Posted on 04/02/2009 3:39:11 PM PDT by Pondo
Ward Churchill won his case against the University of Colorado today as a Denver jury unanimously decided he was fired in retaliation for his controversial essay on the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
The jury gave Churchill $1 for
(Excerpt) Read more at denverpost.com ...
The University will undoubtedly take him back. It’s a world gone mad.
Please tell me this is satire... $1 is way
too much compensation for that imposter!
Wish it was a joke. Another O.J. jury.
Please tell me this is a late April Fool’s joke.
APRIL FOOLS trick??? He is a FOOL and so is the jury. I am really turning against the AMerican people.
They may have wanted to give him zilch.
The Jury says, “Ya, it is because of what you said, and you can not be fired for what you said. However, we HATE what you said” -—
IF that is how they feel, this is a way to resolve it.
However, had I been on the Jury, I would have said he was fired for being a complete fraud and phony. He is not an Indian. He steals most of his written material. He does not have the credentials he has claimed.
BECAUSE of his controversial statements, the University did more research on this nut case.
“I cannot meet with you. Please re-read the instructions concerning damages if you find for the plaintiff but find no damages (you will have to) find in the sum of $1.”
I have a problem understanding the logic here. If there were no damages, there were no damages. Why would they have to give him a dollar if there were no damages? Giving him a dollar implies that there was a dollar’s worth of damages.
What the hell is the matter with the law?
Indian want wampum..didn’t get much.
Wonder if that grandstander David Lane is on the 1/3 contingency fee plan? LOL
And my diploma is once again about as useful as toilet paper.
Problem still is, regardless of the jury award, once the jury finds for the plaintiff, the judge gets to decide if he gets back pay or his job back.
August, 2003: Ward Churchill Caught On Tape Advocating Terrorism [vs Fellow Americans]
Audio link at Michell Malkin's website (included below)
Question from audience:
You mentioned a little bit ago, "Why did it take a bunch of Arabs to do what you all should have done a long time ago," that's my question.
Churchill: I'm gonna repeat that, tell me if I got that right: Why shouldn't we do something and how do you you move so they don't see you coming.
As to the first part, not a reason in the world that I could see. I can't find a single reason that you shouldn't in a principled way —there may be some practical considerations, such as do you know how (laughter from audience)
—you know, often these things are processes. It's not just an impulse. And certainly it's not just an event.
And the simple answer, although it probably should be more complicated, but I'm not being flip and giving the simple answer, is:
You carry the weapon. That's how they don't see it coming. You're the one...
They talk about "color blind or blind to your color." You said it yourself.
You don't send the Black Liberation Army into Wall Street to conduct an action.
You don't send the American Indian Movement into downtown Seattle to conduct an action.
Who do you send? You. Your beard shaved, your hair cut close, and wearing a banker's suit.
There's probably a whole lot more to it, you know that. But there's where you start. .."
more...
The audio is apparently no longer available -only transcript:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001588.htm
____________________________________________________
For all you'll ever need or want to know about
Wright's Marxist "Black Liberation Theology",
see my FR Home page:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/#Section%204
Hint...
"Their founding document [the Weather Underground's] called for the establishment of a "white fighting force" to be allied with the "Black Liberation Movement" and other "anti-colonial" movements[1] to achieve "the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism."..."-Berger, Dan (2006). Outlaws of America: The Weather Underground and the Politics of Solidarity. AK Press, 95.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weatherman_Underground#cite_ref-Berger_0-0
Outlaws of America: The Weather Underground and the Politics of Solidarity (Paperback) by Dan Berger
http://www.amazon.com/Outlaws-America-Underground-Politics-Solidarity/dp/1904859410
____________________________________________________
From the New York Times, August 24, 2003
"they [the Weather Underground] employed revolutionary jargon, advocated armed struggle and black liberation and began bombing buildings, taking responsibility for at least 20 attacks. Estimates of their number ranged at times from several dozen to several hundred."
Article: Quieter Lives for 60's Militants, but Intensity of Beliefs Hasn't Faded
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F04E4DE1539F937A1575BC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2
____________________________________________________
Here is a 4 minute video from 2006 in which Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn are asked if Ward Churchill in the late 1960s, as he claims, taught the Weathermen bomb making techniques. Ayers says with a sneaky grin: "memory is a real MF-er".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjcS6QFtn_g&feature=related
____________________________________________________
"This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English..."
--now President Barack Obama
So lying on his resume was okay? Geesh! What is that country coming to?
IIRC, it was also the verdict in "The Verdict".
A Pyrrhic victory.
I think the jury felt compelled to follow the jury instructions. I suspect they really wanted to find for CU, but didn't really buy the story of CU that his termination had "nothing to do with his 9/11 essay."
