Image 01 Image 03

Gibson’s Bakery disputes Oberlin College public relations campaign claiming it was “held liable for the speech of its students”

Gibson’s Bakery disputes Oberlin College public relations campaign claiming it was “held liable for the speech of its students”

Issues 56-page FAQ presenting trial evidence: “The recent efforts of Oberlin College and President Carmen Twillie Ambar to reframe this case as a First Amendment issue, while undermining the jury’s decision, should be incredibly concerning to us all. Even after the jury’s verdict, the college refuses to take responsibility for its actions.”

After the massive $11 million compensatory and $33 million punitive damage verdicts (later reduced to $25 million under Ohio tort reform caps) against it for defaming Gibson’s Bakery and its owners, Oberlin College could have done some soul searching as to its own conduct in nearly destroying a 135-year-old family business. Indeed, the purpose of punitive damages under the law is to serve, among other things, to cause such introspection in the hope of preventing future similar wrongdoing.

Yet Oberlin College did just the opposite.

From the moment of the compensatory verdict and continuing through the present, Oberlin College has done everything but soul searching. Instead, Oberlin College commenced a focused crisis management public relations campaign attempting to portray itself as the victim in this process by asserting that it was held vicariously liable for student speech.

After the punitive damages verdict, Oberlin College President Carmen Twillie Ambar issued a blast email and Frequently Asked Questions document pushing this framing of the verdicts:

While we deeply value the jury’s work, we do not believe that case law supports the jury’s determination that Oberlin should be held liable for the speech and actions of its students. To do so is to erode a fundamental constitutional right.

Ambar has conducted a series of media appearances pushing the narrative that Oberlin College was “held liable for the speech of its students”, something Ambar contends should be of concern “whether you’re a progressive or a conservative.” Ambar also attempts to relitigate the case by disputing witness testimony as to the efforts of Dean of Students Meredith Raimondo to spread libelous accusations; but the jury heard both sides of the story, and ruled against the defendants.

Ambar has made several media appearances pushing that narrative, including at NPR, a local media press call, a meeting with the Wall Street Journal editorial board (which does not appear to have bought the spin) and an appearance on CBS News:

“I think this decision is really about whether a college should be held liable for the speech of students,” Ambar told CBSN’s Tanya Rivero. “The college didn’t construct the flyer, the college didn’t condone the flyer, it didn’t write the Student Senate resolution. The judge held at the time that the speech the students were making at the protest was protected speech.”

These themes also were asserted by Ambar in an online conference with alumni. It was clear that many of the alumni who asked questions accepted the views of the case as promoted by the college.

There is a very major problem with the narrative that Oberlin College was held liable for student speech. It’s false.

We have covered this several times:

It is clear that Oberlin College has settled on the claim that it is the defender of student free speech as a crisis management theme.

We have explored many times why the assertion that the college was held liable for the speech of students is false. Oberlin College was held liable for the actions of its administrators, including the Senior Vice President and Dean of Students, in spreading the defamatory statements. The college may dispute the facts, but the legal theory of liability cannot be disputed.

There is a separate legal issue as to whether the accusations against Gibson’s were defamatory or constitutionally protected opinion, but that has nothing to do with the erroneous vicarious liability narrative.

Here is what the judge wrote in denying the defendants’ summary judgment motion, and allowing the libel claim to proceed to trial (Order here): [***]

It’s clear that the theory of liability was not vicarious based on student or even faculty speech but was based on the actions of Raimondo and other administrators.

There is nothing novel in a corporation being held liable for the actions of its employees, particularly senior employees and officers, acting within the scope of their employment….

I now have been able to review the jury instructions, and consistent with the judge’s prior rulings and the law, the jury was instructed that the Gibsons sought damages “for injuries caused by the Oberlin College’s employees.” There was no instruction on Oberlin College’s potential liability for the speech or conduct of students.

The jury instruction on corporate liability for the actions of employees provided in pertinent part (underlining added):

Respondeat Superior

GENERAL. Plaintiffs seek damages from Oberlin College for injuries caused by the Oberlin College’s employees. An employer is liable for injuries caused by their employee while acting within the scope of employment….

In analyzing whether an employee’s actions constitute libel, intentional interference with business relationship, or intentional infliction of emotional distress you should apply the burden of proof and elements of those claims to the evidence presented of the employee’s actions.

Against this highly organized media campaign by Oberlin College, the Gibsons finally are pushing back. Their lawyers issued a press release which reads in part:

Attorneys for Gibson’s Bakery address misleading statements made by Oberlin College

Gibson family’s legal team publishes FAQ document containing trial evidence, allowing facts to speak for themselves 

OBERLIN, OHIO, June 28, 2019 — An Ohio jury recently sent a clear message in the case of Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin College: The truth still matters.

After an intense trial that lasted nearly six weeks, the 134-year-old family bakery was awarded $33.2 million in punitive damages in addition to $11 million in compensatory damages. But despite the jury’s verdicts against Oberlin College and its Vice President and Dean of Students on libel, tortious interference with business relationships and intentional infliction of emotional distress, officials at Oberlin College continue to propagate a narrative that the case is an issue of free speech.

To bring further light to the testimony heard by the jury, attorneys representing the Gibson family have published a list of frequently asked questions outlining the arguments and evidence presented at trial. The 56-page document, containing court exhibits and trial transcripts, is available at and

“In the wake of the national attention the verdict has received, we believe the public has a right to know the facts of this case as they were presented to the jury,” said Lee Plakas, managing partner of Tzangas Plakas Mannos Ltd. “When forming an opinion on this case, it is important to rely solely on the facts. The evidence presented to the jury speaks for itself.”

The record-setting judgment has attracted national attention. It stems from events that occurred in November 2016, when three black Oberlin College students were arrested following a shoplifting incident at Gibson’s Bakery. The next day, protesters descended on the small family-owned store claiming the arrests were a result of racial profiling. In a protest comprised of Oberlin students, with evidence of involvement by faculty and administrators, the Gibsons were publicly shamed as racists with a longstanding history of discrimination. And a boycott was called for Gibson’s Bakery.

“Oberlin College was never on trial for the free speech of its students. Instead, the jury unanimously determined that Oberlin College libeled the Gibsons,” said Terry Moore, partner at Krugliak, Wilkins, Griffiths & Dougherty Co., L.P.A. “Despite what spin the college places on the facts of this case, libelous statements have never enjoyed protections under the First Amendment.”

The jury was presented with substantial evidence that Oberlin College aided students in the dissemination of defamatory materials and ordered the suspension of a more than 100-year-old business relationship. In court, the college presented no evidence of racial profiling or discrimination by Gibson’s Bakery. Additionally, the students involved in the shoplifting incident confessed to their crimes and admitted the arrests were not racially motivated. 

The jury also heard evidence that the college clearly acted in ways that went far beyond ensuring a safe environment for protesters. This included passing out flyers that the Court determined to be libelous per se, issuing instructions through a bullhorn, purchasing gloves, refreshments, and food for the protesters, suggesting college facilities for protesters to print flyers, and allowing a defamatory student senate resolution to remain posted in the student union for more than a year.

“The recent efforts of Oberlin College and President Carmen Twillie Ambar to reframe this case as a First Amendment issue, while undermining the jury’s decision, should be incredibly concerning to us all,” said Plakas. “Even after the jury’s verdict, the college refuses to take responsibility for its actions.”

The Gibsons’ Frequently Asked Questions document contains trial transcript excerpts and exhibits. Obviously it presents the Gibsons’ side of the story, but does so through actual evidence introduced at the trial. It’s an interesting read.

Viewing Oberlin College’s concerted effort to reframe the case around the speech rights of students, rather than the actions of Oberlin College employees, it is clear Oberlin College has learned a lesson from the jury verdicts.

Unfortunately, it appears to have learned the wrong lesson.

[Featured Image via YouTube]


NOTE: Our trial coverage is a project of the Legal Insurrection Foundation. Your support helps make this type of coverage possible.

Donate Now!


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Nice PR move by the Gibson’s and their legal team. It would have been easy enough to have blown this part off and said “eh we won so what.” But they know that the fight isn’t over yet. They’re too smart to spike the ball before they’re over the goal line.

(they’ll be over the goal line the day that money is deposited into their account)

    I hope the ‘goal line’ also includes the termination or resignation of Ambar and Raimondo. Oh, and the cratering of financial support from Oberlin alumni.

      JohnSmith100 in reply to MrE. | June 29, 2019 at 3:42 pm

      After learning Tita Reed’s role in extortion to get the three thieves off the hook it is my opinion that she also also needs to be canned. Oberlin College is a cesspool.

        Tom Servo in reply to JohnSmith100. | June 30, 2019 at 9:39 am

        Don’t hold your breath waiting for anything to happen to anyone at Oberlin – note how the Chairman of the Board of Trustees is one of the George Soros’ faithful lieutenants?

