Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 23, 2017, 12:40:15 AM
75132 Posts in 1768 Topics by 359 Members
Latest Member: nic4real
Home Help Login Register
TalkLeft Discussion Forums  |  Topics  |  Duke Players' Civil lawsuit  |  Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel  (Read 7410 times)
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 586

Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« on: April 18, 2008, 10:16:02 PM »

Amended complaint (486 pages)


(from Liestoppers--excerpt)


445. The Chairman was aware that Mangum was a deeply disturbed young woman who exhibited signs of psychosis, and that her accusations were false.

446. The Chairman was aware that Gottlieb was on a vendetta in response to the Gottlieb Dossier.

447. The Chairman was aware that Nifong was preparing to ride the case into office.

448. The Chairman knew that Addison was lying publicly about the evidence.

449. The Chairman was aware that the investigation belonged to the Duke Police Department.

450. The Chairman knew that, if the public perceived Duke abandoning the Plaintiffs, the public would conclude that Duke knew they were guilty.

451. The Chairman knew Plaintiffs were innocent, and, to the extent he was not certain, he ensured that neither he nor any senior University officials saw the evidence of innocence that he knew was offered.

452. To the Chairman, Plaintiffs’ innocence was irrelevant: what was “best for Duke” turned upon perception.

453. Aware of these things, the Chairman announced that it would be “best for Duke” if Plaintiffs were tried and convicted on Mangum’s false accusations.

454. In response to a plea for Duke to show some measure of support for the students who were being framed in plain view of the University’s leadership, the Chairman explained, “sometimes individuals have to be sacrificed for the good of the Organization.”

455. The Chairman’s Directive, as it was understood by one who received it, was straightforward: “Steel is going to f**k those lacrosse players.”


456. To that end, the Chairman directed the Duke Police Department to act in furtherance of that objective. For example, the Chairman, through Brodhead, Trask, Burness, and Graves, directed the Duke Police Department:

A. To cease all efforts to find evidence of the truth, particularly evidence that contradicted the accuser’s account;

B. To conceal evidence of Duke Police Officers’ prior investigative role in the investigation;

C. To conceal all evidence of the Duke Police Department’s primary jurisdictional authority to control the investigation and its power to intervene to prevent the wrongs conspired to be done;

D. To fabricate false and misleading police reports, disguise them as bystander
“witness” statements, that covered-up the Duke Police witnesses’ personal knowledge of Mangum’s psychosis, her radically changing story, the overwhelming consensus among her doctors and nurses at DUMC that she was lying, and the inability of any doctor, nurse, or police officer to find even a spider-web of evidence that she was raped or sexually assaulted; and

E. To direct those who were at the hospital on March 14th to give “not-for attribution” false reports about Mangum’s appearance at DUMC in order to lend credibility to Mangum’s false claims in the eyes of the public.

457. At all times subsequent to the Chairman’s Directive to force a trial and convictions, the Duke Police Department had the power to revoke its delegated authority and/or to intervene to prevent or aid in preventing the unlawful conspiracies and violations of Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights as alleged herein, and, yet, refused to do so.

458. At all times relevant to this action after March 25, 2006, the Chairman and the members of the CMT directed the Duke Police Department not to intervene to prevent or aid in preventing the wrongs that they knew were conspired to be done to Plaintiffs and their teammates by their co-defendants in this action. In compliance with the Chairman’s Directive, the Durham Police ‘turned a blind eye,’ and did nothing.
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 586

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2008, 11:00:46 PM »

A. Himan and Gottlieb Brief Nifong and Conspire to Stigmatize the Plaintiffs

591. On March 27th, Nifong summoned Gottlieb and Himan to his office to brief him on the evidence for the first time. Already, however, Nifong had painted himself into a corner; he had told multiple press representatives that he was certain Mangum was raped at the 610 N. Buchanan residence by members of the team.

592. Himan and Gottlieb detailed some of the findings of the investigation up to that point. Among other things, they advised Nifong that they had found Mangum’s missing shoe. Nifong asked about contradictions in Mangum’s story, which he had learned about from another source. Gottlieb and Himan did not have any evidence to counterbalance that glaring problem in the case.

593. Nifong erupted at them, shouting, “You know, we’re f****d!” Nifong made it clear to Himan and Gottlieb that he was already committed; Nifong told them that he had already given several interviews about the case, he had more scheduled that day, and even more already scheduled through the week. Nifong ridiculed their inexperience, particularly in rape investigations. He dispatched the officers with instructions to obtain emails sent by team members after the party ended on March 14th.

