You are viewing this article in the archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see
Posted on Tue, May 24, 2011 : 5:27 p.m.

University of Michigan apologizes, settles lawsuit with dismissed professor for $550,000

By Juliana Keeping

The University of Michigan will pay $550,000 to settle a civil lawsuit brought by Andrei Borisov, a dismissed U-M professor who sued the university, alleging fraud, defamation and false imprisonment, according to a settlement agreement obtained today by

The agreement settles an expensive, years-long string of public disputes between U-M and Borisov.

A former non-tenured faculty member in U-M’s Department of Pediatrics, Borisov filed the civil lawsuit in August 2009 in Washtenaw County Circuit Court. In the suit, he alleged he gathered evidence between 2006 and 2008 that his mentor, Mark Russell, plagiarized his research in reports to federal funding agencies involving grants worth $1.7 million. Borisov's lawsuit also alleged that he was removed from projects without prior approval from the funding agencies. U-M denied his claims.

A police report states two campus officers were asked to be present at a Sept. 4, 2008, meeting on the third floor of the Medical Science Research Building, where Borisov worked in the department of pediatrics. At the meeting, the lawsuit says, he turned in a resignation letter after being told that his superiors perceived his behavior as threatening.

Police said a confrontation ensued as Borisov cleared out his office under their watch. Borisov was charged with two counts of attempted resisting or obstructing a police officer and one count of disturbing the peace. Those charges were dropped in April 2009.

The university then banned the professor from campus for life — even as he anticipated that a new position in another department was his. The offer for the other position was withdrawn. Nine months after the confrontation, police modified the ban so that Borisov, an Ann Arbor resident, was only excluded form some buildings on the medical campus.

That ban stuck until the April 15, 2011, settlement agreement asked police to resolve the matter within five days.

U-M’s decade-old policy banning certain people from campus is under review after criticism from the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan and the U-M ACLU. The organizations allege that the policy is unconstitutional, saying it lacks due process and can be used to chill free speech. Changes are expected this month.

Separately, Borisov filed a grievance with the U-M Department of Public Safety Oversight Committee in April 2010. A report released by the committee in May recommended the university make changes to avoid similar incidents in the future. They include: keeping DPS officers outside of a meeting with an employee in a similar circumstance and giving officers proper instructions on how long an employee has to clean out his or her office. The committee report states Borisov had 20 minutes to clear out his office.

Under the eight-page settlement agreement obtained via the Freedom of Information Act, almost $200,000 will go to Borisov’s attorney, and the rest will go to Borisov. U-M also agreed to remove negative reviews in the professor’s file and the “do not rehire” marker within his personnel record. U-M will return the professor's lab equipment and samples.

The agreement prompted U-M to post a public apology on its website April 22 calling events involving Borisov and U-M “unfortunate and unintended.”

“The University regrets any incorrect information published about these events that harmed Dr. Borisov’s reputation,” it states.

Juliana Keeping covers general assignment and health and the environment for Reach her at or 734-623-2528. Follow Juliana Keeping on Twitter


sbarron RN,BSN

Sun, Apr 28, 2013 : 12:01 a.m.

I am really concerned now after reading some of these comments. I have a lawsuit pending in the Federal Court against UMICH. It sounds like sometimes people just disappear. Please see sheri barron on vimeo. I hope that someday there will actually be an investigation. See how UMICH lawyers can say that filling out an 'incident report' is the same thing as being on 'Workman's Compensation,' so it was ok that HR contacted my State Farm claim's adjuster. The only medical release I gave HR specifically stated ONLY physical medical conditions. Why would they call State Farm and tell them I had been on 'Workman's Comp a few times,' had been on a disability other than physical, and had a history with them. Since being hired as a graduate RN in 1986 I had filled out 4 incident reports- I have never been on Workman's comp in my life. This caused me to have to get a lawyer because State Farm was not paying me, I lost my house in foreclosure, and suffered horribly while trying to recover from an auto accident. At least the deposition my lawyer did showed what UMICH did to me. But I did not get JUSTICE in the civil court.


