Image 01 Image 03

Oberlin College vows to fight Gibson’s Bakery Verdict: “This is not the final outcome”

Oberlin College vows to fight Gibson’s Bakery Verdict: “This is not the final outcome”

Oberlin College president in blast email: “Let me be absolutely clear: This is not the final outcome. This is, in fact, just one step along the way of what may turn out to be a lengthy and complex legal process.”

After a jury awarded Gibson’s Bakery and its owners $11 million in compensatory damages, and $33 million in punitive damages (which likely will be reduced to $22 million under a state law capping damages at 2X compensatory damages), the college and its administrators are unapologetic and vowing to fight.

The President of Oberlin College, Carmen Twillie Ambar, just sent this blast email (h/t commenter rhhardin):

Dear Members of the Oberlin Community,

By now many of you will have heard about the latest development in the Gibson’s Bakery lawsuit, a jury’s declaration of punitive damages against Oberlin. Let me be absolutely clear: This is not the final outcome. This is, in fact, just one step along the way of what may turn out to be a lengthy and complex legal process. I want to assure you that none of this will sway us from our core values. It will not distract, deter, or materially harm our educational mission, for today’s students or for generations to come.

We will take the time we need to thoughtfully consider the course that is in Oberlin’s best interests. I will update the community as we make these decisions. I am confident that when we resolve this matter, it will look substantially different than it looks today.

We are disappointed in the jury’s decisions and the fragmentary and sometimes distorted public discussion of this case. But we respect the integrity of the jury, and we value our relationship with the town and region that are our home. We will learn from this lawsuit as we build a stronger relationship with our neighbors.

This has been a remarkable year for the college and conservatory. There is unprecedented unity around an ambitious new vision for Oberlin. The work of fulfilling that vision is already underway. Long after this lawsuit has receded from memory, that work will shape Oberlin’s future. I appreciate the contributions so many of you have made, your perspective at this important time, and the commitment you have shown to what matters most for Oberlin.


Carmen Twillie Ambar

This stands in contrast to the conciliatory tone taken by Oberlin College in arguing no punitive damages were needed:

“You have spoken,” said Oberlin College attorney Rachelle Kuznicki Zidar to the jury. “You have sent a profound message. We have heard you, and believe me, colleges across the country have heard you,” She also looked at the Gibson family and said, “The college doesn’t hate you.”

In a move I’ve never seen by a college or university, Oberlin College has moved its Twitter account to “protected”:

[Update 5:15 p.m. – Oberlin College has removed the protection of its account]

This comes after Oberlin College several days ago blocked journalist Andy Ngo:

[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.


CaptYossarian | June 14, 2019 at 10:17 am

Oh, goody. Let me get some popcorn and a comfortable chair.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to CaptYossarian. | June 14, 2019 at 1:34 pm

    Will Oberlin provide “free” popcorn to their alumni as the alumni watch the Democrat Party owned college administration squander Million$ more of their funds?????

Fine with me, Twillie.

Of course, it looks like your insurance company will fight you … and let the interest charges accrue!

    Tom Servo in reply to walls. | June 14, 2019 at 10:38 am

    Seeing what she wrote, I realize that she is just the female version of President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho.

      LeftWingLock in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 3:29 pm

      Tom, generally your posts make good sense. But it is an insult to compare this woman to President Camacho. She does, however, have what Oberlin craves. The solution, IMO, is to send Dean Raimondo to Monday Night Rehabilitation.

    LKB in reply to walls. | June 14, 2019 at 12:26 pm

    Reading this makes it clear: Oberlin has learned absolutely nothing, and has zero remorse for what it did.


    puhiawa in reply to walls. | June 14, 2019 at 12:31 pm

    No insurance for intentional torts. I suspect the matter will be decided somewhere in the middle, but not for the punitives. That will be on Oberlin.

      artichoke in reply to puhiawa. | June 14, 2019 at 5:18 pm

      The president just made it sound more intentional.

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to artichoke. | June 14, 2019 at 6:50 pm

        Being defiant is not a good way to get a judge to go lenient on awarding attorney’s fees. More poor judgement from the school.

        So now the clock starts to tick soon on their appeal. Oberlin will burn around $2,000,000 per year in interest and attorney’s fees on this, more if they also fight the insurance companies which is also a losing proposition.

        They could easily burn another $2 million bucks. If the Gibson family is able to wait this out, they likely have little to lose. Any appeal has a low probability of success.

PR b*ll, considerably toned down from the blast email sent after the compensatory damages award. It took over a day to write, too. I had this mental image of Meredith Raimundo jumping and down and screaming “I’m gonna sue Gibson’s!!! I’m gonna sue!!!” and it took this long to get her to calm down. :-/

    healthguyfsu in reply to redcybra. | June 14, 2019 at 10:35 am

    It would be fun to see someone try to sue for being sued. I haven’t watched near enough smackdowns yet.

      Tom Servo in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 14, 2019 at 10:39 am

      She’s talking about appeals – I think even an SJW like her has been told that you can’t sue about a lawsuit.

      Pettifogger in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 14, 2019 at 10:59 am

      In a sense, you can do that. The cause of action is called abuse of process. Of course, one of the elements is that you prevailed in the litigation you complain about.

      But of course, that requirement is symptomatic of a white, patriarchal, Western hegemonic system. As is the notion of letting proles sit in judgment of their betters.

“We will take the time we need to thoughtfully consider the course that is in Oberlin’s best interests.”

Wait, now it’s Oberlin’s INDIVIDUAL interests that are pararmount?

What about muah SOCIAL justice?


    Ironman in reply to Andrew Branca. | June 14, 2019 at 11:11 am

    Andrew, out of curiosity is LI gaming out potential motions for appeal by Oberlin?

      Valerie in reply to Ironman. | June 14, 2019 at 11:40 am

      Sure we are. That is why only double damages were included in the headline of one of these articles. The full award is possible, but there is a cap on damages unless there is a showing of malice.

      I am one of many who assumed the punitive damages award would be cut. Now, I am no longer so sure of that. I hope the plaintiffs move to include these blast letters in the appeal evidence. It is later-developed evidence, but very pertinent to the issue of continuing malice. Perhaps they can appeal the ruling by the trial court to keep the letter immediately after the verdict out of evidence.

      I’m just an observer like the rest of you on this one. 🙂


    artichoke in reply to Andrew Branca. | June 14, 2019 at 5:19 pm

    I thought they would have to deposit the amount of the judgment immediately and appeal, or else pay it and be done.

    Full amount.

    Is that not correct?

      Gremlin1974 in reply to artichoke. | June 14, 2019 at 6:18 pm

      (IANAL)That probably changes from State to State, so it probably depends on how the law there handles damages. Here in my state Punitive and Compensatory damages aren’t even paid together or in the same way.

      griffeydog in reply to artichoke. | June 15, 2019 at 12:56 am

      In many states they have to post a bond against the judgement before appealing. But in many places that bond is capped. And this award would be over most caps if there is one. Btw, such a bond requirement is what killed Gawker. They could not both post the bond and afford legal costs of the appeal.

        Publius_2020 in reply to griffeydog. | June 15, 2019 at 3:49 am

        In Ohio, the law requires an “adequate” bond to obtain a stay on appeal, and the determination of adequacy is up to the trial judge. So Oberlin is going to have to go to the court and make a proposal.

She comes across very angry. Also, the first paragraph about lengthy and complex legal process is intended to be threatening.

    Whitewall in reply to quaker lady. | June 14, 2019 at 11:52 am

    Predictable response from pig ignorant “progressives’.

