Gallaudet under fire after official placed on leave over ballot signature

[TXgolfer]

no... it's not because she has taken a high road..... it's because it's illegal to reveal such confidential information and she would be subjected to both criminal and civil liability.

It's a criminal offense to say "I was confronted by Xx. xxxxxxx xxxxx in the hallway this morning"?

Hmm, that doesn't sound like America.

 

[Jiro]

It's a criminal offense to say "I was confronted by Xx. xxxxxxx xxxxx in the hallway this morning"?

Hmm, that doesn't sound like America.

it's illegal to reveal a name of confidential source especially when filed against you. the name can later be revealed by proper authorities such as judge or lawsuit.

 

[TXgolfer]

As first reported in the blog Planet DeafQueer, “a Gallaudet faculty member, who at this time wishes to remain anonymous, noticed Dr. McCaskill’s name, address and signature on the anti-gay marriage petition (published by the Washington Blade) and inquired about it.

I would be more concerned about the person who would do this ^^^^ actually.

 

[Jiro]

I would be more concerned about the person who would do this ^^^^ actually.

ah. for bringing it up. as you can see - it's confidential. I'm wondering how does steinhauer know who.

 

[TXgolfer]

it's illegal to reveal a name of confidential source especially when filed against you. the name can later be revealed by proper authorities such as judge or lawsuit.

"Confidential source" sounds more like a reference to journalistic ethics rather than law. I don't believe this is accurate. Regardless, I am certain any confidentiality (if any) would be voided by the public confrontation. At least as a matter of criminal law.

 

[TXgolfer]

ah. for bringing it up. as you can see - it's confidential. I'm wondering how does steinhauer know who.

Wishing to remain anonymous is not the same as protected confidentiality. Again this is a matter of journalistic ethics.

 

[Jiro]

Wishing to remain anonymous is not the same as protected confidentiality. Again this is a matter of journalistic ethics.

protected confidentiality. now you know why I'm wondering how does steinhauer know who.

 

[Jiro]

"Confidential source" sounds more like a reference to journalistic ethics rather than law. I don't believe this is accurate. Regardless, I am certain any confidentiality (if any) would be voided by the public confrontation. At least as a matter of criminal law.

is there a criminal proceeding that I'm unaware of?

 

[TXgolfer]

is there a criminal proceeding that I'm unaware of?

The reference to "law" is in regard to your claim that McCadkillcould face Criminal prosecution if she chose to break "confidentiality."

 

[TXgolfer]

protected confidentiality. now you know why I'm wondering how does steinhauer know who.

Ask him, perhaps he will tell you. I also know "who", but I won't reveal it on AD.

 

[Jiro]

Ask him, perhaps he will tell you. I also know "who", but I won't reveal it on AD.

I'm not interested in "who"... only "how".

 

[Jiro]

The reference to "law" is in regard to your claim that McCadkillcould face Criminal prosecution if she chose to break "confidentiality."

nope I've said no such thing.

again - there's no criminal proceeding nor criminal investigation nor criminal charge.

I said revealing such a confidential information especially during an investigation on you is a breach of organization policy and laws. never said anything about criminal prosecutions. you did.

it's probably best to sit and wait for McCaskill's press conference tomorrow before you further confused yourself.

 

[TXgolfer]

nope I've said no such thing.

I said revealing such a confidential information especially during an investigation on you is a breach of organization policy and laws. never said anything about criminal prosecutions. you did

Umm...Your post 166....

no... it's not because she has taken a high road..... it's because it's illegal to reveal such confidential information and she would be subjected to both criminal and civil liability.

your post 172

it's illegal to reveal a name of confidential source especially when filed against you. the name can later be revealed by proper authorities such as judge or lawsuit.
Like

 

[Jiro]

Umm...Your post 166....

your post 172

oh you must be confused. let me explain for you then. as you see, a formal complaint has been filed against McCaskill. Required by Title VI, Title IX, and Gauladet University policy... they have to investigate the matter and by doing so, they must place that person on administrative leave. Filing a formal complaint is confidential and so is the name of complainant. Such matter is treated with strictest level of confidentiality.

When a "defendant" reveals a name of complainant during investigation... well Post #166 and #172 explains what would happen.

You must be unaware of laws and university policy regarding this matter. Perhaps these links will help you to better understand how the system works.

https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/media/en/gui/21988/index.html

1.15 Policy on Reporting Suspected Misconduct (Whistleblower Policy) - Gallaudet University

http://www.gallaudet.edu/Student_Af...xual_Misconduct_Policy_Grievance_Process.html

 

[TXgolfer]

oh you must be confused. let me explain for you then. as you see, a formal complaint has been filed against McCaskill. Required by Title VI, Title IX, and Gauladet University policy... they have to investigate the matter and by doing so, they must place that person on administrative leave. Filing a formal complaint is confidential and so is the name of complainant. Such matter is treated with strictest level of confidentiality.

When a "defendant" reveals a name of complainant during investigation... well Post #166 and #172 explains what would happen.

You must be unaware of laws and university policy regarding this matter. Perhaps these links will help you to better understand how the system works.

https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/media/en/gui/21988/index.html

1.15 Policy on Reporting Suspected Misconduct (Whistleblower Policy) - Gallaudet University

Sexual Misconduct Policy Grievance Process - Gallaudet University

No confusion at all.

You have now listed administrative proceedings that result in "disciplinary action up to and including dismissal from the university.

Nothing here supports your claim of "criminal liability" in post 166. That appears to be a misstatement to me.

Sure you don't want to move on?

 

[Jiro]

No confusion at all.

You have now listed administrative proceedings that result in "disciplinary action up to and including dismissal from the university.

Nothing here supports your claim of "criminal liability" in post 166. That appears to be a misstatement to me.

making me do all the homework for you? I find that bit sad.... considering the fact that you're much older than me. or maybe I should go easy on you since you probably don't have any work experience at corporate/university setting.

when being investigated, there's really no reason to disclose a confidential information of a complainant unless you have such malicious intention.

by doing that, you can be subjected to criminal liability such as - negligent/intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, workforce retaliation (illegal under federal law), etc.

Sure you don't want to move on?

you sure you want to continue this charade, thinking that you're being clever or something? sad.

 

[TXgolfer]

making me do all the homework for you? I find that bit sad.... considering the fact that you're much older than me. or maybe I should go easy on you since you probably don't have any work experience at corporate/university setting.

when being investigated, there's really no reason to disclose a confidential information of a complainant unless you have such malicious intention.


by doing that, you can be subjected to criminal liability such as - negligent/intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, workforce retaliation (illegal under federal law), etc.


you sure you want to continue this charade, thinking that you're being clever or something?

All of that, just for disclosing the name of someone who confronted you in a public hallway? Hmm, I don't think that is correct. Looks like we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Jiro]

All of that, just for disclosing the name of someone who confronted you in a public hallway?

that's not what happened in here. perhaps you're in a wrong thread?

Hmm, I don't think that is correct. Looks like we will have to agree to disagree.

I just presented facts along with federal laws and university policy. You presented opinions along with... uh... quibblings.

fact > opinion

 

[Steinhauer]

So counselor, what happens if the name is released by the press?

 

[Jiro]

So counselor, what happens if the name is released by the press?

that depends on how the name was obtained. Valerie Plume thing? yea that was a treason.

but in this case, that faculty member had already talked to press and asked to remain anonymous. to release the name would be a breach of journalism ethics.

so Steinhauer... how did you obtain the name?