        Ambar, Raimondo, and the rest are all going to get promotions out of this, because they were doing exactly what Soros paid them to do. They still are.

        The only bright side is that Oberlin itself will now hopefully decay and slowly die.

          MajorWood in reply to Tom Servo. | June 30, 2019 at 11:25 am

          I think that normally that would be the case, if say, they held the line and the loss wasn’t great. But, with so many obvious blunders along the way, and with the large amount of negative national attention, I think that Oberlin will be cut free from any type of sugar daddy bailout. Their inability to STFU and bite the bullet along the way is making it easier for similar situations (cough, Sandmann, cough) down the road. The players and the institution are now comically toxic. How long until “Ambar Alerts” starts to gain traction? 😉 Lord that makes me chuckle. Has John Oliver covered this? If he hasn’t, then there is simply nothing here that they can mock and come out looking better. Also telling is that Oberlin’s lawyers have gone into hiding. The person on the WKYC clip looked like an intern who had to be there because she got someone’s Fourbux order wrong. Lee Plakas has been nothing but class in his appearances, displaying humility and a measured response that has been in complete contrast to the arrogance of the Oberlin administrators as they lash out. Anyone who gets to page 5 of the FAQ will have written off Oberlin forever. Perhaps we can chip in and buy Oberlin a mirror, or as a friend often says, when you point a finger at someone, there are three pointing back at you. Oberlin doesn’t even have “acceptance” in their sights yet. My guess is that we will be stuck in the bargaining stage for the foreseeable future, even though Oberlin’s only tool at this point is a well worn shovel. If it means that my wardrobe eventually consists of mostly Gibsons T-shirts to keep them afloat, well, I’m OK with that.

          Silvertree in reply to Tom Servo. | July 1, 2019 at 1:12 am

          Major Wood, you will need a few Gibson’s classic ball caps as well, to protect from the fire and brimstone that is raining down!

        Gremlin1974 in reply to JohnSmith100. | June 30, 2019 at 3:20 pm

        Oberlin needs what I like to refer to as an Administrative Enema.

How far can the Oberlin admin. push the “we are the victims” and oblique suggestions that the Gibsons run a “racist” business narrative before the court is asked to intervene? The behavior of Oberlin’s senior admin. continues to damage the business and the reputation of the Gibson family. I bet a new round of discovery would reveal e-mails and other behavior by Oberlin admin. and faculty that would support another law suit.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to SHV. | June 29, 2019 at 2:02 pm

    First thing I thought when I saw the CBS piece with Carmen Twillie Ambar continuing to misrepresent the case, thereby continuing to defame Gibsons, was that there should immediately, be a new lawsuit filed, The offer to settle it should be a very reasonable $22,070,000. That amount shpoldincrese by $35,000 per day.

    guinspen in reply to SHV. | June 29, 2019 at 11:00 pm

    “How far can the Oberlin admin. push the “we are the victims” and oblique suggestions that the Gibsons run a “racist” business narrative…”

    All the way to the poorhouse, I hope.

I say identify the students, depose them, and further establish a communications channel between them and Raimondo. Time to play a little game of “who wants to cut a deal first.

    Cypher in reply to MajorWood. | June 30, 2019 at 1:52 pm

    A recent grad named Kameron Dunbar has already been referenced in documents submitted to the court, was on the student Senate that passed the resolution, and wrote a letter to the New York Times all but taking credit for organizing the protests.

    Others that need deposed are the Africana Studies faculty like Pam Brooks, Justin Emeka, Yvelina Alexis, etc. It was always very interesting (as someone who worked at the college for years) that the so many of the on-campus protests took place around mid-terms and finals. It’s almost like they were assignments or something.

    Also interesting to note that both of the heads of the Multicultural Resource Center (Toni Myers, Julio Reyes) have already ‘moved on.’ Very convenient!

    I believe President Ambar, Dean Raimondo, etc. are happy to protect the faculty and students who they know to have been behind it. Even with the extensive reporting on this case, there is much more going on…

    Silvertree in reply to MajorWood. | July 1, 2019 at 5:35 am

    I found some writings by some students who was heavily involved in the protests. I’m not going to dox them here, but what I did discover from reading their descriptions is this: they honestly believed at the time of the protests that Mr. Aladin was violently assaulted in a racist act of fury. They described the assault in horrific terms.

    Obviously that was the story they had been fed. At that time I believe most of them knew nothing about the actual facts: how Mr. Aladin had several chances in the store to stop and wait quietly for the police, for instance and how he slapped the phone into Mr. A. Gibson’s face, and pushed and threatened to kill him. Many students did not believe any shoplifting had occurred at all. Also, they did not seem to realize that multiple black students were kicking and punching Mr. Gibson; in their mind the students were only trying to rescue Mr. Aladin, loosen the chokehold and pull the enraged Mr. Gibson off—because it looked like he would actually murder Mr. Aladin!

    However, after reading multiple accounts, I believe that on some level the students actually wanted and needed to make this whole incident into a horrific act of violence in their own deranged fantasy world—in order to express their utter rage and anguish about Trump’s election. They were completely brainwashed by the MSM and utterly distraught. They wanted to nobly fight back against this horrible nemesis, as they perceived Trump to be. They desperately needed a scapegoat in that moment so they created one.

    Interestingly enough, on that very same day after the 2016 election, there were multiple other race-hate hoaxes by college-age students, all over the country.

    This whole thing at Oberlin was like a mob mentality, almost a flash-mob type thing; with the white students, in their minds, nobly defending their black fellows from racist violence, and humbly serving the black protest leaders by following whatever they said should happen.

    It’s all so absurd, but it is certainly much clearer to me now why the Oberlin students seem to have gone completely overboard. The story they were fed (or that they fed themselves through rumors spreading like wildfire) was basically this: a greedy racist capitalist white man tried to MURDER our young fellow black student, just for petty theft! Combined with a sleepless election night and their hot emotions over Trump (they honestly believed that American democracy was basically over and a new evil Hitler had just been elected), there was enough uproar to burn down multiple bakeries.

    I can also understand more clearly now the argument that Meredith Raimondo needed to be there to keep things from perhaps turning into Antifa-style violence. Her presence took what might have been a wild, very ugly scene involving smashing windows and beating people up, and basically turned it into a much more tame “chaperoned protest party”—still ugly, but likely much tamed by having the older adult there kind of leading and directing things on the bullhorn, with the College offering refreshments and restrooms and music, with free pizza, drinks, gloves, places to rest and copy flyers, etc. After everything I have read now, and realizing how emotionally volatile those students were that day, I think the College actually probably did deescalate things by taking such a big role in the protests.

    Nevertheless, that was a huge mistake. The College should have not been involved in the protesting at all. Instead they should have made serious efforts, as soon as they got wind of the protest events, to talk the students leaders right down and say, “Wait until all the facts are in, then you can do all the protesting you want.” After that they should have stayed completely away, even if the students would not listen, and let the police handle it.

    The College needs to get back some of its power and leverage to handle these volatile kids and sober them up before they go out protesting and possibly rampaging; for instance, students should know they will be immediately expelled if they cause physical damage to any infrastructure or any person, or are convicted of any other crime.

      Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 5:46 am

      More about the fake race-hate crimes:

      How US colleges reward fake victimhood

        Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 12:04 pm

        Maybe the students would have remained more or less peaceful no matter what the College did. There’s no way to know that. I’m just speculating here, that likely the College support did help keep them somewhat in check. That does not make it right though, what the College did, not at all. If anything the College should have tried to stop these misguided protests altogether.

        Interesting: just a couple days before the protests, two white Oberlin College students had been arrested for shoplifting at Gibson’s.

          ObieWanKanObie in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 12:52 pm

          I disagree. The involvement of Oberlin’s administration made it worse, not better.

          If the students had protested entirely on their own, with no support, coddling, or encouragement from OC’s administration, I think very few of them would have had the courage to do anything but walk around with signs and chant slogans for an hour or so. They would certainly not beat people up or break windows. Students are not anonymous in this small town. They know there would be consequences. (And as far as I know, no one in the administration called in Antifa.)

          But the College’s de facto official endorsement gave those students a big shot of courage. It was cool to join in. Consequences would be non-existent; after all, it’s an official college event, right?

          Working adults expect Oberlin to do much more than just stay out of student protests. They expect the college to be an authority. That is, to encourage mature, level-headed adult behavior–both by example and by enforcing severe consequences for the lack thereof. That is what parents expect of all colleges, but it just is not done today.

          Can you imagine a college administrator, a dean, from the 1950s getting involved in protesting a local business? Even for Oberlin that was unheard of, and rightfully so. By the 70s, though, things were beginning to change.