B. Ryan’s Email
594. Shortly thereafter, Nifong released Gottlieb and Himan from their morning meeting with orders to obtain incriminating email evidence, Gottlieb obtained an email written by Ryan McFadyen. Within 10 minutes, the two investigators were back in Nifong’s office, as instructed, with a copy of an email exchange that contained Ryan’s email parody of American Psycho, which the responding emailers obviously understood as such.

595. Nifong, Himan, and Gottlieb discussed what to do with the email. Upon information and belief, they discussed the fact that Mangum did not identify or even recognize Ryan in the March 16th Identification Procedure. Nevertheless, Nifong instructed Himan and Gottlieb to obtain a warrant to search Ryan’s room. The point of obtaining the search warrant was not to search for evidence; it was to place Ryan’s email in a public document, stripped of the reply emails that reveal that Ryan’s email is a parody.

C. The Agreement to Abuse the Warrant Power
596. Nifong, Gottlieb, and Himan agreed and understood that the investigators would include Ryan’s email in the Search Warrant application. It was plainly obvious that the facts alleged in the application for the NTID Order were sufficient to obtain Judge Stephens’ authorization to search Ryan’s dorm room. Only four days prior, Judge Stephens relied upon it to authorize an NTID Order directed to all 46 team members, including Ryan.

597. Upon information and belief, Nifong, Gottlieb, and Himan knew and believed that their fabricated NTID Affidavit, which had already succeeded in obtaining an NTID Order directed to McFadyen, would also be sufficient to obtain a warrant to search his room.

598. Nevertheless, because their agreed purpose for obtaining the warrant was not to search Ryan McFadyen’s room, but to vilify him (and by extension his teammates) in the local community and in the eyes of millions of people, they agreed that Himan and Gottlieb would revise the Affidavit. The revised Affidavit would add the text of Ryan’s email to the NTID Affidavit. The purpose was to convert Ryan’s private email into a public document, stripped of the contextualizing replies of others which made it plainly obvious that Ryan’s email was a parody of a movie assigned to Duke students who studied American Gothic literature in their courses.

599. Nifong, Gottlieb, and Himan were all acutely aware that the intense media firestorm that had exploded over the weekend had been ignited by their leak of the NTID Affidavit to the media. They knew that Ryan’s email, stripped of its context and held out to be evidence of a ‘conspiracy to commit murder,’ would explode into nuclear dimensions.

600. It was plainly obvious to Nifong, Gottlieb, and Himan, as well as those who aided them in obtaining the email, that its release to the public, particularly in the toxic climate they had created, would cause the unprecedented public vilification of an innocent young man, and would irrevocably stigmatize Ryan in the eyes of hundreds of millions of people throughout his lifetime.

601. Knowing these consequences would ensue to a moral certainty, and with the specific intention to bring them about, Gottlieb and Himan revised and submitted the Affidavit in application for a warrant to search Ryan’s room.

602. It was the risk of precisely this injury to which the Chairman was deliberately indifferent in directing the delegation of all Duke Police Department official policymaking authority to Nifong, Gottlieb, Himan, and the Himan Chain of Command. Gottlieb habitually humiliated and stigmatized Duke students, as was demonstrated in the Gottlieb Dossier and the student narratives of their experiences with him on the street, in the jail, and in the courtroom. The Chairman and other Duke University officials with policymaking authority were aware of that, and were deliberately indifferent to the near certainty that Gottlieb would use this investigation as a means of humiliating McFadyen and his teammates, in keeping with his habitual practice and fueled by his desire to retaliate against Duke students for having the temerity to submit a complaint detailing this very pattern of misconduct.

603. It was obvious that Ryan’s email was a parody of a book or movie that was readily identifiable as such to the recipients of the email, who, like many Duke students, were required to watch the movie or read the novel as part of the curriculum in many courses offered at Duke. In fact, the first reply to Ryan’s email was “i’ll bring the phil collins.” That reference was to the music of Phil Collins, whose music provided the incongruous background music in American Psycho’s shocking “dream scenes.”