    This latest message is consistent with the other communications from tone-deaf, arrogant Oberlin. This case and the judgment have threatened the protected cocoon of the academic leftist echo chamber, and the only response is to attack. Facts do not matter. I wonder who is orchestrating Oberlin’s defense and communications strategy? Clearly not experienced crisis managers. You don’t show that you have learned by attacking and pointing fingers. “Distorted?” The only people whose opinion really matters are the 8 jurists. Everything becomes public record That is part of what helped lose the case for Oberlin – the actions and communications from Oberlin overwhelmingly demonstrated anger, malice and intent. “Unleash” the students? Rain “fire and brimstone” on the Gibsons? “F—” them? I guess it is Oberlin’s DNA to double down continuously. Either that or all of this is for show, a cover your a– act for the trustees and alumni to somehow convince them that Oberlin is the innocent victim.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to quaker lady. | June 14, 2019 at 6:18 pm

    She is angry, that’s all SJW’s have is anger and hate.

She provides a perfect example of how the entire Oberlin administration is in complete denial about what just happened. Which in fact justifies the entire punitive damages award.

Someone yesterday noted that this whole case was like an extended episode of Fawlty Towers, where Basil Fawlty never missed a chance to double down when he was wrong.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 10:33 am

    In denial and heavily lacking in contrition and adaptation.

    fscarn in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 10:50 am

    Is the whole place loaded with AA hires? Complete with the arrogance and the incompetence.

      walls in reply to fscarn. | June 14, 2019 at 11:33 am

      Twitter blocking for an academic institution is antithetical to the mission of academic freedom. Clearly, they are in over their heads! They would be well-advised to seek competent, professional, outside help for crisis management and strategic planning.

    Ghostrider in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 11:17 am

    “Let me be absolutely clear: “ this is what the resistance and the face of hypocrisy looks like. The Oberlin President has absolutely no respect for the rule of law and the US judicial system. She thinks she is going to win on appeal…good luck with that

      walls in reply to Ghostrider. | June 14, 2019 at 11:56 am

      Twillie has a JD from Columbia School of Law and is a member of the New York Bar Association.

        rochf in reply to walls. | June 14, 2019 at 2:16 pm

        She must have cut class the day they discussed defamation, and she must have missed the entirety of civil procedure.

          Close The Fed in reply to rochf. | June 14, 2019 at 6:42 pm

          Rochf: it appears she also missed evidence class, when she discusses the “distorted” information the jury received.

          Juries never get everything; it’s always filtered by rules of evidence.

          Get Woke; Go Broke.

        Publius_2020 in reply to walls. | June 15, 2019 at 4:01 am

        I tried to figure out if she practiced as an actual attorney, or whether she’s been an apparatchik her whole life. She graduated from Columbia in 1994, and immediately went to work for the City of New York as a government lawyer in the corporate counsel’s office. From there, she went to straight to “Assistant Dean for Graduate Education” at Princeton.

      andrewp111 in reply to Ghostrider. | June 14, 2019 at 9:26 pm

      It all depends on who hears the appeal, doesn’t it? Which Party appointed the judges of the relevant Ohio appeals court that hears cases from this district, and which political party controls the Ohio Supreme Court? And can Oberlin manufacture any grounds to get this into Federal court before Democratic judges?

        Publius_2020 in reply to andrewp111. | June 15, 2019 at 4:03 am

        The Ohio Supreme Court is 5-2 Republicans. And no, it’s not going to the federal court.

          Milwaukee in reply to Publius_2020. | June 15, 2019 at 7:55 pm

          ” And no, it’s not going to the federal court.”

          In a sane world, you are correctomundo.

          But that isn’t the current case. Remember the President banned people from countries with dysfunctional governments, because visa applicants weren’t being properly screened by their own governments, and that turned into a “Muslim Ban”, and went to the Federal courts. Or President Obama said the Dreamer thing would be unconstitutional, and with a memo, not even an executive order, a memo, had it implemented, and a Federal court could stop President Trump from stopping it. A longshot bet to be sure, but if there is some underlying civil rights in there, or pretending to be there, it could end up in a Federal court. All you need is to find a looney Obama judge and make something up.

    OnTheLeftCoast in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 11:20 am

    “Social Justice Warriors always double down.”

healthguyfsu | June 14, 2019 at 10:32 am

“It will not distract, deter, or materially harm our educational mission, for today’s students or for generations to come.”

Well that is a far cry from yesterday’s pleas for the poor future students (who will in reality just go elsewhere).

    Her stilted, pompous language is what you would expect from someone attempting to re-litigate the case via social media, but she clearly is not an experienced litigator nor used to dealing with public crises. But she did get one thing right – it has been a remarkable year for Oberlin.

    griffeydog in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 15, 2019 at 12:57 am

    Almost as if they just committed perjury in their pleadings now isn’t it?

    Firewatch in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 16, 2019 at 10:38 am

    Does she have a sister in Baltimore?

Further proof that the jury made the right call.

healthguyfsu | June 14, 2019 at 10:38 am

“In a move I’ve never seen by a college or university, Oberlin College has moved its Twitter account to “protected”:”

Well, they are protected…from reality. Apparently, they divorced decades ago.

There are rumors that any alums that are critical of the university for more than just this case have been hastily blocked by the Oberlin alumni association twitter account.

    This is battlespace preparations. “We wuz threatened by the VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!!” is likely a gambit for public sympathy. Many of the administration, faculty and students of Oberlin have joined with groups such as BLM, BDS, and Antifa, and it is standard operating procedure of these terrorists to accuse their victims of being the real criminals.

    Next will come Christine Blasey Ford clones claiming this-or-that racist statement/act from the members of the Gibson family.

      If that’s what they think (it may be) then they have made an even greater error than their previous errors. This is no longer a fight for “public opinion”, the trial is over. With respect to their twitter blockage, this is a fight for future contributions, and you can bet that every alumnus that has been blocked will never give them another dime.

      For the sake of their vanity, they’re cutting their own financial throats.

        RITaxpayer in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 1:39 pm

        Here, Oberlin, try this BIGGER shovel!

        Actually, I was thinking more of Oberlin and its defenders in the MSM/DNC axis insinuating unsubstantiated charges of racism against the Gibsons in order to (1) drive them out of business, and (2) mute as much as possible any public backlash for doing so. Revenge, in other words.

        We have seen similar blood libels directed against the country of Israel, President Trump, Justices Kavanaugh and Thomas, Roy Moore, the prolife movement, the Tea Party, and the NRA, among others. Some of these smears have failed, but others have succeeded in (if nothing else) diluting public anger against the truly guilty by creating a hazy impression that the innocent are somehow the real culprits.

          Was the behavior, for which they have been found responsible and assessed both compensatory and punitive damages, consistent with Oberlin’s mission?

          She didn’t even address that question. She didn’t even call it a breach of their values and mission and say how they were going to work to make sure it never happened again.

        andrewp111 in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 9:36 pm

        What if Oberlin’s defiance induces well heeled SJW donors (like Soros)to give Oberlin more than $35M? In that case it costs them nothing, and defiance pays off.

      Silvertree in reply to Recovering Lutheran. | June 14, 2019 at 8:50 pm

      May God preserve us.