          Working people in Oberlin live by a completely different set of rules than the college students and administrators. They expect adults to respect the law and to exhibit mature behavior. Instead they were betrayed when the college sponsored just the opposite. And they are being betrayed yet again as the college is refusing to accept any responsibility for its actions, in spite of a verdict against it.

          jb4 in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 1:27 pm

          If it was known by the College that 2 days before the protest two white students had been arrested for shoplifting there, not a given, then the College’s conduct then and since is even more atrocious. From what I have read here and elsewhere, shoplifting appears to be epidemic and the College appears not to care – by virtue of wanting it reported to the College and not the police. How many students have ever been expelled for it?

          President Ambar’s “lived experience” remarks take on a new light. Every single student walking into Gibson’s has to be looked at as a potential thief and, indeed, some might take it as racial profiling . However, it seems like it is a lack of standards for student behavior and/or having consequences, that is responsible for this, which makes Ambar’s remarks rather offensive.

          Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 3:45 pm

          Yes, ObieWanKanObie, you may well be right about that. It might have remained much more tame, without all the support from the College! As it was, the police nearly had to call in the county riot squad!

          It was definitely a problem to have the “adults” taking part, especially the way they actually joined in and supported things. It’s hard to say what all the effects really were, but it was definitely the wrong way for the College to handle things.

          This is a completely different case as far as morality, but I just keep thinking about the professor in tears at Kent State, just begging all the kids to sit down after the students had been shot (shot in part by other kids—many of them were exactly the same age in the guard troops) —this one lone courageous guy just pleading with all these students to disperse peacefully. I wonder what would have happened there without him. Luckily this situation was nowhere near that level of danger. I just wonder what the OC policy should really be about administrators and faculty at student protests, going forward. Should they be there at all?

          I keep thinking about the bad riots in Berkeley too, how violent those students (and the older adults masquerading as kids) became. Some serious deescalation training for these administrators and faculty, and for campus security and the Oberlin PD as well, would be essential at this point. Plus there needs to be a serious rethink about what kind of activism Oberlin wants to be supporting and training in its students. Sounds like there has been some movement on that last front. These kids are downright nuts, some of them, so far out on the edge. Many of them are on strong psychotropics and quite unstable.

          Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 3:52 pm

          ObieWanKanObie, wouldn’t Oberlin College administrators in the fifties have actually gone out to those kids with a bullhorn and made them stop protesting and disperse immediately, on pain of disciplinary action including possible expulsion?

      AlexanderYpsilantis in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 10:58 am

      Oberlin College needs to stop recruiting students from ‘troubled’ backgrounds and those that have a history agitating. Along with hiring staff persons who have bought into the black victimization mindset they’ve brought a bunch of students in who are only interested in being SJW champions. That is NOT the purpose of college and I think you’d find that most of the real involved activists are not good students.

      The pushed the envelope, they went too far and they have been corrected by the Courts-this is what happens in our society. If Ambar and Raimondo-and others-can’t accept the verdict of the Courts, apologize and get this ship back on course they need to be FIRED by the Board and replaced.

        Silvertree in reply to AlexanderYpsilantis. | July 1, 2019 at 12:54 pm

        Yes exactly: my brief research showed that some of the main kids involved seemed to range from somewhat troubled to extremely troubled. Many were also from economically-challenged homes. That’s one reason I didn’t give their names; they just seemed to be so lost and confused and really young, sad, pathetic creatures. Many were taking some kind of mental-health drugs, seeing counsellors, and/or confused about which gender they might be, and talking about all that openly on public internet sites. It’s a huge tragedy, what is happening to these young people.

        What became especially clear, something that has been commented upon at this site multiple times, is that some of the Oberlin College majors are actively, openly training these kids to become activists. These particular students clearly feel that learning to protest and also organize and lead protests is an integral part of their education, and they feel proud of protesting and deeply supported in that by their teachers and peers. Certain bolder student activist leaders are idolized and treated as quasi-celebrities on campus.

        Also, many of the courses within majors at Oberlin are built around race, class, or gender themes: themes of oppression. The College appears to be an activist training camp for lots of these students, who are meant to go out as heroes and change the world consistent with these new values they have absorbed. One main value seems to be that the white western male “cis-sexist heteropatriarchy” controls and destroys all that is good in our world, and has done so for centuries.

        Ironically, Gibson’s is actually something these activists should cherish according to their own values: it’s a small local bakery, passed down carefully through one family, with the full nurture and support of the women of that family, a small business that keeps money in the local economy rather than being integrated into a large wealthy powerful global chain. The bakery also uses relatively pure ingredients to produce a fresh, homemade product daily.

        But so many of these students have become proudly, profoundly racist and sexist against white men. They even turn on their own fathers and brothers! Many of the young white male students absorb all this too and become apologetic and ashamed of their own heritage. This is just a terrible tragedy for our culture, for our whole civilization.

          PostLiberal in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 4:36 pm

          Yes exactly: my brief research showed that some of the main kids involved seemed to range from somewhat troubled to extremely troubled. Many were also from economically-challenged homes. That’s one reason I didn’t give their names;

          If they were from economically challenged homes,they were definitely atypical of the typical affluent Oberlin student: 2% of Oberlin students come from the bottom 20%. This suggests to me that students from poor backgrounds who attend Oberlin view activism as a solution to poverty, as opposed to acquiring skills that can be used in better-paying jobs. It also suggest to me that Oberlin is deliberately recruiting activist types.
          NYT: Economic diversity and student outcomes at Oberlin College

          The median family income of a student from Oberlin is $178,000, and 70% come from the top 20 percent. About 1.2% of students at Oberlin came from a poor family but became a rich adult.
          What kind of students attend Oberlin?
          Among the lowest About typical Among the highest
          In the N.C.A.C. In Ohio Among Other elite schools (public and private) colleges
          Median family income $178,000
          Average income percentile 83rd
          Share of students from top 0.1% 1.1%
          …from top 1% 9.3%
          …from top 5% 37%
          …from top 10% 55%
          …from top 20% 70%
          …from bottom 20% 2%

          Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 4:36 pm

          Fascinating to read the local news stories from that time, and watch the videos: the students keep demanding to not be filmed by the reporter, as hundreds of them engulf the sidewalks of downtown Oberlin! The white students seem to see themselves as emissaries to the reporter and try to make their “reasonable, logical” arguments about not filming, in protection of their black colleagues. They also refuse to tell why they are there; they just mutely hold up signs and flyers and hide their faces behind them! Such vulgarity as well, such foul mouths. What do they think a protest is for, if not to stand up honestly and courageously and tell your story!

          For jb4: Here’s the one about the white shoplifters.

          “The [Aladin] incident was the third instance reported to police this week in which someone allegedly attempted to shoplift from Gibson’s. Melissa Harris, 20, was arrested and charged on Sunday, and Davis Sawyer, 22, was arrested and charged on Monday.

          Both Harris and Sawyer are white and students at Oberlin College as are Aladin, Lawrence and Whettstone.”

          Shoplifting arrest incites protests at Gibson’s in Oberlin


          Here’s the link with kids arguing with the reporter about filming, and hiding their faces. You also see how when an adult (faculty member perhaps?) talks the students down somewhat and starts educating them about freedom of the press, how the kids do listen to her. Ironically enough, the young woman in the lower video who says “No pictures, no pictures,” ended up front and center in the main video footage on Tucker Carlson’s prime time show, seen by millions.

          VIDEO: Protests at Gibson’s in Oberlin


          This article is particularly fascinating because it quotes lots of people who are there:

          Oberlin Protesters Return for Second Day

          It includes this great quote by one of the students:
          “One thing both sides know … we both don’t have all the details,” she said. “And, one thing both sides can agree on is this thing is so complex. One thing we can agree on is something in this country is off, but what that is, we don’t know and we need to figure it out together.”

          OH, the irony!

          Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 4:45 pm

          Yes, PostLiberal, that is my impression, but I really cannot say. I did follow one student who is now back in her poor circumstances with a degree that cannot even earn her a modest living.

        I can’t believe that the majority of Oberlin students come from troubled backgrounds. Tuition, room, board, fees, and books add up to over $74K.

        Oberlin clearly creates “troubled backgrounds” for those entitled rich kids who don’t arrive with one. Take Lena Dunham.

        Please, take her somewhere. Anywhere. Just as long as it’s somewhere with no TV production facilities.

