Police mace the hell out of peaceful OWS protesters

Page 36 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,123
12
81
Also motion, I think we are talking about two different things: while your focus has been from a purely legal perspective - and I applaud your analysis - if you look back at my posts, my focus has been on the practical repercussions...I think at one point I even said regardless of the legalities, I don't think the school handled the situation well and it's going to cost them.

Right - I am looking at the law; you are looking at the PR.

I had no doubt that the PR would win out. My point has always been that nothing illegal happened (or, at least, it still had to be determined), it was just unpopular.

If people can just be intellectually honest, there would be little to argue about.

Stupid and unpopular does not equal illegal.

MotionMan
 
Apr 17, 2003
37,622
0
76
Right - I am looking at the law; you are looking at the PR.

I had no doubt that the PR would win out. My point has always been that nothing illegal happened (or, at least, it still had to be determined), it was just unpopular.

If people can just be intellectually honest, there would be little to argue about.

Stupid and unpopular does not equal illegal.

MotionMan

Sorry motion, whether or not something illegal happened is a question for the jury to decide. Juries are not intellectually dishonest - they are just not trained to pick up on the finer point of the law. We can pour over the law all we want, but it's just not in our hands.

Again, back to my original point, my concern is how the situation was handled. My point has always been if the idiot cops would have let the idiot kids sit there, the school wouldn't be out 1.75 million - plain and simple...and we wouldn't be having this discussion right now. At the end of the day, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING GOOD came out of this for the school from the student back lash, to the heat the admin got, to the negative PR, to the 1.75 mil they ended up spending.

I just hope they review their procedures and make the appropriate changes for how to handle similar situations in the future.

With that said, I have a filing deadline coming up today but I'll be back!
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,123
12
81
Sorry motion, whether or not something illegal happened is a question for the jury to decide.

That was most of my point of arguing in this thread; Everyone said what was done was per se illegal. I simply pointed out that they were wrong.

I get that you agree with me on that point, no?

MotionMan
 
Apr 17, 2003
37,622
0
76
That was most of my point of arguing in this thread; Everyone said what was done was per se illegal. I simply pointed out that they were wrong.

I get that you agree with me on that point, no?

MotionMan

I don't disagree with you at this point...I'd have to go back and read the opinion and cross reference it with the facts presented in the investigation which AFAIK is the most comprehensive account of the facts that we have.
 

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
11,562
1,741
126
God damn hippies!

We need to get back to the days of Johnny U! Now, he was a good American.
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,123
12
81
UC Davis chancellor placed on leave as officials launch probe into alleged misconduct

University of California President Janet Napolitano placed UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi on administrative leave Wednesday night and ordered a probe into “serious questions” raised about her involvement in campus jobs for family members, possible misuse of student service fee revenue and misstatements about her role in social media contracts.

“I am deeply disappointed to take this action,” Napolitano said in a statement. “But Davis is a strong campus, nationally and internationally renowned in many academic disciplines. I’m confident of the campus’ continued ability to thrive and serve California students and the Davis community.”

Katehi, in a campus email earlier Wednesday, had said she was “100 percent committed” to remain as chancellor.

A statement from Katehi attorney Melinda Guzman called Napolitano's action “disappointing, unprecedented and, based on the facts, entirely unjustified.”

A renowned scholar in electrical and computer engineering who became chancellor in 2009, Katehi has been widely criticized for questionable moonlighting activities and spending to cleanse the Internet of unfavorable publicity about the pepper-spraying of peaceful student protesters by campus police in 2011.

But Napolitano's letter to Katehi outlined several new issues that the president said would be examined by an independent outside investigator.

She said Katehi's daughter-in-law, who directly reports to one of the chancellor’s staff members, had received promotions and pay increases of more than $50,000 over 2 1/2 years. During that same period, Napolitano said, Katehi approved a pay increase of more than 20% and a title change for her daughter-in-law’s supervisor.

Napolitano also said that an academic program employing Katehi's son as a paid researcher was recently placed under the direct supervision of the chancellor's daughter-in-law.

“It does not appear that appropriate steps were taken to address, document or obtain approval for the fact that your son now reported to your daughter-in-law, who, in turn, was supervised by one of your direct reports,” Napolitano wrote.

Katehi also may have made “material misstatements” when she told the UC president and the news media that she had no knowledge of contracts that UC Davis officials made with social media firms, according to Napolitano’s letter.

The Sacramento Bee reported that Davis officials paid the firms at least $175,000 to improve the image of Katehi and the campus, in part by burying negative publicity about the 2011 pepper-spraying incident.

In fact, Napolitano wrote, documents indicate Katehi had “multiple interactions” with one vendor and efforts to set up meetings with others.

The investigator will also review complaints made under the campus whistleblower policy that student fee revenue was misused and specifically directed to “unapproved instructional purposes,” Napolitano wrote. She provided no further details.

Earlier in the day, as rumors swirled that Napolitano had asked Katehi to resign, hundreds of UC Davis faculty members rallied behind the chancellor. As of Wednesday evening, more than 400 faculty members had signed a petition expressing strong opposition to any “preemptory action” by Napolitano to remove her without consulting campus administrators or the Academic Senate.

In another letter to Napolitano Sunday, faculty members said they believed Katehi was being singled out for criticism over her moonlighting because she is a woman.

“I am completely shocked [by the allegations]. … She has done a lot of good for the campus with respect to creating and funding programs for students and being transparent about the budget and decision-making such that this seems completely out of character,” Linda Bisson, a faculty member, said in an email to The Times.

The chancellor, who earns an annual salary of $424,360, was criticized for accepting lucrative paid board positions with a textbook publisher and a for-profit college firm, DeVry Education Group, under federal and state investigations for misleading advertising.

Katehi took the board position with the college firm without obtaining Napolitano's approval, as UC policy requires, but stepped down and apologized. Napolitano seemed satisfied at the time.

But she told Katehi on Wednesday that the new issues could not be ignored.

“As I said when I defended you after you accepted the DeVry board position, another violation of University policy, you have done some great work for UC Davis,” Napolitano wrote. “Given the accumulation of matters that require investigation, however, it is both necessary and appropriate to address these matters in a fair, independent, and transparent manner.”

Seems like Katehi has some ethics and honestly issues. Maybe everyone should trust my Spidey Sense that she was a liar?

MotionMan
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
68,334
12,562
126
www.anyf.ca
The OWS people had a proper cause they were fighting, problem is, there's really nothing you can do about it and they just made a fool of themselves by thinking they could. But on the other hand got to praise them for at least trying though.