|
"Pathologies" and destruction of evidence The two versions of the Corner/Esler report |
A right royal UniversityIt is not surprising that the University of St Andrews attempted to suppress this site (see "Suppression") since it gives information about : Just as Prince William was beginning his studies at the University of St Andrews in September 2001, his soon-to-be teachers in the Department of Social Anthropology were under investigation by the University Executive. The investigation had been commissioned by the Principal and Vice Chancellor of the University (Dr Brian Lang) following a number of allegations of abusive behaviour by the author to various figures in the University management over a lengthy period. It was conducted by two of the highest-ranking officials of the University — Mr David Corner (then Secretary) and Professor Philip Esler (then Provost). Referring to what Corner and Esler uncovered — what they described as a series of "pathologies" — Dr Lang later stated at an internal meeting and also testified to an employment tribunal that he had never seen anything like it in all his professional life. What the newspapers did not report was that two members of the Department of Social Anthropology had testified to the same employment tribunal that Dr Lang's behaviour had been deeply abusive and completely unacceptable. Nor did the newspapers report that the then Secretary to the University (Mr Corner) had deliberately destroyed all of the evidence relating to the Corner/Esler report in his possession — with the result that this evidence could not be used in any proceedings, whether internal or in a court of law (see destruction of evidence). Whether or not the Secretary took the decision to destroy evidence of what he himself had called "pathologies" in consultation with other members of the University Executive, in particular the Principal, has never been clarified. At the employment tribunal an attempt was made to cross-examine the Principal regarding his knowledge of Mr Corner's actions, but the Chairman of the tribunal prohibited any question on this matter from being put to the Principal. The implications of removing evidence that might be used in proceedings could hardly be clearer. The destruction of evidence by a member or members of the University Executive was at the centre of a long series of abusive behaviours by "managers" at the University of St Andrews both before and after the Corner/Esler report. As a result of the breakdown in trust brought about by the abusive behaviour of the Principal, other members of the University Executive, and a small number of other University managers, the author of these pages resigned and sued for constructive dismissal. The linked pages tell the story of the evidence that was submitted to the subsequent employment tribunal. Summaries of the case can be found in the final submissions made to the employment tribunal by each side. They illustrate a catalogue of abusive behaviour right through the managerial chain at the University of St Andrews up to, and very actively including, a number of the most senior members of the University Executive. This abuse included a long list of false and misleading statements made to the employment tribunal itself by the University’s representatives. The simplest way to unravel the story of the abusive behaviour in the University of St Andrews that is documented on these pages is by looking first at the final submissions made to the employment tribunal, and then to follow the links. |
|
Skorupski's Law: "The more vain one's ambition, the more redundant one's grasp of morality" |