        “…Sexual abuse

        In November 2014, Dunham and the book became a subject of controversy[14] following a profile of Dunham by Kevin D. Williamson published in National Review. In her book, Dunham describes examining her sister Grace’s genitals when they were children out of curiosity, bribing her with candy for kisses and casually masturbating while lying in bed next to her. Williamson characterizes this as sexual abuse,[15] but Lena, Grace, and child psychologists, sexual abuse experts, and researchers in human sexuality reject the notion.[16][17][18]

        In an interview about the controversy in Slate magazine’s XX Factor blog, developmental psychologist Ritch Savin-Williams says that the cited passages do not indicate abuse and that “Children have been doing this stuff forever and ever and ever and ever, and they will do it forever and ever and ever.”[16] Child sexual abuse expert David Finkelhor said that a judgement requires more than a single incident, and psychologist Sharon Lamb opined that the incidents described in the book were “within the norms of childhood sexual behavior” and that “It wouldn’t be sex offender wrong, it would be inappropriate…”[19]

        Dunham later apologized for some of the wording in the book, specifically the joking use of the term ‘sexual predator’, which she described as insensitive.[20][21]
        Legal issues

        In December 2014, Breitbart News investigated Dunham’s claim that Dunham was at a party, “alone, drunk and high on Xanax and cocaine” and was sexually assaulted by a leading member of the Oberlin College Republicans, whom she called “Barry”. Breitbart found a politically conservative alumnus of Oberlin with the forename Barry, later known as “Barry One”, who had attended the school at the same time as Dunham but denied he was the man described by her. Breitbart later raised further doubts that the incident between “Barry One” and Dunham had even occurred. Oberlin College publicly distanced themselves from the issue.[22]

        The alumnus (“Barry One”) subsequently set up a legal fund online to pursue legal action against Dunham and her publisher.[23] “Barry One”‘s counsel stated that ‘Despite multiple requests … Dunham has not issued any sort of statement clearing Barry’s name and clarifying the confusion that is happening.'”[24]

        On December 9, 2014, Random House issued a statement claiming Dunham had related that “Barry” was a pseudonym and had no connection to the Oberlin alumnus with the same first name. The pseudonym was to be removed from all further editions of the book.[25]…”

        I can understand “playing doctor.” But not with my own brothers or sister. The girl down the street, the blonde cutie, yes. But even when I was three years old I would have thought that was a sick thing to do with a sibling.

        Had I had her dad for a father, though, I might have turned out differently.

        “I know about Lena Dunham against my will.

        I’ve never sought out information about this marginal, unstable pop culture player, and yet at least every couple of months Lena Dunham floats to the surface of the news stream, and I have to hear more about her…

        ‘Carroll Dunham makes paintings that not even a mother could love. Vulgar beyond belief, his super-crude depictions of a naked woman crawling through a cartoon landscape border on vicious.

        It’s easy to see why many people find them offensive, demeaning and disgusting, as well as mean-spirited, malicious and horrific. They are all that and more. Much, much more…'”

        Don’t click on the link unless you have a strong stomach. I can deal with it because I spent more time in Bangkok and Olongapo (Subic Bay; again, that tells you how ancient I am) than should be allowed by law. I remember yelling, “Put it on! Put it on!” What is seen can never be unseen. I won’t go into too much detail as that would be almost as bad as looking at the paintings themselves.

        And I’ve seen acts involving darts, balloons, and a boa constrictor. There’s a bar in Olongapo called “The Freaks Stagger Inn” and whoever named the place wasn’t kidding. It was straight out of “Full Metal Jacket.” They haven’t even repaired the bullet holes in the walls since WWII. The bar was a plank sitting on stacked crates. On one end of the bar was the only light in the place. A kerosene lantern. On the other end was the world’s oldest prostitute.

        I ran screaming into the night.

        “…Behold the moronic masterpieces selected and elevated by our utterly corrupted and compromised institutions. This list could go on and on, full of examples of irrelevance, carrion, excrement, pornography, and debris.

        This is the elite’s idea of what is significant in our culture. This is what the establishment is stocking our museums with. This is our self-aggrandizing ruling class’s tawdry and nihilistic vision of life, being inflicted upon us all…”

        Apparently there’s a lot of money in painting naked women with outlandishly oversized genitalia and no faces. I honestly don’t think he’s ever put a face on any of the women he depicts in his “art.” Judging by the quality of his work I don’t believe for an instant that he could.

        But as I said there is a lot of money to be made in this. Dunham’s family is apparently rich as sin. Analogy intended. And when I think of a typical Oberlin student I think of her.

        Don’t worry. I’m not going to link to the picture of her obese tatted up self eating an entire birthday cake while sitting naked on a toilet. She really is daddy’s little girl. But as I said, once seen it can not be unseen.

        I wish I never had been made aware about Dunham’s existence. But for a while her crappy TV show “Girls” was all the rage and you couldn’t swing a dead cat without hitting a website talking about it. Lena Dunham is why I cancelled my cable in 2005. I hadn’t heard about her yet. She was probably young enough to be still living at home molesting her sister.

        But I knew it was only a matter of time.

        “…Oberlin administrators announced the Emotional Support Companion Animals Program for Everyone, affectionately known as “ESCAPE,” last week to an eager student body. “This is a safe space,” said Walter Green, the college’s Executive Vice-President for Redress of Grievances. “And we choose to make it safer with the help of the nonhuman companions with whom we share Mother Earth.”

        …Unfortunately, ESCAPE has not provided the solace for which it was designed. Problems began the first day when Little Mister Derrida, a wolf hybrid companioned with popular Classism Professor Forrest Moore, savagely attacked senior Pietro Salvador’s emotional support rabbit Che. “It’s unreasonable, and in fact very offensive, to expect Little Mister Derrida to deny his nature in order to confirm to social expectations that make the majority comfortable,…

        There were other violent confrontations between companions of different backgrounds and life experiences throughout the week. Moreover, many students reported that their classmates had not offered the welcoming and accepting community that is the hallmark of Oberlin. Sophomore Henry Trask’s attempt to bring his emotional support pig to a Comparative Religion class led to a largely unproductive and mostly screamed debate about the inherent tension between Trask’s right to emotional support and his classmates’ protected right against offense. Freshperson Darlene Oswalt filed a federal civil rights complaint when a professor asked her to take her raptor outside, saying that the college had attempted to “silence [the eagle’s] own story.” Moreover, students with sensory differences have reported hygiene anxieties. “The residence halls reek from feces and urine,” said one student who asked to remain anonymous. “And this time not just that one graduate dorm.”…”

          Silvertree in reply to Arminius. | July 1, 2019 at 10:30 pm

          No, you’re right: only about 2% of Oberlin students come from households below the poverty line. The student body skews heavily wealthy. Yet many of the student activists appear to be from poorer backgrounds, if you look into it a little. It is not only wealthy rich kids protesting.

Lefties – always wrong but never in doubt.

    goomicoo in reply to pfg. | June 29, 2019 at 11:27 am

    Thread winner

    Arminius in reply to pfg. | July 1, 2019 at 9:11 pm

    No truer words. I wasn’t at all surprised to learn that according to the Oberlin PD over 82% of people arrested for shoplifting in that town are Oberlin college students. By and large lefties are the most vicious selfish people on earth.

    This is what happens when 1) your Bible isn’t the Bible but the Communist Manifesto and 2) the world owes you. You’re a victim, and you want so badly to be a victim you’ll make up fake victimhood and/or 3) if you are a rich WHITE leftist the only way you can feel good about yourself is if you feel bad about being white.

    Number 3 may not appear at first glance to be a factor in the leftist culture of theft. But when “morally superior white leftists” walk into a place like Gibson’s bakery they can’t help but want to steal from their inferiors because the only reason Gibson’s has been in business since 1885 is because they are profiteering from white supremacy and privilege.

    And profit according to Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Mao is theft. So it’s only right in their minds to steal some back.

      Arminius in reply to Arminius. | July 1, 2019 at 9:50 pm

      How much do you want to bet that Carmen Twillie Ambar comes from money?

      “…A native of Little Rock, Arkansas, Dean Ambar holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Foreign Service from the Edmund A. Walsh School at Georgetown University, a master’s degree in public affairs from the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and a law degree from Columbia School of Law.

      …Dean Ambar is the chair of the Public Leadership Education Network (“PLEN”) Board and vice-chair of the New Jersey Commission on the Status of Women. She is a member of the board of the American Repertory Ballet, the advisory board for the American Society of Civil Engineers, and the Liberty Science Learning and Teaching Committee. She is an honorary inductee of the Phi Beta Kappa Society, was honored at the 2004 Executive Women of New Jersey Salute to the Policy Makers, and is the recipient of the Wynona M. Lipman Award from the State of New Jersey, and the Woodrow Wilson School’s Edward P. Bullard Distinguished Alumnus Award.

      She studied at L’Institut de Science Politique in Paris and the Université de Caen in Caen, France, and was an exchange student in Kobe, Japan.”

      I grew up in Oakland, CA. It’s almost impossible to grow up in Oakland and never meet a poor black woman. That’s not the kind of curriculum vitae of a poor black woman. I’m not saying it’s impossible I’m wrong. But I was stationed in Japan and it’s an expensive place to live. I never lived in France but I bet it’s an expensive place to live. Yet somehow she didn’t need to work as she apparently spent the first 30 years of her life as a student.

      An international student no less.

      She reminds me of Cory Booker. To hear him talk about how hurtful Biden’s comments about working with segregationists are you’d think he grew up an impoverished black child in Camden, raised by a single mother.

