receiving a degree in his major even upon his re-enrollment.

The student never received a hearing, despite policies requiring one.

Also, a campus newspaper which has criticized the university has been told it can be punished if “anything that the university deems to be confidential” is “published or shared, [that] could violate university policies.” The university refuses to elaborate as to what is meant by this vague phrase — which of course increases the in terrorem effect to the point where any criticism at all feels risky.

More on the case from Inside Higher Education.

FIRE is involved — which reminds me that it’s time to make a monetary contribution to FIRE. Hang on one sec . . .

Screen Shot 2015-02-13 at 10.01.54 AM

There. That was easy.

Thanks to Simon Jester for the tip.

104 Responses to “Tulsa University to Student: Because of Someone Else’s Facebook Post, You Are Suspended And Can Never Receive a Degree From Us in Your Chosen Major”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (2b72e1)

  2. even Tulsa, OK has been infected and overrun by the vermin.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  3. Our esteemed host quoted:

    TU suspended student George “Trey” Barnett last October for three Facebook posts published by his husband that criticized another student and two TU faculty members. None of the Facebook posts came from Barnett’s account; the statements were posted by his husband, who either tagged Barnett or posted them directly to Barnett’s Facebook page. Barnett’s husband later submitted a sworn affidavit attesting to his sole authorship of the posts.

    The answer is obvious: the University is discriminating against him because he is homosexual.

    The realistic Dana (f6a568)

  4. “his” husband? Enjoy the swamp you wanted, good buddy!

    nk (dbc370)

  5. TU suspended student George “Trey” Barnett last October for three Facebook posts published by his husband. . .

    Homophobes.

    There, it had to be said.

    Seriously, the irony is that elements of the left will probably be much more attuned to this free speech outrage because it was directed towards a member of a protected class. Mr. Barnett, assuming he is white, is very lucky to be gay in this case.

    JVW (27e4a7)

  6. The realistic Dana nk, and I all landed on the same page.

    JVW (27e4a7)

  7. If lawyers had not been invented, this stuff would make them necessary. Sue the bastards.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  8. Yeah, but I still beat you to the punch! :)

    The Dana who got there first (f6a568)

  9. It is amusing to sense a tiny bit of schadenfreude, especially as all the participants in this little drama are probably not people I would want to know.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  10. Dr K wrote:

    If lawyers had not been invented, this stuff would make them necessary.

    If lawyers had not been invented, the aggrieved party could just shoot the bastards and be done with it. Oft times, that is the superior solution!

    The Wild West Dana (f6a568)

  11. “The realistic Dana, nk, and I all landed floated on the same page?”

    correction made…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  12. OK. I am having difficulty getting the gist of what actually went on here. Can somebody more familiar with the case offer a Reader’s Digest version of the events, or point to a story where it’s better explained. I get FIRE’s involvement. Good for them. Sounds warranted. But what started or led up all the egregious facebook postings and criticisms and accusations between paper, faculty, and Barnett and his partner?

    elissa (656059)

  13. Dr K suggested that some of us might be enjoying “a tiny bit of schadenfreude.” I assure you, it’s much more than a tiny bit! :)

    The highly amused Dana (f6a568)

  14. Stop the pigs! Save the people! Attica! Attica! Fire this homophobe!

    nk (dbc370)

  15. OT but I doubt I will ever get to the point when I read the phrase ‘his husband’ and not assume poor proofreading is involved.

    epobirs (915bde)

  16. elissa,

    A lot of the background, from the university’s point of view, is here. If anything, it reinforces my previous impression.

    Patterico (2b72e1)

  17. Sounds warranted. But what started or led up all the egregious facebook postings and criticisms and accusations between paper, faculty, and Barnett and his partner?

    My guess is that Barnett’s husband, Christopher Magnum, posted some obnoxious stuff that perhaps is borderline harassing or threatening. The proper response in this case would have been to seek a restraining order against Magnum and perhaps bar him from campus. But since many academics can’t seem to deal with nuance where civil liberties are involved, they decided to bring the hammer down on Barnett too.

    What needs to happen is that a public university needs to be sued for violating a student’s rights, the student needs to win a sizable judgement, and then the state legislators need to fire the entire administration of that university. It seems that only something that draconian will get the attention of the wannabe censors.

