This is an update to an earlier blog post.
I have been reviewing the initial case documents in this case and I am stunned. I think the allegations are likely true, but if even 10% of the allegations are true, this is a horrible, horrible travesty that must be addressed.
The complaint includes accounts of gross sexual harassment (and I would argue even assault when a male professor uses in appropriate physical contact with a female professor) of other professors, law students and undergraduate work study students; sexual discrimination (including a practice of promoting equally qualified male professors over female professors and paying male professors more than female professors); and an atmosphere that mocks and belittles those who think that women and racial minorities have a place at the table for events like Constitution Day.
Since these documents are in the public domain (see pacer.resource.org), I am publishing them here. OCU Law apparentely has done its best to minimize these complaints and brush them under the rug. I think it is time to shine some light on this situation.
* Document 1-1 – “The Complaint”
* Document 1-2 – “Confidential Memo to William J. Conger dated October 17, 2007”
* Document 1-3 – “Grievane for Sexual and Racial Harassment, Discrimination, Retaliation and Failure to Following University Policies and Procedures, dated April 16, 2008”
* Document 1-4 – “Protocol: Procedures for Faculty-Discrimination panels convened under subsection IX(A) of the Faculty Handbook”
* Document 1-5 – “OCU Whistle Blowing Policy”
* Document 1-6 – “Letter to OCU Law Faculty from William J. Conger”
* Document 1-7 – “EEOC Charge of Discrimination”
* Document 1-8 – “EEOC Dismissal”
* Document 1-9 – “Civil Cover Sheet”
I will publish later case documents as well as my finances permit (PACER charges 8 cents per page to access these documents in the public domain). Certainly it is fair to hear the responses to the complaint by Dean Hellman and OCU Law.
0 thoughts on “Part 1 of case documents in the case of Johnson v. Oklahoma City University, et al”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Moving the agenda forward is a hobby of liberal progressives. Easy to allege with no proof. I have set on juries like this with only the word of the of the litigants.
If true I hope they receive satisfaction.
It is difficult to prove sexual harassment cases, as the perpetrators usually are smart enough to only behave badly when not in front of witnesses. That’s why many deserving cases are never brought, because the victims are afraid to see their names be drug through the mud.
The administration at OCU law is CORRUPT. Nothing surprises me anymore with this school. Hellman needs to either step down or McDaniel simply needs to fire him. Hellman’s abuse of power can no longer continue.
I applaud Johnson for stepping up to the plate in holding these crooks accountable. I also applaud the law student (who filed suit under the ADA). It’s good to see the courage in these two women.