Sat, May 28, 2011 : 6:13 p.m.

Mark Russell was (or still is ) a small guy among the faculties. If he is a red-hot professor, then the chairman, the dean, even the president may will stand by him, and Andrei Borisov,'s attorney would be offered a job at U, the case had to be over. The little whistleblower, like Andrei Borisov, would be killed. no settlement, no apology, nothing. To end of the pain Andrei can not stand by, he had to kill himself, the best out come.


Fri, May 27, 2011 : 2:01 a.m.

$550,000 is a very small money to the university, just one person's salary per year., isn't it? if fraud brought grants, it would be in millions, even in billions. Please remember, at U, money is money, money talks.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 11:44 p.m.

If I recall when this first became public the Ann Arbor News gave a negative account of Dr. Borisov. And what will the U do to Mark Russell now that the truth is finally out? Also, shouldn't the U return the grant money to the federal government?


Thu, May 26, 2011 : 1:44 a.m.

Presuming that the grant was funded on the basis of its scientific merit and the science behind the application was never called into question, I don't see why "returning the money" would be prudent (if it's even an option).


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 9:08 p.m.

This is called the mutual responsibility of the underworld.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:54 p.m.

Unfortunately, the People's Republic of UM can not be sued directly for the anguish caused Dr. Borisov. Despite its constitutional autonomy, it is considered an arm of the state and therefore enjoys sovereign immunity, unlike cities, counties, courts, etc. Although the University will always indemnify its employees for their wrongful acts, hopefully some administrators will now be unwilling to follow erroneous direction from the Office of General Counsel.

Mr. Tibbs

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:52 p.m.

makes you wonder how much has been hidden by the Univeristies un-sworn police department. I have noticed a huge drop in reported rapes, robberies, and otherwise untoward behavior especially on campus! Some in the liberal media have said, quite sarcastically I might add, that "might makes right?" which brings me to the point of being very careful about the laws concerning banning this or that behavior in general. and that the constitution is un-waveringly clear in it's statement, and the reasons for the bill of rights. especially the attacks on certain behaviors and beliefs that the constitution was founded on. simply because it has oodles and oodles of money and a couple of streets named after lawyers, the U of M uses both to the detrment of all concerned. including the students who have the right to know who really makes up the curriculum and this behavior of the "U" activley HIDING the truth is nothing short of criminal and criminal charges if not for anything else than intelectual "theft" by aiding and abeting this plagarist. But I am sure all of that would have been included in the "agreement" and "apology" right? That no criminal charges would be filed and all further action shall cease and desist. the mighty U. of M. teaching your children that if you have enough money you can get away with anything and even buy the right people to allow you to get away with it. now for something really interesting, did you know that while you cannot be an employee of the city, and serve on the city council, BUT you can be an employee of the U...... tax money anyone?


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 4:13 p.m.

Would you be able to publish the name of the law firm? My attorney backed out. Even if you have a problem, not many law firms will handle these cases.


Fri, May 27, 2011 : 2:04 a.m.

Was your attorney hired by U?


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:27 p.m.

Deborah Gordon represented Borisov during the setttlement negotiations although his initial counsel was reported as Christine Green.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:57 p.m.

@Cash- I would be happy to share with you the grant fraud evidence but I cannot post it hear because it will get removed by the moderator but you have my permission to contact and get my contact information or send me yours.

Snarf Oscar Boondoggle

Sun, May 29, 2011 : 2:34 p.m.

hmm, sure wiesh there were a way to contact directly abouth things.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:09 p.m.

Thank you Trespass. I will do that.

fight hunger

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:32 p.m.

is he really getting all that money omg omg i need to be his freind

Wolf's Bane

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:05 p.m.

Lots of politics going on at the School of Information as well... That's academic life for you.

Snarf Oscar Boondoggle

Sun, May 29, 2011 : 2:32 p.m.

mmmm, bill ... sure with therer were a way to direclty communicate .. school of information, hmmmmm, politicas, hmmm.