This is why you should always refuse to agree to follow the jury instructions when you are on voir dire for sitting on a jury.
If you are asked "Will you follow the instructions of the court?" Just answer "That depends on what the instructions are."
Of course you won't be sitting on that jury if that is how you respond.
I never got the check.
I bugged them about it for years. :-)
As far as I know, Churchill didn't even bother to deny he was a faker, a liar, and an academic plagerist. He just said, "They didn't fire me for all that-- it was the essay" and these idiots went for it. Morons!
I think you may just own that patent.
The jurors were probably too stupid/ignorant to realize that.
He may get hundreds of thousands of dollars due to this idiotic $1 verdict. It opens the door to collect attorney’s fees and possible reinstatement with back pay.
If I were head of the university, and I had to take him back?????? Windowless basement office the size of a broom closet. No duties except to grade papers 10 hours a day!
He’d look better tarred and feathered.
Wow a whole dollar...Did he get his job back?
Ignorant would be the operable word. But sometimes stupidity prevents one from realizing he is ignorant.
Well, at least he won’t be able to buy a whole lotta firewater with that $1 award...that said we should have known that, one way or another, the lawyers ALWAYS get paid.
Yes it is, but the jury asked the judge if they could give $0. The judge replied the minimum was $1.
He gets his choice of either one. He can go back to work at CU or get paid for the years he could have. Unbelievable.
Yeah, but the judge may very well give him more at a future hearing.
The jury was wrong to give him this amoral victory.
Took the dumb jury 2 days to come up with this brilliant verdict, bunch of idiots. And in other news, Jay Cutler is being traded to the Chicago Bears.
As a Colorado resident .... BOOOOOOOO. Jury should have awarded CU the combined total salary that this FRAUD soaked out of the school system while he was present.
“Denver Chief District Judge Larry Naves will decide in a separate hearing whether the former Boulder professor can return to his job or receive pay for years he could have worked at CU. “
Farther down in the article.
Sounds like it was $0.00 for pain and suffering and $1.00 for lost wages. That might be game, set, match for him and Lane.
I’m more than ready for Texas to seceed!
OK when does Senator Frankin take office and where do we go to get the Mark of the Beast? It looks like its about that time. Let’s loot and pillage Baby!!
No, not a joke - read the article. The jury asked the judge if it was possible to find for Churchill and award him $0 in compensation.
The judge told them basically “no, you must give him a minimum of $1 if you are going to find in favor.”
This is the jury’s way of slapping Churchill in the face. It is 100% certain that he will find out that they WANTED to give him ZERO in compensation, and know from it that they all thought him a complete POS.
What the jury ALSO effectively did is prevent Churchill from launching into a continuous cycle of appeals, abusing the courts and costing the University further monies.
They found in his favour - he cannot appeal that. Nor can he appeal the monetary award. The jurors very smartly (IMHO)prevented any further legal actions from this phony indian.
Not an “OJ jury” by ANY stretch of the imagination.
A.A.C.
As I have been saying, the law as practised is intrinsically corrupt. It is not correctible in its present form. No one wants to hear it, but the days of "a nation of laws" are long gone.
I don’t think so, the $1.00 was for lost wages it seems. $0.00 damages. I think the judge might just “get it”.
See post #21
Anothr jury of sheeple.
Pretty simple:
When you're suing, your're claiming to have been damaged economically. The jury can't say "you're right", by finding in your favor, then turn around and say "you're wrong" by giving you nothing. If they want to say "you're wrong", they need to find for the guy you're suing.
Yeah, I know, but the company was too stupid to take real advantage of the technology (in favor of my prior invention) because they were afraid of it (they said it was too sophisticated for their O&M people; in reality it was too sophisticated for management :-). I told them, up front, if they didn't pursue it, they'd be broke in five years because the high material cost of the older technology would create a market opening for the Chinese. They had 60% market share so they blew me off. I built the first unit, proved that it worked, and quit.
They hired a Belgian engineering firm to try to duplicate the principles. The Belgian engineers got a bad case of NIH and failed. The managers had too much pride to hire me as a consultant and the firm that built the unit refused to make another system without me (there's nothing quite like treating prototype metal workers and machinists like the artists they are). The managers were stuck.
Five years later, they went bust because the Chinese had taken over the market. The new technology machine ran the entire time, 24/7, 350dpy without a hitch.
No I am afraid it isn’t a joke. But that low life pig sucker Churchhill is a joke. I live close enough to Boulder that I would be happy to go down there the day his American hateing,Terrorist arse kissing carcuss shows up on the CU campus. I have a nice huge bucket of pig guts and slop ready to poor on that Islamic loving, pig farming dirt bag.
Well, only sorta. He has appeal rights from the restitution hearing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.