[Vision2020] Facts (Completed 2nd Paragraph)

Sat Aug 27 23:18:08 PDT 2011

Apologies for my incomplete second paragraph – my dd called when I was editing & I forgot to finish before hitting Send <shaking my head>.

The second paragraph should read:

The rub, of course, is that since Ms. Benoit was murdered & Bustamante reportedly suicided, the remaining keepers of the answers to important questions inarguably have a vested interest in disclosing information that makes their respective institutions/departments/whatever look good.  Indeed, I think we’ve already seen an alarming amount of that up to and including the press releases Friday.  

___

In part, Paul wrote:

“There is so much we don't know here.  I'd personally rather wait until we have some inclination of who knew what when before we light the torches and grab the pitchforks.”

I think I agree with you, Paul, and with the rest of your post, too.  BTW, MPD is no longer – it’s Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID).  And, I’m certainly not an expert, but we don’t know that he even had DID/MPD or schizophrenia (which some anonymous students are claiming he told them).

The rub, of course, is that since Ms. Benoit was murdered & Bustamante suicide, the remaining keepers of the answers to legitimate questions inarguably have a vested interest in disclosing information that makes them look good.  Indeed, I think we’ve already seen an alarming amount of that 

Darrell, I kind of agree & kind of disagree with you.  First, just because someone may legitimately have DID (and there’s only anecdotal reports of that with Bustamante), that absolutely does not automatically make them incompetent as you seem to want to imply – shame on you.  Do you hold that opinion of all with mental illnesses or just some?  I suspect that’s not what you really intended to imply, but since you want to apparently over-simplify the thoughts of others, I’m going to hold your feet to the fire with respect to what you actually write.  Fair enough?

It seems to me the UI perhaps has already conveniently (whether that information was accurate or not is a different issue) – and for its own benefit – violated privacy law with respect to Bustamante’s employment yet wants to hide behind the law with respect to other information it & only it holds.  Why? 

I do support privacy laws, generally speaking.  However, they are imperfect.  And I do think that the situation would be different had Bustamante not killed himself and thus precluded a criminal trial where crucial information may have been brought to life.

Certainly if he was still alive, I perhaps would be arguing different points.  But, he’s not . . . and nothing released is going to prevent him from getting another job, or blackball him professionally or personally.

What purpose, then, does “privacy” play when the victim filed a complaint against the suspect & both are now dead due to the violent actions of the suspect?

Frankly, I don’t think privacy laws were written to address this kind of situation . . . but feel free to show me otherwise.

Sometimes, true justice just might demand that laws be broken, and this, it seems to me, might be one of those times.  I’m curious to see what direction UI gets from the court.

Saundra

From: Paul Rumelhart [mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 10:51 AM
To: Darrell Keim; Saundra Lund
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Facts

Nor is having MPD actually a crime in the first place, when you get down to it.

There is so much we don't know here.  I'd personally rather wait until we have some inclination of who knew what when before we light the torches and grab the pitchforks.

Paul

  _____  

From: Darrell Keim < <mailto:keim153 at gmail.com> keim153 at gmail.com>
To: Saundra Lund < <mailto:v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm> v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm>
Cc:  <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com> vision2020 at moscow.com
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Facts

Privacy laws can be inconvenient.  They are a double-edged sword.  But I know of no better in protecting certain citizen rights.  I'd rather live WITH the inconvenience then WITHOUT the privacy laws.

Yes a solid argument can be made about giving up privacy rights when announcing MPD to a class.  An equally strong argument could be made that someone with such issues is not in control enough to be able to knowingly give up their rights.

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Saundra Lund <v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm> wrote:

I seems to me a solid argument can be made that Bustamante waived any privacy rights surrounding his employment when he announced his “multiple personalities” to students in UI classes.

And, of course, there’s the giant white elephant in the room:  it’s obviously quite convenient for the UI to fall back on privacy laws when the employee isn’t ALIVE to give consent and the VICTIM -- a UI student who was “introduced” to her murderer in the course of her on-campus education here --  isn’t alive to tell her side of the story.  Quite convenient indeed.

Saundra Lund

Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing.

~ Edmund Burke

From:  <mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com> vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto: <mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com> vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Ron Force
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 7:54 AM
To:  <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com> vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Facts

Why aren't they (the UI) talking?

Idaho Code § 9-340C

(1) Except as provided in this subsection, all personnel records of a current or former public official other than the public official's public service or employment history, classification, pay grade and step, longevity, gross salary and salary history, status, workplace and employing agency. All other personnel information relating to a public employee or applicant including, but not limited to, information regarding sex, race, marital status, birth date, home address and telephone number, applications, testing and scoring materials, grievances, correspondence and performance evaluations, shall not be disclosed to the public without the employee's or applicant's written consent.

Ron Force
Moscow Idaho USA

  _____  

From: Rosemary Huskey < <mailto:donaldrose at cpcinternet.com> donaldrose at cpcinternet.com>
To: 'Paul Rumelhart' < <mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com> godshatter at yahoo.com>;  <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com> vision2020 at moscow.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 10:11 PM
Subject: [Vision2020] Facts

There are facts available via media and personal accounts about Ernesto Bustamante that are indisputable: he was a four year employee of the University;  he held a position of power over students; and he killed one of them.  These are the ingredients of a tragedy: a violent perpetrator, an innocent victim, and a gaggle of feckless enablers.  

I don’t really care what (if any) disease factor or personality disorder led to Dr. Bustamante’s crime.  There is no excuse, no justification that absolves him of clearly calculated, cold-blooded murder, and let’s not pretend there is.  Concurrently, his aberrant behavior was noticed and reported by students, his serial disregard of a non-fraternization policy between faculty and students, while not forbidden, should certainly have called his judgment into question. Surely over the  past four years his general demeanor was observed by professionally trained colleagues who, one can reasonably assume, are able to recognize deviant behavior occuring in front of their PhD eyes.  Why in the name of heaven was Bustamante retained on faculty for several years prior to Miss Benoit’s complaint?  Something is broken in this picture – not the least of which are the hearts of Miss Benoit’s parents, family, and friends. 

Despite the terrible pain and loss the Benoit’s are experiencing, University of Idaho administrators have fled to the unholy sanctuary of privacy rights for a dead murderer, and by the way, conveniently sheltering themselves and the institution from any culpability.  I don’t believe I am alone, in pointing out that their graceless behavior shelters them from providing explanations on how this event came to be, and what they did or didn’t do that contributed to it.  At the very least we know that grievous  mistakes were made and sorrowfully, they can not be repaired.

What a pity, and in my opinion a crime, that in a university of all places, a free and open appeal to truthfulness is trumped by laws which were never intended to obscure it.  Integrity has fled the scene, in favor of self- protection and a deeply flawed sense of loyalty to an institution which appears to be rotting from the inside.

Rose Huskey

=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet, 
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.  
              http://www.fsr.net                      
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net
         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet, 
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.  
              http://www.fsr.net                      
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20110827/a4ff9a0f/attachment-0001.html 