Yep, and 3, 2, 1, just like clockwork an “academic” weighs in with “Nothing the Oberlin students did was defamation, and certainly nothing Oberlin administrators did qualifies as defamation.”
Here is his article:

    Tom Servo in reply to gkissel. | June 14, 2019 at 12:21 pm

    I read through that article, to try and get an idea of what legal claims Oberlin might raise on appeal. The author claims that the Judge made an “Error of Law” when he didn’t allow Oberlin to present “Evidence” that the Gibson’s really were Racists during the trial. He claims that a facebook post by Allyn Gibson made in 2012 should have been admitted – why? It had absolutely nothing to do with this case at all.

    First, there was no such “evidence”, second, the Judge ruled that the entire issue had nothing to do with the actual case being litigated. He also briefly mentions, and then completely ignores, the tortious interference count, which had nothing to do with defamation at all, but rather the actual actions of the Oberlin administrators.

    Still, it was enlightening to get a view into what Oberlin’s litigators were thinking, and why they handled this case so badly. I now believe that they Defense team went into the trial thinking that they were going to be able to “Prove” that the Gibson’s were “Racists!!!” on the stand, and that when the Judge threw out that whole line of argument, they had no plan B and just gave up.

      artichoke in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 5:36 pm

      And now, they still don’t say they did anything wrong or will change anything. Instead they’ll fight on. Still trying to prove Gibson’s are racists? Will that be one of Oberlin’s big areas of emphasis, the fight to prove that a local bakery is racist, that many black people say isn’t?

      Silvertree in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 9:01 pm

      What does the post say? It seems to me that if it is a truly racist post, the students would be justified in taking their business elsewhere, if they feel so moved. Of course they always have that choice, but I have been operating under the assumption that they are completely delusional about the Gibsons. Yes ithe post has nothing to do with the case, as one Facebook post does not equal “a long history”. But it might have everything to do with how the students feel about the bakery. So now you have sparked a question in my mind. What does the post say that seems to be so offensive in Obieland?

      andrewp111 in reply to Tom Servo. | June 14, 2019 at 9:39 pm

      The Judge also denied Oberlin’s motion for change of venue. This is something that a Democratic Party appointed Appeals court could use to order a new trial.

        Publius_2020 in reply to andrewp111. | June 15, 2019 at 4:14 am

        Change of venue motions are essentially impossible to win on appeal. The standard of review is “abuse of discretion,” and you have to show that you could not obtain a fair trial. It’s a loser.

    cucha in reply to gkissel. | June 14, 2019 at 1:33 pm

    Just read his tweets (@johnkwilson) to know he is an unhinged progressive wacko.

Blaise MacLean | June 14, 2019 at 10:47 am

She misses the entire point of the verdict. It’s not about the size of the judgment per se. Maybe some black-robed masterminds in Akron with reduce the amount. That means nothing.

The point is that a jury made up of ordinary people in the community, represented that community, heard what Oberlin’s conduct had been, heard their attitude towards a small local business and their indifference to the effect of their behaviour on the reputation of a family (from the very young to the very old) and they were furious.

And that is the point of the verdict. The community,to which the Oberlin aristocracy perceives itself to be so superior, is absolutely infuriated, indignant and repulsed.

It seems Oberlin hasn’t got its head around that.

I imagine a settlement is possible prior to any appeal being heard. If so I hope there is no confidentiality agreement attached.

What I find interesting is “Oberlin College has moved its Twitter account to “protected”:”. The only reason for that is to shutdown the Social Media reaction when your “average Joe” has a chance to think about what really happened and who the “Bad Guys” really are. I wonder when they will shutdown their Facebook account?

I checked the Oberlin College and the Oberlin Alumni Facebook and Twitter accounts this am, before the “protection.” Not a word about the case, no posts at all since either May 27 (graduation) or June 6 (someone got a award). Pitiful.

If they offended a Muslim vendor, would they be falling over backwards to apologize even if they did nothing wrong?

Slander or libel someone who was truly wronged? Not a chance of an apology if you can label them racist instead?

I hope they get a bunch of additional legal fees and nothing to show for it.

And I hope Gibsons have speedy justice.

I would love to know just what Oberlin’s core values are? and what exactly is the ambitious new vision for Oberlin? Apparently it includes not admitting to your mistakes and not taking responsibility for those mistakes. I would also love to know what Ms Ambar and Oberlin learned from this lawsuit? It’s clear from Ms Ambar’s email that Oberlin College considers itself a “community” separate and distinct from Oberlin, OH. Maybe that’s the real problem here? Hopefully Oberlin College’s “new vision” is to become part of the Oberlin, OH community and teach its students how to play a more productive role in that community rather than a destructive role. I think Oberlin students would be better served in the long run.

    Silvertree in reply to djung8734. | June 14, 2019 at 2:26 pm

    Concerning community relations, here is an excerpt of my response to Ms. Ambar’s letter this morning:

    “You will not ever, you will NEVER regain the respect of your neighbors until you apologize for smearing a good and honest family that has been a pillar of your community for more than a century….. Without such an apology, your efforts are futile. Futile! No, this lawsuit will not be soon forgotten. The arrogance and disdain shown by the College in their handling of this affair is now seared into Lorain County’s collective consciousness; these memories will live on in your community, passed down through generations. Your only hope is a full and contrite apology, IMMEDIATELY.

    If you do appeal this case, you will drive the last possibilities for reconciliation away. You now have one final chance to apologize, accept your losses and go home.

    But Oberlin College, it seems you are not sorry for the damage you have caused to these innocent people. You tried to destroy them, but that is OK in your world because of the color of their skin. Oberlin, you no longer uphold the progressive values of your founders; you have become racists of the worst sort. What matters to you most is a person’s skin color, not the content of their character. It is the color of the Gibsons’ skin that blinds you to who they really are.

    It seems you don’t care about these good neighbors of yours, Oberlin College, this kindly bakers family that has been your good neighbors for over a hundred years. They were willing to let this matter drop, if only you would tell the truth and clear their good name.

    If that’s how it is, if you as a college community care nothing for them, then go ahead: don’t apologize. Continue to destroy yourselves, for it seems you have completely lost your way, completely lost any sense of decency or integrity. Yes, if that’s how it is, it would be best that you completely go down in flames, so that from the ashes in some distant day can arise a new sense of humility and sacred purpose, to love your neighbors as yourselves.”

      Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | June 14, 2019 at 2:29 pm

      And no I did not use all-caps for NEVER and IMMEDIATELY, I just settled for serene bold. A sense of delicacy must be preserved.

      Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | June 14, 2019 at 2:33 pm

      I guess they are not racists of the WORST sort…. I was a little extreme there. But racists they clearly are. This is all about the color of the Gibsons’ skin. If a black shopkeeper had done the same exact thing as Allyn Gibson did, and detained a black shoplifter, we would have heard nothing about this. Zero.

      That is the hidden secret in all of this, the Open Secret:


        healthguyfsu in reply to Silvertree. | June 14, 2019 at 11:29 pm

        No, you were right the first time. They are racists of the worst sort.

        It takes a special kind of sniveling coward to claim that the protected class to which they or their allies belong cannot be racist/sexist/fascist/etc while at the same time projecting that their current victim target must be racist/sexist/fascist/etc because of the demographics to which they belong.

        Isn’t that just a little convenient?

        How these a-holes can even face the mirror in the morning is something that I cannot fathom.

      Cleetus in reply to Silvertree. | June 15, 2019 at 6:55 am

      What bothers me so much is the fact that Oberlin College demanded Gibson’s drop the theft charges to which the student eventually plead guilty. It causes me to wonder if such a demand would have been made if the student had been white.