604. The movie was taught in several courses at Duke, including a freshman cluster called “Forging Social Ideals” and the English Department’s “Companionate Love” and “Literary Grotesques: Of Gods and Monsters, Richard III to American Psycho.” In fact, literary critics hail the novel a “classic” of the “American Gothic” genre. The American Psycho DVD was available in Duke’s undergraduate library, and on popular internet video sites. iTunes now offers its sequel, American Psycho II.

605. Nifong, Gottlieb, and Himan agreed to include in the new Description of Crimes the assertion that police are investigating a “Conspiracy to Commit Murder,” with strippers as the putative victims. No reasonable officer would believe a conspiracy to parody of American Psycho, which the responding emailers obviously understood as such.
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2008, 12:27:41 PM »

   Robert Steel in his two month tenure at Wachovia has doubtless(judging by  his proven financial expertise) siphoned out enough money to pay off the aggrieved lax players and cool his own heels comfortably.Still we would like to indulge ourselves and visualize him ,Jaimie Gorelick and Tara Levicey all reduced to hiding out in the northern woods to escape the Lax process servers.

 "  Sept. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Citigroup Inc., the biggest U.S. bank by assets, will pay about $2.16 billion for banking operations of Wachovia Corp. after shares of the North Carolina lender collapsed under the weight of overdue mortgages.

While regulators said the Charlotte-based bank hadn't failed, Wachovia will lose its biggest unit and investors will get only about $1 a share for the bank, whose stock topped $59 in April 2006. All depositors will be protected, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., which helped broker the takeover by Citigroup.

Wachovia agreed to the stock-swap transaction just hours before the U.S. House of Representatives planned to vote on a $700 billion bank industry bailout. The package -- which lawmakers rejected in an afternoon vote -- was aimed at stopping the credit crunch that drove Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Washington Mutual Inc. into bankruptcy and led to the hastily arranged rescues of Merrill Lynch & Co. and Bear Stearns Cos.

``The problem must have occurred last week with their ability to continue to attract and hold deposits after the failure of Washington Mutual,'' Gary Townsend of Hill-Townsend Capital in Chevy Chase, Maryland, said of Wachovia. ``On Thursday and Friday they must have had a large run on the bank.''

Wachovia's stock, which finished last week at $10 on the New York Stock Exchange, traded for $1.84 in 4:15 p.m. transactions, a loss of 82 percent for the day. It plummeted 83 percent in the past two years through last week. Citigroup fell 12 percent to $17.75 today.

Citigroup's Role

Wachovia will continue to own its securities brokerage unit, the Evergreen mutual-fund family and insurance and retirement businesses. The brokerage has about 14,600 financial advisers and more than $1 trillion under management, making it third in the U.S. behind Merrill Lynch and Citigroup's Smith Barney unit.

The purchase gives New York-based Citigroup about 3,300 more branches and offices in 21 states. The combined company will have about 4,300 U.S. bank offices and more than $600 billion in deposits for a 9.8 percent share of the U.S. banking market. Citigroup's total deposits globally will be $1.3 trillion, the bank said, or about $350 billion more than JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Citigroup plans to cut its own dividend in half and raise $10 billion in capital as it takes on Wachovia's senior and subordinated debt. Citigroup will absorb as much as $42 billion of losses on Wachovia's $312 billion pool of loans, the FDIC said in a statement. The regulator will take on losses beyond that amount in exchange for $12 billion in preferred stock and warrants.

Steel's Tenure

The transaction is a blow to Wachovia Chief Executive Officer Robert Steel, 57, who was recruited from the Treasury department in July to rebuild the lender's credibility with investors. He bought 1 million shares of Wachovia stock for about $16 million two weeks after arriving at the company.

Steel wasn't available for comment beyond a prepared statement in which he called Citigroup ``a strong partner to preserve the stability and quality of our banking franchise.'' A call to Lanty Smith, chairman of Wachovia's board of directors, wasn't immediately returned.

``This is a compelling deal,'' said Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit, 51, on a conference call with analysts and investors. ``This is one of those rare high-return acquisitions in which we have contained the risks.''

Wells Fargo & Co. had also bid for Wachovia, according to the Wall Street Journal.

`Citi Needed It'

``Citi needed it more than anybody,'' said Nancy Bush, an independent bank analyst. ``It would have been nice for Wells, but I couldn't see them taking on that chunk of bad debt.''

