[winflop]

“Based on the guide, had the research been conducted at SLAC I imagine we would already be processing MTL’s paperwork for dismissal for cause,” Chassin wrote. “The fact that his past research activities did not conform with Stanford’s standards at that time is the most relevant question in my mind, and these revelations should disqualify him from holding any current position at Stanford or SLAC. The credibility of the entire organization is at stake and it should be painfully obvious to all that his personal privilege is subordinated to that of the organization he leads.”

Amen.

I'm not as concerned as Bik is that a former DA is running the investigation, as long as they involve qualified independent scientists as well. This will be a complicated investigation and I think a DA has more relevant experience.

as long as the DA understands that the standard of academic integrity is very different from the standard a DA uses when considering whether a criminal case goes to trial. i would presume the typical DA would look at this at say, what's the fuss about?

Anyone with a law degree understands the difference between the standard for civil (preponderance of evidence) and criminal (reasonable doubt). I'm confident that someone who is a former DA has been given guidance from BOT as to what the evidentiary standard is for this investigation

[winflop]

“Based on the guide, had the research been conducted at SLAC I imagine we would already be processing MTL’s paperwork for dismissal for cause,” Chassin wrote. “The fact that his past research activities did not conform with Stanford’s standards at that time is the most relevant question in my mind, and these revelations should disqualify him from holding any current position at Stanford or SLAC. The credibility of the entire organization is at stake and it should be painfully obvious to all that his personal privilege is subordinated to that of the organization he leads.”

Amen.

I'm not as concerned as Bik is that a former DA is running the investigation, as long as they involve qualified independent scientists as well. This will be a complicated investigation and I think a DA has more relevant experience.

as long as the DA understands that the standard of academic integrity is very different from the standard a DA uses when considering whether a criminal case goes to trial. i would presume the typical DA would look at this at say, what's the fuss about?

Anyone with a law degree understands the difference between the standard for civil (preponderance of evidence) and criminal (reasonable doubt). I'm confident that someone who is a former DA has been given guidance from BOT as to what the evidentiary standard is for this investigation