    JVW (27e4a7)

  18. Just saw the bit in the article that said that the University of Tulsa is a private institution. I never knew that. Apparently it is historically a Presbyterian university. Pity that Barnett and Magnum didn’t post defamatory stuff against Israel, since those views would be A-OK with that crowd.

    JVW (27e4a7)

  19. that poor fat little thing she needs to get the gastric bypass for so her ankles stop breaking

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  20. No case, in my courtroom, taking the memorandum as true. Private institution, the “harassment policy” and other rules are part of the contract. He can’t hide behind his proxy/husband to avoid responsibility.

    nk (dbc370)

  21. I have a difficult time developing any enthusiasm for someone’s free speech rights if it deals with a dude who’d compel me to call his significant other his “husband.”

    I’d have to know going in if George “Trey” Barnett thinks I should have to cater his wedding.

    Before I go to the mat for George “Trey” Barnett’s First Amendment rights these days I’d like to know what if any of those rights I’d be left to enjoy, should he and his “husband” be given free rein to run the world.

    Steve57 (560f3e)

  22. Otherwise it’s like having to choose between Hitler and Stalin.

    Steve57 (560f3e)

  23. It would be a real shame if someone who’s studying public relations, for instance, so they can make sure Brendan Eich can never work again didn’t get their degree because of viewpoint discrimination.

    Not.

    Steve57 (560f3e)

  24. Private institution, the “harassment policy” and other rules are part of the contract. He can’t hide behind his proxy/husband to avoid responsibility.

    Yeah, that makes a difference for me too (though, I hasten to add, I am not a lawyer). FIRE has long been consistent in that while private institutions do have a right to implement speech codes, they cannot do so while publicly proclaiming to uphold First Amendment rights. It would be interesting to see if Tulsa has something on their website affirming their devotion to free expression. A cursory check just now hasn’t come up with anything, but I’ll dig more deeply if I have time.

    JVW (27e4a7)

  25. Thanks for that link @16, Patterico. It’s more like War and Peace than Readers’ Digest, but it really helps paint the outlines and colors in the details and the personalities of the “dispute.” This would probably not have happened in Tulsa’s Chemical Engineering program (if they have one) for a variety of reasons. It is sooooo Theater Department in every single respect. :) None of the parties are particularly sympathetic. Still, these types of test cases are almost always flawed and petty and seem never to be the ones you’d prefer to have. Tulsa administration over-reacted and screwed the pooch big time. This is a great example of the folks in today’s collegiate faculty structure pearl clutching and shutting down speech that ticks them off–NOT doing what they’re supposed to be doing—-teaching.

    elissa (656059)

  26. i would tell winona tanaka that no you can’t have a bite of my sandwich but you can have a taste of my pickle spear

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  27. If the University of Tulsa is an historically Presbyterian college, why should they have allowed an open homosexual to enroll in the first place? And if they didn’t ask on the admissions form, shouldn’t the open acknowledgement that Mr Barnett has a “husband” be grounds for expulsion?

    Alas! Even at a Catholic college, homosexuals are allowed to enroll, so I suppose that there’s no reason to expect more of Protestants.

    The very Catholic Dana (f6a568)

  28. ooh look here on the internet we can learn more about our friend Susan Barrett

    Where do I start? She never shows up. Ever. She is a huge chain smoker. When she does come to class she stinks. She is more worried about smoking than teaching. She lied about a student and had them expelled because the person they were dating critisized her for being tardy all the time on a social site. The person wasnt even a student at TU.

    Susan don’t listen to this person. If you quit smoking you’ll gain weight and then your ankles will break like what happens to our other friend all the time.

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  29. She lied about *a* student and had *them* expelled because *the person* *they* were dating critisized her

    English, mother____. Do you speak it?

    nk (dbc370)

  30. Mr. JVW that point is addressed in the press release from the fire people

    “TU students are right to be concerned about their free speech and due process rights, given the university’s sheer vindictiveness in banishing Barnett and its treatment of their student newspaper,” said Bonilla. “We’ve warned TU about its dangerously overbroad harassment policy before, yet it continues to fly in the face of its promise that students retain ‘the rights and privileges granted to all citizens in the Bill of Rights.’ The university needs to be held accountable for breaking that promise.”