The FDIC said it won't have to tap its insurance fund, something the agency also avoided in the WaMu failure last week. Keeping the FDIC's fund healthy has been a priority for U.S. regulators because its $100,000 insurance on deposits keeps depositors from panicking when a bank's health is questioned.

Oppenheimer & Co. analyst Meredith Whitney said in an interview on CNBC there was ``no doubt'' in her mind that there had been a run on Wachovia.

Steel sent a memo to the staff last week affirming that the company was sound and more diversified than Washington Mutual after that lender failed. The memo, according to a copy obtained by Bloomberg, included a set of questions and answers for employees who might have to answer queries from worried customers, such as ``Does all the recent news put Wachovia at risk?'' and ``How is Wachovia different'' from Lehman, Bear Stearns and WaMu.

`Silent' Run

Louise Pitt, a credit analyst at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., wrote Friday that Wachovia may have been facing the possibility of a ``silent'' run on deposits, in which customers fearful of a bank failure withdraw their money in unusually large numbers. WaMu became ``unsound'' after customers withdrew $16.7 billion since Sept. 16, the Office of Thrift Supervision said when it seized WaMu on Sept. 25.

The FDIC and Wachovia didn't say today whether the bank suffered similar withdrawals.

Wachovia reported $9.7 billion of losses in the first half of 2008. The slide toward collapse began when the bank paid more than $24 billion in October 2006 for Golden West Financial Corp., the California lender that specialized in option-ARM home mortgages. The bank holds about $122 billion of the adjustable- rate home loans. Kennedy Thompson, the chief executive officer at the time, later admitted that the purchase at the height of the real estate boom was ill-timed.

Option ARMS

Wachovia was the largest holder of option ARMs, ahead of Seattle-based Washington Mutual until it collapsed. ..."
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2008, 03:53:51 PM »

  In further rapidly accelerating developments (1) Bill O'Reilly of Fox demanded last night that Steel be indicted (2) The Duke Board of Trustees which will be questioning Steel and Brodhead at the Annual Meeting this week.The meeting for the first time has been ordered herrmetically sealed from any public attendance or reportage whatsoever(3) Steel's friend James Cromer rushed on  national television to denounce him as a member of Wall Street's Hall of Shame.
Cromer claims Steel took advantage of him and shamelessly lied to the viewers about  the condition of Wachovia less than two weeks ago.In any case those who believed  Steel have certainly lost a lot of money.
    It is even being cllaimed that no other CEO in history has ever lost as much money for his stockholders in as short a time as Steel.
    Pray God the Lax kids can quickly  rope hiim up - ahead of the thousands  and  thousands of other folks now gunning for hiim
    Look,don't get us wrong,we believe that Steel(and Brodhead)unequivocally deserve the fair hearing of which they deprived  the players but,regardless of its eventual resolution,in Brodhead's oown wwords,"Whatever they did  is bad enough".
      See Cranston oon Steel here:
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #4 on: December 11, 2008, 03:17:15 PM »

   From John in Carolina's blog.Consult  our Gorelick threads.


Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Take a quick Duke quiz

It’s short (one question) and you can immediately check your answer.

Here goes - - -

What three things do the following four men have in common?

Bob Steel, Richard Wagoner, John Mack, Alan Schwartz.


1) All are members of Duke’s board of trustees.

2) All have led major companies as CEO’s

Steel - Wachovia

Wagoner -- GM

Mack-- Morgan Stanley

Schwartz-- Bear Stearns

3) All four companies have collapsed or are near collapse.

A blog friend who sent the above information added:

I expect that the recent investment results of Duke's endowment ( if they ever release them ) will be terrible . It will be interesting to see how the results compare with those of other comparable universities.

The BOT did not perform too well during the lacrosse incident either.

No, Duke’s BOT didn’t perform too well during the lacrosse incident.

And it’s not performing too well now unless your definition of “performing well” includes keeping President Brodhead and “Dick’s senior team” in place and raising their salaries while stonewalling alums asking for explanations of Duke’s disgraceful actions and inactions during the Hoax and frame-up periods and the now ongoing cover-up of what happened then at Duke University and DUMC. 
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2008, 03:42:39 PM »

   From the Duke Chronicle following the Annual Financial Meeting.It appears contributions are down in the wake of the Lacrosse  suits and investment returns are plunging as a result of bad advice from the likes of Gorelick and Steel. Brodhead and Steel supporters say,"Sour grapes all this tripe  is being invented  by  the vicious  Laxers."
   Gee,how did the brain trust psyche that I am really David Evans? And why do they believe I should still be  mad at them as I  collect many millions of Duke dollars as the direct result of their bungled  malice  and ,above all,of their  utter administrative incompetence.
   The Chronicle:
     posted 12/08/08 @ 8:43 AM EST
The list of leaders that Brodhead and Steel cite, as members of our Trustees guiding Duke through this economic night, would be hilarious if it were not so tragic. Their list consists of some of the biggest losers in the national and international fiscal crisis.

