By Zachary D. Roberts
By Anna Merlan
By Jon Campbell and Laura Shunk
By Albert Samaha
By Amanda Dingyuan
By Anna Merlan
By Anna Merlan
By Albert Samaha
By last October, nearly two years had passed since plagiarism allegations had first been made to the administrators of Columbia Teachers College against one of its professors, Madonna Constantine. Last week, the Voice detailed those allegations and the ways in which college administrators initially protected Constantine [Columbias Knotty Noose Problem, July 2]. Eventually, the college hired an outside law firm to look into the allegations, and was close to releasing the results of that investigation when suddenly, a noose showed up on Constantines door and the professor became the center of worldwide attention.
In hindsight, the timing of the incident appears suspicious. But at the time, it generated enormous positive attention for Constantine.
Lawyers in tow, she led a demonstration on the Teachers College steps. Students chanted and waved signs with slogans like Intolerance is Intolerable and Say No to Racism. Media requests poured in from around the world.
The next morning, the professor appeared on Good Morning America. She choked up slightly in the interview, calling the incident very personal and very degrading. She told her interviewer, The reaction from the college community has been awesome. The incident, she said, had brought everyone together.
On October 12, a professional group, the American Counseling Assocation, offered Constantine their full support.
A week later, as the police investigation continued, Teachers College president Susan Fuhrman gave a speech lauding Constantine as a distinguished professor, and credited the outpouring of support she was receiving. At the time, Fuhrman would certainly have known about the findings of the plagiarism report.
In the meantime, as the media looked for any clue as to who might have targeted Constantine with the noose, Professor Suniya Luthars name surfaced as someone who might have a grudge against her. Initially, the college said nothing to refute the claim, even though college officials were well aware of Luthars role as whistleblower. Early in 2006, after shed become department chair, Luthar became aware of the allegations against Constantine and had brought them to a deana close friend of Constantineswho reacted by investigating Luthar, forcing her from the chairmanship.
And now, Luthars name was being raised in connection to the noose. Eventually, Fuhrman tried to put an end to the rumors, blaming the media for a wrongful and vicious campaign.
I regret that, in an effort to protect [Luthars] privacy, and under legal advice not to comment about her in response to any questions about the incident, even when asked specifically about herwe didn't offer her the public support she deserves, Fuhrman declared.
The college president went on to blame a family emergency and a communications breakdown and the presence of so many politicians for the poor response.
But it was too late. Luthar, a colleague said, felt as though she had been hung out to dry.
In the wake of the noose incident, detectives requested security videotapes that could help in their investigation. The college required a subpoena, but there were no cameras on the floor where Constantines office sits anyway.
In November, detectives with the Hate Crimes Squad secretly installed surveillance cameras on the floor. They told no one, only top college officials and the security director.
But they botched the job. People noticed sawdust on desks, saw holes in the ceiling, and figured out what was going on.
Constantine complained to the faculty executive committee and demanded a meeting with the administration. Vice Provost Bill Baldwin and Professor Lambros Comitas met with Constantine and her allies, Derald Sue and Marie Miville.
The three professors questioned the need for the cameras. The NYPD, they were told, was trying to catch the noose perpetrator.
Four hours later, Constantine sent out a faculty-wide e-mail disclosing the existence of the cameras and complaining about a set-up
I think that was the turning point between her and the administration, an insider says. They realized she was not behaving rationally. For years people had been telling these stories, and they persisted in acting like Constantine acted rationally. That was when people at the top finally realized that she was a loose cannon.
Fuhrman replied to Constantines e-mail curtly, the sources say.
Although the results of the plagiarism investigation were ready to be released about the time the noose showed up, the college waited another four months before making the investigation public.
On February 18, Fuhrman sent a terse e-mail to the faculty saying that the 18-month probe had found that Constantine used the work of a former Teachers College professor and two former students without attribution. Constantine had been sanctioned.
The school hasnt disclosed what that penalty might be, but sources say it was just a letter of reprimand.
Constantine later rehired her attorney, Giacomo. And just two weeks later, he says he was able to assemble enough information to dispute the claims of Constantines accusers.
Giacomo wrote a letter to George Davidson, the attorney investigating Constantine, asserting that his report was false.
Davidson, Giacomo says, ignored him. He went ahead without getting any information from us, and issued a second report which basically rubber-stamped his first report, Giacomo says.