Ward Churchill Letter

Reading Time: 2 minutes

The CU Chancellor has sent out an e-mail regarding the Ward Churchill investigation. Michelle Malkin blogged the press conference earlier.

SUBJECT: CHANCELLOR’S EMAIL TO PREVIOUS WRITERS

FROM: Office of the Chancellor

SENDER: Collect@Colorado.edu

DATE: March 24, 2005

Dear Friend:

You were one of many citizens who wrote or called the University of Colorado at Boulder concerning the controversial essay about 9/11 written by Professor Ward Churchill. Because of your interest, I am writing to share with you the outcome of our review of allegations concerning Professor Churchill’s conduct and scholarship.

In short, our review team found that Professor Churchill’s controversial essay on 9/11 and other public comments are protected by the First Amendment, but that other allegations of plagiarism, misuse of others’ work and fabrication may constitute research misconduct.

The report also points to possible research misconduct related to allegations that Churchill misrepresented his ethnicity to gain credibility and attract an audience for his scholarship. Research misconduct, if proven, is subject to university sanctions.

We take these allegations very seriously and will address them through established university procedures that require due process. I have determined that the allegations of research misconduct should be referred to the campus’s Standing Committee on Research Misconduct for thorough investigation. Appropriate action will be taken upon completion of the committee’s work.

More information and a copy of the full report are available on the campus web site at www.colorado.edu/news.

Thank you for your continuing interest in the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Sincerely,
Chancellor Phil DiStefano

While, as Michelle points out, it’s a shame that Ward Churchill still has a job, the university seems to be moving toward dismissal while practicing due diligence. With number of academic frauds involved, one might expect the school to suspend Churchill pending results of the investigation.

Looking back upon this story’s birth, I think very few pundits believed it was get this far. Then again, who knew Churchill was a fraud of this magnitude?