Steel himself presided over the decline of Wachovia. The bank that went plop that will soon disappear into Wells Fargo. Soon we can visit the empty skyscraper in Charlotte and the sites where 18,000 people worked in North Carolina, and join in unison in saying "Thanks Bob." Let's hope Steel does not do for Duke what he did for shareholders at Wachovia.

Alan Schwartz. Seems to me he was head of Bear Sterns, and that's the first major financial institution to go into the toilet during the crisis. Plop plop. He's now, properly, out of work.

Rick Wagoner. He's head of GM, now begging for money in Washington. He's done so well that even President-elect Obama said this weekend on Meet the Press that Wagoner (not identified by name) will have to be replaced. Something about poor leadership, poor decisions, weak management. Rick will be lucky to survive this week. His biggest distinction is having lost most more money than any other CEO in history, according to the NY Times; he rates three plops. Polp. Plop. Plop. And a prayer that he doesn't do for Duke what he did for GM.

And John Mack. Two years ago he made news as the highest paid executive in a Wall Street firm (this does not include hedge funds nor private equity). His earnings were $40 million for the year. Last year and this year his company, Morgan Stanley, will give Mr Mack just two and a half percent of that for his leadership. Let's hope he steers Duke better than his own firm. One plop for him.

It's also rather interesting that Steel and Brodhead met with a reporter after the Trustee meeting, since just a Trustee meeting ago they said they would not do that anymore. Feeling the heat, Dick?

Yes yes in just a few moments, someone will say this analysis comes from a lacrosse nut. Well that's the response everyone is getting these days to any criticism of the regime; let Brodhead and steel explain why their "successful" Trustees can guide Duke so well.

And let them put the actual numbers of the loss in our endowment on the table. Why the big secret Dick?

Your counterpart at Harvard provided specifics this past week; Faust lost $8 BILLION for Harvard, and said the total may be way higher because its vast holdings in private equity and hedge funds had not been re-evaluated in light of the crisis. Why can't you tell us Dick, or at least give us a valid reason why you do not tell us, the specifics.

posted 12/08/08 @ 7:26 PM EST

Originally posted by
Doris Leissing
Is this comment by the same Robert Steele who presided over the dissolution of one of the South's greatest banking institutions, Wachovia?

Is this the same Robert Steele who is still presiding over the slow bleed of Duke's financial capital into paying off the wrongly-accused Lacrosse players in what is known to the world as the "Duke Lacrosse Hoax"?

Why would anyone take Robert Steele's analysis of financial matters seriously?

The man is stricly a one-note johnny... and that note is HIMSELF. He did not care about Wachovia. He does not care about Duke. He was asleep at the wheel at the Dept. of the Treasury.

Anybody who takes Robert Steele's words seriously deserved to go down with him.

Hey, you have to admit...that Steele has always been a dab hand at siphoning huge chunks of capitol off for himself from the places he run's into the ground.

Witness the a fore mentioned lacrosse scandal. he has the university paying out the wazoo to prevent or postpone discovery which would reveal legal malfeasance on his part.

What's not to love?

posted 12/08/08 @ 7:29 PM EST
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2008, 01:05:00 PM »

   A couple of these items seem  pertinent to our ever continuing saga:
       The Worst Predictions About 2008
By Peter Coy Peter Coy Mon Dec 29, 10:46 am ET

Here are some of the worst predictions that were made about 2008. Savor them -- a crop like this doesn't come along every year.

1. "A very powerful and durable rally is in the works. But it may need another couple of days to lift off. Hold the fort and keep the faith!" -- Richard Band, editor, Profitable Investing Letter, Mar. 27, 2008

At the time of the prediction, the Dow Jones industrial average was at 12,300. By late December it was at 8,500.

