I really think it's the administration who is REALLY scared of the facts, not the other side. I truly feel that this whole "public hearing" thing was a ruse to make the profs "look" like they have something to hide. The adm. was 100% certain that Addleman would not want this public, for a variety of reasons discussed on this board (handbook, PR machine spinning unfounded "charges", etc).
The irony is that when the facts DO come out, Thames is not going to look good in front of an imparial judge who understands the rights of tenure.
quote: Originally posted by: query "I really think it's the administration who is REALLY scared of the facts, not the other side. I truly feel that this whole "public hearing" thing was a ruse to make the profs "look" like they have something to hide. The adm. was 100% certain that Addleman would not want this public, for a variety of reasons discussed on this board (handbook, PR machine spinning unfounded "charges", etc). The irony is that when the facts DO come out, Thames is not going to look good in front of an imparial judge who understands the rights of tenure. Eatme and wise1 might want to consider that. Thank you."
I believe that you will be proven correct, and that the "truth" will hurt the adm. I would welcome open hearings, but RA might not wish for such a media circus. Should actually be fun.
Thames seems to like to use the idea that because the prof's didnt want their hearing open they are hiding something. Thames also conveniently forgets that lawyers run the show. Since Glamser and Stringer have hired lawyers to run the show, they really do not get a say in what happens and what goes on. They may WANT an open trial to prove Thames idiocy, however, their layers probably said no.