cannon3

(June 17, 2010) Gordon C. Cannon – University Ombudsman 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? Cannon: Mainly clarification, you know, making sure that I understood what was actually put into the letter[s]." Be aware, Dr. Cannon made no effort to confirm whether the claims were true. He just accepted the claims without a shred of proof.

(June 21, 2010) Gordon C. Cannon – University Ombudsman 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) Gordon C. Cannon – University Ombudsman 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?" Cannon: That's one that's always sort of amazed me. My contract has that in there, as well, concerning tenure. And my understanding is that "cause" is for whatever reason the university or IHL can make a case against you.

(June 23, 2010) Gordon C. Cannon – University Ombudsman 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? When your job is on the line, is this the due process you can expect for yourself?

(June 24, 2010) Gordon C. Cannon – University Ombudsman 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) Gordon C. Cannon – University Ombudsman 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”?