2. AIG (NYSE:AIG - News) "could have huge gains in the second quarter." -- Bijan Moazami, analyst, Friedman, Billings, Ramsey, May 9, 2008

AIG wound up losing $5 billion in that quarter and $25 billion in the next. It was taken over in September by the U.S. government, which will spend or lend $150 billion to keep it afloat.

3. "I think this is a case where Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE - News) and Fannie Mae (NYSE:FNM - News) are fundamentally sound. They're not in danger of going under I think they are in good shape going forward." -- Barney Frank (D-Mass.), House Financial Services Committee chairman, July 14, 2008

Two months later, the government forced the mortgage giants into conservatorships and pledged to invest up to $100 billion in each.

4. "I'm not an economist but I do believe that we're growing." —President George W. Bush, in a July 15, 2008 press conference

Nope. Gross domestic product shrank at a 0.5% annual rate in the July-September quarter. On Dec. 1, the National Bureau of Economic Research declared that a recession had begun in December 2007.

5. "I think Bob Steel's the one guy I trust to turn this bank around, which is why I've told you on weakness to buy Wachovia." —Jim Cramer, CNBC commentator, Mar. 11, 2008

Two weeks later, Wachovia came within hours of failure as depositors fled. Steel eventually agreed to a takeover by Wells Fargo. Wachovia shares lost half their value from Sept. 15 to Dec. 29.


9. "In today's regulatory environment, it's virtually impossible to violate rules." -- Bernard Madoff, money manager, Oct. 20, 2007[see Current Case thread under Innocence Project]

About a year later, Madoff -- who once headed the Nasdaq Stock Market -- told investigators he had cost his investors $50 billion in an alleged Ponzi scheme.

10. "There's growing evidence that parts of the debt markets…are coming back to life." —Peter Coy and Mara Der Hovanesian, BusinessWeek, Oct. 1, 2007.

Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2009, 01:28:51 PM »

   From Durham in Wonderland:
     Saturday, January 24, 2009
Steel Under Investigation
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Securities and Exchange Commission has launched an investigation of Duke Trustees chairman Bob Steel.

Over the summer, struggling Wachovia Bank had named Steel as its CEO--preposterously citing his ability to lead institutions in a “time of turmoil” as a criterion for the selection. In a CNBC broadcast on September 15, Steel asserted that Wachovia had a "great future as an independent company." He added, "But we're a public company, so we're going to do what's right for shareholders, I can promise you that. But we're also focused on the very exciting prospects when we get things right going forward."

Within two days, Steel was privately discussing a merger with JP Morgan--contradicting his assertion that Wachovia had a "great future as an independent company."

The Journal notes that "whether Mr. Steel misled investors and violated securities laws will depend on what Mr. Steel knew at the time of his comments. In general, securities laws say that an executive can't knowingly make a false statement that is material to the company's prospects."

Anyone who followed the lacrosse case wouldn't have been surprised by Steel's penchant to try to "spin" the press with misleading information--this is, of course, the same Bob Steel who privately claimed knowledge of "terrible, terrible" things in the lacrosse captains' house. He has never explained the evidence for which he based his claim, which the details presented in the Attorney General's report wholly rebuffed.

It is unclear whether Duke will allow Steel to remain as chairman while under SEC investigation--although, given the University's unwillingness to demand accountability for his failures in the lacrosse case, I wouldn't expect Steel's removal on this matter anytime soon.
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #8 on: February 16, 2009, 02:04:33 PM »

   Saturday,Feb.14th, from John in Carolina:

Duke Chronicle A Bit Critical of Duke’s Secrecy

Duke's President Brodhead’s never said why he refused to meet with the lacrosse parents on March 25, 2006. And The Chronicle's never asked why.

Brodhead, Duke's trustees, and almost all its faculty, including all but one or two of the Law School faculty, were publicly silent when racists outside and within the Durham County Courthouse shouted threats, including death threats, at then Duke student Reade Seligmann. TC never asked why.

Thanks abb

For that matter, TC's never explained its own editorial silence when the racists attacked Seligmann.

TC has never asked Brodhead or BOT chair Bob Steel whether Duke did in fact secretly release FERPA-protected student records to now disbarred former Durham DA Mike Nifong.

Or whether, if it did that, Duke then engaged in a charade with Nifong to deceive the students, their parents and the court into believing Duke had not already released the records?

But perhaps TC will soon ask those questions and others that most members of the Duke community want answers to.

