RETALIATION BY THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-PLATTEVILLE AGAINST DR. SABINA BURTON

Short Timeline:  This contains only the most egregious violations against Dr. Sabina Burton.  Hyperlinks provide evidence, some of which is password protected.  For access to private documents email Roger Burton at rogerburton@plattevillerealestate.net with your request.

 

Oct. 10-11, 2012:  I advocated for a female student in reporting a sexual harassment incident by a male faculty member of my department (TheSolicitousNote).  

My advocacy of the student caused my immediate supervisor, the department chair Dr. Caywood to retaliate against me. 

 

Jan 29, 2013 (8:15 – 9:15 am) : I met with HR Director Jeanne Durr and Dean Throop in response to Dr. Caywood’s retaliation against me.  I audio recorded the meeting (audio exhibit A1) transcript (audio exhibit A1a).    Durr’s notes on the meeting are in [UW-P 000178]. (Dkt 101-18)     I informed them that I wanted to file grievance charges.  They blocked my efforts to get a hearing before a grievance committee.

 

Jan 29  12:33  :   I sent an email to Durr saying ‘Where do I hand in my grievance package?’ [UW-P 000072]  She never answered my question but I found out from another person.

 

Feb. 7, 2013 (8:30 -9 am) :   I met with HR Director Jeanne Durr about Dr. Caywood and she told me that Dr. Caywood “doesn’t need to answer your questions.  You would like him to answer your questions, but he doesn’t need to.”  She said “he could totally ignore everything that you send him from now till you both retire.”  She said “He can continue to ignore you forever.” I recorded the meeting [audio-exhibit-A2]  (excerpt-A2b) (Partial_Transcript_of_meeting-A2c).

 

3/28/2013  I turned in my printed grievance package to Mary Rose Williams (folder exhibit FE1)   (exhibit EZZZZZS).  The heading of my (cover letter to the grievance committee) stated “Grievance: Dr. Caywood, chairman of the Department of Criminal Justice, practices retaliation, sexual discrimination and favoritism.”     

 

April 12, 2013 (4 PM to 5:45 PM) a Grievance Committee hearing was conducted.  The meeting was recorded by the university  (audio exhibit A6)   (ZM-1-Transcript-GvnceHrg).

 

April 17, 2013 –  Dkt 53-32.  The Complaints and Grievances Committee sent a letter to Chancellor Shields expressing their findings about Gibson’s actions.  [UW-P 002846-2847]   (exhibit Gibson-Slut-Shaming)  In this letter they wrote “his actions were so egregious” and “Dr. Gibson showed extremely poor judgment in conducting an in-class example of a study,” and “ Dr. Gibson’s email is beyond reprehensible.”  The committee made recommendations for dealing with Dr. Gibson.

Gibson confirmed that the phone number on the note given to a student was his personal cell phone number.

The committee wrote that his actions “undermines Dr. Gibson’s competence to teach research methods ethically.”  They called his apology to the class “slut-shaming” and wrote that Gibson “has serious liabilities and lacks even a fundamental understanding of structural sexism.”

Yet, even after all of that the committee seemed to believe that the note was part of an experiment.  I think it was an attempt to get a female student to sleep with him.  I wouldn’t want him teaching my daughters.  He was allowed to leave UWP with no entry of wrongdoing in his record.  Gibson is now teaching at University of Maine, Presque Isle.    UWPI.edu    Gibson-UMPI

 

April 19, 2013 - The grievance committee’s initial report about my grievance was somewhat satisfactory to me (exhibit ZA)  (Dkt 101-21).

 

5-25-13 3:02 PM  - The chancellor didn’t act within the mandatory 30 days.  I was on pins and needles and nothing came.  Provost Den Herder verifies in an email that the Chancellor was “out of compliance” –[UW-P 000133] also [UW-P 005744].   

 

June 4, 2013 - Instead of acting on the grievance committee’s report the Chancellor ordered the committee to change their report (exhibit ZA-2). The committee never spoke with me again. 

June 27, 2013 – Attorney Jennifer Sloan-Lattis sends a letter to the chair of the grievance committee that “framed” my grievance issues inaccurately.  [UW-P 005749-52]   I believe this was way outside the bounds of ethical legal practice.  I could not find anything in the policies that allows this.   She “framed” me.  Her explanation to the committee bears no resemblance to my actual grievances.

 

July 8, 2013 – At a meeting with Chancellor Shields I gave a printed updated grievance to Chancellor Shields (folder exhibit 541),  (index of exhibits and appendix included in package),  (exhibit 541a)   [UW-P To_Chancellor_7-8-13],   [SB000231 to 319] (Dkt 40-19, Dkt 40-20).    He handed the package to Provost Den Herder.  This package named both Dr. Caywood and Mr. Dutelle.  This grievance was ignored by the administration.  I never was allowed to confront Mr. Dutelle for his part in my abuse.  The university violated its bylaws by not conducting a grievance hearing within 20 days.   

 

July 10, 2013 - The second grievance committee report was issued (exhibit ZA-5) (UW-P 000046) (Dkt 101-22).  It did not address my complaint in any way and was completely disconnected from my written grievance package and from the audio recorded grievance hearing.  The committee’s report was based on Attorney Lattis’ “framing.” 

