H.A. Breaking News--Case against USM settled - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 9, 2006

RE: H.A. Breaking News--Case against USM settled

Date: Mar 9, 2006

Ignorant Newcomer wrote:

....the earlier sexual harassment case involving Shelby Thames....Thames received a rap on the knuckles and was relieved of his administrative duties on the coast.

Yes, and then he was elevated to the presidency. Weaseling out of this mess was evidently a banner achievement for SFT, evidencing his skills as an escape artist and political operator. It was likely pivotal for the IHL in tapping him for USM's top job.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

chaze.... wins $800,000, on appeal loses some issues, comes back to this trial and gets a settlement. i suspect the settlement might be less than $100,000, maybe less than $50,000.

My experience with negotiated settlements is zilch, but I can't conceive of Chaze agreeing to settle for less than $50K, or even $100K. Wouldn't there be some consideration of diminshed lifetime earnings by Williams due to her being denied the opportunity to comple her PhD? How generous are Forrest County juries? Surely Chaze would have some sense of what a jury might reasonably award and aim for a settlement approaching that figure. If he gets 1/3 of the settlement monies, $17K would barely cover his expenses considering the 10 year life of the case. Can any of the attorneys on the board enlighten us?

Date: Mar 9, 2006

i heard today that USM's attorneys had already talked with the judge, and they knew that if the jury award was outrageous that the judge would reduce it.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

That no one on this board will give the particulars (without naming names) is indicative of the level of fear that even a declawed SFT can inspire. Ask some of the old timers. They know the truth. Scarbrough does. He also knows about Lucas and the AAUP.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

i heard today that USM's attorneys had already talked with the judge, and they knew that if the jury award was outrageous that the judge would reduce it.

So it's safe to assume that Chaze knew this too? Don't judges always have the authority to reduce damage awards, or even set aside jury verdicts? I don't know what amount a judge would consider outrageous, but in any case it sounds like the good ole boy network had the fix on again. Let's see, that would be the third iteration of Davida Williams abuse by USM--first by Stamper, then by her department chair and dean, and finally by the courts. Pathetic.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

i heard today that USM's attorneys had already talked with the judge, and they knew that if the jury award was outrageous that the judge would reduce it.

SCM, Besides $$$ isn't one of the motivations of a settlement is that part of the agreement is to keep the terms secret? Which of the parties do you think would like to keep this secret?

Date: Mar 9, 2006

given the hyperlink to the supreme court decision which lays out a timeline and the cast of characters, i'm not sure how much secretive information (other than the amount of the settlement) there is.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

given the hyperlink to the supreme court decision which lays out a timeline and the cast of characters, i'm not sure how much secretive information (other than the amount of the settlement) there is.

Yes, that's what I meant. Do you think the IHL will be paying (like for G&S) then it would be in their minutes?

Date: Mar 9, 2006

i suspect the only thing that will appear in IHL minutes is the amount paid to USM's non-staff attorneys.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

P.R. wrote:

Besides $$$ isn't one of the motivations of a settlement is that part of the agreement is to keep the terms secret? Which of the parties do you think would like to keep this secret?

I heard from an unauthorized source inside the courthouse that the settlement amount was in the $650K range. Maybe SCM has better information on the damage award. I don't know what contingency deal Chaze has with his clients, maybe 1/3 of the take? If Williams diminished lifetime earnings were considered, and the rumored settlement amount is accurate, USM got off easy.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

I cannot believe that anyone would agree to confidentiality for the small amount that has been mentioned. If one side wants to keep something quiet in the outcome of a lawsuit, it costs a lot more. The University paid Gary and Frank to keep quite. The victim could make more than $100,000 writing an expose of all the players in the episode. It would be all over the papers. It would not take more than a week to work up a good juicy chapter and release it to the press. Remember, what is written does not have to be absolutely true. The memory plays tricks on us and we often do not rember accurately. Hence there is a lot of leaway in what the victim could say. I do not think that the University would want the stories out nor would they want to pursue further legal action to shut the person up since that would open up even more scrutiny. As a side note, Kim Chaze has written some novels so he could be the co-author.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

What would be the possibility of Davida Williams obtaining a waiver of the time limit for completing of her dissertation, forming a new committee, and knocking that sucker out? One of my neighbors was admitted to PhD candidacy at the U. of Chicago, then married and left school without completing her diss. She returned after 15 years, formed a completely new committee and completed the program. Williams seems to be in a similar place. She had an approved prospectus, conducted research and wrote the paper, would only need to revisions as suggested by her committee and then schedule a defense. What am I missing? It's an unusual situation but I'd think the English department would want to do what they could to right previous wrongs.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

Cossack wrote:

Remember, what is written does not have to be absolutely true.

That has become abundantly clear of late.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

Gossypium wrote:

Cossack wrote: Remember, what is written does not have to be absolutely true.

That has become abundantly clear of late.