      Actually, his parents were highly paid IBM executives. He wasn’t raised in the hood but in a wealthy mostly white community, and went to Stanford, Oxford on a Rhodes scholarship, and Yale law school.

      But he also needs to be a victim so desperately that if the poor black child didn’t exist he’d have to invent him.

      Oh, wait, he did; T-Bone.

      But note how Ms. Ambar is living up (or down) to my description of a typical leftist. According to her, she’s the victim in this legal mess. According to the court Oberlin college is the victimizer. And she’s demonstrating the leftist’s attitude toward honesty. Contempt. With this as an example it’s no wonder the student body is robbing the town blind.

      If an Oberlin student doesn’t show up to the school as a liar and thief they will be by the time they graduate.

      jb4 in reply to Arminius. | July 1, 2019 at 11:33 pm

      Don’t forget President Obama’s famous “you didn’t build that” line – perhaps another reason to steal some back.

      As things stand now, if Ambar’s legal talk is not posturing, required for the time being by current legal strategy, and comments about change to alumni were “fake news”, I suspect the college is going to learn the hard way the error of its ways.

      Families are not going to risk a $70K tab, even if subsidized, for a diploma of questionable value. The number of people with the College (not the Conservatory, which has different considerations) as first choice will drop a lot and so may those having the school as a lesser choice. High School guidance counselors may be very reluctant to mention the school at all. Their admissions problem next year may be how less selective to become in order to pay the bills.

It seems like they’re prepared to add the cost of defending against ongoing defamation by Oberlin to the attorney fees for which they are requesting compensation at the upcoming hearing. Good.

Wow! This was linked in yesterday’s thread and I *strongly* urge everyone to download and read the Gibson FAQ. It is kind of long but not hard reading. Even after LI’s terrific coverage of the whole story it is still stunning to read how blatant Oberlin’s behavior was and reinforces that their stance continues to be dishonest and manipulative.

    SHV in reply to FOAF. | June 29, 2019 at 11:58 am

    At your suggestion, I read the entire PDF, well worth the time. Nothing new to a reader of LI but seeing the FAQ presentation, Oberlin dodged a real financial bullet, thanks to the Ohio punitive damage cap. Those narcissistic, arrogant, Oberlin SJW a**holes deserved punitive damages beginning at $100 million. It’s obvious that from their post trial behavior, $24 million was nowhere near enough to get their attention and to induce them to correct their behavior.

      RandomCrank in reply to SHV. | June 29, 2019 at 2:07 pm

      In the end, it’ll be a $30 million-plus bullet. I don’t know the details about that endowment, but I suspect the real liquidity there will be a less than the $1 billion principal figure would imply.

Oberlin doesn’t have to agree with the jury’s verdict, just comply with it.

    rdmdawg in reply to rhhardin. | June 29, 2019 at 3:04 pm

    By continuing to publish a counter-narrative to the judgement of the court, they’re persisting in their defamation of Gibson’s Bakery. Sure, they can disagree with the verdict, they need to do so quietly though.

      rhhardin in reply to rdmdawg. | June 29, 2019 at 3:31 pm

      As far as I know they’re just claiming that they had nothing to do with it, not that Gibson’s has a history of racism. In fact they deny saying that. Where’s the defamation?

        ObieWanKanObie in reply to rhhardin. | June 29, 2019 at 4:03 pm

        Ambar is not denying it. She’s being more subtle about it, though. She calls it “lived experience” in her recent communications.

        Silvertree in reply to rhhardin. | June 29, 2019 at 4:19 pm

        I think you are right about the racism part. The smear comes by falsely insinuating that the Gibsons will be responsible for shutting down the free speech of students at colleges everywhere, proven by the fact that they have gone after poor innocent Oberlin.

        This also makes the Gibsons look racist: since the Gibsons don’t want student voices to be heard, they must have something to hide. That’s just how the whole thing comes across.

        And for the very casual reader, it will be:
        Jury: No the Gibsons aren’t racist pay up.
        College: We don’t agree, they are racist.

        Not sure of the legality here, but the moral reality of what they are doing on a national stage is very clear. It’s quite chilling, actually, to borrow a phrase.

        Yes, Oberlin! Aiding and abetting misguided student protests has consequences. You were wrong. Take your punishment like a man.

        Silvertree in reply to rhhardin. | June 30, 2019 at 4:21 pm

        I have changed my mind about this, after seeing the latest article in the Chronicle Telegram. President Ambar is saying publicly that there are people she knows who have a lived experience of racism at Gibson’s, and that their experience has to be honored. Who are these people? Why do they not stand up and give their names? Where does this slander of an innocent family ever stop? It is infuriating. It seems to me that there should be some legal recourse for the Gibsons against Carmen Twillie Ambar for spreading malicious lies about them.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 12:55 pm

          Then there is the question of if those People with “lived experiences”, should they actually exist, were actually the subject of racism or if they just got upset and screamed racism, the latter being worlds more common than the former.

    AlexanderYpsilantis in reply to rhhardin. | July 1, 2019 at 11:01 am

    Just comply with it and STOP LIBELING AND SLANDERING.

    The Judge can raise the punitive damages if Ambar doesn’t stop libeling the Gibsons, she better stop flapping her gums and withhold further comment!

Many alumni accepted the college’s argument. So much for critical thinking. One more foundational brick laid down with BLM, and other fabricated lies. If their blind allegiance only hurt them then fine but their beliefs and actions hurt us all.

    artichoke in reply to alaskabob. | June 29, 2019 at 1:15 pm

    I hope there’s an alum out there who takes this new FAQ and does a blast email to the alum mailing list, to cut through the propaganda. That institution can still be saved with new management. It’s academic and cultural reputation is still pure gold — if they act quickly. But they’ve got a serious problem with the existing leadership and some of the trustees.

      rdmdawg in reply to artichoke. | June 29, 2019 at 3:09 pm

      ‘That institution can still be saved with new management.’

      I hope not, that school is a hotbed of SJW activism and idiocy and needs to be put out of our misery.

        artichoke in reply to rdmdawg. | June 29, 2019 at 4:09 pm

        Yeah you may be right. An alum from the 90’s wrote in on the Reddit page and thanked the PC Police for making him aware of systemic racism, the plight of Palestinians, etc. etc.

        It’s been a cancer longer than I had realized.

        JusticeDelivered in reply to rdmdawg. | June 29, 2019 at 10:01 pm

        While Oberlin College deserves to be shut down, the Oberlin community does not deserve what that would do to them.

          Tom Servo in reply to JusticeDelivered. | June 30, 2019 at 9:42 am

          That’s like saying “While the Third Reich needs to be shut down, the German People don’t deserve the horrors of what war would do to them.”

          Allow disgusting and vicious leadership to take over, bear the consequences.

          amatuerwrangler in reply to JusticeDelivered. | June 30, 2019 at 8:28 pm

          Tom– I don’t see the equivalency. Certainly the German people of the 30s brought the world The Third Reich, either by design or neglect, but I would like to know how the citizenry of the town of Oberlin is in any way responsible for the day-to-day operations of the college, including who sits on the board and what kind of over-educated yahoos they hire to run the place. There is no reason to endanger the economy of the town because of the bad behavior of possibly their major employer.

      Henry P in reply to artichoke. | June 29, 2019 at 5:21 pm

      I and some other alumni/dissidents, tired of what our alma mater was doing (not Oberlin), tried to contact alumni with information about what was really happening on campus. We learned that colleges and universities closely protect their alumni mailing lists. While alumni may be able to access contact information for other individual alumni, it is usually impossible to do a blast email to all alumni. No college or university wants dissidents gumming up fund raising or countering those cheery stories about all those happy, “diverse,” and hugely accomplished student bodies.

        artichoke in reply to Henry P. | June 29, 2019 at 6:57 pm

        To get an idea of how accomplished an alumni body is, the LinkedIn Alumni Tool is useful. You can start with the name of your own college to see how the names are formatted, then guess the page for a college you’re interested in and put it in the address bar.

        The most useful thing I saw was a table showing the percentage of alumni working by name of company. If not many companies there, maybe they’re baristas and don’t want to post a LinkedIn page.

        JohnSmith100 in reply to Henry P. | June 29, 2019 at 9:42 pm

        Depending on how alumni communication software works, it may be possible capture the whole database.

The self-congratulatory egotism, arrogance and infantilism of contemporary Leftists are perfectly captured by Oberlin administrators’ attitudes. The “Woke” ethos that these jackboots worship can brook no contrition, introspection or admission of wrongdoing, brimming as it is with messianic fervor and self-reverence as to the perceived righteousness of its totalitarian mission.

Did CBS news do an interview with the plaintiffs’ attorneys? Nah, wouldn’t want to disturb the narrative

    JusticeDelivered in reply to goomicoo. | June 29, 2019 at 1:01 pm

    Clearly, CBS is promoting the narrative. And they wonder why ever increasing numbers of people despise media.