Wolf's Bane

Thu, May 26, 2011 : 1:38 a.m.

I could tell you, but then again, maybe I won't. HCI.

Rod Johnson

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 8:34 p.m.

Specifics please.

John of Saline

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 4:25 p.m.

Such as?


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:02 p.m.

clownfish, what doesn't seem to be cleared up at all is how the federal grant issue was investigated and that's my big question. That is our tax money and was there some deceit there or not? I would have to believe that most people are wondering that now. I think many feel some ownership in public educational institutions....whether right or wrong. So when we have questions and seem to not get answers, we question. No matter how much wealth UM holds, they still gladly accept our tax money. I have a hard time finding any fault with questioning this issue no matter which side of the political fence we are on. But to each his/her own.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:08 p.m.

I am questioning if there was something illegal done. You are stuck in some previous world.

Marshall Applewhite

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 4:16 p.m.

Haha, so not you're finally concerned about tax money? Didn't seem to be such an issue when you were "fighting" to keep all those high union benefits on these pages......


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 1:39 p.m.

Gosh this is rich! While there does not seem to be much question that UM abused it's power, many of the people most outraged are the same people that tell workers elsewhere that if they don't like their working conditions to "MOVE!" "QUIT!" Evidently it is OK for a private company to abuse their power but lordy lordy don't let the govt operate like a business! Wait, they want the govt to operate more like business, but no, not this time, but in general, except in certain situations, but in general yes, like a business, just not this time.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:47 p.m.

I don't know any private companies that have the power to arrest you and ask the prosecutor for criminal charges. If the case had not involved the abuse of police power by UM they might have gotten away with it but I think the public is outraged when they use the police power that was granted in good faith by the state legislature to abuse a whistleblower.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 12:59 p.m.

What do you want to bet that nobody involved from the University's side gets disciplined.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 12:48 p.m.

This is an example of a situation where department administrators also need to use logic and compassion while maintaining UM policies and guidelines. Borisov clearly deserved to have been treated more fairly. It's not about the degree following a last name, it's about maintaining open communication by listening and acknowleding employee concerns and issues.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:55 p.m.

It's about responding to allegations of misconduct by investigating the misconduct, not punishing the whistle blower.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 12:21 p.m.

No surprise, from the Harvard of the Huron.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 12:19 p.m.

The University will do anything and everything it can to preserve its position and power. They feel they can outlast pretty much any issue brought against them and eventually "the little guy" will cave. This is a perfect example that might does NOT make right. Kudos to the whistleblowers, please use this as an opportunity to find the courage to come forward.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 11:22 a.m.

<a href=""></a> My post with this information was deleted so let me try again. To see the announcement of the editorial board members and the related comments, here is the link. As this was already on this site and not deleted, I do not see why it should be deleted again. Thank you.

John A2

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 3:32 a.m.

I have been going to the U of M for some 40 years now. I have had times that they have told me &quot;we never said for you to do this&quot;, or sending in many doctors and all slam you with different ways to stop the pain. I was so confused when I left I still didn't know what to do. But, plagiarized legal document for gov grants? What happened to that story? I am glad that the whistle blower didn't get kidnapped and vanished. Instead he gets a huge chunk of money and told he is OK to work there? I don't know about that either. Is the U of M going to be fined or at least fire the Mentor and charge him with felony embezzlement? Where's the rest of the story? Why did U of M settle and apologize? Did they give him money to shut his pie hole? Where's the juice?

Rod Johnson

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 4:09 p.m.

40 years! I hope you have a hell of a graduation party.

G. Orwell

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:49 a.m.

I could be wrong but it appears the U tried to silence a whistle blower and it backfired. Whistle blowers are a dying breed as our government is cracking down on them.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:47 a.m.

