What we had instead of drama was a re-introduction to Ward's World, in which — and I swear, under oath, this is one of the linchpins of the trial — we got a full hearing of how Churchill wrote an essay that was published under the name of Professor Rebecca Robbins which was then cited by Churchill in another essay he wrote (this one under his own name) to support a point made in the Robbins essay written (remember) by Churchill himself. Which may or may not be a case of circular academic fraud, but is definitely one of the strangest linchpins of a case to ever make its way into Denver District Court. . . .Littwin's obtuseness in a nutshell: he doesn't know what the principle is that CU, albeit tardily, half-heartedly, and from a weak moral position of its own, is fighting for.
Long ago, CU didn't settle because the story was too hot, and the editorialists and the talk-show guys and the governor said that principle was more important here. And now we're wondering what the principle was exactly, unless it was for CU to have yet another scandal drag out for years — and face an embarrassing loss in the end.
Vince Carroll (who was in the courtroom yesterday) has another view.
Update: Pirate Ballerina notes a suit filed by one Patrick O'Rourke over boots and obnoxious liquids.
No comments:
Post a Comment