Just remember that we've all had the benefit of wurl' class instruction in the art of prevarication from Thames, and Dvorak, and Mader.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

two things--lifetime earnings were considered, but it was only the difference between the salary being ABD and PhD. As to letting her finish--English could I suppose--but I also heard that the quality of the dissertation was not good in the estimation of some faculty. But remember, as well, a faculty member has to agree to serve on a committee--no committee, no dissertation.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

The faculty in the Department would never think of letting her finish. That would remind them that they let her down in the first place. The faculty would not be able to look her in the eye. They are setting and squirming and hoping that this all goes away as soon as possible. I would settle for a statement from even one member of the Department that they personally will work hard to make sure this does not happen again under their watch.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

....As to letting her finish--English could I suppose--but I also heard that the quality of the dissertation was not good in the estimation of some faculty. But remember, as well, a faculty member has to agree to serve on a committee--no committee, no dissertation.

Her dissertation could probably be salvaged. As you say, the rub would be assembling a new committee. Apparently there's only one member of her original committee still teaching in Hattiesburg. I'd be surprised if she's even interested in having any further association with USM. As Invictus has suggested in other threads concerning the prestige of a USM diploma, the bloom is off the rose.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

Cossack wrote:

I would settle for a statement from even one member of the Department that they personally will work hard to make sure this does not happen again under their watch.

Good Evening Cossack:

I just pulled up the message board thinking that by now, under the protective veil of this anonymous board, some member of the English faculty would have provided an explanation for the unconscionable (Dr. McGraw's description) treatment Davida Williams received. I didn't see it. If they're unwilling to acknowledge prior wrongs then I doubt you'll see an affirmative statement of the sort you describe. So, perhaps little has changed. Maybe after Thames is gone? As much as I loved Hattiesburg and my time at USM, I'm glad to be 3,000 miles away.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

Some of the posters are comparing apples and oranges. It was been established that there was sex harassment. But that doesn't say a thing about the quality of the dissertation. It could be that the quality of the dissertation was not good enough in the evaluation of the committee. If that is the case, are you suggesting that the committee should forget about quality and award the Ph.D. because of the sexual harassment?

Date: Mar 9, 2006

And then there's the issue of Ms. Williams' dissertation. Consider the known facts. Her grades were superior, her comps were passed with flying colors, and her committee (not just Stamper) approved the dissertation prospectus. We know that her initial submission was deemed insufficient, which is not unusual. Cannot one reasonably assume that given the usual and customary support and mentoring offered doctoral candidates, she could have eventually produced and successfully defended her dissertation? I'd wager that she'd have done so.

A fellow graduate student at the times opines that Ms. Williams was a good student. Moreover, if the faculty had wanted to see that she finished, they would have worked with her until it was good enough. And yes, if they had to make a stretch to approve it, they should have done so. It is not as if they were on the moral high ground. They sold out their moral principles, but were not willing to budge on academics? Spare me.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

compare her phd efforts to some of Ginn's completed and awarded phd's in ELR.

Date: Mar 9, 2006

Apples & Oranges wrote:

Some of the posters are comparing apples and oranges. It was been established that there was sex harassment. But that doesn't say a thing about the quality of the dissertation. It could be that the quality of the dissertation was not good enough in the evaluation of the committee. If that is the case, are you suggesting that the committee should forget about quality and award the Ph.D. because of the sexual harassment?

I guess I opened this can of worms so I should answer your question. I did not suggest and hope I didn't imply that USM should have given Ms. Williams a free ride on her dissertation. However, let's examine her record, as reflected in court transcripts. She completed 42 semester hours of doctoral level courses in residence at USM, taught by many different members of the English department faculty. She earned 39 hours of A credits, and 3 hours of B credit. Evidently all her profs were of the same mind concerning her abilities and the quality of her course work. Then she passed the PhD comps, reportedly with ease. Her dissertation prospectus was approved by the entire committee, not just Stamper. She wasn't a dilettante. She was a mature, serious, capable student. Based on her record, it wouldn't be a stretch to characterize her as a superior student. And then the harrassment began. Read the account. That she was able to complete a dissertation at all is impressive in my book. She was a single mom, working full time teaching, and writing her paper. During this period she was sexually assaulted and then harassed by her original committee chair, offered precious little in the way of support or assistance by senior faculty, and ignored, no, make that shunned by her new committee chair for four years, after which he claimed to have been distracted. Under these conditions she was still able to complete a dissertation. Deficiencies were identified by her committee. What typically happens next? The candidate, taking counsel from his or her committee, makes revisions, resubmits, and schedules a defense. She was denied this opportunity. Had I been in her shoes I'd likely have said the hell with the dissertation, told my committee to take a flying leap, and ended up a psychological basket case to boot. Instead, she soldiered on. But I digress. Under normal circumstances, given even a modicum of mentoring, I cannot imagine that Ms. Williams wouldn't have completed her dissertation, and successfully defended. So no, I don't suggest that the committee should "forget about quality and award the Ph.D. because of sexual harassment." I do suggest that the lady deserved a little slack, a little understanding, a little support, and she got....nothing.

