<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt">Courtesy of the Lewiston Morning Tribune:<br><br><h1 style="font-size:24px;">UI releases Bustamante timeline</h1>
<div>
<strong>
Posted: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 2:10 pm
</strong>
</div><div>MOSCOW -- University of Idaho officials have released a timeline
of events relating to former assistant professor Ernesto
Bustamante.</div>
<div>Here is a timeline overview spanning Bustamante’s hiring to the
homicide/suicide.</div>
<div>Aug. 12, 2007 : Ernesto Bustamante starts his employment with
the University of Idaho as an assistant professor of
psychology.</div><div>Fall 2007 : During fall semester, Bustamante self-discloses to
Ken Locke, psychology department chair, that Bustamante has a
diagnosis of bipolar disorder that is managed through
medication.</div><div>Fall 2007: Three or four female students share with Locke their
observations of Bustamante’s “flirtatious behavior and favoritism.”
Locke meets with Bustamante about the complaint; Bustamante says
female students misunderstood his friendship with a student as a
fellow Hispanic. Locke discusses proper faculty-student
relationships.</div><div>Jan. 28, 2008 : Bustamante’s annual performance evaluation from
department chair “meets expectations.” According to Locke, student
evaluations showed that “a number of students praised Ernesto for
‘trying to be the best teacher he can be.’” Locke notes that
Bustamante published one refereed article and one refereed
proceeding.</div><div>Jan. 30, 2009 : Bustamante’s annual performance from department
chair “meets expectations.” Department chair notes Bustamante earns
instructor performance and course quality marks from his students
that are similar to university averages and which “is commendable”
for the type of courses he teaches. Locke also notes that
Bustamante published three peer-reviewed papers; two peer-reviewed
proceedings; and gave three presentations.</div><div>Fall 2009 and Spring 2010 : Bustamante applies for positions at
Michigan Tech and the University of Dayton.</div><div>Dec. 1, 2009: Memo from psychology department Third-Year Review
Committee to Locke. The memo summarizes the committee’s thoughts
regarding Bustamante’s progress toward tenure in the areas of
teaching, research and service. Narrative includes:</div><div>Teaching: The committee finds that — measured through student
evaluations — Bustamante’s performance in his courses is
consistently good. An undergraduate research methods course, “which
traditionally has received the lowest student evaluations within
the department, is as good or better than the long-time averages we
have seen for this course. Bustamante’s graduate level courses “are
outstanding. He clearly passes or exceeds the departmental criteria
for teaching” in the promotion and tenure guidelines.”</div><div>Research: The committee notes that Bustamante created the
Cognitive Engineering & Decision Making Laboratory in 2007, an
active lab. He has four peer-reviewed journal articles published
since joining the university, four others under review, and a fifth
with an undergraduate as first author, published in an
undergraduate research journal.</div><div>Service: The committee notes that Bustamante transformed the
previously defunct Human Factors and Ergonomics Student Chapter in
a “vibrant student chapter, with the highest number of engaged
student members in recent history.”</div><div>Dec. 4, 2009 : Third-year review memo from department chair to
dean, noting Bustamante’s “exemplary levels of productivity and
engagement” and “has done an impressive job of making them [methods
courses] rigorous yet engaging.” He notes that Bustamante “is very
active professionally, as evidenced by his publication record and
his numerous conference presentations.” Department chair concludes
that Bustamante “should be a very strong candidate for tenure.”</div><div>Dec . 15, 2009 : Letter from Jeanne Christiansen, vice provost
for academic affairs, informs Bustamante of his nomination for the
university’s annual Award for Teaching Excellence. Asks for
supporting materials from Bustamante for the Teaching and Advising
Committee to review.</div><div>March 5, 2010 : Third-year review memo from College of Letters,
Arts and Social Sciences (CLASS) Dean Katherine Aiken to Provost
Doug Baker. Aiken notes that “Bustamante has done a good job of
demonstrating to students the importance and relevance of these
courses [methods classes] and his student evaluations of teaching
reflect this.” Concurred with department chair that Bustamante is
“well positioned to receive tenure and promotion.” She also notes
that Bustamante’s publication and presentation records are
“excellent. His cognitive Engineering & Decision Making
Laboratory is active and engages students in research as well.”</div><div>June 15, 2010 : Third-year review memo from Baker to Aiken: “Dr.