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  31. There is no right or privilege in the Bill of Rights to call a woman morbidly obese; ask that she be fired; and accuse her of giving liquor to minors; and not have your ass kicked.

    nk (dbc370)

  32. Trey’s just like Mr. Governor Scott Walker where in the last semester things just sort of happen to where it looks like maybe he’s not gonna finish his degree right away

    maybe not ever

    i wonder what his thoughts are on evolution

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  33. Thanks Mr. feet — I unsurprisingly glossed right over that on the FIRE release.

    JVW (27e4a7)

  34. Alas! Even at a Catholic college, homosexuals are allowed to enroll, so I suppose that there’s no reason to expect more of Protestants.

    Heavens, Dana, not only are they allowed to enroll at Catholic universities, they are finding school-sanctioned affinity/support groups there.

    Very few Catholic universities are still worthy of the designation. I long ago gave up on Georgetown and Notre Dame, and even schools like St. Mary’s and the University of San Diego are starting to trade in Catholic doctrine for typical academic leftism. When we have the annual collection at church that supports Catholic universities, I no longer donate to it.

    JVW (27e4a7)

  35. Sorry, but I can’t help giggling: His husband’s name is Magnum. Oh well, it struck me as amusing

    Angelo (d89d7b)

  36. His husband’s name is Magnum.

    As in “Biggus”?

    Also, Trey-Magnum.

    Kevin M (56aae1)

  37. 36- LOL

    Angelo (d89d7b)

  38. Sorry, but I can’t help giggling: His husband’s name is Magnum.

    maybe his stage name?

    😎

    redc1c4 (b340a6)

  39. is actually Mangum

    so stop giggling

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  40. @39
    Mangum is less humorous?

    Angelo (d89d7b)

  41. Winona, Winona…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7jnhTDg4mk&sns=em

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  42. “There is no right or privilege in the Bill of Rights to call a woman morbidly obese; ask that she be fired; and accuse her of giving liquor to minors; and not have your ass kicked.”

    nk – WUT? I don’t know what Bill of Rights you read but it is about the government passing laws about speech, not other entities. A person can say absolutely that stuff, but it doesn’t mean the speech is without consequences.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  43. There is no right or privilege in the Bill of Rights to call a woman morbidly obese; ask that she be fired; and accuse her of giving liquor to minors; and not have your ass kicked.

    Indeed, and therefore you should be punished for it, nk.

    Whether you said it or not.

    Patterico (2b72e1)

  44. “Indeed, and therefore you should be punished for it, nk.”

    Patterico – It was an Obama worthy straw man.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  45. I will never forget my first sociology class at a major leftist university. The professor walked in and stated with authority, “Hello my name is _______. I am a black, feminist, Marxist . . . and this class will be taught from MY perspective.” What a fun semester that was.

    Orion's Belt Loop (092219)

  46. The strawman is in FIRE’s press release, quoted by happyfeet at Comment 30. That I was responding to. TU being a private entity, daleyrocks, the Bill of Rights is
    a) inapplicable
    b) a strawman
    c) a demagoguing catchphrase in place of substance
    d) all of the above.

    nk (dbc370)

  47. The problem is that all TU students are guaranteed 1) a hearing in ALL cases involving campus “justice” and 2) the right to bring forth witnesses in their defense. This is according to TU’s own policies. Now, this crypto-fascist Tanaka penalized Barnett for communicating the contents of various documents relating to the investigation to Magnum because it violated “confidentiality,” this despite the fact that Magnum is Barret’s exculpatory witness and crucial to his defense. In addition, at no point was Barret given an opportunity to give his side of the story in a hearing, everything was done through various letters that were dropped on him as if by God.

    So, the reason that FIRE is calling TU out is not because of some theoretical commitment to free speech, but for blatant and willful violations of TU’s own written policies that denied Barret even the slightest resemblance of due process.

    David

    David, infamous sockpuppet (12a5ec)

  48. So, basically, by violating TU’s written policies, Tanaka has decided to use University funds to provide Barret with a generous trust fund.

    Smooth move, you blithering academic pillock.

    C. S. P. Schofield (a196fd)

  49. I will never forget my first sociology class at a major leftist university. The professor walked in and stated with authority, “Hello my name is _______. I am a black, feminist, Marxist . . . and this class will be taught from MY perspective.” What a fun semester that was.