Also on July 10, 2013 Dr. Caywood sent an email to the department claiming that he had been “removed” as chair, Dean Throop sent an email to the department claiming that Dr. Caywood had “stepped aside” from being chair and Dr. Caywood sent an email to Provost Den Herder about getting a “soft landing” and getting full pay during his transition out [UW-P 005933].  Even though Caywood was removed/stepped down from the chair position Den Herder agreed to pay Caywood his full chair salary (Dkt 53-55), [UW-P 005758-61-pages 29-32],  [UW-P 005800].

 

July 26, 2013 the chancellor publicly blamed me and Caywood equally but did not say what I did wrong; because I had done nothing wrong (exhibit ZA-6).   His response does not address any of my demands (Grievance claim of 7-8-13 section 6d).  

 

July 26, 2013 Chancellor Shields wrote a letter to the Faculty of the CJ department (exhibit ZA-7)  (Dkt 101-7).    He wrote “VC Den Herder and Dean Throop have recently taken steps to begin to address the challenges faced by the Department.  I applaud their decisive step of appointing an interim chair and a commitment to a national search for a longer term appointment of a chair of the department.” Three separate committees later found that Dean Throop violated policy in appointing Dr. Dalecki as interim chair (exhibit ZT-2)  (exhibits 503, ZZA-1).  Chancellor Shields applauded an act that violated policy, violated my due process rights and violated laws guaranteeing faculty self-governance. 

I didn’t receive either of the Chancellor’s July 26 documents until Aug 8, 2013.  My remarks concerning these letters are in  (ZA-9-Rmks-ChancellorFindings-7-26-13), (ZA-9a-Rmks-Chancellormemo-7-26-13).

 

July 29, 2013 – Caywood writes an email to Den Herder asking if he would have legal counsel provided by the university. [UW-P 005777]   She wrote back that he would be.  

 

Aug 9, 2013 - The Chancellor ignored my request to meet him in a face-to-face meeting to discuss the issues (exhibit EZZZZZJ-1).

Aug 13, 2013 - I filed with ERD/EEOC for Title VII and Title IX violation (Dkt 54-1), (exhibit ZO).

The new Department Chair that had been appointed illegally by Dean Throop began to discriminate against me right away in many ways that are detailed in the timeline.

 

Nov 6, 2013 - I filed a grievance against Dean Throop (exhibit EZZZZY-4), with two attachments (exhibits 554a, ZP). 

 

Nov 15, 2013 – Dr. Caywood filed a grievance against the provost and dean.  [UW-P 005322] He said he recommended Gibson and Reed to replace him and after they asked for someone from outside the dept he suggested Dalecki.  Note: Gibson is the faculty member who handed the solicitous note to a female student and started the whole mess.  Gibson was later voted in by the department as chair but he was fired instead.

 

11/20/13 A meeting I did not attend produced notes that were provided in discovery. -Dkt 48-137 -stamped   Dkt 48-137 (complete set) .      Lohmann’s notes say “Tom: Incompetent Chair – 5 major incidents” and Aric Dutelle – accused of taking bribes on paper.  Academic staff person batshit crazy.   [UW-P 004838 to 4845].   “Mike Delecki – concern CJ is Tom Caywood.  “Women do not belong in the criminal justice field.”   Lohmann also wrote “Finalists are all women.”     Notes also say “Sabina (Jennifer Lattice) Professor CJ. Assoc. Prof earned tenure, emotionally labile.”   So, it appears that Lattis told everyone at the meeting that I was not qualified to be chair because I was “emotionally labile.”

 

November 22, 2013 2:02:40 PM - (11-22-13-KeepingMike-intheloop)   Reed, another faculty member, asks “are the by-laws binding. Why aren't we following the by-laws?” He wrote  “I tell my students that they have to follow policies to protect themselves. If the by-laws are intended to be binding, I now feel as if I am a hypocrite when lecturing to students about the value and importance of following their employer's regulations if we aren't following ours. Are the by-laws binding?”

 

12-2-13 – My grievance against Dean Throop was conducted:   The meeting was audio recorded by the university and that audio is (audio exhibit A13)  I also recorded the meeting and that audio is (audio exhibit A13a).  I made a short clip of the university’s recording when Throop was explaining why I was not eligible for chair and that audio is (audio exhibit A13b). (Grievance-Throop-Transcript) and Burton’s Rebuttal to the statements in the hearing.

Early in a grievance hearing the chair of the committee was asked if the open meeting had been advertised or posted and he said “No, we didn’t advertise it... I was unaware that I needed to.”  He admitted to violating Wisconsin Open Meetings Law.

Documentation specifically relating to this grievance include:  (exhibit EZZZZY-4) with attachments (exhibit 554a) and (exhibit ZP);  (appendix X) (exhibit EI)   (Claim of 7/7/13 section 6d)   (Dkt 43-11)     (exhibit EZZZZG-1) (exhibit EZZZZG) (exhibit EZZZZS-1) (exhibit EZZZZS-2) (exhibit 519)  (exhibit EZZZZS) (exhibit EZZZZZG-2)  (appendix XI) (appendix XII) (exhibit ZM-1) (exhibit ZQ) (exhibit ZZ)  (appendix XV)- I can explain each of these on request.