Bustamante should be commended for his ability to engage students
in courses which are traditionally not popular. He has provided
evidence that he’s becoming an independent researcher,”</div><div>Aug. 23, 2010 : Kathryn Benoit enrolls in Bustamante’s
Psychology 218 class.</div><div>Dec. 7, 2010 : The University’s Ethics and Compliance Hotline, a
contracted third-party service, receives an anonymous call claiming
that Bustamante is having sexual relationships with students,
including the claim of an abusive and coercive relationship with
one student. Caller declines to give names; says this information
had been relayed earlier that same day a university faculty member.
[NOTE: The university has confirmed that Katy Benoit was not the
student mentioned by the caller.]</div><div>Dec. 8, 2010 : Aiken and Carmen Suarez, director of Human
Rights, Access and Inclusion (HRAI), meet to discuss the hotline
report. Aiken then meets with the faculty member mentioned by
caller to discuss the hotline report. Aiken tells the faculty
member that the university needs a formal complaint before an
investigation can occur in this case.</div><div>Dec. 9, 2010 : Faculty member reports to Aiken that the
purported victim denies any improper behavior on Bustamante’s part
and will not make a formal complaint.</div><div>Dec. 10, 2010 : Aiken sends an email requesting to meet with
Bustamante.</div><div>Dec. 13, 2010 : Aiken and Richard Reardon, associate dean of
CLASS and interim assistant vice president and center executive
officer for northern Idaho, meet with Bustamante regarding the
hotline complaint.</div><div>Aiken and Reardon tell Bustamante that the University of Idaho
has no tolerance for sexual harassment or retaliation. If
Bustamante is indeed involved with a student, it must stop
immediately.</div><div>Aiken discusses the implications of Bustamante’s power and
influence over a student of his and of the potential third-party
concerns with any student relationship, and provides him with
information detailing the university’s policies on sexual
harassment and retaliation.</div><div>Bustamante denies any violation of policy and indicates he
understands the seriousness of the allegations.</div><div>Dec. 15, 2010 : Suarez and Aiken update each other on additional
details from the hotline call. They note that the student at the
center of the allegations does not describe the circumstances as
sexual harassment and refuses to come forward.</div><div>Dec. 18, 2010-Jan. 12, 2011- University Winter Break</div><div>Jan. 18, 2011 : University’s International Programs Office (IPO)
contacts Nelson about problems dealing Bustamante in connection
with his work authorization and visa.</div><div>Jan. 19, 2011 : Nelson instructs Bustamante to direct all
questions to him, not IPO.</div><div>Feb. 15, 2011 : Annual performance evaluation by department
chair “meets expectations.” Locke notes that student comments show
that Bustamante’s students “clearly respected his intelligence and
his genuine efforts to promote their learning and understanding.”
Locke notes that Bustamante had one article published; had four
peer-reviewed conference proceedings; and gave one
presentation.</div><div>March 12-21: University Spring Break</div><div>April 24, 2011 : Letter from Aiken to Bustamante awarding him a
university early career research fellowship for his proposal
“Preventing Rear-End Collisions: Evaluation of a Graded
Deceleration Display”.</div><div>May 1, 2011 : Bustamante e-mails Locke and states that he is
experiencing significant withdrawal symptoms due to a change in his
main medication. Locke follows up with Bustamante, encourages him
to seek medical attention, and requests that he keep him [Locke]
informed.</div><div>May 11, 2011: University Spring Semester Ends</div><div>June 10, 2011 : Benoit’s first contact with the university --
through HRAI -- regarding her complaint against Bustamante. Based
on this first discussion, Suarez asks Benoit to submit a written
complaint, which begins the university’s formal process of
responding to a complaint. Suarez outlines formal complaint process
for Benoit. Suarez urges Benoit to take safety precautions and
contact Moscow Police Department (MPD). Suarez provides Benoit with
personal contact information for MPD and Alternatives to Violence
of the Palouse (ATVP) for assistance beyond those the university
offers. Nelson also contacts Moscow Police Department directly.</div><div>June 12, 2011 : Suarez receives initial draft, via e-mail, of