      The continued defiance by Oberlin, their refusal to see their own guilt, their demand to be protected from criticisms on their Twitter account and elsewhere, etc., all point to an SJW arrogance that is too great to be believed. Now, as icing to this cake, they are throwing good money after bad and showing even more bad judgement in wasting more funds to continue to fight this losing cause. The real proof will arrive later this year when Oberlin sees how much smaller their freshman class is or how much alumni donations have dried up.

    Yamamma in reply to djung8734. | June 17, 2019 at 8:23 am

    Lie cheat and steal. That’s what their core values seem to be to me.

Createcompassion | June 14, 2019 at 11:08 am

What is a AA hire?

Gee, if the saintly Oberlin “students” hadn’t looted the place, none of this would have happened.

They should bet double or nothing that they win. The schadenfreude when they lose again would be exquisite.

Because $33 million + attorneys fees wasn’t enough. So now they want to pile on even more attorneys fees. What happened to “cash poor”? BTW, I hope they hire the same attorneys. They seemed nice.

    alaskabob in reply to Pasadena Phil. | June 14, 2019 at 11:52 am

    Soros et al

      andrewp111 in reply to alaskabob. | June 14, 2019 at 9:51 pm

      Soros can pay the entire $35M from change that falls between his couch cushions. Oberlin just has to give him proper motivation to do so.

    The whole “the plaintiff’s bakery is worth only $35k” line of argument by the defense ought to constitute legal malpractice.


      Massinsanity in reply to Andrew Branca. | June 14, 2019 at 12:21 pm

      That was a hideous miscalculation on many levels!

        Gremlin1974 in reply to Massinsanity. | June 14, 2019 at 6:27 pm

        It was no “miscalculation” that indicates that it could be a mistake, it was an outright lie and the Attorney should be censured for it.

      That’s what makes them so endearing.

      Tom Servo in reply to Andrew Branca. | June 14, 2019 at 12:28 pm

      That bit of “expert testimony” was one of the most spectacularly disastrous bits of legal backfire I’ve ever seen. Usually in a damages case, a Jury will look at what the Plaintiffs ask for, and then at what the Defendants say the damage is, and try to work out some kind of balance between them. (it’s an intuitive reaction of most people to that kind of issue) BUT, when one side tosses in an outrageous lowball offer, which is that Oberlin’s expert did, then the Jury is insulted and completely disregards that side of it, and all they are left with is the Plaintiff’s estimate, which they accept completely.

      Oberlin would literally have been much better off if their “Expert” had never shown up and never said anything. At least they’d have saved their fee to him, and they certainly couldn’t have done any worse than they did.

      alaskabob in reply to Andrew Branca. | June 14, 2019 at 12:44 pm

      Did Oberlin choose legal counsel solely on SJW ideology? Or did the prez (a JD) direct the attorneys as what to do? Obviously, they failed to adequately assess the jury pool and expected course of the plaintiff’s case. Their underestimation was and will be very costly. That said, they will persist, endure and be down for the struggle since that is all they know.

        andrewp111 in reply to alaskabob. | June 14, 2019 at 9:54 pm

        Yeah, but did they ever consider that? Which political party appointed the relevant appeals court judges? That is the only thing that really matters here.

      Another Voice in reply to Andrew Branca. | June 14, 2019 at 2:18 pm

      This piece of costly testimony in of itself was the defining attitude which conveyed to the jury the arrogance and contempt those at Oberlin had for even to be there in court to have to address the Gibson charges.

        Tom Servo in reply to Another Voice. | June 14, 2019 at 4:09 pm

        I think the part of his testimony that hit home to the Jurors the most was when he was asked if he had ever visited Gibson’s, or the town, before making his valuation, and he testified (paraphrased) that naw, he didn’t need to, he could paper whip the entire thing from his NYC office.

      TheOldZombie in reply to Andrew Branca. | June 16, 2019 at 9:32 pm

      I wonder if they even realized how bad that would look to a jury. I’m not a lawyer but even I know enough that I would never allow someone on my side in a case to say such a thing in front of a jury. Clearly Gibson’s is worth more than $35,000 and to say something like that in court just invites the jury to slap the side that said it.

She answers to their Board of Trustees, who may take a different view. We can hope.

    rhhardin in reply to maxmillion. | June 14, 2019 at 12:26 pm

    A structural flaw is that recent graduates vote for trustees, probably more than other alumni, so it trends left.

    Another Voice in reply to maxmillion. | June 14, 2019 at 2:39 pm

    As President Ambar is newly hired and her employment is contractual, there is more than not a “termination performance clause” in place the trustees will need to consider in approving further and continued litigation. Ambars’ defense decision to close down their media accounts to alumni and potential future families and students considering Oberlin, may be deemed self-serving by the trustees who will ultimately be the ones to approve how far too far is to open themselves for continued media exposure and financial costs.

What happens when you have a college administered by a bunch of ignorant hacks with worthless paper “degree’s” leading a group of carefully selected future ignorant hacks?

A preview of an American communist system.

It is good that average Americans fired a shot across the bow. I hope it is a precursor to a new movement for American liberty practiced in the university system.

    Tom Servo in reply to Barry. | June 14, 2019 at 12:30 pm

    What happens is that the Institution which allowed itself to be taken over Dies. That’s all. Nothing lasts forever, and this is how things come to their end.

      Barry in reply to Tom Servo. | June 15, 2019 at 12:20 am

      Tom, I hate to break it to you, but most of the educational institution has been taken over, kindergarten to graduate school.

Only small problem President Ambar. The appeal bond. That is one heck of a bond. It will cost you big time. Your insurance carriers will not bond you for more than you coverage limits. A bonding company is not going to want to be on the hook for tens of millions.

An Ohio supersedaes bond is a requirement under ORC 2505.09. Pursuant to the statute, “a supersedeas bond must be filed by the appellant and run to the appellee, with sufficient sureties and in a sum that is not less than the cumulative total for all claims covered by the final order, judgment, or decree and interest involved.” There is a statutory cap to the amount of bond which must be proffered, of fifty million dollars ($50mn).

    clerk in reply to dystopia. | June 14, 2019 at 11:42 am

    President Amber. Let’s get real. Your insurance companies will likely try to disclaim coverage because actual malice was found. As a registered SJW it may come as a shock to you that no insurance company executive wants a 33 million loss on his portfolio. Bye Bye bonus. You will likely be in litigation with your carriers for years.

    That means you may have to post bond yourself. So get ready to did into that endowment.

    Warfare is much harder when you take casualties.

    walls in reply to dystopia. | June 14, 2019 at 11:43 am

    Dear Oberlin Alumni,

    Twillie here. We need some cash ….

      counsel in reply to walls. | June 14, 2019 at 11:47 am

      If the insurance carriers bond the 33 million they are on the hook if the judgment is affirmed. They are also on the hook for all appeals costs. If they want to disclaim coverage they will have to litigate with Oberlin.

      Best move. Deposit coverage limits with Court and walk away. Don’t pay for appeal. That’s throwing good money after bad.

    legalbeagle in reply to dystopia. | June 14, 2019 at 11:57 am

    “A bonding company is not going to want to be on the hook for tens of millions.”

    I don’t know how bonding companies are regulated in Ohio. But anyone posting what is likely to be a 40 million dollar bond (with legal fees added on) would want a liens on assets, mortgages and a “confession of judgment” as regards foreclosing on the assets.

    Of course the upfront fee would be at least 4 million — more if allowed by law.

    objection in reply to dystopia. | June 14, 2019 at 12:12 pm

    Ouch. An insurance company that undertakes an appeal on behalf of Oberlin will be on the hook for the entire judgment regardless of the policy. To enforce coverage limits they would have to sue Oberlin after the case is resolved.