Profs won't get a raise this year, but they were getting one when everybody else was how shall we say, tightening their boot straps. Pleeeeeeeeease, the profs have the easiest gig in the world. They publish articles as the lead researcher when those lower level PhDs and grad students put in all the work. And anybody who knows anything knows they make a ton of money freelancing as experts and consultants. There was an article on here earlier about the value of higher education. Higher educatuion is a business model that allows lazy people to benefit at the expense of many. I mean where in the private sector can you be an associate vp, general counsel administrator wanna be coach hugging making some kind of decision, without any risk to you or your position, because you won't ever get fired decision maker? Right! Yes, college gives you a sense of discipline, but if we use that anlogy what does that say about those who are the disciplinarians?


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 10:14 p.m.

This is the deal though. Not all profs are bad. A lot of them, maybe even the majority, are really hard working, unflinchingly ethical, nice people who care about their research and care about their research teams. I know there is some awareness that there will always be a few bad apples, but that doesn't mean the U should aid and abet them.

Mr. Tibbs

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:56 p.m.

now you understand the reasons for the second amendment finally.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 1:35 p.m.

AIG, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Home Depot, Enron, KBR


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:38 a.m.

The Leaders and Best!


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 1:26 a.m.

@loves_fall; I'll tell you what it means. My kid's tuition is going up more than it would have, had the U not gone off half cocked.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:52 p.m.

Roadman, agreed. My biggest complaint with the U process is that no one gets to weigh in on faculty reviews. I don't know who does them or what their process is, but faculty certainly don't get penalized for treating others like crap. In fact, Russell is still some kind of distinguished professor (or has some named professorship) and got a raise last year. A guy who got blacklisted by the FDA for conducting bad research is still UM faculty... I want to know why action isn't taken against these people.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:21 a.m.

Perhaps your kid's tuition will go up, but that probably has more to do with the state of Michigan cutting the state university budget by 15 %. And professors who teach your kid won't get a raise this year.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 1:58 a.m.

There needs to be accountability of those in power who were responsible for the shabby treatment dished out to Dr. Borisov.

David Briegel

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 12:52 a.m.

Our tax and tuition dollars at folly. Fiduciary responsibility? Anyone? Two Police Chiefs? Or none? Is that Col Klink in charge?


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 11:23 a.m.

I see nothing.

Jeff Renner

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:43 a.m.

I do believe that David Briegel makes the most cogent comments on


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 12:49 a.m.

President Coleman and the Regents have always refused to comment on the case because they said they were afraid of a pending lawsuit. Now that it is settled, how about asking them again to comment on the lessons they have learned from the case and what they intend to do to fix the underlying problems?


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 11:52 p.m.

Roadman, I specifically asked when the UM PR person was put on the editorial board if the general fund payments to Magee story would die and was told &quot;no&quot;. Of course it died and was buried. Nope. We get Ann Arbor Visitors and Convention Bureau stories and Public Relations for UM stories. I think I'll email David Jesse, now with the Free Press, and ask him to get a story out of this &quot;settlement&quot; for us.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 6:36 p.m.

@Julianna- Andrei waited for almost a year before he filed a lawsuit because he wanted to use the Faculty Hearing Committee process to settle the grievance. He would have settled for UM letting him find another job at the University. The administration refused to let anyone testify before the FHC for more than 6 months before Andrei filed a lawsuit. However the statute of limitation for filing a lawsuit was only a year so Andrei was forced to file a lawsuit at that time. Thus, when the University says that they could not give their side of the story because of the pending litigation, they had plenty of time to tell their side of the story before there ever was a lawsuit. The lawsuit was Andrei's last resort when the administration refused to cooperate with the grievance procedure.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 1:54 p.m.

Wow, thanks Juliana!!!

Juliana Keeping

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 1:27 p.m.

Cash, Since a few of you are asking for more details, I uploaded a pdf of a 55-page April 2010 report by faculty governance that includes lots of details and a timeline. You can get to it by clicking on the text &quot;years-long string of public disputes&quot; in the second paragraph. Keep in mind that the university considered the report one-sided, since administrators couldn't participate because of Borisov's pending civil suit at the time. Former provost Teresa Sullivan called the report "one-sided," as well as "unfair, unwise and harmful."