Files I printed and took to the hearing are (exhibit FE3).

 

Dec 2013  (estimated date) Throop’s notes:   (Dkt 42-82) Dean Throop wrote a chronological list of events in CJ since June 2012.  [UW-P 005940 to 5941  (Dkt 101-20)   She wrote “It of course is NOT a proper breach experiment and was interpreted by the student as sexual harassment.”  She wrote “Caywood knowingly altered the start date for Lomax to 31 days after his official date of retirement, in direct violation of the law and committing fraud.  His illegal behavior resulted in Lomax donating his time to the university as a volunteer. When I confronted Caywood on his illegal activity, he laughed and said that’s what you get when you deal with former law enforcement: “we know how to get around the law.” I didn’t think it was funny.”  She wrote: “He also seemed to be encouraging, or at least abetting, bad behaviors by his male colleagues Gibson and Dutelle and ignoring or denigrating the excellent work of his female colleagues.”  She speaks in paragraph 5 of Dutelle asking for what he called a “finder’s fee” but that was interpreted by the HR department director at a DC-based defense contractor as a request for a “bribe.”  She wrote of the another incident of sexual harassment but did not mention a name. 

 

Throop wrote in paragraph 7 “we offered to send Caywood to chairs’ workshops, management training, or conflict resolution training.  He refused to consider any of these options.  I then said, “well, Tom, how do you plan to avoid having another year like the one we just finished?” He said “I will just hope for the best, I guess.”  I said “That troubles me a great deal.  That can’t happen.”  He said “Maybe it’s time for new leadership.”  I said “Maybe it is.  Are you stepping down?” “I guess so,” he said.  “Who would you suggest replace you as temporary chair?” I asked.  He suggested Mike Dalecki.”

 

 Throop wrote “I will agree that an election should have been held in the summer before opting for an external candidate. I actually did not expect that Caywood would step down; I was very hopeful that he would have been willing to acquire the management skills necessary to allow the department to run at a minimally acceptable level.”

 

On about Mar 9, 2014 a student told me about an incident involving Dr. Reed. On Dec 17, 2013 he sent her an email asking whether she would like to go out with his godson. She told him that she was lesbian in an email. Dr. Reed responded with another email saying, among other things, that she is an “attractive woman.” She thought this was an attempt at getting her to re-think her sexual orientation, which made her uncomfortable. (exhibit EZZZZZQ)

I brought the incident to the attention of Dr. Dalecki and he spoke with the student about the incident. He told me he would have a talk with Dr. Reed and point out that his actions were inappropriate.

 

Mar 27, 2014 – Dalecki wrote Reed a reprimand about sexual harassment. [UW-P 004861]   This letter is not in Reed’s file provided by Defense [UW-P 005942-5954].

 

Mon, 4/14/14 – My federal suit was filed (exhibit 502)  also (Sabina Burton complaint filed 4-14-14)

May 16, 2014 –   Dalecki distributed the reports of analysis of the Forensic Investigation (FI) program   (exhibit 521d) by   Dkt 40-30. Stojkovic and    Dkt 40-29.  Ault. An independent expert auditor wrote: “Departmental leadership is important to addressing the problematic nature of the FI major, but the consequential problems as a result of the creation and perpetuation of the FI program goes well beyond departmental leadership. Campus administration and the dean’s office must shoulder some responsibility for the train wreck that occurred much later.”  A second expert auditor had similarly harsh words for the program.  (exhibits 521b, 521c)

 

Aug 27, 2014 – I filed a grievance against Dr. Dalecki  (exhibits 558, 558a, 558b, 529, 536, 508, 529a, 533, 537).    I have made some updates to (interactive exhibit i558a)  Working documents for the grievance are (folder exhibit FE 4). A grievance hearing was promised but a hearing was never even scheduled. 

 

10-20-14 -  I filed EEOC claim form (exhibit 567).   (Dkt 54-2).    EEOC charge no. is 443-2015-00090C. 

 

10/29/2014 7:59 AM –  I received an email from Throop (exhibit 570).  Attached was a letter of direction, dated Oct 28, 2014, which violated my due process rights (exhibit 570a) also [UW-P 005456 to 5458].    Dkt 42-78,   Dkt 37-15 (exhibit A(pg4-6)) .   Dkt 48-143,     I wrote a rebuttal -  (Dkt 42-78,   Dkt 37-15 pg 30(exhibit I)) and continued to update this Rebuttal in (i571-DirectionRebuttal).   This bogus letter of direction is the basis for the 2017 statement of charges by Chancellor Shields.  

 

November 12, 2014 3:15 PM –Dkt 54-17.  -  I formally filed a grievance against Dean Throop in an email to Dr. Balachandran. (exhibit 600)    Attached files were my rebuttal to the letter of direction       Dkt 37-15 (exhibit I)  and supporting files (exhibits 571, 571f, 600a, 600b) (Appendix XV)   I have made some updates to the rebuttal (interactive exhibit i571f).  I have made updates to (interactive exhibit i600a).  I continue to update the LOD rebuttal in (i571-DirectionRebuttal).  I was promised a hearing but never given one.

