Subject: Update on Law Suits Involving Sexual Misconduct Against the President.
Ed: Sadly, our concerns that Professor Olson and his associates would continue to
try to embarrass Del Mar have been proven yet again.
JK: This is not an embarrassment to Del Mar but only the expose of a few Del Mar Yanquis.
Ed Cohn: Professors Olson and Samsing went on KRIS and reported that Del Mar had failed to fully investigate an SGA off-campus scandal.
Why was the investigation conducted in an unwholesome manner, overlooking the sexual acts that are now well documented regarding only a bare minimum of partakers?
Why were select students singled out when there were many who were equally responsible?
Why was there no resolution within DMC (EEOC or Administration).
Were students expelled so as to cover up further culpability of the "adults" in attendance. Donna Strong's letter conveys her self serving message as we all know she is a little angel. Was Carlos Garcia in attendance? Was Mike Westergren in attendance? Did Carlos Garcia ask Joseph Ramirez any questions? Was Jose Rivera in attendance?
These are serious issues Mr Cohn.
Is that why we send our youth to Del Mar College, so they can learn how to do things halfway? Or is it so they can have their "due process" thwarted? Or......? I am sure you get the message.
Your lament is very disingenuous and obsequious in nature no doubt.
Ed: This SGA event apparently occurred about a year ago
and was investigated by Jose Rivera, VPSD. Then EEO Teresa Cox was also
involved. The implication is that the investigation was truncated because Del
Mar, under the current President, allows sexual harassment.
************************************************************************************
This comment from a
Del Mar Housekeeping Anonymous Input source regarding the
Del Mar College / SGA / Select Faculty / President CGTA / In House Counsel Approved Event at Port Royal.
The most important point has been missed concerning this Del Mar thing. All student groups have college authorized advisors. They are supposed to be there to monitor and chaperon these events. The details of what happened in November, to my knowledge, did not come forward until January. What took so long? Why didn’t the advisors stop all this stuff at the time? It seems to me that the advisors have a lot to answer for and other head should have rolled here?
Where were the advisors when all this was going on?
Why are those advisors still working at Del Mar College?
Why were they let off the hook?
JK: The Del Mar College / SGA / Select Faculty / President CGTA / In House Counsel Approved Event at Port Royal occurred November 2005. This story was Nationally Recognized and published by MSNBC and Mr Cohn beckons as to whose credibility? So why was the investigation truncated Mr Cohn? And say Ms Cox was involved; we have all witnessed the documentation here and
here with Ms Cox acting in adverse interest to the students and the due process. Was the DMC EEO Officer acting independently or under directives from Admin and In House Counsel? From the documents it is clear she was not acting in the interest of JUSTICE. And while it comes to my mind the question must be asked, "why is this situation happening (with regularity) at DMC and not at TAMUK or TAMUCC". Why is this crap happening while a common group has retained control?
Ed: You can also expect to see a Foghorn article tomorrow concerning the release of
a Baker/Box report for the Regent's of the Administration's conduct with regard
to Teresa Cox's employment. I do not know what the Foghorn will report, but I
have placed a call to the editor, Ms. Edwards.
JK: The "Baker / BOX Report" Mr Cohn???
LOL
And I suppose you are going to claim to have read this report as well?
Ed: A few weeks ago, the Olson group wanted the President removed from office
because he personally was accused of sexual harassment. Let's go through the
status of the law suits that allege this:
Ed: 1. The Lopez case. Despite repeated reports that Ms. Lopez wore a wire and "had"
the President, the tape was never produced for trial. The suit appears likely to
be settled at its nuisance value, if that. Anyone who doubts the paucity of the
accusation needs to go the Federal Court and read the statements of the Federal
Judge in granting the individual defendants summary judgment.
JK: Nuisance Value Mr Cohn? If the statements of the Judge were so damning to the Plaintiff's; why would the defendant's give them one cent? A settlement is an admission of guilt and is usually to prevent the meat and potatoes of a case from public scrutiny. There is also a very valid question as to the fact that Mike Westergren is a former Judge and you can figure out from that point. Is the Judge performing in a quasi jurisdictional interest as Judge and Jury as well? I question the integrity of anyone who reads the Court Documents and can still deny there is a viable issue at hand. And remember that depo of Gabe Rivas? The voters seen right through all of the rhetoric and voted him out. That is from the Federal Courthouse. I am sure there is a plethora in the accusations Mr Cohn.
Ed: 2. The Foghorn article about the Lopez (and Benitez) cases (the cases were split
for trial), last week. The attorney for the two accusers says that they were
"satisfied" with the settlements. It is not because of the size of the
settlement. The dismissal of the individual counts insures that the judge was
not impressed with the evidence that the accusers had.
JK: Mr Cohn, you exclaim, "It is not because of the size of the
settlement." as if you know the amount? And you probably have not even considered these victims just want this to be over with? That figures. The Judge is wrong. The Judge is supposed to remain impartial and eventually allow the arguments to be presented to a Jury of 12 (barring a bench trial).
Ed: 3. The Cox allegation. The Baker report to the Regents clears the President of
any actual sexual harassment or intentional wrongdoing. It is critical of the
timing of the non-renewal of Ms. Cox.
