Part 39 (1/2)

Even though the hearing committee at Belmont had made its report and recommendation to terminate, the actual termination letter had not yet been sent. From the time she was accused, Diana had found life at work to be difficult. As a plaintiff, in a lawsuit against Belmont, it was nearly impossible.

Nearly, that is, because her students never wavered in their efforts to encourage and help her. It was during this wait that factual information was obtained concerning a dean at Belmont who had falsified a faculty promotion sheet. The occurrence had been rumored, but now the players were known. Al Garret had talked to the princ.i.p.als of the event and obtained two affidavits attesting to the misconduct and subsequent lack of punishment awarded the dean who was still employed at the university.

The man had suffered no loss of rank or pay for his transgression.

These affidavits were added to the pile of papers already on file with the judge.

Early in June, the Opinion and Order of the judge arrived.

Al Garret's third charge had been thrown out by the judge who wrote that the law cited did not apply to Belmont University.

The other three charges were sustained.

On charge number four, relating to the open meeting law, the judge wrote in part: ”To permit this hearing panel to operate outside the Open Meeting Law would be to enable the university to take round-about steps to avoid its public duty.”

He continued by describing the hearing panel as resembling, ”. . .the type of secret activities the Open Meeting Law seeks to prevent. . .” and suggested that if the panel had considered any area to be extremely sensitive, it could have gone into executive session. Even this he qualified--a.s.serting that it was subject to the plaintiff's right to a public hearing.

As to the public record law, charge number five, he ruled that the plaintiff should have access to the evaluations requested.

”The Court finds,” he wrote, ”that Belmont must comply with the Public Records Law.”

Finally, on charge number six, relating to the fair employment law, the judge found the evidence submitted to be sufficient to indicate retaliatory, s.e.xual discrimination.

A few days later, with this Opinion and Order from the court in hand, John T. Pope, president of Belmont University, terminated the plaintiff, effective immediately.

The Pope's action was expected by everyone except Al Garret, Diana's attorney--he still thought he'd won the case.

Belmont had been thumbing its nose at the judicial system as long as anyone could remember.

Diana Trenchant packed up the teaching and research acc.u.mulations of nearly twenty-five years and left for home.

Neither the president nor any of the Vees could be reached for comment.

However, Bob Alastar, the PR for Belmont, called in the press.

”We have no comment,” he a.s.serted. ”It is the university's policy not to discuss personnel decisions with the press.”

Now there was a new angle in the threatening phone calls to the plaintiff. The caller would start out in a friendly fas.h.i.+on.

In a conversational tone, he would advise Diana to, ”go down to the courthouse and examine the court records for the past ten years.

Just check the directory for all the cases that Belmont has been involved in and read the outcome. The court clerk will help you.”

Then the voice would become threatening. ”You will see that no one has ever won a case against Belmont. It owns the courts and it owns the lawyers. You'll lose all your money and you'll be hurt in other ways. It can and will make appeal after appeal.

It can and will tie this case up for years. Give it up before you get hurt.”

Chapter 38

The investigation by the Attorney General continued. When she tried to interview potential witnesses at Belmont, she was prevented by the administration. ”Do not even talk with her,” was the gag order that went out from the central administration of Belmont to every chair and director. These lesser administrators were told to alert their departments or units and advise all faculty, staff and students not to cooperate in her investigation.

For a while, the investigation lagged. It was hoped that as tempers cooled and reason rea.s.serted itself, the university would be more receptive to the questions posed by the A.G. It was, after all, to their benefit to answer the questions. It was an opportunity to get their position known because the report, when completed, would be sent to the EEOC.

It would have considerable influence on research grants applied for by Belmont faculty.

The cooling off period solved nothing. Belmont administration was adamant.

They had done the right thing. There was nothing to investigate.

The incident had ended. The Pope had spoken.