Untitled Page

(June 7, 2010) Part 1, Gordon Cannon, Ombudsman, USM:The Gordon Cannon Doctrine of Plagiarism "Dr. Gordon Cannon, chemistry professor at University of Southern Mississippi, ...".

The following information has been obtained through sworn testimony. Here is an opportunity for you to see what is often hidden. It is rare that we get a chance to question University of Southern Mississippi’s Ombudsmen under oath (or any ombudsman for that matter) about how they perform their duties. This series of reports chronicles the inside story".

(June 14, 2010) Part 2, "A question directed to Ombudsman Gordon Claude Cannon at his deposition on April 16, 2010 about his investigation of Professor DePree with the charge of recommending whether to terminate DePree’s tenure and employment: Did you undergo any special training in preparation to be an ombudsman?...".

(June 15, 2010) Part 3, "A question directed to Ombudsman Gordon Claude Cannon at his deposition on April 16, 2010 about his investigation of Professor DePree: 'If (someone) told you something, and it wasn't true, and you based your recommendation (in your ombudsman report) on that fact, would that change your recommendation?'...".

(June 16, 2010) Part 4, "Question directed to Ombudsman Gordon Claude Cannon at his deposition on April 16, 2010 about his investigation of Professor DePree with the charge of recommending whether to terminate DePree’s tenure and employment: Did you attempt to obtain any documentary evidence to substantiate any of the claims made [against Professor DePree], either within the letters [written by DePree’s accusers] or over the course of the interviews?...".

(June 17, 2010) Part 5, "Question directed to Ombudsman Gordon Claude Cannon at his deposition on April 16, 2010 about his investigation of Professor DePree with the charge of recommending whether to terminate DePree’s tenure and employment: What requests did you make of the faculty [who made accusations against Professor DePree] to attempt to substantiate the claims made in those letters?...".

(June 21, 2010) Part 6, "Questions directed to Ombudsman Gordon Claude Cannon at his deposition on April 16, 2010 about his investigation of Professor DePree: Question: Well, did you confirm any of the assertions that he [DePree] made, the substantive aspects of his claims that you received?...".

(June 22, 2010) Part 7, "Questions directed to Ombudsman Gordon Claude Cannon at his deposition on April 16, 2010 about his investigation of Professor DePree with the charge of recommending whether to terminate DePree’s tenure and employment: Question: What is your definition of 'cause?'...".

(June 23, 2010) Part 8, "... We cannot help but wonder, (1) Did Dr. Cannon deliberately ignore sworn testimony that contradicted his conclusions or what the faculty told him? (2) Was he too lazy to review the document? or (3) Had he predetermined what his conclusions would be and didn’t want waste time reading the testimony?...".

(June 24, 2010) Part 9. "Questions directed to Ombudsman Gordon Claude Cannon at his deposition on April 16, 2010 about his investigation of Professor DePree with the charge of recommending whether to terminate DePree’s tenure and employment: Your report [to President Saunders] says that: I feel Dr. DePree has been provided with sufficient university resources. What resources had he been provided that you considered sufficient? Cannon: An office and a desk...".

(June 25, 2010) Part 10. "... Doesn’t Dr. Cannon claim to be a scientist. Science strives for knowledge. If he is a scientist, why does he act contrary to the principles of science? Why is Dr. Cannon satisfied with ignorance. If Deans Doty and Williams told Dr. Cannon the world is flat and that the earth is the center of the universe, would he believe that, too? ".

(June 28, 2010) Part 11 "... 'If you were told by former Dean Doty and Dean Williams that Dr. DePree being neither AQ nor PQ jeopardized the … accreditation effort and that was not true, would that trouble you? Cannon: I don't know that it would trouble me too much.' Usmnews.net invites Dr. Cannon to tell the faculty what would trouble him? By his own admission, recommending termination of a tenured professor in violation of his duty to verify and substantiate allegations does not “trouble [him] too much."

(June 29, 2010) Part 12 "... How do we reconcile your contradictory comments, Dr. Cannon? Are we witnessing a charade? A charade is defined as 'an absurd pretense intended to create a respectable appearance'? ...".

(June 30, 2010) Part 13 "... Drs. Posey, Williams, and Cannon admitted they did not have a shred of evidence for their assumption that Professor DePree placed flyers on the chairs of classroom seats. And they testified under oath to that lack of evidence. But their knowledge that no evidence existed did not stop them from continuing their unfounded accusations. To them placing flyers in classroom seats is a terrible crime and someone has to be punished for (what they consider) this unforgiveable crime. Dr. DePree had never seen the flyer and testified to that under oath...".

(July 1, 2010) Part 14 "... If your career is on the line, will Dr. Cannon or someone like him, find it too much trouble to contact witnesses who are unlikely to support the conclusion the ombudsman wants to reach? Dr. Cannon claims to be a scientist. Surely, he understands that a scientist should consider all available information - not just that which confirms his biases...".

(July 1, 2010) Part 15 "...What should trouble all of us is that any faculty member may have the misfortune to be the subject of an ombudsman's investigation. Any of us may be subject to termination proceedings based on his findings - all without a shred of evidence. And don't think it can't happen to you...".