 

Nov – Dec 2014 - Dr. Balachandran created bogus Grievance Hearing Procedures in violation of policy (SFDGHP).  I was held to these bogus procedures that had not existed prior to my grievance filing.

 

Tuesday, December 16, 2014 4:51 PM   -Dkt 42-78,   Dkt 37-15 (exhibit J).  Dkt 43-3 BENSKY EXHIBIT AAAA – 002      Dkt 41-42.   Throop sent me an email falsely accusing me of canceling classes the past Friday and threatened disciplinary measures.  She later admitted that she owed me an apology for the false accusation but stopped short of apologizing to me.

 

Jan 5, 2015  Dkt 54-11 - Dkt 42-78,   Throop filed a bogus complaint with Chancellor Shields against me (exhibit 619b)   Dkt 37-15.      Dkt-53-56--9454   (exhibit 619a)..  SB000773 to 812]  I rebut Throop’s complaint in (never sent 619d)  I learned of the complaint on Jan 15, 2015.  I have updated the rebuttal here (i619d-RebuttalThroopcomplaint-1-5-15). 

 

January 15, 2015 9:48 AM – Dkt 42-77 - I received an email from Chancellor Shields informing me that Throop filed a complaint against me and that he was initiating an investigation into her allegations against me (exhibit 619) Dkt 42-78,   .   Attached to his email were Throop’s exhibits (exhibit 619a). The investigation was intended to harass me into silence, to distract me while I was preparing my court case and to accumulate evidence against me.  The chancellor sat on the investigation results until I forced him to make a statement on Aug 31, 2016 when he falsely stated that the dean’s complaint had merit but failed to give any details.  I never received a copy of the results of the investigation until a year after it was delivered.  The investigation report was completely biased and did not reflect the audio recorded interview.

 

Aug 25, 2015 –   (Dkt 42-68 ) -  John Lohmann, HR Director sent a memo to Janelle Crowley describing how a Letter of Direction Dean Throop had given a faculty member in the music department was bogus.  Throop was forced to withdraw the LOD.  (This shows that Throop likes to write bogus LODs)

In fall of 2015 at least 2 defendants lied under oath in their declarations and depositions and I can prove they lied.  

 

3/18/16 – My case was dismissed in summary judgment (90), (90 Notes), (More notes).   My former Attorney Tim Hawks sabotaged my case.  I intend to pursue a malpractice suit against him if I win the current case.

 

Mon 4/18/2016 6:22 PM -  I sent an intake complaint to OLR concerning my former attorney Tim Hawks (OLR-Intake-Hawks-4-18-16).  Attached were (Analysis-PetersonJudgment), (Grievance-TimHawks) Complete folder of filing:  (ComplaintAgainstHawks-4-18-16)

 

4-25-16 – I asked HR Director Crowley to add my rebuttal to Throop’s LOD to my personnel file.   (AddRebuttaltoPersFile-4-25-16)  Attached was (Burton.Rebuttal-LetterofDirection).   Wis Stat 103.13(4) says: ”Personnel record correction. If the employee disagrees with any information contained in the personnel records, a removal or correction of that information may be mutually agreed upon by the employer and the employee. If an agreement cannot be reached, the employee may submit a written statement explaining the employee's position. The employer shall attach the employee's statement to the disputed portion of the personnel record. The employee's statement shall be included whenever that disputed portion of the personnel record is released to a 3rd party as long as the disputed record is a part of the file.”  My rebuttal was not part of my personnel file when Crowley copied it for me on 12/21/16.

 

Tue 4/26/2016 11:53 PM -  I filed a grievance against Dean Throop:  (ReinstateGrievance-ThroopLOD-Rice-4-26-16). Also, I asked for a grievance against Deb Rice.

 

5-3-16 – Dr. Fairchild wrote a letter that denied my grievance hearing request for bogus reasons  (Fairchildrefusalletter), (LtrfmFairchild)  and (Fairchild refusal letter-5-3-16)

 

May 6, 2016 11:09 PM– I wrote an email to Mr. Fairchild about his refusal to hear my grievance.   I asked a lot of embarrassing questions.  (Re_ Fw_ DeniedGvncHrg-5-9-16)  This was cc’d to the Board of Regents.  (Shields-LOD-6-3-16-Attachments).   

 

5-13-16 – Fairchild wrote denying my grievance hearing request  (GvncHrgRqst-5-13-16)   (Fairchild-300daylimitdenial-5-13-16),  (FairchildLtr-dateunsure).  In his letter Fairchild again misquotes the Employee Handbook.   The Employee Handbook does not have his quote in it (Appendix Article IX: Complaints and Grievances).  For background on the policy violations concerning the grievance procedures see (SFDGHP).