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 11:42 p.m.

By the way...........has anyone ever heard what has happened to former DPS chief Ken Magee? Is he still working his tail off selling antiques..............or collecting a salary higher than the Governor or FBI director? Or is he receiving disability benefits?


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 11:35 p.m.

This is a great result. Dr.Borisov had to endure a criminal jury trial that resulted in his exoneration. The University of Michigan Department of Public Safety has a history of heavy-handed tactics. The harassment of Andrew Shirvell by U-M Public Safety (after the AAPD came out and acknowledged there was no basis to prevent Shirvell from engaging in constitutionally-protected Free Speech and the County Prosecutor later ruling no stalking law violations occurred) was another example of abuses by U-M. So were the 3,300 persons placed on a trespass list in blatant violation of the U.S. Constitution. As was the criminal prosecution of Dr. Catherine Wilkerson after a police riot at U-M in 2006, who was likewise acquitted by a jury in Ann Arbor. University of Micjigan neeeds to change its ways.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 10:21 p.m.

Local hero? I have not had one of those since Ricky Leach finished quarterbacking the Wolverines at the end of the 1978 Big Ten football season and got drafted into professional baseball


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 6:05 p.m.

roadman... I was at the event where Wilkerson and accomplices attempted to shout down an invited University speaker. To characterize the police reaction as anything but appropriate...let alone a &quot;police riot&quot;.... is totally typical of your inflammatory and grossly hyperpolic and distorted &quot;m.o&quot; on behalf of your even more 'over the top&quot; local heroes like wilkerson (who, although narrowly acquitted by a clueless jury nonetheless got the firing she deserved and earned by her repeated public antisemitic behavior...which i have also witnessed.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 1:47 a.m.

The Catherine Wilkerson acquittal was applauded by many prominent civic leaders, including Larry Kestenbaum, David Cahill, and Steve Bean.


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 11:10 p.m.

Every independent report on this case have found in Andrei's favor. The reports of the Faculty Hearing Committee, the American University of University Professors and the DPS Oversight Committee all said that the University treated him badly. He was also acquitted of all criminal charges. Anyone who listens to the audio recording of his arrest will agree with the jury and conclude that the officers claim that Andrei assaulted them is false. The real question is whether or not the University is embarassed enough by all of this to change the way they handle similar cases in the future. The first test is to see if they make substantive changes to the trespass policy. So far they are proposing cosmetic changes that would not prevent what has happened to Andrei and others. They also threatened the chair of the DPS Oversight Committee if they published their report and they have tried to impose rules that would allow the Police Chief and President prevent them from hearing a grievance if they don't want it heard. This cost the UM a substantial amount of money. The best thing for everyone is for the University to prevent this from happening again by having real reform of how they handle grievances.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 3:57 a.m.

Dr.Borisov was acquitted by jury members who lined up to shake his hand as he left dis trict court.

Matt Cooper

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:50 a.m.

&quot;Borisov was charged with two counts of attempted resisting or obstructing a police officer and one count of disturbing the peace. Those charges were dropped in April 2009.&quot;

Matt Cooper

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:50 a.m.

&quot;He was also acquitted of all criminal charges&quot;. No, the charges were dropped according to the article, which is quite a bit different than being aquitted. And the fact that the charges were dropped does not in any way mean he didn't do what he was accused and/or charged with doing. It simply means they either didn't have enough evidence to win their case, or they simply decided not to pursue it.


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 11:30 p.m.

Trepass, I completely agree. I still would like to know more about the federal grant issue. Of course this article says UM denied it.....but they still paid him off. Under the always.


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 10:50 p.m.

Welcome to Beijing, home of University of Beijing. Please leave any personal liberty at the door. And whatever you do, do not DARE to blow the whistle on our methods of collecting federal funds. Or else. We might get more of the truth on this issue if a member of the editorial board here wasn't a PR person for the University of I mean Michigan. Wouldn't this be a fascinating story if we knew all of the details? Wow. If only.............

