A jury is deliberating the verdict in Ward Churchill’s lawsuit against his former employer, the University of Colorado.
Churchill, a former professor at CU, gained national attention for an essay he wrote in 2001 titled, “Some People Push Back, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens,” in which he referred to some victims of the Sept. 11 attacks as “little Eichmanns” after a mid-level Nazi official. The essay came to light in early 2005, and gained national attention.
The former governor of Colorado Bill Owens, as well as national pundits such as Bill O’Reilly, criticized Churchill. In 2007, Churchill, a tenured professor, was fired by CU after several university committees allegedly discovered that he had been engaged in academic misconduct, plagiarism and fraud.
Churchill is now suing CU, claiming that he was wrongfully terminated in retaliation for his 9/11 essay. The trial is winding down after having started at the beginning of March.
Patrick O’Rourke, the head attorney for CU, was the first to offer a closing argument. O’Rourke spoke to the jury mainly about Churchill’s alleged misconduct.
“There are two worlds, there is the real university world and there is Ward Churchill’s world,” O’Rourke said. “Ward Churchill’s world is a place where there are no standards and no accountability.”
O’Rourke then went over several of the accusations made against Churchill in the trial, including writing essays under another professor’s name and fabricating numbers of Native Americans killed in a smallpox epidemic.
O’Rourke finished by telling the jury that David Lane, Churchill’s head attorney, told the jury in his opening argument, “if Professor Churchill did the things they said he did, throw him out…accept Mr. Lane’s offer and throw him out of court.”
O’Rourke finished his argument at that point, and Lane went before the jury.
Lane argued in a much quieter tone, first addressing the allegations that his client changed his story.
“Well, duh, that’s what history is about, the story keeps changing, new evidence keeps coming out,” Lane said.
“White guys in suits write history in this country,” Lane said, adding that if anyone tries to rewrite that history “they’re hands are put on the chopping block and they get chopped.”
Lane also argued that his client’s Sept. 11 essay was a motivation for his termination. He reminded the jury of testimony from former CU president Betsy Hoffman, who said that Owens and several regents told her to fire Churchill after news of his essay came to light.
“Betsy Hoffman swore an oath that this was the truth, those four people said fire Churchill,” Lane said. “Was the essay a substantial part or a motive among several? Yes, then (Churchill) wins, end of story. What do you believe fairly compensates a man for crushing his identity?”
Lane added that that if the jury simply gives Churchill some monetary compensation, “CU wins.”
At that point, Judge Larry Naves ordered the jury to be taken to a private area during the court’s lunch break for deliberation.
This story will be updated as more information becomes available.
Contact CU Independent News Gatherer Sam Dieter at Samuel.dieter@colorado.edu.
