Chronicle columnist Kristin Butler’s column today does an outstanding job explaining why so many of us can’t “move on” and “heal” despite the urgings of now disbarred Mike Nifong, Duke’s President, Richard Brodhead, and The Chronicle’s editorial board.
Butler’s eager to move on but how can she without knowing more about the University’s bungled and disgraceful response to “the lacrosse case” and other important matters?
However, with only one exception, each time a suit’s been brought which could’ve provided some answers, Duke’s given the plaintiffs big checks on condition they drop the suits and say no more.
The one exception is the suit brought by attorney Bob Ekstrand on behalf of three unindicted Duke students and lacrosse players.
About that suit and the upset its caused among MoveOn.Duke supporters, a commenter asked one of the supporters on Butler’s column thread:
Why is it that whenever there is a call for the truth, there is someone like you (most likely, a charter member of G88) who condemns such a call as a "Witch Hunt?” …It’s in the broader and long-term interests of Duke for the truth to come out now.
If it turns out that Durham police Sgt. Gottlieb had abused Duke students, as alleged in the Ekstrand complaint, wouldn't you want that to come out?
And if it turns out that DUMC employee Tara Levicy conspired with Gottlieb in the fabrication of evidence, as alleged in the Ekstrand complaint, wouldn't you want that to come out? ...
Only those culpable in the University’s bungled and disgraceful response to Crystal Mangum's and Mike Nifong's lies benefit from the current cover- up.
It’s time Duke stopped writing checks to prevent the truth from becoming publicly known.
What Duke must do now is move on to full disclosure.
I don’t doubt full disclosure will confirm much that’s alleged in the Ekstrand complaint filing and require the University to reach compensation agreements with Ekstrand’s clients and a good many others.
Full disclosure will surely make it obvious some major personnel changes are needed along with changes in the University’s governance structure.
Full disclosure will mean Duke will go through a painful and financially costly period.
But is there any other way for Duke to move on from its current cover-up which is damaging the University’s reputation, costing it financially and hurting it in many other ways?
Butler’s column is here.
7 comments:
.
Full disclosure would (hopefully) be a product of a thorough discovery process. There's the rub. Duke's endowment has been raided again and again to provide settlement payoffs to plaintiffs without trial. Why? In order to prevent discovery and public knowlege of the details of the maneuverings between University staff (and Trustees) and the Durham and State agencies, back when the media-supported PC lynch mob was drooling over jail terms for three persons of pallor.
Oh, and a few little details like Duke's backroom determinations of how to deal with its own students as if guilty, without any benefit of due process.
Let's make this an Age of Discovery, and proceed to trial. Go Kristin!
I'm glad Duke has you, Ms. Butler, and the others who refuse to allow the outrage to stand.
There is hope as long as there are honorable people who refuse to allow the dishonorable to simply move on.
Fortunately there are those who neither accept the Move On idea nor the ridiculous notion that it was all Nifong's fault.
They are and will be known as plaintiffs.
Go Kirstin! You most likely pay some personal price at Duke for your continued piercing editorials about the Hoax. I have missed you. I am so glad that you have REFUSED to move on, until the mess is cleaned up.
You simply cannot rebuild on rubble. And the rubble is high and deep.
Keep up the good work gal, you have a bright future ahead of you. Congratulate your parents for us. They raised a fantastic young woman.
Yes - I want all information to come out - including any "false Documents" prepared by anyone - To date - none have materialized. What is that about????
It is a Witch Hunt because many bloggers want these folk burned at the stake.
Gottlieb's superiors have acknowledged he was directed by them, to clamp down on Duke students to discourage the drinking of alcohol and bad acts associated with being drunk. Is this a surprise?
Post a Comment