    Silvertree in reply to goomicoo. | June 29, 2019 at 4:32 pm

    The local yokels, WKYC 3 in Cleveland, interviewed both Gibsons and College and gave them both a very nice hearing. Well done!!

    Their piece on the Gibsons is particularly beautifully done, taking you right inside the bakery on the day of the punituve damages verdict, with interviews with the Gibsons and others who are there. Wonderful!
    Branded as racists, Gibson family took on Oberlin College to rewrite obituary

      MajorWood in reply to Silvertree. | June 29, 2019 at 6:23 pm

      Yeah, but weren’t you also really really hungry when that piece was over? 😉

        Silvertree in reply to MajorWood. | June 29, 2019 at 8:50 pm

        Yes, what a delicious feast! It reminded me of those Gibson’s whole-wheat glazed donuts you mentioned were still haunting your dreams…..

Comanche Voter | June 29, 2019 at 11:53 am

Oberlin’s response has headed off into figures don’t lie, but liars can figure territory. Shame on Oberlin.

It’s not so much that they lost the case, as bad as that is. Oberlin is mostly upset that the tide was turned against them by an unknown (to them) web site like LI. I hear that their attorneys told them to relax, LI host Merrick Garland is on their side. Nothing to worry about.

    artichoke in reply to Pasadena Phil. | June 29, 2019 at 1:30 pm

    And based on their level of awareness and research skills that only get you by in academia if you’re on the far left (standards are much higher for anyone else) they believed their lawyers and didn’t think independently.

      RandomCrank in reply to artichoke. | June 29, 2019 at 5:14 pm

      We’ll never know, but my guess is that their lawyers told them that they had a weak case. It’s the lawyer’s job to either zealously represent the client or withdraw, so I think the lawyers looked at how much they could make off of Oberlin and followed the college’s marching orders.

    MajorWood in reply to Pasadena Phil. | June 29, 2019 at 4:32 pm

    Oberlin turned the tide against themselves when they decided to run with it. LI only reported what was happening. Oberlin et al had just been through 8 solid years of “do as you please” and the thought that a differing opinion could even be uttered was still outside their awareness. In fact, it could be argued that some of them are still there.

      Don’t underestimate the effect having a respected national blog had on the judge, jury and attorneys. Suddenly, they were engaged in something that transcended local interests. Journalism is much more important than lawyers in getting results. Nothing disinfects like sunlight. LI introduced glaring sunlight on a simple case where the only issue was whether the laws would be enforced.

      As I pointed out last weekend, it was the Boston Globe’s tenacious investigative reporting and courageous decision to publish their findings that took down the Archdiocese of Boston over pedophilia in 2001-2002. It turn blew the lid off of these cases around the world. It wasn’t because lawyers won in court. With the average age of victims at 12 y.o., the statute of limitations at 3 years and a maximum penalty of $20k even when convicted, there wasn’t much point for district attorneys to sue. So parties settled out of court to keep things private. The cat was out of the bag and the public was demanding justice and damn the law.

      The Oberlin case wasn’t hamstrung by the same legal absurdities. It was clear-cut application of the law. Yet, there was lots of doubt around here about whether the Gibsons could win, something I have pointed out a couple of times. LI elevated the trial into the national consciousness which energized the prosecution, judge and jury and awakened a new found reality that the case national implications beyond just Oberlin.

      THAT is why Oberlin refuses to accept the verdict. They can’t go national on the case itself. They need to persuade the nation (and their national conspirators) that this was a violation of the constitution. Maybe they are dreaming that this can still become another “Hands up, don’t shoot!” event triggering another series of protests and riots to keep the cause alive?

      Won’t happen. It’s too late. They never thought they would lose and still can’t believe it/won’t accept it. They are just trying to salvage who knows what and buying time to get organized. Complete waste of money other people’s money.

Why not send a cease and desist letter to Ambar, she’s willfully and purposefully harming Gibson Bakery’s reputation.

At some point the faculty are going to need to wake up and realize how this is affecting them. Let’s say that this rounds off to $30M being taken from the endowment. At 4%, that is $1.2M a year in income that is gone. Every year! That likely translates into about 10 faculty positions which just went poof. If they appeal, 10% bonding fee is another 2 positions. College rankings are based on a lot of things, including student-faculty ratios. So a dozen faculty positions out of 200 is a 6% drop, which probably means a drop of 5 positions in US News’s college ratings, which now means fewer students applying or Oberlin having to accept lesser qualified students (I am using lesser correctly here), as well as fewer qualified students. That too leads to a decrease in rankings, as well as a drop in tuition money, and more faculty cutbacks. That is the death spiral that the college now finds itself in, as they pull back harder on the stick. The faculty will soon need to face the realization that the Captain is “a bit off” and may need to be relieved of duty before they all end up in the drink. I bet things would change quickly if a person with access to the alumni roster were able to mass email the url for the Plaintiff’s FAQ. I am not on twitter so perhaps I am not seeing everything with a google search, but there have been about a dozen total tweets since mid-May with “oberlin” in them. I wonder if everything with “oberlin” in it is going through a special filter. But as always, it is the cover-up, and in this case no-news is definitely bad-news. Oberlin is telling their alumni that they aren’t smart enough to see both sides and make up their own minds. That has never worked out well, ever.

    artichoke in reply to MajorWood. | June 29, 2019 at 1:26 pm

    When she took over a couple years ago, Ambar held a meeting and then issued an internal letter basically saying Oberlin was in trouble already. (Nice move to lessen her own responsibility to fix it, but then she’s a sociopath.)

    Reddit’s group for Oberlin College has created a thread, which they’re censoring pretty heavily but the new legal FAQ from Gibson’s lawyers is still up there.

    Tom Servo in reply to MajorWood. | June 30, 2019 at 9:47 am

    “At some point the faculty are going to need to wake up and realize how this is affecting them.”

    Objection, your honor, assumes Facts not in Evidence. Namely, that there is a single person on the faculty who has even the slightest bit of awareness that this could end up affecting them personally.

Please note the Oberlin announcements are not to deal with or try to reduce the claim against them.

They’re PR fundraising.

Oberlin needs 25 million dollar contributions, or some other multiple in order to bring their funding back to the previous level, and the only way they can do that is to go hat in hand to various Leftists. To buckle under to reality and admit their fault would mean a very empty hat, so they’re doubling or tripling down, because only the most frothing leftists will write them the largest checks.

I suspect they will be disappointed.

    artichoke in reply to georgfelis. | June 29, 2019 at 2:07 pm

    Nah it might work. Many here would find that frustrating, and they’d like that. They want to sap our spirit. When you’ve got George Soros level of funds available, they’re going to use an irreplaceable gem like Oberlin College for all it’s worth. You can’t buy such an established name, you have to find one and take it over, and they’ve done so.

    Our best plans are still the standard “blocking and tackling” including helping prospective students next year know what’s been going on there and what the place and its leadership are like, so they and their parents can make informed choices.

      MajorWood in reply to artichoke. | June 29, 2019 at 6:11 pm

      But Oberlin works only if Oberlin works. Right now, Oberlin is on the edge of Jussie Smollett level obscurity. I honestly think that they have pushed it to the point of being cut-off. Tough Love time. On a plus note, if they shed the toxicity, they might become productive members of society again. Lets make Oberlin a place that Lena Dunham can’t be proud of.

RandomCrank | June 29, 2019 at 2:04 pm

I read the entire FAQ last night. I think it is absolutely devastating for Oberlin. Donations and enrollments will drop off a cliff. I wonder how much of that supposed $1 billion endowment is actually in the bank vs. “pledged,” and what percentage of what’s really there is a) restricted for particular purposes and/or b) recallable.

I think the set of shoes to drop will concern Oberlin College’s precarious finances, and the cutbacks that it this will entail. Poor babies!

A #MeToo moment. Oberlin wanted to be an authority. They strong-armed a local business and lost. It seems that projections of diversity were what finally aborted their progressive cause. The social justice scalpel is a double-edged weapon. #HateLovesAbortion

ObieWanKanObie | June 29, 2019 at 4:12 pm

I read in earlier articles that Oberlin paid for the shoplifers’ lawyers and even limo transportation to and from Columbus. I’m surprised that there was not more about this in the trial and in the FAQs. Oberlin very clearly sided with the shoplifters in this case.

Why? Why is a college involving itself in the private legal matters of its students? I suppose it is allowed to do so, but why? And would a student at a state college ever get that kind of privilege?

Publius_2020 | June 29, 2019 at 4:13 pm

“After a year, I hope we rain fire and brimstone on that store.”

That single sentence probably ended any argument about Oberlin’s legal “malice.”

NYT has a new opinion piece on this case:

“Stop the Knee-Jerk Liberalism That Hurts Its Own Cause.”

    MajorWood in reply to Silvertree. | June 30, 2019 at 1:01 pm

    Looks like the NYT just tied a “guide knot.”