    Right now senior executives of these insurance companies are holding crisis meetings on what to do next. Each firm will steadfastly refuse to pay more than its coverage limits.

      danvillemom in reply to objection. | June 14, 2019 at 1:04 pm

      Why would an insurance company renew a policy for OC? I would expect the only insurance they would be able to get in the future would be the equivalent for high risk DUI divers.

    andrewp111 in reply to dystopia. | June 14, 2019 at 10:03 pm

    Oberlin has 1 billion in the bank. They can easily afford the appeals bond. They get the money back if they win their appeal.

      objection in reply to andrewp111. | June 15, 2019 at 5:30 am

      Unfortunately, Oberlin argued to the Court that they could not afford the punitive damages. They plead poverty.

      The appeal will add probably another 5 million in legal costs to go all the way to the Supreme Court on First Amendment issues. They may get the judgment amount reduced but then again they may get 10 million of additional legal fees tacked on (when you include the Plaintiffs).

Holy cow,what a disjunctive letter!

“Let me be absolutely clear: This is not the final outcome. This is, in fact, just one step along the way of what may turn out to be a lengthy and complex legal process” versus “[We] respect the integrity of the jury, and we value our relationship with the town and region that are our home. We will learn from this lawsuit as we build a stronger relationship with our neighbors.”

Oberlin is showing off all that is wrong with our higher education system.

Oberlin College

This is what happens when Affirmative Action, tenure and a supreme sense of entitlement intersect. Toss in the Dems/Progs inability to understand what reality is and here we are.

They are so wrong that they can’t/won’t accept it.

    02sbxstr in reply to Romey. | June 14, 2019 at 2:41 pm

    Ah, at last someone threw in ‘intersectionality’ into the conversation.I was waiting for it to appear. Blacks shoplifting wine (what, not Colt 45?) should just be ignored? Maybe they went just a little to far into the hood for these AA recruits. Would love to see how much tuition they were paying.

As we speak Oberlin is gathering support across a wide (?) spectrum of like minded institutions and legal groups. This will be a national issue. They have to fight for both material and ideological reasons. They are down for the struggle . The narrative is “free speech ” and fighting the “colored” legal system. OC is now a Martin/Brown type victim.

    Not necessarily. So far, this has been such a fiasco for Oberlin that it just may not be the case anyone would go to the wall for. This is such a slam-dunk case, who would want to educate the nation by re-arguing the case again?

    Small college playing in a small arena trying to be a big player in a big arena. They’ll need a much stronger case. By now, the Board of Trustees just wants to put this to rest so it’s more likely that Ambar gets fired and files a racial discrimination lawsuit against Oberlin. That would also be a national teachable moment proving that race cannot cover for criminal incompetence forever. There are limits to everything. The “Ambar vs Oberlin” may accomplish putting Oberlin on the map but for different reasons.

      Twillie is only 49 yo … very young for the position. With age comes reason and seasoned experience. I assume most college presidents are in their 60’s and have been around the block a few times. Need I say more?

      Another Voice in reply to Pasadena Phil. | June 14, 2019 at 2:58 pm

      Agree. Lawyers representing other institutions and legal counsels will be looking at the same material available to the Defense as was used by the Plaintiffs. They will also be reviewing taking on any appeals by reviewing the potential of prevailing with the Ohio State Appeal Court. Even if requested by the Oberlin trustees to do so, I do not believe there will be any takers and they would have to go it alone.

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Another Voice. | June 14, 2019 at 8:59 pm

        Always try and avoid legal action. It is uncertain, costly, and emotionally trying.

        A large number of appeals are strategic to try and get a settlement before appeal. I looked up appeal success rates in Ohio, and for civil cases tried by jury, success is around 20% for the appellant if appellant is defendant, so a reasonable aim for Oberlin would be an attempt to shave at least $6.6 million from the verdict in settlement negotiations. However, nothing Oberlin has done to date appears reasonable to me.

        Appeals in Ohio are pretty quick, it seems. Courts clear their cases in a little over 6 months on average. Given the size, it will probably take a while longer. Normally, appellant is in a more stressful position, however, in this case, appellant, except for Raimondo, is an institution, and it’s the institution’s money, not the money of the people making the decisions which colors their judgement to take more risk. All indications point to them being unreasonable. So far, it has not served Oberlin well. However, now, they only thing Oberlin is looking at is more legal fees and interest, which are dwarfed by the awarded sums against it. Now Oberlin has less to lose by an aggressive appeal.

      andrewp111 in reply to Pasadena Phil. | June 14, 2019 at 10:05 pm

      What do you mean? The verdict is already a worst case scenario. Oberlin has nothing to lose by litigating this until the cows come home.

    walls in reply to alaskabob. | June 14, 2019 at 12:04 pm

    We will soon see if their Board of Trustees is sane ….. or not.

oberlin college – an institution of higher learning
They learned alright – when in a big hole, go get an excavator !
Judgement, attorney fees awarded, bond to appeal! , more attorney fees to appeal and to fight the insurance company – yep, they really have learned !

ReddeCaesari | June 14, 2019 at 12:02 pm

From Oberlin Review…Seniors Strip for Final Time in OBurlesque Performance

Aly Fogel, Staff Writer|May 10, 2019

Last Wednesday, the Cat in the Cream was packed with students chatting under the venue’s familiar twinkling lights, nibbling on cookies, drinking tea, and anxiously waiting for their peers to come on stage and take off their clothes.

“So basically, the classic burlesque is kind of old-timey, lingerie, slow-dancing, slowly stripping and teasing the crowd,” said College senior and four-year OBurlesque member Katya Bouazza-Salvá. “Burlesque at Oberlin has kind of really drifted away from that and is more definitely [about] doing stripteases, but is more comedic. It’s more body-empowering.”

At an OBurlesque performance, the acts range from sexy solos to oddball group numbers to dances incorporating circus tricks. The genre is vaguely defined and held together by a similar aesthetic value of exaggeration and camp. On Wednesday, the audience loved it all, hollering in support and roaring with laughter.

Since the club was re-founded in 2015, the club’s membership has increased dramatically. Some students sign up for just one show, while others become regular performers. The quality of the shows and the organization itself has also changed for the better.
“It’s definitely become more creative in ideas,” Bouazza-Salvá said. “I think we’ve become better at choreography too, because the first few years we really had no idea what we were doing.”

It was easy to see those improvements at the Cat in the Cream on Wednesday. Each performance was electric. There were many comedic acts, and some standouts included: a performance to Justin Timberlake’s “Sexy Back” by a group that dubbed themselves SexyJack and the Hoebot Snaccs, where performers wore robot costumes; and a duet to “The Loophole” by Garfunkel and Oates, a song about Christian women who exclusively have anal sex to save their virginity. Both left the audience shrieking with laughter.

Who is shrieking now?

goddessoftheclassroom | June 14, 2019 at 12:07 pm

Oh, there’s my red pen…

1. “Let me be absolutely clear: This is not the final outcome.” Do not capitalize the T of “this” as it follows a colon.

2. “We will take the time we need to thoughtfully consider the course that is in Oberlin’s best interests.”
Avoid splitting infinitives: “to consider thoughtfully”
Also, “which” is the better relative pronoun, especially since the object of the preposition is plural.

3. “…it will look substantially different than it looks today.”
AARRGGHH!!! Different FROM!!!