    Orion’s Belt Loop (092219) — 2/13/2015 @ 3:11 pm

    “How Hog Eats Cabbage 101″

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  50. 48. Heh, C.S.P. If there was money to be made, he wouldn’t be going to FIRE. He’d have lawyers waiting outside his door. Moreover, how much do you think an Oklahoma jury would give him and his husband after reading the Facebook posts? In New York, Seattle or San Fransisco, it might be a different case, maybe.

    nk (dbc370)

  51. Time for FIRE to put on their posterior kicking shoes again and sue another bunch of First Amendment ignoring morons until the rubble bounces.

    M. Scott Eiland (725705)

  52. 45.I will never forget my first sociology class at a major leftist university. The professor walked in and stated with authority, “Hello my name is _______. I am a black, feminist, Marxist . . . and this class will be taught from MY perspective.” What a fun semester that was.
    Orion’s Belt Loop

    Brings back some memories. In the required speech class freshman year, my instructor spouted off that he was a “communist” and also indicated he was a cousin of William Buckley, as if that was important. Thereafter, I made sure to wear my ROTC uniform to class (although I had a break between that class and ROTC and could have changed into uniform then). I even gave a ‘persuasive’ speech advocating bombing Haiphong harbor. I will say that he graded me fairly throughout the class and was actually a pretty nice guy. Fun times.

    Bill M (906260)

  53. Glenn Reynolds keeps posting about colleges denying due process to their students, along with a tag-line like “This is going to make more trial lawyers rich!”

    I keep leaving him comments saying that I get tons of inquiries from prospective clients wanting to sue their schools, yet haven’t yet seen a single one of those cases I’m willing to take on a contingent-fee basis, because I’m unpersuaded that there’s money to be made gambling on schools to roll over and pay up. In my experience, they do the opposite: They circle the wagons and use their enormous resources to pay enormous law firms to make motions to dismiss. They’re tough nuts to crack and, in the case of public schools, they often enjoy a significant degree of governmental immunity that effectively authorizes them to behave arbitrarily and cruelly.

    I think we keep seeing these stories because (1) nothing (including legal threats and lawsuit results) is yet having any effect in reducing the political correctness pressure that’s created and continues to drive this bad behavior by school administrations, and (2) the playing field is seriously slanted in the schools’ favor and they’re continuing to get away with murder.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  54. Since I have a child enrolled at Tulsa and another one who is a graduate, would it be OK if I looked into this and report back later?

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  55. It used to be known as FASCISM or COMMUNISM. Unfortunately pathetic MORONS have allowed their AND your freedom to be sold. Those who subject themselves willingly to FASCISM, believe that THEY ARE IMMUNE from the FASCISM they SUCK UP TO.

    Gus (7cc192)

  56. No, it’s not, Gus. It’s a hair-pulling between “theater people”. Just laugh.

    nk (dbc370)

  57. I’d like to hear what you find out, Ag80.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  58. In general, why do we need colleges policing speech? When I was in college many years ago, colleges were still considered to have responsibility for students the way parents had for children. Students then could be punished for bad conduct or speech, but they also had school-sponsored curfews and other restrictions. Those days were starting to end in my college years but they’re gone now, so why not treat students as the adults everyone considers them to be?

    In other words, why is the college involved in this? If Barnett or Mangum defamed Barnett’s professors, then let them sue for defamation. Let them use the civil law system to work this out, just as the criminal justice system should handle rape investigations on campus. If colleges want a role, then let them make available low-cost legal clinics or assistance to all professors and students. IMO this would help everyone, and especially students, learn how the real world works,

    DRJ (e80d46)

  59. DRJ, if I owned a restaurant and a customer called one of my waitresses names; suggested I fire her; and accused her of committing a crime during work hours, I’d throw him out and bar him from ever coming back.