    A guide knot is the pejorative name we give to a slip knot on a climbing harness. As the client-party disappears into the crevasse, the guide knot allows the leader to quickly detach themselves from further risk. I think the NYT just sent Oberlin their public version of a Cease and Desist letter.

This FAQ was necessary. Oberlin continues to lie, first about the reputation of Gibson’s and now about the issues at trial. The result is that Gibson’s reputation remains at stake, and now, the reputation of the jury and the system is being tarnished.

It will be interesting to see just how far this flies.

    Anchovy in reply to Valerie. | June 29, 2019 at 8:11 pm

    And the judge. Don’t forget the judge.

      MajorWood in reply to Anchovy. | June 30, 2019 at 11:47 am

      I am now looking at Varner’s blast email as a clear provocation to make the judge overstep somehow. Keep hurling insults until someone punches you in the nose, and then focus on getting punched. But no one is playing their game, so their insignificance grows by the day.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to Anchovy. | July 1, 2019 at 1:14 pm

      Is there some kind of motion that can be filed with the court by the Gibsons to hold Oberlin responsible?

In order to affectively counter Oberlin’s claims, this needs to get out through the mainstream media. Need to counter their PR campaign. More people need to hear.

If I remember correctly, the Gibsons were awarded attorney’s fees.

Now, after the trial is over, the Oberlin College president is going on a media tour, misrepresenting the trial and the verdict.

The attorneys for the Gibsons needed to respond to the misrepresentation outside of the courtroom, and spent time and effort in putting together this FAQ document.

My question is, does this time and effort by the attorneys preparing this FAQ document constitute “billable hours” that Oberlin College will be responsible for paying?

Richard Aubrey | June 29, 2019 at 10:28 pm

Gollleeeee, I love your math.

Here’s the story I found with some description of the alumni conference, online or call or whatever it was.

Seems like the party line. Race was vaguely involved but she won’t say how, wouldn’t apologize if it contradicts any students’ “lived experiences”.

One thing about the left: it’s entirely graceless.

    Silvertree in reply to artichoke. | June 30, 2019 at 12:16 am

    This is so disturbing. Ms. Ambar is still questioning the whole shoplifting events! And she continues talking about people experiencing racism at Gibson’s? Smh.

    MajorWood in reply to artichoke. | June 30, 2019 at 2:17 am

    So we now have a price tag to put on “lived experiences.”

    When I hand back excess change to the cashier I always tell them that I’m not suggesting that my integrity can’t be bought, but it is going to be for significantly more than 40 cents.

    The interesting thing about Oberlin is that they have decided to attach this huge price tag to their behavior, and yet, the behavior isn’t even something that is remotely admirable. In my circles, an absence of humility is viewed as being sort of sad.

    So, anyone have thoughts on how they are going to double-down this to $60M. I honestly think that they still have it in them.

      Tom Servo in reply to MajorWood. | June 30, 2019 at 9:52 am

      I have seen that excess change thing, and I think I’ve figured it out – it’s a sad sign of the times. The store clerks who do it are generally young and got through school/day care without ever having been taught to count or make change. Some eventually figure it out on their own, but others have realized that if they just hand a pile of change to the customer and it’s too much, almost no one will complain and they’ll get by.

        JusticeDelivered in reply to Tom Servo. | June 30, 2019 at 12:26 pm

        With each of my children, 3 and up was was handing them change to count, when they made a mistake I divided the amount in half, and they tried again until they had something. Teaching starts in the home, that is how we set the stage for them to become good students. I find it hard to understand how any parent fails at this.

      I share your perspective, with one qualification.

      Lack of humility really bothers me. However, once a legal strategy is determined, the client can’t go off script until the case is done or the strategy changes. On the alumni phonecast on 6/27, their legal posturing was in place. However, in the Q&A I saw a hint of wanting to put this behind them and interest in making some changes. If so, they will not appeal the reduced judgment and move forward, which is my prediction. If they do appeal and continue with the adverse press, they will deserve the Evergreen State College experience they will likely get.

      Silvertree in reply to MajorWood. | June 30, 2019 at 4:07 pm

      If people have something to say, they should say it openly, not whispering behind people’s backs in dark corners. It is the behavior of cowards. It is disgusting.

      Isn’t this grounds for a new defamation suit? If the Oberlin College president is coming out saying these unnamed people have a lived experience of racist behavior at Gibson’s, isn’t that a statement of fact that could be considered grounds for a libel suit?

Oberlin gave their brainwashed students “guns” when they decided to assassinate Gibson Bakery. Now they must pay the price for arming the loons they brainwashed. Liberalism needs to be held accountable for its crimes against America.

    MajorWood in reply to Pouncekitty. | June 30, 2019 at 12:08 pm

    In a way it parallels the drug gangs that employ minors who will not receive the same punishment as an adult would. Oberlin is Po’d that they skipped over the soldiers here and went after the officers. Maybe we can all chip in and get Raimondo that “UNLEASH” vanity plate. It must be nerve wracking for all of those students who can be clearly identified in pictures and video clips holding signs accusing Gibsons of racism, who are still waiting for that call or letter advising them that they have been summoned for a deposition. Or maybe it is worse that their 15 minutes has gone unnoticed?

      Gremlin1974 in reply to MajorWood. | July 1, 2019 at 1:22 pm

      Yea, the British had the same mentality during the Revolutionary War. It was considered dishonorable to target officers. This was because the officers were the line soldiers “betters” and deserved better treatment. But then again that was also a time when the soldiers basically stood in ranks in an open field and shot the hell out of each other.

      I still don’t understand how that military doctrine came to be, I mean you can mass fire with your troops in cover.

OnTheLeftCoast | June 30, 2019 at 5:19 am

David Gibson kept on fighting so that his father wouldn’t die labeled as a racist. Oberlin College is employing a Big Lie tactic.

OC now knows how much it has to cost the bakery to ruin it once and for all; the bakery probably won’t survive constant demonstrations picket lines and demonstrations on the sidewalk outside the entrance.

Purely as an exercise in educating its students about their right to free speech, the college will train its students how to continue to portray the Gibsons as racists and get away with it.

Allyn W. Gibson will be the target of charges of racism for the rest of his life, and if the students pursue a Westboro Baptist tactic, at his funeral as well.

There are likely to be street demonstrations in front of the bakery on an ongoing basis; how to do this within the law is well known. The only question will be can the students and faculty maintain enough discipline to stay within the law.

    MajorWood in reply to OnTheLeftCoast. | June 30, 2019 at 12:24 pm

    If they show that behavior, then it will be time to put the student body on suicide watch. The first protests took place when 98% of Lorain County didn’t know about Gibsons, or even where Oberlin was located. Now they ALL know. “Snowflake, meet Mr. Blowtorch,” or, “does the name Custer mean anything to you?”

    JusticeDelivered in reply to OnTheLeftCoast. | June 30, 2019 at 12:32 pm

    I hope you are wrong about this, but if they continue after this ruling they will be sued again.

I am not the least bit shocked or surprised about Oberlin refusal to accept personal responsibility for their part in this brouhaha. The ‘elite’ consider themselves to be a law unto themselves, even when convicted of crime. I believe it’s an attitude promoted through culture, genetics in some cases and just moral laziness.

Showing grace or mercy to Oberlin university is a waste of time, since like Jihadi warriors, mercy equals weakness. What would have been an effective way to deal with Oberlins judgement is for the judge to demand payment as soon as the trial is over, or lock up the offenders until can pay their debt.

The social point of court actions isn’t well understood. If I’ve had enough of you and your perfidious behavior, my taking it to court isn’t asking the court to say enough is enough; my taking it to court is me saying enough is enough.

So in that way the Gibsons’ court action isn’t asking the court to agree but is itself what they wanted to say.

It’s not necessary for Oberlin to agree with the verdict for everything to work.

“It’s not necessary for Oberlin to agree with the verdict for everything to work.”
Except that the post verdict behavior of Oberlin administration continues to damage the reputation of the business and the Gibson’s as individuals. If this pattern of behavior continues, I suspect that the court will be asked to get involved again.

    rhhardin in reply to SHV. | June 30, 2019 at 1:48 pm

    Oberlin isn’t saying the Gibsons are racists. The students were saying it. Oberlin is saying it was the students, not them.

    The jury said Oberlin was saying it, but Oberlin doesn’t have to agree with the jury. They do have to pay.

    As an innocent man condemned to death says, he’s taking one for the team. The verdict is wrong though.

      Valerie in reply to rhhardin. | June 30, 2019 at 2:11 pm

      The FAQs from Gibson’s attorneys cite testimony and exhibits that show behavior by Oberlin employees. The focus is not on the students. The jury instructions relate to behavior bt Oberlin employees, not the students.

      There is evidence.