 

6-6-16 – I received in the mail a Letter of Direction (LOD) dated 6-3-16 from Chancellor Shields. (Shields-LOD-6-3-16)   Included with the letter were quite a few printed copies of emails (Shields-LOD-6-3-16-Attachments).        I rebut Chancellor Shields’ letter of direction here: (ShieldsLOD-Rebuttal).    

Chancellor Shields seems to have misinterpreted the OCR July 28, 2003 “Dear Colleague Letter” which states: “ No OCR regulation should be interpreted to impinge upon rights protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution or to require recipients to enact or enforce codes that punish the exercise of such rights. There is no conflict between the civil rights laws that this Office enforces and the civil liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment. With these principles in mind, we can, consistent with the requirements of the First Amendment, ensure a safe and nondiscriminatory environment for students that is conducive to learning and protects both the constitutional and civil rights of all students.”     

 

June 6, 2016 2:21 PM – I sent an email to Jason Williams of Campus Police, with a timeline of the defamation by Deb Rice.  (Re_ Defmtn-Timeline-Rice-6-9-16)  Attached was a timeline of Rice’s actions against me.  (Defamation by Deb Rice)

 

6-20-16 – I filed with the OCR Department of Education:   OCR-EEOC-filed-6-20-16.  I also sent consent for the OCR to tell my employer about it (OCR-ConsentForm).  I asked for a copy of the original complaint on 11/29/16. I received it soon after and here it is (OCR-Complaint-6-20-16).  

Here is a Timeline of events concerning the OCR complaint  (OCR-timeline).  

 

6/22/16 – Judge Peterson issues his decision to uphold his decision to grant motion for summary judgment denying my pro-se request for reconsideration.  (Dkt-106-DenialofReconsideration)

 

7-15-16 -  US Department of Education sent me a letter saying they referred my complaint to the EEOC.  OCR Case No. 05-16-2290.   (OCR-refersto-EEOC-7-15-16)  I sent Melissa Lawent an updated timeline on about 9/16/16:  Timeline for 2016 OCR.

 

7-19-16 – The Supreme Court of Wisconsin sent me a letter saying that my claim against Tim Hawks for misrepresentation is dismissed due to insufficient basis to proceed.  No surprise.  I need to win the appeal in order to show that he misrepresented me.  (claimagainsthawks-dismissed-7-19-16).   The letter was accompanied by a brochure about fee dispute arbitration. (feedisputearbitrationbrochure)  

 

8-8-16 – Rice filed a bogus complaint against me. (Complaint-Rice-8-8-16)  She never provided any evidence whatsoever.

 

8-16-16 – Chancellor Shields initiated an investigation against me.  (Complaint-Rice-8-8-16)   (Rebuttal-Shields-Invest-8-16-16).

8/24/16 4:43 PM -  Brokenburr-referstoLegal-8-25-16 -  I wrote to Brokenburr with a simple complaint about Shields and Throop.  

 

Thu 8/25/2016 8:41 AM   Brokenburr-referstoLegal-8-25-16  -  Brokenburr refuses to process my complaint but refers it to UWS Legal counsel for further guidance.  I suspect that Jennifer Sloan Lattis may have had something to do with the fact that this complaint was not acted on.

 

Thu 9/1/2016 11:23 PM     Complaint-against-Shields-Throop    -  I sent an email to Senator Harsdorf with a complaint against Shields and Throop

 

9-2-16 – I received the Chancellor’s letter of 8-31-16, dismissing Throop’s complaint against me, in the mail.  (Chancellor-8-31-16-letter).  My rebuttal: ResponsetoChancellorLtr-8-31-16-email   Attached was: Chancellor-8-31-16-letter  and ResponsetoChancellorLtr-8-31-16.    I have since updated my rebuttal: (ResponsetoChancellorLtr-8-31-16-a).  I later received Barraclough’s biased investigation report and here is my rebuttal (Barraclough_Report-Rebuttal).

 

September 2, 2016 1:03 AM -  I sent an email To: sbrokenburr@uwsa.edu, Cc: Sen.Harsdorf@legis.wi.gov;  Jane Radue; Michael.ODonnell@ed.gov; melissa.lawent@eeoc.gov; Staci Strobl; Janelle Crowley; Dennis J Shields; Dale Burke; henn@a.-wisconsin.org; Deborah L Rice. complaintagainstRicetoRegentsHR   Attached was:  Rice Complaint.9.2.16.  

 

9/23/16 -  I received an email from the Chancellor’s office.  Shields-letter-9-23-16  Attached was a letter from Shields Shields-letter-9-23-16-attachment.   In this letter he wrote that my complaint would not be heard for bogus reason.  Here is my reply and rebuttal to this letter (ReplytoShieldsLtrof9-22-16)

 

Sept 30, 2016 – I submitted a complaint to ERD  (<../../private/updates-after-1-16-17/Analysis-PetersonJudgment.pdf href="../../private/updatesafter11-4-16/ERDcomplaint-9-30-16.pdf">ERDcomplaint-9-30-16).  

(OCR-Timeline-2016)  Timeline for 2016 OCR/EEOC Complaint – EEOC 443-2016-01415N

 

10/14/16 – Right to sue was signed (RighttoSue).  