4. “But we respect the integrity of the jury, and we value our relationship with the town and region that are our home.”
One does not begin a sentence with a coordinating conjunction in such formal writing.

5. “I appreciate the contributions so many of you have made, your perspective at this important time, and the commitment you have shown to what matters most for Oberlin.” Ok, credit where deserved: she used the Oxford comma.

    As far as split infinitives go, I’d have preferred. “We shall take the time we need to boldly go on the course which is in Oberlin’s best interest” (sarc)

    At least “to boldly go” has some Star Trek in it. I would not have expected such prosaic writing from a college President.

    Dear Goddess, Thank you.

    This was a formal communication from the president of an institution.

    The Emperor’s New Clothes are showing.

    Not usually a grammar fanatic … but these are (supposedly) educated people. Probably all studies degrees.

    1) I disagree. Capitalization is appropriate when a complete sentence follows the colon.
    2) I agree with your second point, not your first.
    3) AARRGGHH! Nice summary.
    4) I love you.
    5) See 4.

      goddessoftheclassroom in reply to Anonamom. | June 14, 2019 at 3:15 pm

      My first point is literally a matter of style–MLA and Chicago; your version, equally correct, is APA.
      It’s so nice to be appreciated!

John Casteel | June 14, 2019 at 12:13 pm

“I want to assure you that none of this will deter us from our core values.” Given what happened here and how the school has responded, it would be enlightening if the school would enumerate exactly what its cores values are.

    rabidfox in reply to John Casteel. | June 14, 2019 at 5:01 pm

    I doubt that they could define ‘core values’ let alone enumerate them. ‘Core Values’ has just become another one of those meaningless phrases that the left likes to throw around because they sound profound.

    artichoke in reply to John Casteel. | June 14, 2019 at 5:55 pm

    Whatever they are, she did not bother to say that Oberlin’s conduct, for which they have been found legally responsible, violated those core values.

“The President of Oberlin College, Carmen Twillie Ambar…”
Tells you everything you need to know.

Massinsanity | June 14, 2019 at 12:29 pm

I found this comment interesting… “the fragmentary and sometimes distorted public discussion of this case”

Clearly she could not be referring to LI as this site has produced hundred of pages of detailed coverage and analysis.

If Oberlin had hired Professor Jacobson and moved to settle this rationally they would indeed be looking at a much different outcome!

This is one failed college that desperately needs to be put out of our misery.

Oberlin message to jury: “We heard you, you ignorant racists!”

A rational defendant would have asked for mediation. But that is something the self-righteous SJW cannot do, because to them it means uncompromising with the enemy. Besides, they are only spending the capital of the dead white men that made the endowment. Other peoples money.

    RITaxpayer in reply to puhiawa. | June 14, 2019 at 1:59 pm

    Maybe the Gibsons should make an offer to reduce the award to make this go away. Drop it by say…$35,000 or so IF Oberlin pays today.

      This new letter makes me wish another $11M could be awarded to Gibson’s.
      The insolence of this woman is stunning.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to puhiawa. | June 14, 2019 at 6:37 pm

    I read somewhere that they did have mediation, but Oberlin’s rep’s were basically intractable and insulting. Though that could be in error.

“We will take the time we need to thoughtfully consider the course that is in Oberlin’s best interests.”

And will they consider that it might be in Oberlin’s best interests if those directly involved in this fiasco (and perhaps also those providing institutional supports for these) … resign?

The impression an outsider gets is that Oberlin selects these people by passing them through an exquisitely selective political filter, with little regard for overall competence in whatever they are supposed to be doing for Oberlin.

Although according to more than a few of their job descriptions, what they’re supposed to do for Oberlin can be difficult to discern (let alone measure).

Yet somehow I expect it’s far more likely they’ll all double down on justifying their crass behavior. And if so, they’ll surely not be the first instance of leadership confusing their personal interests with those of the institution they supposedly serve.

It’s a little dated, but, have they considered “We have met the enemy, and the enemy is … us”?

These unhinged left-wing ideologues never learn, do they?

DouglasJBender | June 14, 2019 at 1:18 pm

Wasn’t “O, Berlin!!” one of the musical numbers in the “Springtime for Hitler” musical in Mel Brooks’ play, “The Producers”? If not, it should have been.

Soros will post a bond and cover all future legal costs. Her threats and arrogance show she knows this. This is only a single battle in the war.SJW soldiers oppose justice and the rule of law and the USA.

Createcompassion | June 14, 2019 at 1:39 pm

One of these comments seems to assume that a black college president is an affirmative action hire.(As if no black person is qualified to be a college president) Is that a little narrow minded?

    02sbxstr in reply to Createcompassion. | June 14, 2019 at 2:49 pm

    Given the evidence, apparently not.

    Given that her response to the verdict was so disjointed and contained many grammatical errors, in her case it’s not a “narrow-minded” conclusion at all.

    tom_swift in reply to Createcompassion. | June 14, 2019 at 3:59 pm

    As if no black person is qualified to be a college president

    This is the fundamental assumption underlying modern AA, and its great disaster. A black person in America is automatically the AA candidate. There is no way to opt out and compete with whitey and Asians on a level playing field. And, worst of all, this blatantly racist concept is here to stay. Those of us who try to end AA are bitterly denounced as racists, just because we think it not inconceivable that a black American might be as capable as anyone else and should have a chance to demonstrate it without officialdom fluffing up his numbers and stacking the deck in his favor. The whole thing is grotesque, and undoubtedly one of modern Liberalism’s greatest crimes.

      Silvertree in reply to tom_swift. | June 14, 2019 at 6:53 pm

      Wow, that is a great point. The AA system has handicaps built in like you would have in horse racing, but these handicaps have nothing to do with ability. Rather, they are determined solely by skin color, yes? So the “person of color” never gets to know how he or she might have measured up on a completely level playing field, without any special advantages. How demeaning that must be for one’s self esteem.

    Another Voice in reply to Createcompassion. | June 14, 2019 at 4:18 pm

    Are you also not making the same assumption that comments made referencing the article at hand are race biased soley based by use of the term “AA”?

    Having read most of the comments over the entire coverage by LI, this is the first I’ve come across which brings in the mention of race other than what was used in testimony of this case. Your negative implication derived from postings referencing A.A. is being taken out of context. Your usage imitates that the sole reason of the posts bringing in A.A. is flawed. A.A. is used to hire the BEST qualified of any race. If the “blast letters” penned by President Ambar represent her leadership and are indication of her qualifications, Oberlin being Oberlin, apparently used it to mark off the box of “black female” when hiring. Comments posted have been in response to her incompetent handling on Oberlin’s legal position and inept passive/aggressive response to the greater Oberlin community of which Gibson’s reside.
    You are the first to have attached the “race card” until this straw-man post.

      alaskabob in reply to Another Voice. | June 14, 2019 at 8:36 pm

      “A.A. is used to hire the BEST qualified of any race. ”

      Sadly, I have to challenge that. A.A. was intended to break the barrier that prevented qualified minority applicants to equally compete for hiring and be hired appropriately. Then it became a system to “right the wrongs” of the past by making the competition more than equal on the outcome side. Thurgood Marshall wanted centuries of A.A.. It has in part become a reparations program. It can demean truly qualified and successful minority candidates.

      If truly successful, A.A. and organizations such as NAACP should eventually fade away.

      mister naturel in reply to Another Voice. | June 15, 2019 at 4:02 am

      “Your usage imitates that the…….
      Your usage INTIMATES……
      Spell checker is my worst enema, too

      Milwaukee in reply to Another Voice. | June 16, 2019 at 1:10 am

      “A.A. is used to hire the BEST qualified of any race. “

      No, not ever.