JK: Have you read the Baker / BOX report Mr Cohn? No way sir. Maybe if there was such a report you might have read it, but there is no DMC Baker Box report. Also, at DMC when you speak of incompetence and Ms Cox, everybody knows who is the incompetent one; not to mention zero credibility.
Ed: 4. The Parker case. Attorney Heil, the same attorney who was unable to find any
wrongdoing in the Lopez and Benitez cases, is Ms. Parker's attorney in a law
suit filed outside of Del Mar. We should not be trying this case by "tfac"; it
is clear however Ms. Parker has clear ties to Jaime Kenedeno, assuming he is
Mr. Haley, the brother of the "friend" of the accuser of a respected faculty
member; recall that these charges were found to be totally false.
Part II
Ed: In summary, 2 of the 3 cases are in the process of clearing the President. As we
know, the legal system is not a thing of beauty but it will work
JK: Settling out of court for an undisclosed settlement is indicative of the President’s tenure and his diverse relationship with the now multi tiered Del Mar College faculty, foundation, outsourcing and network if you will. How much was the official settlement amount?
.
Ed: Stripped of their ability to make the case against the President directly, Jaime
Kenedeno was the first to shift the argument. He reported ? Some big mistakes
were made in the Sexual Harassment investigations against (a faculty member)
according to Theresa Cox." (Caution, I have not seen any evidence of Ms. Cox
having said this). The important point is that Ms. Cox was the lead
investigator and found no basis for any of the charges, in a report she signed.
JK: Hey Ed, I don’t know where you have been but it is well documented; my original conflict with Del Mar College. “Ben Blanco brought me into your world”. Nothing has ever shifted, however the information has since, been stacked up and sifted. And the quote from above was copied from the Caller Times Forum Online and it is linked back to the original publication so do your homework lest you prove yourself as you just did. I believe Theresa Cox makes things crystal clear as to her signature (un-coerced).
Everybody (@DMC knows about the abuse of this position. Must we hash through it Mr. Cohn?
Ed: It now appears Prof. Olson is making the same argument: OK, so the President did
not do anything wrong himself, but he wasn't diligent in upholding EEO.
JK: There are many credible facts to go along with the argument Ed. Let’s see if I can name a few right of the bat; The Covered Up of the DMC / SGA / T-fac adm / IHC / CG&TA / SEX ……….
There is a settlement. Ed calls it a Nuisance Value, whatever your flavor Mr Cone a settlement is a settlement. If it is such a small pittance then why don’t you pay it personally? Why should the voters pay for Carlos Garcia’s indiscretions or his lawsuit magnetism or his ineptitude as DMC President. The owner needs sell and the team needs to find a new general manager.
There is another settlement.
And another settlement.
Simple facts Ed.
Ed: This is simply not true. The President has acted quickly where he perceived actual
harassment. Further, the SGA was investigated by VPSA Rivera; so far as I know,
no one has ever accused him of any impropriety of action.
JK: Ed, you have said so many times you believe it? Nah, you cant possibly believe that nonsense of a cheer. But nice brown nosing nonetheless, Man,….now CG make sure you credit Mr Cohn with those brownie points cuz he sure did give it that “ole college try”.
Ed: The false accusation that Del Mar does not care about sexual harassment, because
it replaced its EEO officer is (1) untrue; (2) harmful to DM if publicized by a
respected member of the faculty on TV (we all understand Bruce's hyperbole and
don't take it seriously, but the public does not understand and will be
mislead); and (3) best left to the courts.
JK: Dude you should have stopped while you were only brown nosing, no you are attacking a whistle blower and his lively hood.
Ed: At this point, Professor Olson and his associates have discredited themselves as
dispassionate contributors. They clearly seek to embarrass to win what I assume
for now they believe to be a righteous cause. In order for Professor Olson to
begin to regain the credibility he once had, he needs to:
JK: Mr Olson has aligned with the students and in the interest of integrity. His credibility is his and I nor you can remove it from him for revealing the Port Royal SGA fiasco coverup.
Heed the advice form Dr David D Kurz.
I can only assume your email was generated as a result of the recent opinions that a few staff have been posting and verbally expressing. Let's put this in the perspective of a psychologist. A child complains. The parent says, "Shut up or I'll put you up for adoption." (That never works, by the way. But let?s say that it does in this case.) The kid stops complaining out of fear of going to a strange family. Now the parent says, "My child must like it. He isn't complaining, is he?" Problem of complaining solved. Your analogy is good but not complete, the College will have more to say on this in the days to come.
Psychologists have what we believe is a better solution. Does anyone care to hear it? Absolutely!
David D. Kurz/delmar
JK: The Dr is right on target with his assessment. So was Guadalupe Rangel's assessment.
Ed: Sorry to have to write this.
Back to the classroom.
Ed Cohn
JK: See what I mean? Now, it appears you have just wet yourself.
August 2, 2007
kingalonzoalvarezdepineda13 - you are a total hipocrit! You judge others so harshly while doing the very thing you claim you hate. Every morning your SPAM emails jam my computer up at work and I can't get my work done for about 5 - 10 minutes until your crap finishes downloading (kinda like you did with this opinion section). When asked to stop emailing the DMC campus you don't even reply or stop. You think you are so justified in raising a stink- but when others don't want to hear your opinion you cram it in their face anyway. YWith your approach - even if what you are saying is true- no one wants to hear it because it's SO obnoxiously done. You need to get the log out of your own eye.