 

10/26/16 – Matt Kittle of Watchdog.org published an article “UW-Platteville professor pays price for standing up for student, taking on administration.”  He wrote several others later.  He plans to write more.

Thursday, November 3, 2016 11:45:42 AM – Strobl sends an email to department saying that she officially resigns citing her reason as “lack of institutional support.”  (this file is cut off for some reason)  use this file (Stroble_Resigns_11-3-16)      11/4/16 – 6 PM – KWWL TV news had a spot titled “University department chair resigns amid controversy.”  (KWWL-news-11-4-16)   (KWWL-news-11-4-16-transcript)   

WKOW TV had a spot:  University department chair resigns amid controversy  -  WKOW.          Criminal Justice department chair resigns   -  Exponent (Mackenna Moralez)

 

Nov 19, 2016 – Pat Solar, former police chief, threatened my husband and me writing: “Your failure to comply will result in consequences of my choosing” (Solar-Threat).   I complained but the university did nothing to him.

 

Fri 12/2/2016 9:56 AM -  I sent an email to Paul Erickson, cc to the assist DA Kilpatrick, Crowley, Board of Regents and the Matt Kittle explainint that I thought they were in violation of law to deny my access to the record (DenialofAccess-12-2-16).   Attached was (Erickson.Denial11.30.16).  Three days later I received investigation report I’d requested but not the other one: (Envelope-dated-12-2-16). Inside the envelope were two packets.  Rice v Burton Complaint Dismissal Packet and Burton Complaint v Rice Dismissal Packet.   I rebut Deb Rice’s complaint, Dale Burke’s sham investigation report and Chancellor Shields’ withdrawal letter (Rebuttal-DebRice-Complaint808016).  Investigator Burke admitted that the report was forged.

 

12/16/16 – Provost Throop and Dean Gormley issue a complaint about me to the Chancellor asking for my termination (Chancellor-Suspends-Burton-1-3-17).  (Rebuttal-Throop-Gormley-complaint-12-16-16).

 

Sat 12/31/2016 8:53 AM -  I asked the AG for an investigation into the matter of my seriously messed with personnel file  (PersFile-MajorProblems-12-31-16).  Removal of the rebuttals is a violation of Wis Stat 103.13(4) which says: ”Personnel record correction. If the employee disagrees with any information contained in the personnel records, … the employee may submit a written statement explaining the employee's position. The employer shall attach the employee's statement to the disputed portion of the personnel record. The employee's statement shall be included whenever that disputed portion of the personnel record is released to a 3rd party as long as the disputed record is a part of the file.”

 

1/3/17 – Chancellor Shields suspended me from teaching at UW Platteville and denies me access to the university (Chancellor-Suspends-Burton-1-3-17, (Rebuttal-Shields Suspension-1-4-17).    He appointed Dr. Petra Roter to investigate the bogus charges against me (Chancellor-investigation-ltr-1-19-17) (Shields-appoints-Roter).  I have a daughter attending UW Platteville and I can’t visit her on campus without asking permission from the Chancellor.  Denying me access to a public university seems to violate my First Amendment right to peaceably assemble.

Shields offered to meet me but only if Attorney Lattis, who has been instrumental in the retaliation against me for years, was in the room.  This violates policy by creating a hostile environment for me rather than an informal one (UWS 4.02).

 

2/8/17 – I signed an agreement with Blake-Horowitz Lawfirm (Signed_retainer-2-8-17).  Kara Amouyal is my attorney.  Blake-Horowitz specializes in corruption cases but they don’t have history with dealing with the UW System.  I hope Bob Kaiseta will be able to either work with Kara or at least offer me some practical advice to help me keep me from getting fired.  Kara is in Chicago and driving to Platteville for the hearing sessions could become expensive.  Note that the retainer only includes events up to Jan 2017.  Kara has been working with me somewhat on helping me keep from getting fired but the administration seems to be ignoring her too.

 

Feb 9, 2017 – I met with Dr. Petra Roter.  Audio of meeting: (BurtonInterview-audiolink-2-23-16), (A41-PetraRoter-Burton-interview-2-9-17-Pt1)  (A41-PetraRoter-Burton-interview-2-9-17-Pt2)   (A41a-PetraRoter-Burton-interview-transcript).

 

Sat 3/4/2017 1:38 PM– Shields sent an email.  Attached was a “Roter report.” (RoterInvestigationReport-3-4-17)  (Shieldsofferstomeet-3-4-17) (EmailfmShields-3-4-17)    I believe it is likely that Chancellor Shields and/or Attorney Lattis forged the report (Rebuttal-RoterReport3-4-17).  This seems to violate Wis Stat. (943.39), (943.38 (1)) and/or (943.38(3)).

 

 

3/7/17 – I filed an EEOC complaint (Burton-Complaint-3-7-17).

 

3-17-17 – The 7th Circuit court of Appeals entered their decision to uphold the lower court’s decision to dismiss the case.  (Rebuttal-7thCircourtDecision-Appeal).  Defense’s argument was that Tim Hawks had failed to provide proper evidence and that I couldn’t now bring what they called “new evidence to bear.”  Fact is that I gave all the evidence to Hawks and he kept important evidence and arguments out of the record.