I say that because today TC’s editorial board addresses serious matters involving trustee and senior administrator's decision-making, particularly the secrecy that typically shrouds it.

Here’s some of what TC’s editorial board says - - -

Last weekend some current and former members of the Board of Trustees came to the University for a closed-door meeting about the recession and how the University can best respond to it in the future.

The public knows almost nothing specific about the meeting. Representatives-including Chair Robert Steel, Michael Schoenfeld, vice president for public affairs and government relations, and Executive Vice President Tallman Trask-acknowledged to The Chronicle that the meeting occurred and that its focus was the University's financial situation.

But as to who was there, what specifically was discussed, why the meeting was necessary and what the University's general strategy will be in the recession-mum's the word.

And although it is encouraging that the University appears to be acting in a proactive manner, it is disconcerting that the information coming from University administrators was so vague and that the meeting itself was seemingly secret. …

As the editorial progresses TC gets increasingly wobbly and closes with - - -

In the end, it is understandable that, in order to function effectively, a board of trustees at a private university will need to keep many matters secret. But there are some subjects-and this is one of them-about which a board of trustees should make every effort to inform the many people in the Duke community who are invested in the University and whose livelihood depends on it.

No one is demanding the minutes of last weekend's meeting: a coherent and public statement of strategy would do just fine.

The entire editorial’s here.


My comments:

Today the TC editorial board took a few small steps toward what let's hope is now its goal of questioning the excessive secrecy that’s characterized the Steel/Brodhead running of Duke since at least Spring 2006.

When Duke won’t explain its silence when an angry crowd at the edge of East Campus waved a CASTRATE banner and went after Duke students, it’s shamefully secretive.

We are now at a point such that when a person asks, “Do you think Brodhead and Steel OK’ed the release of that FERPA information?”, people can only shrug and reply: “We’ll just have to wait for discovery in those suits.”

But it shouldn’t literally take federal lawsuits to get an honest answer to that question and many others the Brodhead/Steel leadership team is covering up on.

Let’s hope TC's small steps today are soon followed by bigger ones.

Request to the TC editorial board: Please tell us why editor Chelsea Allison recused herself from today’s editorial.

Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2009, 06:39:33 PM »

       This is not one of my many computor generated solicisms.That is three BILLION not three million.

Thursday, February 26, 2009
Butler & Rickards Are Back For Duke

There’s great news for people who love Duke and don't confuse its best interests with the interests of President Brodhead, BOT Chair Steel and the other Duke dependents in the civil suits brought by former Duke students and family members victimized by the hoax, attempted frame-up and ongoing cover-up.

Former Chronicle columnist Kristin Butler (T '08) and Ed Rickards (T’63 & Law ’66), the 1963 Chronicle editor-in-chief, have just started a blog True Blue.

Here in full is True Blue’s "Introduction" post:

Welcome to our blog! We hope to provide information and analysis that will empower students, parents, faculty, staff and alumni to participate more fully in the governance of Duke.

Some of our posts will be long because our material is very detailed. We will often post original documents. We will tell our readers when we seek information and cannot get it.

When we wrote a joint column in The Chronicle in the fall semester, President Brodhead and Executive Vice President Trask refused our requests for interviews. Vice President for PR Michael Schoenfeld said we were entitled to public reports -- and no help in understanding them.

In this antagonistic atmosphere which some administrators created and continue, we do our best to carefully source all information.

You are encouraged to post comments: click on the title above our post, in this case the word "Introduction." Or click on the word "Comments" at the end. We welcome your thoughts indeed.

Our URL is www.ButlerRickards.blogspot.com and our e-mail for additional feedback and tips is Butler.Rickards@gmail.com

After their "Introduction" Butler and Rickards get right at it with a post report: "Duke has now lost $3 BILLION in financial crisis."

Give that post a read, including the note appended at the end which begins:

"the preparation of the above report was made more difficult by the Brodhead Administration's failure -- unprecedented in Trinity College and Duke University history -- to produce an annual report for the 2007-2008 school year[.]"

To Kristin and Ed - - Welcome to the neighborhood.
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Alleged complicity of Duke BOT chairman and Under Secretary Steel
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2009, 06:41:57 PM »

   That's three billion dollars loss for Duke before they get down to paying the fifty-seven people now suing for damages iin the wake of the Lacrosse case.
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Advertise Here