Benoit’s complaint in writing.</div><div>June 13, 2011 : Benoit sends e-mail to Suarez indicating she has
contacted MPD.</div><div>June 13, 2011: Suarez replies to Benoit, again urges her to
contact ATVP. Per Benoit’s request, Suarez provides her with
reference information for an attorney should Benoit wish to pursue
an order of protection.</div><div>June 13, 2011: Benoit e-mails Suarez with thanks for lawyer
referral.</div><div>June 13: Aiken meets with Provost Baker to report on the
Bustamante situation and outline immediate next steps in the
process following the complaint.</div><div>June 14, 2011 : Benoit sends e-mail to Mo Hendrickson, HRAI
human rights compliance assistant, saying she does not want
Bustamante served with her complaint until a further discussion
with HRAI. She indicates she will come in the next day.</div><div>June 16, 2011: When Benoit does not come in on June 15,
Hendrickson sends an e-mail to her to encourage her to come in for
the follow-up meeting.</div><div>June 16, 2011: Benoit comes in to HRAI for follow-up meeting
with Hendrickson, who assures her that Bustamante will not receive
Benoit’s complaint until Benoit gives her permission. Hendrickson
again refers Benoit to ATVP and, since the university can’t provide
her with legal counsel, refers Benoit to the Latah County Court
Assistance Program. Benoit indicates she has already been to ATVP
and the organization has been helpful and indicates she will time
an order of protection to coincide with when the complaint is given
to Bustamante.</div><div>June 30, 2011 : Suarez receives e-mail from Benoit apologizing
for being out of touch. Benoit writes she had been out of town and
will be gone again the next week.</div><div>July 5, 2011 : Suarez talks with Benoit on the phone; Benoit
gives permission to Suarez to deliver the complaint to Bustamante.
She will let Benoit know as soon as the formal complaint is sent.
Suarez reiterates the importance of Benoit’s safety and to seek
help as needed. Suarez says the university will direct Bustamante
to have no contact with Benoit and for Benoit to let the university
know immediately if he does attempt to contact her, or to call 911
if she feels threatened.</div><div>July 6, 2011 : Suarez delivers the complaint letter via e-mail
to Bustamante and mails a copy to his home address. The letter
outlines the content of Benoit’s formal complaint; it directs
Bustamante to have no contact with Benoit, and proposes an
in-person meeting for HRAI with Bustamante on July 8.</div><div>July 6, 2011: Bustamante e-mails that he will be out of town and
cannot meet on July 8. Suarez responds with alternate meeting
times; Bustamante agrees to meet on July 19.</div><div>July 6, 2011: Suarez e-mails Benoit with confirmation that
complaint has been sent to Bustamante and reiterates that “if you
feel in any way scared or threatened, that you call the
police.”</div><div>July 6, 2011: Suarez requests security measures as precaution
for scheduled meeting with Bustamante.</div><div>July 7, 2011: Suarez calls Benoit to check on her well-being and
about steps taken to date following delivery of the complaint.</div><div>July 9, 2011: Benoit e-mails Suarez to say she is out of town
until July 13.</div><div>July 11, 2011 : Aiken forwards Benoit’s complaint to Locke.</div><div>July 11, 2011: Bustamante e-mails Suarez his response to the
complaint, in which he denies Benoit’s allegations.</div><div>July 14, 2011: University Threat Assessment Team, which includes
Moscow Police Department representative, meets to assess the level
of the safety risk for Benoit and others involved in the
university’s complaint investigation.</div><div>July 14, 2011: Suarez and Hendrickson meet with Benoit to review
Bustamante’s response to the complaint and let Benoit know that
university investigators would interview Bustamante on July 19. The
interview meeting is considered a high-risk point because of the
nature of Benoit’s allegations, so recommendation is made for
Benoit stay somewhere other than her apartment to avoid contact</div><div>July 18, 2011 : Suarez e-mails Gary Williams, chair of English
department and co-investigator, in preparation for July 19
interview with Bustamante.</div><div>July 18, 2011: Suarez calls Benoit to check on her well-being
and reminds her of the July 19 interview scheduled with
Bustamante.</div><div>July 19, 2011 : Suarez and Williams conduct in-person interview
with Bustamante and outline how the investigation will proceed.