    The “theater people” do have a contract with the university, and the university is bound by the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. But that’s all this is. A contract case. Like you said, the university is not in loco parentis. If its customer, the student, becomes a bad customer they can refuse to do business with him or condition further business on the rewriting of the contract.

    nk (dbc370)

  60. No, I do not believe it was all the husband’s doing without any culpability on the wife’s part.

    nk (dbc370)

  61. Don’t the high handedness and vague but obvious threats/intimidation of the administration against the independent school newspaper over coverage of this matter bother your sensibilities at least a little, nk? That’s when it started to go seriously down hill and landed with a thud far beyond a spat of personalities within the theater department as far as I am concerned. Who knows? The newspaper may have come down on the side of the administration had they been allowed to pursue their investigation and look at all the facts from all sides. By tamping down any discussion of the issue on campus the admin looks thin skinned and as if they did have something to hide.

    elissa (691172)

  62. The students, the newspaper as well as the disciplinee, are entitled to good faith and fair dealing. But a case can be made that the university wanted to cut to the chase and not be sidetracked by shouting and table-pounding, and that if the facts are solid any deficiency in form is harmless error.

    nk (dbc370)

  63. Yes, nk, but if the restaurant’s customer had paid for the meal and all he got was an appetizer and a few drinks, wouldn’t the customer be entitled to a refund when the restaurant threw him out?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  64. Also, where in the contract does it give the university the right to deprive him of his diploma because of speech? That’s the remedy for a material breach, and how many people would sign that contract if they knew it was the deal?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  65. Had the meal already been cooked? 😉

    Like I said, there is a covenant of good faith and fair dealing. So the discipline cannot be unfair. But the university is entitled to the benefit of its bargain, too. What are the tuition refund terms for dropouts? He’d be entitled to that, maybe.

    nk (dbc370)

  66. Excuse me?
    They abrogated the rights, as expressed in their own Code of Conduct, of an individual in a same-sex marriage?
    All sorts of Whoopa$$ should result….and I’m confident FIRE will recover a satisfactory educational and monetary settlement for the aggrieved student, plus compensation for themselves – richly deserved.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  67. T nice try, nk, but he isn’t a dropout. He was kicked out and the college should have the burden of showing it was done by the numbers.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  68. Well, yes, the college has the burden of showing that he breached the contract, and that its actions are reasonable steps to mitigate its damages.

    nk (dbc370)

  69. NK said @69: if I owned a restaurant and a customer called one of my waitresses names; suggested I fire her; and accused her of committing a crime during work hours, I’d throw him out and bar him from ever coming back.

    And if the customer was correct in accusing her of that crime?

    Dilligas (389b02)

  70. I’d fire her, and give him a free dessert. Next question?

    nk (dbc370)

  71. But you already threw him out and told him to never come back…

    Dilligas (389b02)

  72. You want to stick to the facts of this case? A Facebook post. With all the cat-bitchiness a “theater person” can dredge up. To the public at large. Not a complaint to a responsible person in the college administration over a bad instructor.

    nk (dbc370)

  73. See, that’s really the complaint of the “theater people”. They didn’t get a chance to scream, shout, wave their arms all about, throw mud, or even cross their arms stamp their foot and grimace and flounce out in a fluff. The university went to the heart of the matter, found that they were malicious disruptive creeps, and abated them so it and the other students could on ahead with the business of education.

    nk (dbc370)

  74. *flounce out in a huff* But “fluff” works too, I guess.

    nk (dbc370)

  75. Just followed your tangent…

    Based on the written decision, and using the reasoning given, I can make the finding that everyone involved in that entire fiasco violated the university’s harassment policy – including Ms. Tanaka who wrote the decision.

    Of the facebook posts noted in the decision, the accusations of a crime are the most concerning. There though, the truth, is (usually) the ultimate defense. It is unclear that any of those accusation were refuted – beyond perhaps an anticipated denial by the accused and the sole source filing of the complaint. (Did Ms. Barrett look into the accusation that the other student provided under age students with alcohol – or just take her word that she didn’t? How does she know it’s not true? Could Mr. Mangum provide proof that she did as he accused? Was he given that opportunity?)

    Most of the remaining aspects of those posts, were of an opinion type nature. And while typically “he hurt my poor little feelings” is a free speech type item – it is, as noted, a private university and has more latitude.

    I have a feeling, though, that if it was really looked into honestly, it could likely be shown that the university has not been consistent in how they deal with hurt feelings and punishment of the accused. And again, based solely on the policy noted and the reasoning in the decision – I could easily rewrite it to find even Ms. Tanaka guilty.

    Finally, being held responsible for someone else’s speech is quite a dangerous precedent to set.

