Churchill inquiry sent to higher level
rockymountainnews.com ^ | August 23, 2005 | Kevin Flynn
Panel recommends further investigation of seven complaints
By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News August 23, 2005
A faculty group has sent the investigation of University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill to the next level.
Seven complaints of alleged plagiarism, historical fabrication and other research misconduct by Churchill have been recommended for a deeper investigation, while two other complaints that were part of the original inquiry were dropped, his lawyer said. The report from the faculty subcommittee that had spent about four months looking into the allegations was delivered Monday, said David Lane, who represents Churchill.
The subcommittee made its recommendation to the faculty's Standing Committee on Research Misconduct. The next step is for that committee to decide whether to conduct a full investigation. CU rules call for the faculty group to study the recommendations and receive more input from Churchill before deciding.
If it proceeds, the investigation could take five months. It could lead to anything from exoneration to dismissal for the professor, who opened a maelstrom of controversy with his view that America - and especially the "little Eichmanns" working in the World Trade Center - deserved the retribution of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
"This is really a victory for professor Churchill," Lane said.
He pointed out that two complaints were dropped. And he claimed that the subcommittee members felt unqualified to pass judgment on the others.
The subcommittee, however, wasn't meant to make a final ruling on the merits of the allegations, according to the university's rules. Its job was to pass along its recommendation.
Still, Lane said, they felt out of their element.
"They said, 'Look, this isn't our area. We're biochemists and physicists,' " Lane said. "These guys were doing the best they could, but how is it that a biochemist is cross-examining Ward Churchill on the General Allotment Act of 1887?"
Generally called the Dawes Act, that law removed American Indian land from communal ownership by tribes and divided it into individually owned homesteads. Nearly 120 years later, it still outrages Indians. Churchill has been accused of misrepresenting the law repeatedly in his writings. That is among the charges recommended for further investigation, along with plagiarism and fabrication.
But, Lane said, the subcommittee dropped a complaint over the controversial ethnicity issue - whether Churchill falsely laid claim to having American Indian heritage to bolster his academic career and gain wider acceptance of his scholarship in Indian affairs.
The second dismissed complaint was a matter uncovered by the Rocky Mountain News - alleged copyright infringement in Churchill's publishing of three works that, while credited to their authors, had been used without the authors' permission.
CU spokeswoman Pauline Hale said the university cannot comment on an ongoing personnel investigation and wouldn't confirm or acknowledge the information disclosed by Churchill's lawyer. Lane went public with the report on KHOW-AM's Caplis and Silverman show.
"The subcommittee jettisoned the ethnicity complaint," Lane told the News later. "They said it's irrelevant to his scholarship."
A News investigation in June found that while Churchill has maintained for decades that he is part Cherokee and Creek, there is no evidence of any Indian ancestry in his family tree.
However, the belief in some form of Indian ancestry is widespread among Churchill's extended family, including some who didn't know they are related to Churchill. Churchill himself has said that his mother and grandmother told him the family Indian legend when he was a child.
As for the dropping of the copyright-infringements complaint, Lane said the three authors involved had no problem with Churchill having published their works.
"The people who hold the copyrights said there's no issue here," Lane said.
But one of those authors, Robert T. Coulter, a lawyer and member of the Potawatomi Nation, told the News in a story published June 3 that while he would not pursue a copyright lawsuit, he was upset that Churchill made editing changes and especially that the CU professor added 15 endnotes to Coulter's article.
"That I never would have agreed to, and didn't know it happened," Coulter told the News for the June 3 story. "I would never have permitted that - especially Ward Churchill. He's not a lawyer. He doesn't have the skill or expertise to add to a paper on my own subject."
The university process is long and cumbersome, filled with numerous decision points aimed at ensuring due process. If the standing committee votes to proceed, it can conduct the investigation itself or appoint others to do it. The investigating panel can have from three to five members. They can come from within or outside the university.
Churchill has steadfastly denied any wrongdoing. Among the complaints being moved ahead for examination:
• That in his published writings, Churchill has mischaracterized the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990, along with the General Allotment Act.
• That Churchill has repeatedly advanced a theory charging the U.S. Army with an act of genocide against the Mandan Indians in 1837, citing sources that contradict his claim.
• That Churchill plagiarized the work of professor Fay Cohen of Dalhousie University in Canada.
• That Churchill plagiarized a defunct Canadian environmental group's pamphlet on a shelved water- diversion project. |
