The President says the Dean of Students was at the demonstrations just to make sure they were peaceful.
Also, the FAQ uses an interesting legal interpretation which may also be libelous. The FAQ implies the cashier should have been prosecuted for assaulting the shoplifter. The shoplifter was presumably minding his own business with the store’s wine under his coat. I am not an expert, but I have never heard of anyone being prosecuted for assault for trying to detain a thief or trying to defend or recover their own property. There are issues of using deadly force, but I don’t think one can be charged with assault.
Why did the college take no disciplinary action against the students charged with attempted robbery? Why not against other shoplifters, as apparently this is common in Oberlin.
You can see how Oberlin’s attitude must have gone over with the jury.
Re #339 - the NPR interview statements today by the Oberlin president are surreal.
She’s either disconnected with reality or just lying through her teeth.
The case has nothing to do with “free speech”!
Everyone can see that the dispute is about libel and tortious interference in the plaintiff’s business.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why the president of a major American higher education institution can state such obvious falsehoods with a straight face.
Is she so deluded that she can deny, to a national audience, the fundamental facts of the case that were admitted as evidence in a court of law?
What on earth are Oberlin’s lawyers telling Oberlin’s president? Is she listening to their counsel?
Where did Oberlin find her?
Are Oberlin’s trustees actively TRYING to destroy their institution?
Ps. My god, the woman has a JD from Columbia. Heaven help us.
If it had been a first amendment case, Oberlin could have removed it to federal court and taken all the ‘small town’ issues out of it. It was a simple tort case so stayed in state court.
In one article, there was a discussion of the value of the business. Many of you have said that the value couldn’t possibly be $11M, that the case was only worth $1M. Neither expert said that. Gibson’s expert said the value of the business was $5.5M over the 30 years. Oberlin’s expert said the business was worth $35k. Really? $35k for a business that had been there for 100+ years, where the owners own quite a bit of real estate on that main street, where there wasn’t much competition for buying ice cream?
Juries are allowed to accept or reject testimony in whole or in part. In this case, it is pretty clear they rejected Oberlin’s expert accountant’s testimony as not credible (as I would have found the $35k valuation). It is then left with Gibson’s accounting of $5.5M in damages, which it accepted. The jury is not instructed to make its own valuation. The evidence supported the $5.5M verdict. The rest of the $11M was for injuries, both physical and emotional.
Lol maybe Oberlin’s expert accountant factored in how much stuff the Oberlin students were stealing from Gibson’s and that drove down the profits and therefore the valuation he calculated.
Related, did anyone pick up on the fact that the editor in chief of the Oberlin publication linked in comment #204 admitted in his article about the culture of theft on campus that he also stole from Gibson’s and other merchants in the town?
ivycover, I get it; I understand the Way of the (SJ)Warrior, the Tao of the Activist, the logical and moral imperatives of the Struggle etc.
But we’re talking about the head of an institution that is swathed in LAWS, in process and procedure, from head to foot. She is not a tenure track professor tweeting or opining into the cosmos.
She’s the executive leader with fiduciary duties to an institution that has just been found guilty, in a court of law, of gross misconduct.
This finding has significant implications for her institution’s
financial and operating situation
reputation as an elite institution in the eyes of not just ideologically-friendly alums, parents and students but also employers and grad schools
based on #1 and #2, ability to attract high-caliber students who care about both academic quality and integrity, and
based on #1-3 above, the financial viability of her institution.
Don’t these things matter more than the culture wars?
Not when you’re jockeying for a dream spot in the royal court of Soros (or the equivalent).
[lol. You’re superimposing you own values again on a Machiavellian comedic tragedy. They’re not applicable. There’s more going on here than either fanaticism or incompetence. Joachim’s razor is rusty.]
Like-minded npr listeners will eat this up. And note, teh so-called journalist did not ask a follow-up question: "I understand that your policy requires the Dean of Students to attend, but does iyour policy also require her to participate in the demonstration? It’s one thing to be an observer, if nothing else, for the safety of the students, and quite another thing to be an active demonstrator with the students, is is not? Isn’t that what the jury found, that the College leadership aided the protest?’
I still don’t believe that the college sends support to all protests off campus. Coffee, gloves, pizza? Pack them a lunch when they are off to DC to protest?
Gibson’s was not worth $5.5M and Oberlin didn’t totally destroy the business.So I don’t really agree with the award amount, but I don’t blame the jury.
Ivy - I understand you’re having fun now, and savoring your schadenfreude.
But - I’m not really addressing you now - I actually want Oberlin to be successful.
It is a great institution.
It’s most definitely a bad thing for our society - a real loss - if one of our great institutions of higher ed goes down the tubes.
And while you can giggle and smirk at this slow-motion collapse, those of us with high-achieving college-applying kids don’t find it funny, because - here’s the main point - there really aren’t many high-quality, nationally-ranked colleges available to us.
There are many good colleges. Consolidation will occur in this industry in the near future anyway, and some colleges will close if the business model is unsuccessful. Oberlin’s actions just might speed up the process in this case.
I have to disagree with this statement, if by “us” you are referring to posters with children looking for a good education. But you may be speaking of your own family. not in general.
Oberlin is a long way from closing. There are LACs in much worse shape. Oberlin is easily top 100 and accepts 1/3 of applicants.I don’t know if any school has gone from top 100 to closed.
^^ True. But Mizzou experienced a decline in enrollment in the wake of the 2015 protests and ended up closing some dorms and watching its rankings fall. These sorts of issues can have serious financial and other consequences for institutions of higher learning not quite up at the tippy top of the list. If the same had happened to Williams - it’d still be Williams (with its #1 ranking and its $2.2 bill. endowment). Not so Oberlin. There are many more comparable institutions with the same academic rigor but without all the silliness.
Oberlin pioneered the dual-degree program comprising a Conservatory music performance education + rigorous liberal arts incl world class science and math undergraduate training. It is a precious jewel in our university system.
Sure there are other such dual degree programs but none that are as feasible as Oberlin’s - feasible in terms of time to completion, proximity, administrative ease and convenience - and that also bring the academic rigor and superior academic reputation that Oberlin brings. The 5 year programs at Harvard etc are not feasible or realistic.
I am disgusted and disappointed beyond words at what is happening to Oberlin.