      Back in the day, when AA started, my understanding was this: employers would post a job, with the minimum qualifications in mind. While some applicants would exceed those minimum qualifications, if a person of a special category met the minimum qualifications, they could be hired over a more qualified candidate from a different category. That is, if a Black candidate had a Bachelor degree in Engineering, and that is what is required, they could be hired over a White candidate with more education. When such an employee might fail, then they were accused of being an “AA hire”, as to explain why an incompetent had scored such a job.

      While “AA hire” is a pejorative, that makes it no less accurate.

      The NBA does not participate is filling it’s rosters with AA hires. Either you can ball or you can’t. End of story.

The unanswered question is why hasn’t Meredith Raimondo been fired? Remember her threat to “unleash the students”? It is past time to “leash” the students and “unleash” Raimondo.

Createcompassion | June 14, 2019 at 2:48 pm

How can the college claim innocence and fire Raimondo? That would not be consistent.

College president Ambar writes to the Oberlin Community:
“I…. appreciate your perspective at this important time….”

Shuts down Oberlin’s Twitter and blocks alumni from posting.

Maybe they are trying to game it to get an appeals judge appointed by Obama who will void the judgment on grounds of, uh, stuff.

If you read this fascinating, beautifully-written article about Oberlin College in the time leading up to the Gibson’s event, you will see that many of the activist students interviewed seem to feel somewhat dispirited about their situation on campus. And here is why: it’s not our tribe, not our color that is essential. That path eventually leads to a dead end. Because, as the Little Prince said, what is essential is invisible to the eye. And there is a part of us that transcends all these things; the most essential part of us includes all of that and yet is far more. Ideally the college experience can be a chance to awaken to that transcendent part of ourselves more and more, something in us that is unrestricted by labels and full of infinite possibility.

The New Activism of Campus Life | The New Yorker

    Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | June 14, 2019 at 4:00 pm

    The article really provides quite amazing context to what happened at Gibson’s, though published a half year before the event.

    Ideally the college experience can be a chance to awaken to that transcendent part of ourselves more and more, something in us that is unrestricted by labels and full of infinite possibility.

    LSD or magic mushrooms is more sure and takes less time. (roughly 1 year vs 4)

Oberlin’s administrators perfectly encapsulate the thuggish and infantile arrogance of contemporary Leftists — utterly incapable of demonstrating a scintilla of civility, contrition, humility, or self-awareness, and, brimming with self-congratulatory sanctimony, adolescent rationalizations and a zealot’s fanatical devotion to ideology, above all else, including truth and fairness.

    murkyv in reply to guyjones. | June 14, 2019 at 8:47 pm

    “At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child — miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.”

    ― P.J. O’Rourke

    Silvertree in reply to guyjones. | June 14, 2019 at 9:31 pm

    Quite an exquisite edifice of words, guyjones! But in what way do they include truth and fairness? Should it not read, “excluding truth and fairness?”

Where’s Oberlin’s Board of Trustees in all this? We haven’t heard diddly squat out of them! Does this mean they are supporting the SJW protesters and Oberlin’s dysfunctional administration? Or are they waiting for a better time to drop the other shoe (if not now, when?)? They need to come out of hiding and DO something about this mess, and soon! The alumni are watching, and are not happy campers at this point. What’s that racket I hear…..alumni zipping up their wallets? 

jackbenimble333 | June 14, 2019 at 4:56 pm

I pulled this quote from one of Legal Insurrections previous articles regarding Oberlin pleading poverty with respect to punative damages:

“that they brought out the school’s president, Carmen Twillie Ambar to the stand to tell that part the story.

“We’ve created deficits … and over the next ten years, if this continues, that is unsustainable and we will not exist,” Ambar told the jury. She even indicated the school’s grants — about $60 million a year from the school, and lots of students get those scholarships as only 10% of them pay the full $70,000 a year — were important to preserve as “the accessibility of education” was a key component of the school’s purpose.”

And now in this article I see the same President of Oberlin, Carmen Twillee making the following claim in her letter to the Oberlin Community:

” I want to assure you that none of this will sway us from our core values. It will not distract, deter, or materially harm our educational mission, for today’s students or for generations to come.”

I would say that ceasing to exist in the next 10-years would be material harm to the educational mission. It seems to me that Carmen told the Judge and Jury a whopper. But apparently Oberlin is not so poor as she claimed on the witness stand.

    artichoke in reply to jackbenimble333. | June 14, 2019 at 6:38 pm

    What would be the process for dealing with false testimony under oath here? Hm, I suppose it could impeach her credibility during any appeal they might file.

It’s funny: I was just starting to read this article and an ad for a Master’s Degree course in Strategic Brand Communication at the University of Illinois popped up.

Based upon her letter, Oberlin’s President and administrators should seriously consider enrolling: they can definitely use the knowledge and they might get a needed group discount on tuition.

It looks to me like Oberlin un-protected its twitter account now.

If the Oberlin trustees behave responsibly, they will rid themselves of at least three members of the Oberlin administration: President Ambar because she is ultimately responsible for the inane defense presented and for the decision not to settle out of court; the Vice President and General Counsel for the same reason; and Meredith Raimondo for providing the malice that justified the huge punitive judgment. Raimondo will probably be fired outright. The other two will be encouraged to resign to pursue other career opportunities. Likely Raimondo is finished in academia even as an instructor. Who would hire someone with such documented poor judgment?

    iconotastic in reply to wfrowe. | June 14, 2019 at 6:57 pm

    “Who would hire someone with such documented poor judgment?”

    SJW losers can find jobs elsewhere in the higher education complex. After all, Melissa Click–the shrew who called for some muscle to throw out a journalist she didn’t like (and she taught Mass Media at Mizzou)–landed an assistant professorship at Gonzaga after being charged and fired by Mizzou.

    IDK if Mizzou admissions has recovered yet but it took a sizable hit from this SJW witch’s actions.

      PostLiberal in reply to iconotastic. | June 15, 2019 at 11:56 am

      IDK if Mizzou admissions has recovered yet but it took a sizable hit from this SJW witch’s actions.

      The university had previously planned for about 5,000 students just out of high school to enroll and now expects between 5,200 and 5,400, Basi said. That is still more than 1,000 fewer than the record of 6,515 set in fall 2014 but it represents a significant rebound from the recent low of 4,134 in the fall of 2017….
      Enrollment crashed in the aftermath of campus protests in the fall of 2015 that drew national attention and a lot of negative publicity to the university. President Mun Choi and Chancellor Alexander Cartwright, who took over their posts in 2017, have worked to expand scholarships, lower overall costs and, with the help of a national marketing campaign, sought to rebuild campus numbers.

      Average housing and dining costs were cut an additional 2 percent for the fall and many students are saving substantially on books by using open-source and online products, Basi said. Most students are paying less this year than they would have a year ago, Basi said.

I wonder if anyone from the Oberlin administration reads these posts ….. would love to know the truth about that.

    artichoke in reply to walls. | June 14, 2019 at 6:39 pm

    I think they do and that we’ve had shills here during the course of the proceedings, trying to bend the argument.