    Dilligas (389b02)

  76. My kids pretty much confirmed the facts as reported in Patterico’s original post as far as they know. They do not know the student nor his husband. Although the campus is small, students in Barnett’s major apparently are tight-knit and don’t mix a lot with students in other majors.

    They do have an opinion, which evidently is shared with at least a significant portion of the campus, but it is based on hearsay. They do agree the administration should have handled the situation better, again based on what they have heard. I can tell you that the Tulsa student body and more recent graduates are well aware of the situation.

    So, I’m not much help.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  77. Ag80,

    A problem with news reporting is we often don’t know if the facts are reliable, so it’s helpful to know these facts may be correct.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  78. DRJ:

    My daughter didn’t mention it, but my son was particularly irked about the allegation that the administration threatened the student newspaper about its reporting of the affair. To him, that’s the real problem. Tulsa does not have a journalism program and I don’t know how the student newspaper is structured.

    That’s a bit off-tangent, but there you go.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  79. I don’t know much about the University of Tulsa except that several National Merit Scholar finalists from my area have gone there on full scholarships, an offer that Tulsa used to extend (and may still) to all finalists. They enjoyed attending there. It also seems to lean left but most colleges do these days.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  80. Wiki says The Collegian is independent from the university, but it may rely on the school if they distribute it on campus. I think this is the most recent article published on this story in The Collegian, but it publishes on Mondays so there may be more tomorrow.

    This appears to be an op-ed or editorial. Brings back memories.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  81. DRJ

    Univ of Tulsa has a world renowned petroleum engineering school and Geophysics Program. Amoco Research Center, Telex and most of the entire Oil Seven Sisters were headquartered there and left in the mid 70’s for Houston. The Space shuttles were built there, the B1 Bomber and some unconfirmed secret aircraft that to this day have not been disclosed.

    Univ of Tulsa has a policy that any student can be dismissed for any reason at anytime. Tulane has the same policy as I was reminded of it from time to time….

    EPWJ (0e4457)

  82. Oh screw this faggoty ass m0therfvcker.

    Baboy (234904)

  83. 29

    What is it like to have a meltdown every time someone writes “then” instead of “than?” How about “to” instead of “too?” I do not spell a lot “alot” often, but try to do it alot when I think about people like you:)

    I think Patterico’s first sentence says it all. Why anyone waste money attending a University like that?

    Grammar Nazi (e2856b)

  84. Grammar Nazi:

    I did. Full disclosure, I wanted my kids to go to Texas A&M.

    Regardless, they seem OK. I will be the first to report otherwise.

    Because, you know, sometimes what you want to believe is easy. The truth is hard.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  85. The allegations against the professors were actually investigated and found to be untrue. And if you research further, the Collegian published the voice recording from the alleged “threat” interview. The Collegian, nor Kyle Walker, was never threatened. They were advised to consult an attorney who could then tell them whether the information they intended to publish was libel or not since it stemmed from a protected, confidential document. The idea was to protect the identities of those involved in the case. If identity is not held confidential, then no one will ever speak up.

    Kay (dfc598)

  86. The internet calls it “the Streisand Effect”, bu the tactic attempted by the “husbands” is as old as blackmail. They tried to intimidate the professors and the university by the threat of the false but dirty publicity. Throwing their dirt in a wider circle. The university refused to be bluffed.

    nk (dbc370)

  87. The Collegian has been shut down and all archives wiped. They went the full Orwell. http://tucollegian.org/

    I’d be very, very careful making any inquiries if you’re a student there. Doing so could be seen as putting the University in a bad light, and be cause for stern disciplinary measures to be taken.

    There is no word what happened to the students who used to published the Collegian, and such matters, including any disciplinary action, would be deemed confidential.

    Zoe Brain (4a79ce)

  88. they were probably shot in the dead of night somewhere near one of the cows

    happyfeet (831175)

  89. bang bang bang said the saucy fascist pistols

    and in reply the cow offered a perturbed moo

    happyfeet (831175)

  90. Are the professors public officials or public figures? I don’t think so. And the liability is for publishing defamation. It’s not necessary to have created it.

    nk (dbc370)

  91. Even if we assume the Facebook post was untrue or at least overly dramatic, it seems like the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. What happened to “Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me”?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  92. Again, let them sue for defamation but banning a student from school seems unjust. He’s not a criminal. Estoppel and quantum meriut come to mind, and due process if the college has policies that promise it.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  93. From link @16:

    Mr. Mangum claims that he wrote about incidents based on his own, personal knowledge, obtained from sources other than Mr. Barnett. Mr. Mangum also claims that he was not influenced in any way, directly or indirectly, by Mr. Barnett.

