| Brodhead interview April 6, 2006 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 28 2010, 11:35 PM (331 Views) | |
| Quasimodo | Feb 28 2010, 11:35 PM Post #1 |
|
http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/156462/ Note how his talking points are the same: The facts kept changing, there was a presumption of innocence, but what the team did was bad enough... Note how he focuses on the bad conduct of the team, and how Pressler needed to be fired. He most likely KNOWS at this time that the team was innocent; but his focus is NOT on trying to dampen down the fires or defending the accused. Secondly, in talking about McFayden, he does not point out--as he most likely could have--that the email was a spoof from American Psycho. Compare his statements here with those of Donna Shalala. (If you remain at the site it will start playing subsequent news accounts from the following days. Take your blood pressure medicine before watching.) Edited by Quasimodo, Feb 28 2010, 11:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Payback | Mar 1 2010, 01:39 PM Post #2 |
|
Did I transcribe this right? Q: Was it important for Richard Brodhead to submit his resignation to move forward? A: Well, I think the time had clearly come. The notion that he could have continued to be an effective or successful leader of that university--I think we just reached the point where it was clear that wasn't going to happen. |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Mar 2 2010, 09:51 AM Post #3 |
|
Note that Brodhead wants to talk about how bad the students were--not about how Mangum's assertions were fraudulent (which, by then, he had reason to know, just from his own university police reports; but in addition, Duke representatives attended the March 29 meeting, where they would have learned that there was no DNA, no evidence, etc. Brodhead here is joining with the other hoax enablers to blame the students--at the same time others are also doing so. Is this just coincidence, or was there an agreed upon plan to do so? (JMOO) |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Mar 2 2010, 09:53 AM Post #4 |
|
I think you got that right...
|
![]() |
|
| Payback | Mar 6 2010, 12:23 AM Post #5 |
|
This may have been brought up before. I post it now because Naomi Wolf says something familiar--that Brodhead promised to get back to her and never did. Ah, those committees that Brodhead appoints so that they can study problems and get back to him so he can make their findings public! And was there one or more centers established that were going to make public reports? This is a small part of Wolf's story: I called the dean of Yale College, Richard Brodhead. He took my call right away. I told him I was calling because I was sexually encroached upon twenty years ago by someone on his faculty, and I wanted to set up a confidential meeting to address it. I wanted to be sure, I said, that Yale’s grievance procedures are now strong. Brodhead seemed to know who I was talking about. He implied the man in question was not well. “I don’t think you understand why I am calling,” I said. “I don’t want to bring a lawsuit against Yale or Harold Bloom. I don’t want the meeting, or this experience, to be public. I simply need to know that the institution is accountable.” “I’ll get back to you,” he said. He didn’t. Sex and Silence at Yale http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/features/n_9932/#ixzz0hN2zlRmT Edited by Payback, Mar 6 2010, 12:23 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |






7:14 PM Jul 10