This thread has gone way out of hand. It is either grand social engineering or, perhaps it is legitimate, but still way off base.
Quote:
Oh, and it's "shirking" not "shurking" (perhaps that helps establish me as a professor).
No, it means you have a spell checker.
Quote:
... to those who have replied thinking that this is a hoax, or I need to learn more about the law (that's what I teach folks, so please don't lecture me), etc. - that's fine, you're entitled to your opinions, but unless you have something worthwhile to contribute, please stop cluttering up this thread.
No, I have been here a lot longer and established myself as somewhat creditable ( unlike you ), responded appropriately to the information given, am entitled to freedom of speech ... oh, forgot, I can’t tell you about that! Never mind, I can’t go there!
Quote:
it made a physical threat that was credible
Let me understand this.
The threat is both credible and against you physically?
Quote:
...that was credible to the website admin, myself, the police, and my lawyer.
So the authorities are involved ( so you say )
You teach law ( so you say )
You post, don’t provide proper information, manipulate your site subscriptions as a first time poster ( then correct it after it is pointed out ) yet say
Quote:
... I'm not techincally savvy -
( forgot to spell check that one professor, didn’t you. )
Well, hooray for you ... you are more arrogant then me, and anyone more arrogant then me is an ******* !!!!!!
Now to the nuts and bolts.
Quote:
... I don't need "beyond a reasonable doubt" evidence, I just need enough to get the student to admit what they did was wrong, etc. (i.e. scare them into an admission - generally not too hard).
But you said the authorities are involved. You can do NOTHING with the Dean until their investigation is concluded! Oh, you teach law, I forgot, so you already know that! That would be interfering with an investigation! And you and the Dean could be criminally charged if you did that!
And you also know that you must. repeat, must reveal all your inquiries ( these posts most specifically included ) in discovery! should it go that far, but as you said it is credible to the authorities, so I guess you will.
( those familiar with “ Sarbanes-Oxley “ already know what “ legal discovery “ is, but also goes back to my original post as to whether this is a private or government entity subject to “ public records” )
If this is an active investigation you have two choices here, and two choices only ( can anyone say obligation? ).
1) Tell the authorities ( including but not limited to, the prosecutor ) what you have done here and provide them with appropriate links
2) PM me with your name, where you work, your position, the authorities you reported it too: I will contact them and verify the situation, inform them about this thread, and quite possibly direct them in the proper direction if they are clueless.
I would prefer #1, but that is up to you ( you are the Law Professor! ). But it would be up to you ( again, the word obligation comes to mind here ) to verify that I did so!
No one knows what I do, by design, but I know a little bit about the law. ( again, the word “ arrogant “ comes to mind. That said, Gore, I don’t think we want to meet in person! )
You want something specific to go to your ” University ombudsman “ which is “worthwhile to contribute” ?
How about the time stamps? How do each of the systems involved correlate the correct time?
I’ve seen internal systems that were so called “ synced “ to satellite time be off by three ( 3 ) minutes. Obviously, they were not “ synced” properly. To do what you wish you will have to prove the systems were properly “ synced”.
If I were You, and I am not, I would go to the admins, call them *******s to their face, apologize for their and your ignorance, do #1 above and again apologize for your ignorance, and walk away.