    Is this believeable? Even if he heard something first from someone else, he would not have asked for information, even if not permission?

    Furthermore Barnett previously used “Christopher Blackstone” as a pseudonym – except he says that it wasn’t him either, in that case, but the other person.

    This looks a lot like Glenn Greenwald.

    Now there’s a separate issue: How bad was some of this? Did it have practical consequences, aside from annoyance? How many people took seriously, either the accusations, or the calls for school employees to be fired? Were some accusations true, but the university objects to the dissemination of this information, at least when combined with calls for punitive action? Is this a fair punishment? Was there fair notice of the consequences? This is an academic death penalty. There’s no offer of any way to make amends. Like for instance, he could issue an apology and an acknowledgement and shut down his Facebook page for the length of his connection with the school and agree to put up no other.

    The academic death penaly really seems to be for persistent lying.

    Sammy Finkelman (e806a6)

  94. If, as Eric says, the university has made it clear that its relationship with it students is consensual, then it’s like breaking up with a high-maintenance girlfriend. If they stop being worth the trouble, they’re out. Just like a student can drop out or transfer for any reason if the school does not suit him.

    As far as due process goes, it’s notice and an opportunity to be heard. It seems to he got that. The hearing vs. exchange of papers part is a red herring. First, did he ask for one? Rights can be waived by not explicitly asserting them. (Trial by jury in a criminal case is one, BTW.) Second, lots of cases are decided by motion practice if there is no genuine issue of fact.

    Quantum meruit and estoppel, if you’ll permit me to be technical, are not applicable when there is an express contract. The only implied covenant in an express contract is one of good faith and fair dealing.

    And my bottom line is that this country went very wrong in the ’60s when it started granting deference to whiny twerps on college campuses. If they don’t like what goes on in the school, they should go find another. They have no right to hang around and demoralize and distract the professors and the good students.

    nk (dbc370)

  95. The University of Tulsa’s policies Appear to protect the student newspaper from being silenced, if that’s happened.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  96. I agree it’s a bad idea to let college students act like children on campuses, but that’s how they are viewed and treated. If the colleges want to control them like parents, they have to be merciful like parents, too.

    Do you think there is an express contract? I don’t remember seeing one in my son’s college years, except for housing.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  97. I Googled Tulsa and student protests. Not only did they let students protest without consequences, the policies I linked above almost seem to encourage it. I don’t see a lot of difference between offensive campus protests and offensive Facebook posts.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  98. Do you think there is an express contract?

    Yes, definitely. The policies you linked are part of it. So is the student handbook. Other published rules and regulations. The course catalog, and individual course syllabi. And, of course, the tuition invoice. 😉

    nk (dbc370)

  99. Another student’s story of how discipline works at TU.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  100. Do you think there is an express contract?

    Yes, definitely.

    Maybe so. My son went to a state school and the disciplinary authority at state schools is generally by statute.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  101. The Patrick Swilling case, DRJ? As the father of a daughter, I’m outraged. Guys with sons are likely gratified.

    With at least three prior rapes under his belt, Swilling was an experienced “son of Obama”. He lawyered up and got “due process”. He also had Bill Blankenship behind him. He didn’t fool the NCAA, though. Probably did not genuinely fool UT, either. They probably knew the score and circled the wagons just to protect their own behinds, the way the lawsuit alleges.

    nk (dbc370)

  102. Sadly, FIRE doesn’t seem interested in my money. I was moved to make a small one-time donation, but they weren’t offering anything but open-ended! repetitive. I don’t give my credit card to any organization that has already told me they’ll keep dipping forever.

    phunctor (8520c6)

  103. I found this post on 20 spot in google search results, you should lower your bounce rate. You will see results fast, i know what can help you, just search in google for: Dasusuri’s Bounce Plugin

    Alfonso (d20758)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.8354 secs.