The Ward was a Bad Boy!

The University of Colorado has released its report on the allegations of academic misconduct of Professor Ward Churchill. And it's a beaut! Forget about the fact that he has portrayed himself as an American Indian (which he is provably not) to get a teaching position and tenure at the University, he cheated, lied, plagiarized and committed just about every other offense during his entire academic career. From the summary (caution, PDF):

"Based on its investigation of those allegations, the Committee unanimously found, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that Professor Churchill committed several forms of academic misconduct as defined in the policy statements of the University of Colorado at Boulder and the University of Colorado system:

1. Falsification, as discussed in Allegations A, B, C, and D.
2. Fabrication, as discussed in Allegations C and D.
3. Plagiarism, as discussed in Allegations E and G.
4. Failure to comply with established standards regarding author names on
publications, as discussed most fully in Allegation F but also in Allegations A, B,
and D.
5. Serious deviation from accepted practices in reporting results from research, as
discussed in Allegation D.

The Committee did not find fabrication in the first sub-question of Allegation D or
plagiarism in Allegation F.

The Committee noted additionally that Professor Churchill was disrespectful of Indian
oral traditions when dealing with the Mandan/Fort Clark smallpox epidemic of 1837, both in his essays and during the course of this investigation, as discussed in Allegation D.

The Committee found that Professor Churchill’s misconduct was deliberate and not a matter of an occasional careless error. The Committee found that similar patterns recurred throughout the essays it examined."

Then the Committee, made up of three Professors from the University of Colorado and two from outside the University lost its nerve. Three said there was enough evidence to terminate and deny tenure, two said not and recommended two years unpaid leave. Which when you are dealing with the high and mighty in academia, is not that surprising. The Ward would have had to murder someone to get fired and denied tenure, and even then you'd have some people on the Committee saying that it didn't involve the University so he shouldn't be punished re: career.

In reality, that fact that this report is so severe on the Ward is the truly surprising thing. I expected a whitewash and a slap on the wrist. Imagine how bad the totality of Ward Churchill must be for this jury of his peers to publish even this.

The Ward will be suing soon, I imagine...