During the interview, Bustamante: admits to a sexual relationship
with Benoit; denies that he has a Utah concealed weapons permit;
denies that he threatened Benoit with a weapon; denies that he
carries a firearm on campus; admits to having sexual relationships
with other students who are not his advisees or students; denies
hotline call claims; denies being told by Aiken and Reardon in
December 2010 that having intimate relationships with his students
is wrong; claims that Benoit has no basis for her complaint.
Bustamante asks what would happen if he resigns; Suarez states the
process would stop due to the lack of a respondent [Bustamante] to
the complaint and because Bustamante has already admitted to a
sexual relationship with Benoit.</div><div>July 19, Aiken is scheduled to meet with Benoit; when Benoit
does not show up for the meeting, Aiken notifies Nelson, who
contacts MPD, which dispatches officers to Benoit’s home address.
She is not home.</div><div>July 19, 2011: Following the meeting with Bustamante, Suarez is
told that Benoit cannot be found. Suarez calls Benoit’s cell phone
to check on her well-being. Benoit says she is at school, but
double-booked appointments and has forgotten the meeting with
Aiken.</div><div>July 19, 2011: Bustamante e-mails intention to resign to
Locke.</div><div>July 20, 2011 : Locke e-mails Bustamante to express concern for
Bustamante and reminds him of counseling benefits available through
Employee Assistance Program.</div><div>July 20, 2011: Bustamante e-mails students and colleagues and
states his resignation.</div><div>July 20, 2011: Aiken meets with Benoit to resolve issue of an
incomplete grade from Bustamante. Aiken also reminds Benoit about
the importance of keeping safe.</div><div>July 22, 2011 : Suarez calls Benoit to ask where she will be
until the start of school. Benoit says she will be in Moscow.
Suarez encourages her to continue to take safety precautions,
including contacting MPD and ATVP.</div><div>July 22, 2011: Aiken emails Bustamante and states that
acceptance of his resignation would require specific conditions,
including his agreement to teach out his summer session distance
and online courses; to vacate university office and return any
university property; to vacate his office; and to not come to
campus without notifying his supervisor. University would agree to
stop the investigation process arising from Benoit’s complaint.</div><div>July 22, 2011: Bustamante e-mails Aiken that he agrees to the
conditions.</div><div>Aug. 2, 2011 : Hoey Graham, senior associate general counsel,
e-mails Bustamante to confirm meeting with Aiken.</div><div>Aug. 3: Graham and Aiken meet with Bustamante to review the
separation agreement.</div><div>Aug. 5, 2011 : Bustamante delivers signed separation, which
includes his agreement to have limited access to his office and
laboratory, and then only accompanied by Locke for purposes of
removing personal items, and no access after Aug. 9.</div><div>Aug. 8, 2011 : Aiken meets with Benoit to wish her well in her
graduate studies; reminds her to be safe and to call 911 if Benoit
has any concerns for her safety.</div><div>Aug. 8, 2011 : Duane Nellis, president, signs Bustamante’s
separation agreement.</div><div>Aug. 9, 2011 : Ron Smith, vice president for finance, signs
Bustamante’s separation agreement.</div><div>Aug. 9, 2011: Bustamante e-mails Locke that he [Bustamante] will
clear his belongings out of his office late in the day. Locke
supervises the office clean out that afternoon.</div><div>Aug. 18, 2011 : Suarez teaches mandatory sexual harassment
workshop for graduate students; Benoit attends. After the workshop,
Suarez asks Benoit about her well-being.</div><div>Aug. 22, 2011 – Beginning of University Fall Semester</div><div>Aug. 22, 2011 : Suarez meets with Benoit and informs her that
Bustamante’s contract with the university formally concluded on
Aug. 19. Suarez cautions Benoit to remain vigilant and get
assistance from the police and others if she has safety concerns.
She also encourages Benoit to remain in contact with university
representatives and to take advantage of university support
services.</div><div>Aug. 22-23, 2011 : Benoit/Bustamante homicide/suicide.</div><div><br></div><br></div></body></html>