3d_camper's Journal
 
[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends View]

Monday, February 26th, 2018

    Time Event
    4:31p
    Немолодой профессор жалуется
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323365864_Academic_Freedom_How_Nasty_Can_a_University_Be

    Student spy
    The university hired a student spy (Maureen Robinson) to covertly surveil
    me for more than one year while I was a professor. Her actions were
    condoned by her immediate supervisors (the dean and the legal counsel of
    the university) and included using a false cyber identity (“Nathalie Page”)
    and falsely representing herself personally to third parties. The student spy
    provided weekly reports about me to the university. Her role was
    described by an Ontario appellate
    -court judge in his motion ruling in the following terms:
    MAUREEN ROBINSON
    [15] The circumstances of Maureen Robinson's involvement in this entire
    matter is troubling at best. Throughout the relevant portion of the Award
    by Arbitrator Foisy, Ms. Robins
    on's written notes were referred to [as] "the
    report on Professor Rancourt's address prepared by a University of Ottawa
    student".
    [16] Pursuant to the Udell Affidavit, and based on evidence from the
    hearing, the student being Maureen Robinson was the edit
    or of the student
    newspaper who had been hired by the University in what the University
    described as in a clerical capacity to assist Professor Rancourt in his office,
    without his input on her hiring.
    [17] Either in consultation with her employer, the University, or on her
    own, she monitored the activities of Professor Rancourt both on and off
    campus and reported her finding back to the University. In an email to
    Dean Lalonde, she admitted to having a "personal grudge" against
    Professor Rancourt and went so far as to liken her monitoring of Professor
    Rancourt as "posing as a young girl to catch a pedophile". Ms. Robinson
    was not called as a witness at the hearing and, the parties agreed that her
    "report" would be considered as an "aide memoire" only.
    [18] The University referred to the “report” thereafter as a transcript which
    such description was objected to by the APUO. Similarly, Arbitrator Foisy
    made certain findings which appear to be based solely on the report which
    was not evidence. [Underlined subtitle in original]

    << Previous Day 2018/02/26
    [Calendar]
    Next Day >>

About LJ.Rossia.org