 

 

Fri 3/31/2017 5:07 AM -  Chancellor Shields sent the Statement of Charges for dismissal to me (sburtonChargesforDismissal-3-3017-email ), (sburtonstatementofcharges3-30-17).  Rebuttal:  (sburtonstmtofchrgs-Rebuttal-3-30-17).  He lied, and based his arguments on previous baseless, bogus and false allegations that I had never been allowed to address.

 

Chancellor Shields did not include appeal procedures with his statement of charges as required by  UWS 4.02(2).  He did this so I would not catch his violations until it was too late.

 

Wed 4/19/2017 5:32 PM – I sent an email to the Regents filing a complaint against Chancellor Shields (Complaint-v-Shields-4-19-17).

 

 

Wed 4/19/2017 6:33 PM – I sent an email to the UW Platteville Faculty Senate asking for a hearing (OpenHrgRqst-4-19-17).   In this email I wrote: “My rebuttal to Chancellor Shields' statement of charges is at:  http://universitycorruption.com/uw/upaft-3-7-17-pub/sburtonstmtofchrgs-Rebuttal-3-30-17.htm

 

4/20/2017 4:04 PM -  I sent an email to the Faculty Senate members with more requests about the hearing  (OpenHrgRqst-Additional-4-20-17).

 

 

4-20-17 – I signed the EEOC Charge of Discrimination EEOC Charge no 443-2017-00601 (eeoc-4-20-17). 

 

Fri 4/21/2017 2:12 PM – Attorney Vaughan finally sent me the links to the appeal procedures (AttyVaughan-sendsProcs-4-21-17).    

 

4-28-17 – I signed and mailed these forms: (ERD-Review-Rqst-4-28-17), (EEOC-settlement-form)

 

On April 29, 2017  I tried to review this link that Attorney Vaughan had sent: UW-Platteville Faculty Handbook, chapter 6.3.12.3 section 7   but the link was broken.  This link was working when Brian Vaughan first sent it on 4/21/19 but as of Apr 29, 2017 it is no longer online.  Someone took it offline between April 21 and April 29.  They didn’t want me to be able to read it.  I searched for the Faculty Handbook online and found the one for February 2017:  https://www.uwplatt.edu/files/governance/Faculty_Senate/Files/do_not_edit_faculty_handbook_spring_2017_for_the_web_february_2017.pdf

Saved here: (faculty_handbook_spring_2017_for_the_web_february_2017)

Archived is the webpage with the link to the Feb 2017 Fac Handbook:  (http://archive.is/AlWsU).  The newer March handbook was not available

 

5-3-17 – I received a large envelope from UW Platteville.  Inside were two pages from Brian Peckham (HearingNotice-5-3-17).  The committee has extended the hearing past the mandatory 20 days for no valid reason.     (Rebuttal-HearingNotice-Peckham-4-30-17).   This violates UWS 4.04. Their real reason was because they wanted to have the hearing just before Labor Day when nobody would be around to support me. 

 

5-5-17 – Kara sent an attachment to Vaughan asking for Fac Bylaws and explaining other issues (Ltr-to-Vaughan-5-5-17)

 

5-8-17 – Kara received an email from Atty Vaughan with the Faculty Bylaws attached (FacHandbook-Spr-2017-recfmVaughan-5-8-17).  This should have come with Shields’ statement of charges on 3/31/17.  

 

5-10-17 – I sent list of actions that harmed me to the AG and asked for an investigation.  (Ltr-to-AG-5-10-17), (NotarizedLtr-to-AG-5-10-17).   

 

 

 May 12, 2017 9:26 AM – I sent an email to Brian Peckham, cc the hearing panel and others about policy violations and pointed out Lattis’ conflict of interest issues etc (AppealPanelViolations). 

 

Fri 5/12/2017 10:46 AM – I forwarded the Brian Peckham email to the Regents and asked them to investigate Shields, Throop and Lattis (AppealPanelViolations-Regents).

I sent the hearing panel a list of my rights (AppealRights-Highlights).  I also sent them a list of the charges against me that I ask to address: (AppealsSchedule).  The first violation by the Appeals Commission was that they allowed Laura Anderson, chair of the Faculty Senate, to hand-pick the appeal hearing panel, which violates Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures and produced the sitting kangaroo court (HearingNotice-5-3-17), (Faculty_Personnel_Policies-Procedures-2017- 6.3.12.3 section 6).

 

 

May 15, 2017 9:58 AM – Kara sent an email to Lattis cc Vaughan and Peckham (Amouyal-email-5-15-17).  Attached were (Amouyal-Brief-CoverLetter-5-15-17), (Amouyal-Brief-UWS-Ch4Violations), (Amouyal-Brief-FirstAmendmentIssues), (Amouyal-Brief-GrievanceProcs).

 

5/17/2017   Kara sent an email to the appeal hearing panel chair (Burton-Objects-5-17-17).   Included in the email was Peckham’s email  in which he concluded that there is not adequate grounds for a continuance (Appeal-DenialofReqst-5-15-17).  