Jeff Renner

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 1:18 p.m.

Thanks, Cash. I had forgotten this or hadn't paid much attention. Your comment see to have been restored. Can't imagine why it would have been deleted since, as you noted, it was quotes from previous posts.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 10:46 a.m.

Jeff, I posted the quotes from the article introducing the new Ann board members in March, but it was removed/deleted. So if you simply search for &quot;editorial board&quot; in the search feature here, you can find the article and repsonses. Thanks. I never saw quotes from this site removed before. Whatever. Cash


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 10:16 a.m.

From March 13,2011 article from Tony Dearing: &quot; is welcoming two new community members to our Editorial Board. Mary Kerr, president of the Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau, and David R. Lampe, vice president for communications at the University of Michigan, joined our board last week and participated in the deliberations on today's editorial. While David Lampe is the communications officer at U-M, we are satisfied that his journalistic background and his integrity allow him to add to our discussion on local issues not related to U-M, and like all current and past community members, he will not participate in any discussions in which he would have a conflict of interest.&quot; Jim then posted: at 5:22 PM on March 22, 2011 &quot;David Lampe spent a good six months fighting The Ann Arbor News at every single point of our academics and athletics investigation. He is a well-paid professional spinner for the biggest organization you cover. The idea you would put him on your editorial board would be nothing less than mind-boggling if it weren't for everything we've seen over the past year-plus. Pretty much epic fail on every front at this point, Tony.&quot;

Jeff Renner

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:39 a.m.

&quot;We might get more of the truth on this issue if a member of the editorial board here wasn't a PR person.&quot; Details, please. From or cash.


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 10:46 p.m.

Denial is the University of Michigan's policy when it comes this stuff. I applaud the guy for sticking it out and not giving in.

David Cahill

Tue, May 24, 2011 : 10:46 p.m.

This is a great result! From now on, I expect we will see fewer cases of DPS officers being used as &quot;muscle&quot; in employment disputes.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 10:17 p.m.

Rod: &quot;....fairly provacative stuff&quot;. Heh. David Cahill has opposed the use of any psudonyms on local blogs and bravely identifies himself when posting on a consistent basis. I have no problem with that. I elect to use a pseudonym because I see my identity as irrelevant but would disclose that I have been a part ot the Ann Arbor scene since the 1970s and have acquired a certain familiarity wth Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County government as well as the University of Michigan and, like Mr. Cahill, have been a vocal critic of each in various matters.

Rod Johnson

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 8:28 p.m.

Sorry, I didn't mean that to sound so hostile. But I'm struck by the incongruity. You seem to feel that Mr. Cahill's history is somehow relevant to this story. At the same time, you post fairly provocative stuff under a pseudonym. What's the point?

Rod Johnson

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 8:22 p.m.

Again, so what? If you're going to be so diligent about people's identities and backgrounds, let's hear yours.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 5:32 p.m.

@Rod: No, I was just trying to convey the political and legal perspective of Mr.Cahill. He was also served as an aide to the late State Representative Perry Bullard and helped draft landmark labor law legislation including the Bullard-Plawecki Right to Know Act.

Rod Johnson

Wed, May 25, 2011 : 4:04 p.m.

Roadman, so what? Good for them. Does that invalidate his comment in any way?


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 12:20 a.m.

I'm sure the ACLU is on the trepass list at UM. LOL


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 11:36 p.m.

David Cahill and his wife have served in various capacities in the local ACLU chapter.


Tue, May 24, 2011 : 10:27 p.m.

So what does this mean -- that everything that happened was in error? They really did drag this guy through the mud, both through the U process and in the media... seems like they ought to take action against the guy who plagiarized his work and make sure he gets a new job (if he wants one) at the minimum.


Wed, May 25, 2011 : 2:16 a.m.

That's the university for you. They are unyielding once they start an action against you and will do everything to destroy you and your reputation. I know, been there and went through a nightmare with them that lasted several years. Vindicated in the end through a civil trial but by then the damage had been done.