 |
Shorb Interview & Missing Documents Links below I allege: |
This is Prescott College: Following my April 11, 2007, interview where I presented 100 exhibits, 438 pages, of college emails, letters, records that explicitly showed dozens of deceptive, misleading, and false statements by Dr. Paul Burkhardt, Mr. Terril Shorb, Dr. Jeanine Canty, and Mr. James Armstrong, esq., Dr. John A. Nixon, the "independent expert" interviewer did a follow-up, "fact-finding," interview with Mr. Shorb. Dr. Nixon did not ask about the evidence, which I showed him and discussed, document by document, and left with him. And he unquestioningly accepted patently false assertions and omissions by Mr. Shorb. For example: Mr. Shorb said in the interview that he and his colleagues drafted my curriculum after I had completed my coursework and used it retroactively to create the credit awards and transcripts that I dispute, with other college documents and records. Although that is a fabrication, if it were true: 1) I never saw that curriculum. 2) I was unaware of it. 3) I never approved it. 4) There are no documents referring to it. 5) It would have been drafted in breach of my signed contracts, which refer to the actual approved curriculum that I included in my complaint and presentation. 6) Mr. Shorb suggested he had it--in the box of "thousands and thousands and thousands of pages"--but it was never included with any of the college documents. 7) Mr. Shorb claimed that the college can alter any document at any time, even after the fact. Dr. Nixon is a "education expert," he should have immediately challenged Mr. Shorb's statement as a violation of ethics as well as of FERPA. As an education expert, Dr. Nixon would have recognized the illegal (FERPA) disclosure of protected financial information made by Dr. Garvey and Dr. Burkhardt, and with Mr. Shorb's review and approval, March 30, 2006. He never asked Mr. Shorb about it. Rather than "document dependent," the college's approved tactic is on clear display: Mr. Shorb maliciously defamed me, as he and Dr. Burkhardt had two days before (see examples), in order to discredit anything I might have said or shown. Dr. Burkhardt and Mr. Shorb claimed to have "thousands and thousands and thousands of pages" that perhaps support their allegations, but: 1) they left the interview with the box of what they asserted was material evidence; 2) what documents they left or faxed were lost, destroyed, or concealed from the ASBPPSE by Dr. John Nixon, record; 3) Mr. Michael Rooney, the college's attorney, implied that Dr. Burkhardt and Mr. Shorb did not leave with material evidence because it wasn't material evidence, they had misrepresented the contents, "a bit of an overstatement" (see discussion). Please note, that Dr. Nixon did not record the first "35 minutes" of the interview. What was said? What might have been agreed to between them? It is clear from the interview that Dr. Nixon had no interest in asking about any of the evidence I had shown him; and he unquestioningly accepted Mr. Shorb's unsubstantiated assertions--most of which Dr. Nixon had seen explicit evidence (college records, emails, letters) to the contrary. Based on the this interview it is clear that Mr. Shorb faxed documents to Dr. Nixon. However, the August, 2007, ASBPPSE Document File Record shows that the documents Mr. Shorb sent to Dr. Nixon pursuant to this interview were lost, destroyed, or concealed from the ASBPPSE itself by Dr. Nixon. Why? This is a pattern of Dr. Nixon's "impartial" "expertise": Dr. Burkhardt and Mr. Shorb brought a box of "thousand and thousands and thousands of pages" of material evidence: coursework drafts, curriculum drafts, altered transcripts, evaluations, see PDF of April 11 Interview. (Mr. Michael Rooney, esq. said that Dr. Burkhardt and Mr. Shorb had misrepresented the contents of the box to Dr. Nixon in their recorded interview, June 6, 2007 memorandum. A misrepresentation that Mr. Rooney failed to correct.) In that interview, Dr. Burkhardt gave documents to Dr. Nixon. The August, 2007, ASBPPSE Document File Record shows that the documents were lost, destroyed or concealed from the ASBPPSE itself by Dr. Nixon. Why?
MP3 (58MB): "Followup Phone Interview w/Terril Shorb 4/13/07" also PDF: Shorb/Burkhardt April 11, 2007 Interview
|
Malice: Definition - Noun
Defamation: Definition - Noun Approved: Dr. Burkhardt accompanied Mr. Shorb April 11, 2007, and they were interviewed at the same time by Dr. Nixon. He clearly approved what Mr. Shorb said and made false statements himself. Dr. Garvey approved false statements, April 4, 2006, cover letter. Dr. Canty and Mr. Shorb signed false declarations asserting the truthfulness of statements by Dr. Burkhardt that they knew were false. The Board of Trustees (Richard Ach, Betsy Bolding, Dan Boyce, Dan Campbell, Anne Sterling Dorman, Chris Hout, Jan Nisbet, Rebecca Ruffner, Jerry Secundy, Paul Sneed, Judy clap, Asha Stout, Alan Rubin, David McCarthy, Karen McCreary, Suzanne Tito, and the new trustees David Meeks, and Suzanne Pfister) saw my documented complaint (July 11, 2006), knew that Dr. Garvey, Dr. Burkhardt, Dr. Canty, Mr. Shorb, and Ms. Mary Trevor had all made false statements to the state board (February 6, 2007). According to Mr. Mark Goodman, esq., the college's agent of record, trustees are personally responsible for the actions of the institution. Mr. Michael Rooney, the college's attorney hired to deal with me, knew the evidence, knew the content of the interviews, knew the falsehoods and defamations, and permitted them to remain uncorrected. If agents of the college made knowingly false statements of material fact to state and federal agencies, if those falsehoods were made with the knowledge of the college's attorneys, administration, and trustees, if when brought to their attention and given their fiduciary and ethical duties to not permit fraud, etc., what else can one assume other than these actions were fully approved. Defamations: Dr. Burkhardt and Mr. Shorb falsely attribute actions and words to me that mischaracterize me as a paranoid, manic, anti-social, schizophrenic, recluse (see discussion). I can prove they are false. But, once someone says, as they did, Mr. Mendelson claims he was in national security, but that's all secret. Of course it's all in his head, he writes blizzards of papers, drafts and drafts of confused stuff. Who would believe anything I say? Who would take the time to look at the evidence? And when I produced, at Dr. Nixon's request, all my documents and records, three crates of papers, with a prepared text, including keys to each of 100 exhibits, I was simply showing him that the college's characterizations must have been correct. The absolute defense against defamation is the truth: Mr. Shorb and Dr. Burkhardt have no evidence (see Responses). All of my complaints have been fully documented with college records, transcripts (see, for example, Presentation).
FERPA: Family Education Rights and Privacy Act ASBPPSE: Arizona State Board for Private and Postsecondary Education
|
www.officialprescottcollege.com www.prescottedu.com www.prescottcollege.us www.prescottcollegesite.com www.prescottcollege.net www.prescottcollegeadp.com www.prescottcollegeedu.net www.prescottcollegerdp.com |
 |
© 1982-2003 Walton Mendelson. All rights reserved. Use of this Website constitutes acceptance of the Terms and Conditions Home | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions| Pricing Policy | Site Map | Contact
|