 

5/17/2017 2:21 PM – Kara sends an email to Peckham, Lattis, Vaughan, cc Burton

(Amouyal-email-5-17-17).  Attached was a letter informing the recipients that “This letter is to inform you that Dr. Burton will represent herself at the hearing scheduled for May 25-26, 2017. Dr. Burton may also invoke her right to “an advisor…or other representatives, and to offer witnesses” pursuant to UWS Ch. 4.05(1)(d). However, as Dr. Burton is now unrepresented for purposes of the hearing” (Amouyal-letter-BurtonRepresentsSelf-5-17-17).  

 

5-21-17 – I sent important information to the appeal hearing panel (Burton-RegardingmyAppeal-5-21-17), with this attachment (ToAppealsCommission-5-21-17).  This highlighted violations and gave the panel my online rebuttals.

 

5/25/17 – I was too sick to attend the hearing.  I had been up all night.  I vomited blood and knew I could not take the stress of going through the university’s kangaroo court.  Roger went to the hearing and informed them that I was too sick to attend and asked them to reschedule.  Attorney Lattis requested that the hearing session continue without me and the hearing panel chair, Susan Hansen decided to do so.   The administration paraded five adverse witnesses in front of the hearing panel.  They lied.  I was not even in the room to cross-examine them.  I was not heard.  The panel planned to deliver their decision after one day of hearings where I was not even able to attend.  (Burton-emailtoBearse-5-25-17)  (Bearse-response-5-25-17). (RogerBurton-Sabinastillsick-5-26-17). (Hansen-Sabinastillsick-5-26-17).  (Bearse-Drs-Note-6-1-17).  

 

  A transcript was later provided at this link:  https://gramannreporting.sharefile.com/d-sf5049f24721441ca : Transcript saved here (Hearing-Sans-Burton-5-25-17) as .zip file.   We received a video also and maintain that offline.  I plan to write a rebuttal to the lies in the testimonies but it has been too painful to put the rebuttal together.  Roger and I will write the rebuttal soon.

 

June 2, 2017 1:17 PM -  Attorney Amouyal sends a reasonable accommodations request (Amouyal-AccommodationRqst-6-2-17); attached was (Bearse-Drs-Note-6-1-17) and (Amouyal-Reas-Accom-Rqst-6-2-17).

 

June 2, 2017 2:06 PM -  Hansen writes that the panel requests that parties allow an extension to the 10-day deadline (implying that deliberations were closed.)  She called the email from Amouyal “late”    (Burton-Hansen-Deliberations-Objections).  

 

Jun 2, 2017 at 2:18 PM – Lattis sends an objection (Amouyal-AccommodationRqst-6-2-17).

 

Sun 6/4/2017 11:38 AM -  I send an email with an attached letter with her objections (Burton-Hansen-Deliberations-Objections);  Attached was (6-4-17-Objections-Deliberations).

 

6/8/2017 9:00 AM -  Lattis writes response to my June 2 communications (Lattis-6-8-17-letter); attached was (Lattis-ResponsetoBurton-6-8-17).   I responded saying “On May 12, 2017 I wrote “I believe the volume of charges and evidence that needs to be addressed will necessitate many more than two days, as allowed under Faculty Bylaws 6.3.12.3 section 4 which states "The appeal process may be lengthy. The deliberative process in particular may take several months to conclude: the issues are significant; there is no limit on the number of deliberative sessions which may be held; and there is no limit on the length of the recesses which may occur between sessions." Please ensure adequate time for me to address each and every allegation in the documents identified in my proposed schedule of discussion” (AppealPanelViolations).    I re-iterated this request on May 23, 2017  (Burton-respondstoPeckham-5-23-17).    I re-re-iterated this request on June 4, 2017 (6-4-17-Objections-Deliberations).   All three times, my request was ignored.  It wasn’t denied, it was simply ignored.  No reason was given for ignoring my requests.”  (Rebut-Lattis-6-8-17).    Again, my request to address all charges against me was ignored.

 

Mon 6-12-17 -  I went in for an endoscopy (Sabina-prep-4-surgery-6-12-17).  I was not surprised when the doctor told me he found ulcers.  

Even knowing my condition the hearing panel pushed for a very short hearing in July.  I believe they want to fire me quickly and quietly before school starts.  Or maybe they hope my ulcers explode and kill me. – (Burton-Hansen-Bearsenote-6-30-17)  Their actions seem to violate ADA law.

 

Fri 6/30/2017 3:18 PM – I sent an email to Hansen with a doctor’s note attached (Burton-Hansen-Bearsenote-6-30-17), (Bearse-note-6-30-17).   Medical Dr. Bearse wrote “I feel like I have expressed the severity of her health issues a number of times, and it has only worsened with increased anxiety.  I cannot stress enough the importance of decreasing her stress level at this time. Again, in my medical opinion, Sabina Burton’s health is at risk, and that risk must be taken seriously.”

Things have been quiet since Dr. Bearse sent that note.  I am trying to relax and heal.  But I also need to get ready for the coming battle.  I can face it if I am allowed to address the bogus and false charges against me in a fair forum.

 

Sabina Burton

More on universitycorruption.com.