Date: Mar 10, 2006

Former English Doc Student wrote:

Apples & Oranges wrote: Some of the posters are comparing apples and oranges. It was been established that there was sex harassment. But that doesn't say a thing about the quality of the dissertation. It could be that the quality of the dissertation was not good enough in the evaluation of the committee. If that is the case, are you suggesting that the committee should forget about quality and award the Ph.D. because of the sexual harassment?

I guess I opened this can of worms so I should answer your question. I did not suggest and hope I didn't imply that USM should have given Ms. Williams a free ride on her dissertation. However, let's examine her record, as reflected in court transcripts. She completed 42 semester hours of doctoral level courses in residence at USM, taught by many different members of the English department faculty. She earned 39 hours of A credits, and 3 hours of B credit. Evidently all her profs were of the same mind concerning her abilities and the quality of her course work. Then she passed the PhD comps, reportedly with ease. Her dissertation prospectus was approved by the entire committee, not just Stamper. She wasn't a dilettante. She was a mature, serious, capable student. Based on her record, it wouldn't be a stretch to characterize her as a superior student. And then the harrassment began. Read the account. That she was able to complete a dissertation at all is impressive in my book. She was a single mom, working full time teaching, and writing her paper. During this period she was sexually assaulted and then harassed by her original committee chair, offered precious little in the way of support or assistance by senior faculty, and ignored, no, make that shunned by her new committee chair for four years, after which he claimed to have been distracted. Under these conditions she was still able to complete a dissertation. Deficiencies were identified by her committee. What typically happens next? The candidate, taking counsel from his or her committee, makes revisions, resubmits, and schedules a defense. She was denied this opportunity. Had I been in her shoes I'd likely have said the hell with the dissertation, told my committee to take a flying leap, and ended up a psychological basket case to boot. Instead, she soldiered on. But I digress. Under normal circumstances, given even a modicum of mentoring, I cannot imagine that Ms. Williams wouldn't have completed her dissertation, and successfully defended. So no, I don't suggest that the committee should "forget about quality and award the Ph.D. because of sexual harassment." I do suggest that the lady deserved a little slack, a little understanding, a little support, and she got....nothing.

I'll be glad when this thread runs its course. It's scary, depressing as hell, and makes me wonder about the backbone of certain sanctimonious profs in my department. I can't wait to complete my program and get out of Dodge. And need I say it, kudos to Davida Williams for having the guts to stand up to the USM machine. Her tale reminds me of a solitary Gary Cooper confronting the outlaw gang in "High Noon." And like Coop, she wiped them out. Sometimes the good guys do win.

Date: Mar 10, 2006

All is still not well in the English Dept....Stamper may be long gone, but there is still a prof there who preys on female grad students. You know who you are.

Date: Mar 10, 2006

Doc Candidate wrote:

I'll be glad when this thread runs its course. It's scary, depressing as hell, and makes me wonder about the backbone of certain sanctimonious profs in my department. I can't wait to complete my program and get out of Dodge. And need I say it, kudos to Davida Williams for having the guts to stand up to the USM machine. Her tale reminds me of a solitary Gary Cooper confronting the outlaw gang in "High Noon." And like Coop, she wiped them out. Sometimes the good guys do win.

What's your discipline, if you can say? From your comments I gather it's in Liberal Arts?

Date: Mar 10, 2006

More Info Please wrote:

Doc Candidate wrote: I'll be glad when this thread runs its course. It's scary, depressing as hell, and makes me wonder about the backbone of certain sanctimonious profs in my department. I can't wait to complete my program and get out of Dodge. And need I say it, kudos to Davida Williams for having the guts to stand up to the USM machine. Her tale reminds me of a solitary Gary Cooper confronting the outlaw gang in "High Noon." And like Coop, she wiped them out. Sometimes the good guys do win.

What's your discipline, if you can say? From your comments I gather it's in Liberal Arts?

I'd rather not say. I'm too close to being out of here and would like to leave with my a$$ intact. I'll just say that the Williams story strikes very close to home.

Date: Mar 10, 2006

Doc Candidate wrote:

Her tale reminds me of a solitary Gary Cooper confronting the outlaw gang in "High Noon." And like Coop, she wiped them out. Sometimes the good guys do win.

Anyone see "High Noon" lately? If so, the connection between Ms. Williams and a solitary Gary Cooper is even more appropriate. As I recall, it was Coop's friends, neighbors and colleagues who betrayed him.

Date: Mar 10, 2006

Wishful thinking wrote:

Anyone see "High Noon" lately? If so, the connection between Ms. Williams and a solitary Gary Cooper is even more appropriate. As I recall, it was Coop's friends, neighbors and colleagues who betrayed him.

After reading this thread, my wishful thinking would include the immediate appointment of LVN as Dean of the College of Arts and Letters.

AE

Date: Mar 10, 2006

AE, what have I ever done to you? I thought you liked me . . .