All speculation at this point. Since she has a masters degree, she may not wish to pursue yet another masters at Oxford which she has to fund herself ( or get a friend to fund).
The wrongful death lawsuit will continue its long wind thru the court system, like all other similar suits against Penn and similar universities. I expect her quest for redemption is heavily motivated by her desire for employment in her field, which may be problematic currently.
Iâm not offering an opinion. Iâm just saying what I heard her say on the Katie Couric interview.
With regard to Oxford, sheâs not pursuing a 2nd masterâs. Itâs been reported that sheâs in a PhD program there.
Perhaps her friends will pay the remaining $100k or so for her to get it. It doesnât seem Oxford is offering her any scholarships/aid.
Iâm sure that Penn does wish that this story will go away, and will continue to use all measures (back-channel pressure combined with PR-driven backpedaling) to try to make that happen. But the ethical violations by Penn administrators in this case are particularly egregious and deserve serious redress.
2 Likes
I really donât know why people think Penn did anything wrong. They were informed that a student acted unethically in their application, they investigated, and they found this to be true. They should be applauded for doing so.
But in terms of providing a PR sob story, Ms. Fierceton is very effective.
7 Likes
Any bets on whether she changes her name once again when she seeks employment? Where does one go with a doctorate in social work ( if she gets one)? Academia seems out for several reasons, not exactly a hiring boom there. Nonprofits might be an option but usually prefer experience. There is always the government âŠ
1 Like
Her doctoral studies are in Sociology.
Youâre right. Oxford has not offered her a scholarship.
The New Yorker article offers different information than that which Penn provided in their response to the lawsuit. The information which is reported in that article corroborates Mackenzieâs story. You should read it. The article contradicts the Penn report, suggesting that they did not find that the student acted unethically. Rather it suggests that Penn was very selective in stating what they found, including testimony from the studentâs very abusers in their report to the court. Either that or their investigation was shoddy since they didnât find the corroborative witnesses who were readily available and were interviewed by the New Yorker reporter. Take your pick.
2 Likes
Bill,
You keep assuming she was abused. However, the case against the mother was expunged, which if you think about it is an extraordinary step to take. At this point, a fair observer would not assume she was abused.
What this implies is that one of the two women is a very effective liar.
4 Likes
Regardless of your stance on who should be believed in this case, Penn administrators should not have been communicating privately with the estranged parent of Fierceton, and certainly not without informing her. There is a lot more in the New Yorker article, but Iâll stick with that as a first point.
2 Likes
Your facts are inaccurate. As is your assumption.
-
Only one tenth of 1% of abuse cases are ever successfully prosecuted., so there was nothing extraordinary about the court action. That is not a determination that child abuse does not happen.
-
The court expunged the case due to insufficient evidence. That happens with court cases all the time. That action doesnât mean that alleged behaviour didnât occur. It simply means that the court was not presented with sufficient evidence to prove it to the standard of proof âbeyond a reasonable doubtâ.
-
You have left out the fact that an investigation by Social Service professionals determined that the abuse did occur and that there was sufficient evidence of such to remove Mackenzie from her motherâs custody and place her in a foster home. They stand behind that determination to this day.
-
The New Yorker reporter spoke to numerous witnesses, including teachers, parents, and medical professionals who corroborated Mackenzieâs version of events. In addition, the article documents that Mackenzieâs hospitalization in her junior year of high school was not the first time that a report of abuse had been filed with social services. A report had also been filed by one of her teachers in her sophomore year. You should read the article.
-
Mackenzieâs own mother corroborates the sexual assault by Henry Lovelace, Carie Morrisonâs live-in boyfriend.
-
The people closest to this situation, the people who know Mackenzie best, find her to be credible. Multiple Penn faculty members have filed a grievance against the Penn administration for irregularities in their handling of this case. The Daily Penn, a campus student newspaper, has written an editorial in support of her complaint against the university. Multiple students who know her have written letter to the editor supporting her. Penn students have organized a walk-out and public rally in support of her.
So, Iâm not assuming anything. Iâm simply accepting the facts of the situation as reported in the New Yorker and elsewhere. Iâm accepting the determination of the local social services agency investigation that there was an established pattern of abuse sufficient to warrant removal from the home. I am accepting the testimony of her mother that the sexual assault happened. I am accepting the testimony of numerous witnesses both back in St. Louis and at UPenn that she is credible.
I am simply stating the facts of this case as publicly reported. You are free to believe what you want. I will not contest your opinion, but I will clarify the facts especially when told that I am just âassumingâ.
7 Likes
Interesting that this article calls the current state of affairs in this case âa public relations disaster for UPenn.â
1 Like
Importantly, it also doesnât mean that the alleged behavior actually did occur.
And the judge reviewing the case disagreed. Note that the judge did not use the standard of âbeyond a reasonable doubtâ, but simply a preponderance of the evidence. In other words, the judge believed there was more evidence that the mother was telling the truth compared to the daughter.
In other words, those who have heard only her side, believe her. Did you expect otherwise?
3 Likes
As I said earlier, Iâm not going to debate the issue. Youâre entitled to your point of view.
I do appreciate the fact that you are not contesting half of the facts which I listed. Good to see that we can be in agreement about some aspects of the case
I understand that reasonable people may disagree regarding Pennâs and the Rhodes committeeâs actions, and even her actions, but I really donât understand the vitriol and contempt that some posters seem to direct at this young woman.
4 Likes
As I wrote earlier, between Ms. Fierceton and her mother, one is a victim, and the other a master liar.
If Ms. Fierceton is indeed a victim as many assume, then her mother has gotten away with a horrible crime. On the other hand, if Ms. Fierceton is the master liar, then her lies have highly damaged her motherâs reputation and career.
I think itâs telling that many professionals have looked at this and cannot remotely agree upon who is telling the truth here.
On the other hand, we do know that certain elements on Ms. Fiercetonâs application are exaggerations at best and flat out lies at worst. And because she was not in touch with her mother at the time, we know these exaggerations or lies are her own work, and not done with her motherâs encouragement. So, is this the first time she has done this, or is it a pattern?
Some have tried to sweep that away by saying that everyone exaggerates on their applications. Thatâs not true for my kids applications, nor do I suspect thatâs true for the vast majority of people on this site. I take a dim view of cheating and lying, and coming from a family that was once poor but no longer is, I apply the same rules for both rich and poor.
5 Likes
Yes, we can agree that victims should strive for as much accuracy as possible. I think that we can also agree that the media (Phila Inquirer) and institutions (Penn) should strive for the same and should handle them in an error free manner.
2 Likes
As a former court stenographer, I sat through more than one child abuse case where each parent was completely believable and yet one of them was definitely lying.
This first time this happened was a standard case where the mother was accusing the father of abusing their young daughter and we deposed the mother first. At the end of the deposition I was convinced the father was a total scumbag. But after a lunch break we deposed the father - and was flabbergasted that his protest of innocence was just as believable, that he did not come across as a scumbag at all.
After that first time not only did I stop judging when Iâd only heard one side, I became much more skeptical of all parties in such disputes. In some cases you have to accept that if you werenât there when it happened you will never know the truth.
10 Likes