      Silvertree in reply to artichoke. | June 14, 2019 at 9:40 pm

      I did wonder about the extremely vile and base comments made about Meredith Raimondo’s appearance, under the article posted here yesterday about the punitive damages verdict. Some of those posts even sounded threatening in their tone. Maybe people were just venting their anger, but to my mind it was a rather egregious display of SJW-style ranting and hate.

        healthguyfsu in reply to Silvertree. | June 14, 2019 at 11:52 pm

        Eh, your inward appearance (character and reputation) does affect one’s perception of your outward appearance. She has rightly been shamed on the content of her character. Is the other too far? Maybe outside of a comment bar, but this is the internet and I’ve seen far, far worse, especially off of this site.

          Silvertree in reply to healthguyfsu. | June 15, 2019 at 2:48 am

          I guess I always ask myself: how did this person get this way? What road did they walk, what experiences shaped the person they have become? I try not to judge, because maybe in their shoes I would have turned out the same or worse. Who are we to pass judgement on another soul? We can condemn the behavior, for sure. But it is going too far to aggressively attack Ms. Raimondo’s appearance with these filthy words and ugly threatening tones. She is still a human being, after all.

          Then too, I do not find Ms. Raimondo to be particularly ugly, so it’s all a little strange to me. For me the fact that she doesn’t make herself up much or dress in a particular way isn’t a big deal, but perhaps most people are not used to seeing a woman out and about without all the trappings? And so many women in our society are overweight…. is she really different in that respect from friends and family in our own lives? Anyway, I find it in very poor taste to trash a woman’s looks in public, hiding behind the screen of anonymity like young adolescent boys trying to impress one another with the boldness of our filthy commentary.

          Besides making us look like spoiled, ranting hate-filled SJWs, such ugly personal attacks may dissuade others from listening to us or supporting our cause. Many will simply turn away in disgust. But each person is free to say here what he or she will, and I am not condemning anyone, though I may despise the behavior.

        mister naturel in reply to Silvertree. | June 15, 2019 at 4:31 am

        is she the ugly porker?

        artichoke in reply to Silvertree. | June 15, 2019 at 10:54 pm

        Or other things, like new people appearing and blaming the students for things, during the couple of days between the compensatory award and the end of the punitive trial, because that would take heat off Oberlin itself. There was suddenly quite a bit of distraction in the direction of blaming students — no substance to it, but propaganda posts.

    MajorWood in reply to walls. | June 14, 2019 at 6:53 pm

    Only the fragmented and distorted ones, so, probably just mine. 😉

    Earlier today I was thinking about one of the dropped complaints, that of negligent hiring, supervision, and retention. Those may not have made it into the trial, but I am pretty sure that they are a) on the minds of some disgruntled members of the Oberlin Community and b) the list is growing.

Carmen Twillie Ambar,

    artichoke in reply to | June 15, 2019 at 10:56 pm

    I don’t know anything about her personally. But I think she’s the wrong person to lead Oberlin at this time. If it’s to have any hope of moving in a new and more compliant direction, since she’s said she is going full speed ahead, I think she should be replaced.

I would like to suggest that we take a higher road and refrain from personal attacks on the members of the Oberlin administration. Since this trial has made it into the national spotlight, a lot of newcomers are visiting this site, many of them Oberlin Alums who are not getting the answers that they want from other sources. It would be best if they aren’t reading posts which cause them to conclude that it is just a racist misogynistic site. Sure, I do understand the anger in our community, and the fact that some of the Oberlin administration are perfect examples of low hanging fruit. But we can do better, and be better. I find them despicable for their acts and their inner ugliness. No need to resort to cheap comments. They fear the truth and we need to do everything possible to share our take on the situation, which includes not pushing people away unnecessarily. Suppress that need for immediate satisfaction. After all, THAT is what got THEM there in the first place. As long as we can keep them on the defensive and force them to go to their favorite tactic, “the oft repeated lie,” we will prevail, and sadly die young from too much popcorn, but hey. 😉

    artichoke in reply to MajorWood. | June 14, 2019 at 7:15 pm

    Indeed, there’s plenty to criticize in the subject matter of the case without straying to personal attacks. Some of these off-topic and off-tone posts may well be efforts to discredit this board. Don’t fall for it.

    Silvertree in reply to MajorWood. | June 14, 2019 at 10:06 pm

    Wish this post of yours could “go viral” here. Then again, perhaps I have contributed somewhat to the off-color tone you speak of. I don’t think so, but It could be. In some ways I feel that only an incredible sharpness can awaken these folks at this point, either heartfelt wrath or biting irony and humor. But the cool quiet factual posts are perhaps best of all. Will have to reconsider my posts in the light of your wise words. I definitely agree with you about base personal attacks against individuals, though I do understand that the level of rage at the pure injustice this family has suffered may unfortunately lead some of us down such paths at times.

    Try the blue-corn popcorn, by the way, if only for the sake of inclusivity and diversity as you slowly grow fat. Remember, it’s the color on the outside that matters, not the substance on the inside, so you should eat it whether it appeals to you or not. Wishing you a very long life to further bless the world with such words of wisdom as you have gifted us with this evening.

      Silvertree in reply to Silvertree. | June 14, 2019 at 10:14 pm

      Sorry, “off-tone posts” was the expression, not your expression but one used by artichoke to respond to you. I think I’m falling asleep in my popcorn.

      artichoke in reply to Silvertree. | June 15, 2019 at 11:02 pm

      Thank you for the kind words as well, and while I don’t think I’ve seen blue-corn popcorn even at Trader Joes, I do have a bag of their Heirloom Popcorn here and several more in the house because it’s really good.

If only there were somewhere these administrators could go where they would be taught to think logically and practice mental discipline of a sort which allows them to constrain their emotions and make good decisions. Such a place could possibly offer courses in many other fields so that they would have a broad knowledge base from which to draw when deciding upon which course of action to take.

Too bad there is no such place nearby for Oberlin admins to go.

This letter seems have made another colossal legal mistake, on top of the previous letter sent to alums. The statement that “ it will not deter, distract or materially harm our educational mission…” will be used by plaintiffs to argue against any reduction of the penalty, since the fine will not “materially” impact Oberlin’s main business it should be imposed as is.

Her tone-deafness and lack of self-awareness are astounding. She learned nothing, and has no clue why Oberlin lost so big.

You have to have a basis for any appeal. I haven’t heard of, nor do I see anything they could hang their hat on. The case, the facts and issues are very clear cut.

I find it baffling that many believe that colleges have no control over student government. Since when? It is a recognized entity on campus which is delegated authority and responsibility to do certain things. Last I knew, the administration could disapprove any action if they believed it would harm the institution.

The death spiral begins…

At War With HOA | June 16, 2019 at 1:53 am

This just gets better and better.

Obviously, no one at the college or on their legal team is familiar with the first law of holes.

JusticeDelivered | June 16, 2019 at 6:55 pm

It would be interesting to look into Carmen Twillie Ambar’s role in Oberlin College demands that merchants should not call police when the school’s detergent students break the law.

At War With HOA | June 16, 2019 at 9:59 pm

“This is not the final outcome”

Right, the final outcome will be worse- paying both the awarded amount plus likely being sued by their insurance companies, plus being even less appealing to quality high school students than it already was (Oberlin College has been declining for quite some time).

Anyone or any institution can be racist, and clearly Oberlin College is racist. They have supported racism against Caucasians, and they are clearly showing that they are also misandrists. They do not like men, and they do not like Caucasians. Dare it be said they “hate” men and they hate Caucasians. The ruling will not change but the amount awarded might, but clearly Oberlin College has been found GUILTY of racism! Black supremacists were running Oberlin College; man-hating, black supremacists.

Comanche Voter | June 17, 2019 at 10:04 am

Well Carmen, you can kiss my buffalo’s backside.