XPost: alt.education, boulder.general, co.cos.general   
   XPost: co.politics, misc.legal   
   From: theprof@jonez.net   
      
   "krp"  wrote in message   
   news:yXGBl.1546$Q52.96@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...   
   >   
   > "Deadrat"  wrote in message   
   > news:ULyBl.15941$D32.2262@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com...   
   >> Frodo Bernstein   wrote in   
   >> news:uabdt4du6dh69rb7e3knqmg8fcvk029qu6@4ax.com:   
   >>   
   >>> On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:37:28 GMT, Deadrat  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>> HE WON  - ONE DOLLAR.  FAR FAR FAR FAR MORE THAN HE'S WORTH!   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> But he DID fabricate materials in his ACADEMIC writings.  LIED HIS   
   >>>>> ASS OFF.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Doesn't matter.  He'll get his job back or be compensated for its   
   >>>>loss.   
   >>>   
   >>> I haven't seen an article that really explained what the case was all   
   >>> about.   
   >>   
   >> Google is your friend.   
   >>>   
   >>> Under what conditions is a university allowed to fire a tenured   
   >>> professor?   
   >>   
   >> It's laid out in the faculty regulations.  A *state* univeristy isn't   
   >> allowed to retaliate against an employee who exercises free speech.   
   >   
   > READ CAREFULLY: Plagerism and LYING are NOT FREE SPPECH.   
      
   Yes. They are.   
      
      
   >   
   >   
   >>> Did the jury actually decide that Churchill wasn't a fraudulent   
   >>> researcher or were they not asked that question?   
   >   
   >> They were asked to determine whether the Churchill was fired because of   
   >> an article he wrote.  They decided he was.   
   >   
   >    They decided that he was fired because of the political pressure on the   
   > University.   
      
   Exactly -- UNLAWFULLY fired.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)