Friday, December 17, 2010

Charles Wirick responds to charges in his blog

It appears that Chas (Charles) Wirick has set up his own blog to counter charges against him "Charles Wirick evidence from Cases." Go and read what he has to say, if the blog is in fact Wirick's which it does appears to be so. The same message in his blog was also left in my blog comment as well
I, Charles Wirick, am appealing the ruling of the Student Conduct Board hearing on two basis:
The decision was not supported by substantial information considering the record as a whole. The facts in the case were not sufficient to establish that a violation of the Student Code of Conduct occurred.
Fact:
There were no physical, verbal abuse, threats, intimidation, harassment, and coercion proven at the hearing. I did not, according to the facts do any of them.
Seven students reported a possible threat of a shooting according to DPS reports. This is suppose to be the reason why I was detained and questioned.
Facts according to DPS reports:
Justin Christian reported that Matt Harris and Jerrod Cunningham were talking about shooting.(It was these two and Justin McDormain and Michael Sprouse that were in the student center talking about the shooting before I arrived) Justin did not name me.
Justin McDormain is not a student. He said at the hearing that Michael started the rumor, not me.
Jelynn Louis reported that Matt Harris and Jerrod Cunningham were talking about a shooting. I was not mentioned.
Britny Latham stated that Matt Harris and Jerrod Cunningham were talking about a shooting and that he started a fire in the dorm. I was not mentioned.
Amanda Biskupiak admitted that I warned her, but she did not understand my sign.
Rachel Steingieser said the same thing as Amanda and repeated that she did not understand my sign.
Stacey DeLaune reported that I warned her about the shooting that 4 others were talking about in student center. She told me to go to DPS and report it so I did.
The sanction imposed was excessive and insufficient and not appropriate.
I was found guilty of spreading rumors that scared and caused panic. I was suspended for one year.
Fact:
I threatened no one.
I was told to report threats to staff, which I did.
I went to DPS and reported it.
I went to Nikki my dorm staff and reported it.
I did not start the rumors, proof shows that four other students did.(Justin, not a current student, admitted that Michael started the rumors at the hearing and he is Mike’s friend).
We are told to report threats. If rumors are grounds for suspension then that should have been the charge and all students that spread rumors should have gotten the same suspension. One year is excessive.
You can read previous blogs about the Charles Wirick case in Part I, II and III.

According to Charles the confusion and misunderstanding appears to revolve around the signing miscommunication on not being able to understand some of Charles Wirick's signing. I brought up this possibility in my earlier blog. Interesting. And that he wasn't the one who spread the rumor.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Interesting,If this recent blog by Chas is in fact Charles Wirick, how ironic is it that his "voice" is appealing the ruling of the Student Conduct Board hearing...
According to Chas...Amanda Biskupiak admitted that I warned her, but she did not understand my sign. Rachel Steingieser said the same thing as Amanda and repeated that she did not understand my sign

http://signcasts.com/videos/118

Miscommunication?

Candy said...

Not surprising.

Miscommunication?

Hell yea.

But, I wonder what involves appealing the Student Conduct Board? Who is on the Student Conduct Board?

Anonymous said...

Charles is innocent. There was no proof. Sounds like a witch hunt.

Gallaudet made a mistake and they are trying to cover it up.

Sad, grow up Gallaudet.