Judge Naves will hear witnesses and legal arguments on Ward Churchill’s motion to reinstate on Wednesday July 1, beginning at 9:00 a.m.
Reinstatement is the usual remedy, but the University of Colorado refuses to acknowledge the jury’s verdict that the Regents fired Ward in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Come & show your support for freedom of speech
“What was asked for and what was delivered was justice.” - Ward Churchill
On April 2, 2009 the jury returned a verdict for Professor Ward Churchill in his case against the University of Colorado.
The jury found unanimously that Ward’s 9/11 essay was a significant factor in the Regents’ decision to fire him, and that he would not have been fired but for his exercise of his First Amendment rights.
The Jury Verdict Form provided by the judge asked,
1. When it terminated Professor Churchill's employment, did a majority of the Board of Regents of the University of Colorado use Plantiff's protected speech activity as a substantial and motivating factor in the decision to discharge the Plantiff from employment?
jury's answer : yes.
2. Did the termination harm Professor Churchill?
jury's answer : yes.
3. "have the defendents (CU Regents) shown by a preponderance of evidence that the Plantiff (Churchill) would have been dismissed for other reasons even if the absence of the protected speech activity?"
jury's answer : no.
In comments made to the lawyers and on KHOW radio, jurors stated that they concluded that Ward Churchill had NOT engaged in research misconduct, and that the University’s accusations against him were essentially trivial.
They also reported having spent several hours debating damages, as five jurors wanted to give a substantial award but one did not. Because Ward Churchill had made it clear that this case was not about money, they agreed on the nominal award of $1.
Reinstatement is the standard remedy in such cases. The judge will make that determination, as well as findings on attorneys fees in a later hearing.
As attorney David Lane observed, “there are few defining moments that give the First Amendment this kind of life.” CU’s attempt to minimize the significance of the findings by emphasizing the $1 award simply illustrates, once again, that money is the only thing valued by University officials.
Official Ward Churchill Site :
DU Law Blog on the Trial :
http://www.theracetothebottom.org/ward-churchill/
All primary materials for the case are found here :
http://www.law.du.edu/index.php/corporate-governance/churchill-v-u-of-co
|
Nov. 20-22 Mass Mobilization to Close the SOA
20 hours 8 min ago
Anonymous
|
|
The Shortwave Report 11/06/09 Listen Globally
1 day 17 hours ago
Anonymous
|
|
War Criminals and their agent control 344 Members of Congress.
2 days 8 hours ago
Anonymous
|
|
Zhibin Gu: Chinese multinationals vs global financial crisis: finance, trade, politics and management
3 days 9 hours ago
Anonymous
|
|
Reject Corporate Options for Health Care
3 days 12 hours ago
Anonymous
|
|
Venezuela: The error of being Lusbi Portillo
4 days 2 hours ago
Anonymous
|
|
FERNANDO LUGO SE ALINEA CON ALVARO URIBE
4 days 7 hours ago
Anonymous
|
|
A Science of Intuition
4 days 15 hours ago
Anonymous
|
|
CUBANUESTRA.FERNANDO LUGO, DEL FASCISMO AL CHONGUISMO
5 days 7 hours ago
Anonymous
|
|
The Untold Story of the Cuban 5
6 days 17 hours ago
Anonymous
|
Comments
location
June 30, 2009 by Anonymous, 18 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 3614
Courtroom 6 (2nd floor)
Denver City & County Building
1435 Bannock St.
Denver, CO 80202
Wednesday at 9am. show your support!