      Silvertree in reply to rhhardin. | June 30, 2019 at 4:16 pm

      President Ambar is saying publicly that there are people she knows who have a lived experience of racism at Gibson’s, and that their experience has to be honored. Who are these people? Why do they not stand up and give their names? Where does this slander of an innocent family ever stop? It is infuriating. It seems to me that there should be some legal recourse for the Gibsons against Carmen Twillie Ambar for spreading malicious lies about them.

        “President Ambar is saying publicly that there are people she knows who have a lived experience of racism at Gibson’s, ”
        Exactly….the malicious defamation of Gibson by Oberlin continues…..time for another round of discovery and depositions

        rhhardin in reply to Silvertree. | June 30, 2019 at 5:57 pm

        If she’s doing that, it’s simple – just sue Oberlin again.

        Still, she can believe whatever she wants. Eventually she’ll figure out the rule.

        RNJD in reply to Silvertree. | June 30, 2019 at 6:58 pm

        Walking into the store, selecting a tasty treat, paying for it and exchanging pleasantries with the bakery staff = good experience with Gibson’s.

        Walking into the store, attempting to shoplift, being caught and exchanging not so pleasant words with the bakery staff = bad experience with Gibson’s.

        President Ambar needs better friends.

So you want to talk about lived experience?

Now the Gibsons, for merely trying to stop some shoplifting, are getting tarred as racists. For merely being concerned about the life of a sentient and potentially sapient human life, others get called misogynistic. For accepting very ancient wisdom about how the human race works, people get called homophobic. For remembering how great grandma cowered in a dungheap with her mouth over her kid brother’s mouth while watching Kurds sew a cat into her mother’s womb and drown her in the upper Euphrates and relating it to 9/11, you get called Islamophobic…

    rhhardin in reply to Kepha H. | June 30, 2019 at 6:16 pm

    Everybody’s called a racist these days. The problem was the charge was used to cut off Gibson’s business. Made it risky to do business with Gibson’s. Mob action.

The student Oberlin Review (OR) has come alive! I won’t copy/paste the entire article – the link is:

The article is rather awkward to read. The errors in logic, the lies presented as facts, and so forth —– not surprising but still disappointing. A few comments if I may, followed by excerpts from the OR.

The OR misses the point – the students actually were/are guilty! No profiling happened, so how can the students be right to protest something that didn’t happen?
“Finally, many journalists and commentators — although not all — appear to believe that the salient question at hand is whether the three students involved in the initial altercation were actually guilty of shoplifting, or if students were right to protest the bakery and characterize that incident as racial profiling.”

The Gibson’s version of events is downplayed. The shoplifter and associates didn’t do anything wrong – but later admitted to the charge in court?
“Noticeably absent from the police report was the perspective of any of the three Black students involved in the initial incident, not to mention the witnesses who originally called police out of concern for the students’ safety or who saw the altercation. Officers did include the line, “It should be noted that as the reporting officer was interviewing all three subjects several other individuals who were also on scene at the time of the incident and who were initially interfering with officers attempting to gain control of the situation, began stating that Allyn was the aggressor and the black man didn’t do anything wrong.” This is the only suggestion in the entire report that anything took place outside of the Gibson’s’ version of events.”

Oh My Aching Head —->
“This omission is meaningful — particularly in a country with a long and shameful history of manipulating testimony and evidence to criminalize people of color, especially Black people. That report defined the narrative that, from the beginning, was parroted by mainstream outlets and right-wing blogs alike to vilify the three Black students and those who came to their defense. By immediately assuming the students’ guilt, the report significantly impacted the way this story is discussed in the public sphere — even today.”

OR, your context is false, incorrect, and wrong. Your conclusion that the Gibson’s version deteriorates in YOUR context is meaningless. Change any context and the results change. Writing your own self-serving context is meaningless outside your circle. The facts have been evaluated – by the jury. Calling for a re-evaluation, outside the court, is meaningless outside your circle.
“In this context, the narrative of the ‘Goliath’ college egging on its students completely deteriorates. It’s true that Raimondo was at the protests, but she was simply attempting to ensure the safety of all involved — as dictated within the responsibilities of her job. Any other framing is incomplete, and we urge both journalists and readers to critically evaluate the facts of the College’s involvement.”

Oh My Aching Butt –> what injustice? The shoplifters admitted to everything in open court. What frappin injustice has been identified?
“Ultimately, we believe that the story of the verdict should be discussed out in the open, because the jury’s decision — as it stands — sets a concerning precedent that must be challenged.

And, in the very near term, we hope that the College will appeal the jury’s verdict and continue to fight for the right of its students — and the rights of students across the country — to identify injustice and speak out firmly against it.”

The OR doesn’t “get it” either. They double down on their false narrative/context. ‘wrong but never in doubt.’ (credit to an earlier commentator)

Fer cryin out loud folks!

    walls in reply to OldSchool. | June 30, 2019 at 7:15 pm

    Assuming the court order isn’t appealed – or any appeal is unsuccessful – with both attorney fees, this is likely going to cost OC $30M or more. I wonder what shoplifter Aladin thinks about this? That needs to go on his resume. Then again, who’d want to hire a convicted shoplifter?

    Silvertree in reply to OldSchool. | July 1, 2019 at 12:15 am

    Yes, the “journalistic malpractice” here is incredibly disturbing. I sent them a scathing letter about it, showing them point by point their lies and deceptions. It is horrible. They should be ashamed of themselves, writing such nonsense.

    In fact perhaps they should be sued for misrepresenting the facts of the case, and insinuating racism where there is none to be found?

    MajorWood in reply to OldSchool. | July 1, 2019 at 1:55 am

    I just sent a reply to their article, and much like the jury verdict, it is going to leave a mark. I was shooting for a minimumn 80% trigger-word content. God I hate having to parent other people’s kids.

      Silvertree in reply to MajorWood. | July 1, 2019 at 1:13 pm

      Thank you, Major Wood!! We will see what makes the cut to be printed this fall! And the trigger warnings should be fascinating.

Re: “…. we urge both journalists and readers to critically evaluate the facts of the College’s involvement.”

Didn’t the jury do that, the party that counts in this country? Failing that, the Gibson’s lawyer FAQ is far and away the best reference provided anywhere for the facts and evidence actually presented at trial.

Absurd that Ambar was able to do an extended interview on a major network without any knowlegeable person there to challenge her lies. If the anchorwoman couldn’t bother to familiarize herself with the case then get an outside expert like Professor Jacobson.


“Did Oberlin apologize to Gibson’s?”

“We did have discussions where we tried to work things out.”

Knowlegeable person:
“Actually Oberlin tried to extort Gibson’s, offering to apologize only if Gibson’s agreed not to report first-time student shoplifters to the police. Imagine what that would have done to their shoplifting problem, if students knew they had one get-out-of-jail-free card…”

    Silvertree in reply to AlecRawls. | July 1, 2019 at 12:40 am

    I noticed that too. It is maddening. On several occasions recently President Ambar has also proclaimed that the Gibsons were unwilling to meet with the students to talk things through. This is not true at all, they were willing to meet but made the condition that the College publicly admit that there is no record of racism or racial profiling first.

    All this deception gives people a totally wrong impression of the Gibsons. So cruel for this innocent family. Clearly Ms. Ambar cares not for the truth. I guess it is her lived experience of the truth that matters? What a smooth talker! In the WKYC3 interview, her sly attorney sitting next to her could barely keep eye contact, you could tell the attorney knew that she herself was lying when she made her “being held liable for free speech of students” spiel. But Ms. Ambar wove her webs of deception quite easily.

    They will get their just rewards for this nonsense, sooner or later. Fire and brimstone raining down, perhaps.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to Silvertree. | July 1, 2019 at 11:34 am

      “They will get their just rewards for this nonsense, sooner or later. Fire and brimstone raining down, perhaps.”

      About 50 years ago I was with a multi denominational group of ministers, we were discussing theology. One told a story detailing someone who was a really nasty piece of crap, and one minister said that person who get what he had coming in the hereafter. Being young and full of piss and vinegar, I commented that I thought that people like I might be here to see to it that evil people were held accountable sooner. A different minister commented that it was good theology. We had a long discussion about that.

      Of course, for that to be true, a person must have the facts right, otherwise they end up being evil like Oberlin College & Carmen Twillie Ambar.

The Oberlin Review just keeps on rolling the ‘new context’. Notice how the OR spoils the milk by reporting the shoplifters were ‘compelled’ to plead guilty and ‘recant’ allegations of racism. Those words imply something other than admitting to facts. The implication is sinister.

Also note this is not/not the same OR article recently linked to. The earlier link was an editorial opinion (?); this is a ‘new’ article.

“The three students involved in the initial altercation took a plea deal in August 2017. In exchange for amended misdemeanor charges, they were compelled to plead guilty to shoplifting and read statements recanting allegations of racism against Allyn Gibson and the bakery.”

No end is in sight.
Oh bother (credit Winnie the Poo)