UPDATE: Robby's message below was posted as a comment at dotCommonweal, where there are now comments on Robby's message. If you're interested: at dotCommonweal, scroll down past Robby's message (in the comments) to read the comments on Robby's message (here).
[Robby asked me to post this, and I am delighted to do so.]
Dear Michael and Cathy,
I notice that on MoJ and on the Commonweal blog you linked to Max Blumenthal's story
about the Nava case at Princeton. You also
linked to the Anscombe Society's statement.
Since Blumenthal's story contained serious allegations
against me, I'm sorry that you did not (since we are friends and can easily be in touch with
each other) first ask me whether these
allegations are true.
In fact, those
allegations are despicable lies.
The worst of them is
this:
"But before George
pointed to Nava's beating as proof of anticonservative bias on campus, he had
been presented with evidence that Nava, while at the Groton boarding school, had
fabricated a threat against himself and his roommate, head of the Gay-Straight
Alliance, in the form of a letter containing the phrase 'die fags.' The letter may have raised doubts in George's
mind, but not strongly enough to deter him from attacking Princeton's
administration."
This is utterly
false---the very reverse of the truth. Fortunately, it is demonstrably false.
The moment I learned about what Nava had done at Groton, I demanded that
he reveal it to the campus police and then I followed up with Alvan Flanders,
the detective in charge of the investigation, to make sure that Nava had given
him the facts. I did not "point to Nava's beating as proof of anti-conservative
bias on campus." Nor did I criticize (much less "attack") the administration's
handling of the case. On the contrary, I praised it. And I praised it because it deserved to be praised.
Moreover, I continued working with Detective Flanders and others to
uncover the truth, and I counseled students against holding a candlelight vigil,
a day of silence, or any other "solidarity event" before the investigation
settled the facts. I was determined to prevent
Princeton from repeating the errors made at Duke in the lacrosse case and, earlier, at Claremont-McKenna and Amherst
College where enormous uproars occurred before it was discovered that what appeared to be hate crimes had been
staged by the alleged victims.
If you have any doubt
about my veracity, please call Detective Flanders at 609-258-1000 and Kathleen
Deignan, Princeton's Dean of Undergraduate
Students (whose office took the lead in the administration's handling of the
case) at 609-258-5431.
Charles Davall, Deputy
Director of Princeton's campus security force, wrote to me thanking me and the
Anscombe Society students who had been victims of the false threats. Here is
what he said about our role in helping to unravel Nava's story and reveal the
truth:
"We owe a debt of
gratitude to you and the rest of the students who under extreme adversity, did
the right thing at many stages of this investigation. Because of their actions,
and yours, we were able to quickly resolve this matter before it became an
even bigger media and University event."
I also received a
message from Dean Deignan. Here are her words to me (please recall here
Blumenthal's charge that I used Nava's claims to "attack" the Princeton
administration):
"Princeton is indeed
lucky to have you here. Perhaps because I spend so much of my time working with
undergraduate "trouble" of one sort or another, I have a special appreciation
for how difficult it can be to approach situations like this one in the careful
and measured way you did. These things can sometimes take on a life of their
own and it's often difficult to provide immediate and supportive responses while
at the same time refraining from drawing precipitous conclusions. I have great
admiration for the guidance you provided to the students and deep gratitude for
the trust you placed in the rest of us. I hope you'll have a little rest from
this ordeal in the next few weeks and that you and your family will enjoy
the Christmas season as it is meant to be -- peace."
You will, I trust, find it instructive in light of Blumenthal's
claims that yet another member of the Princeton University administration has
written to acknowledge and thank me for the role I played in the Nava
investigation. Here is what Shirley Tilghman, President of Princeton
University, wrote to me in an e-mail message this
afternoon:
"Let me say that everyone has
greatly appreciated the way you collaborated so effectively with public safety
and the Office of the Dean of Students. They are very grateful for your
caution, your good judgment and your solicitude for the students. I join them
in thanking you for
everything."
If you would like additional evidence, Michael, please let me
know. There is plenty more where this came from. But again, you needn't take
my word for any of it. I urge you to make the calls so that you can know with
certainty whether Blumenthal is lying or I am.
Among his gross
misrepresetations, Blumenthal says that I "immediately went to the
neoconservative daily the New York Sun, and exclaimed, "Are there double
standards and reforms that need to be made? Absolutely." In fact, I did not go
to the New York Sun or any newspaper---"immediately" or otherwise. A
reporter from the Sun got in touch with me. I told her that
Princeton's administration and campus security people were handling the Nava
investigation in an exemplary manner and without discrimination of any type.
She then asked me if there is any unfairness
towards conservative points of view at Princeton, and I said
"absolutely," and told her about ideologically biased presentations in the
freshman orientation program (especially a presentation entitled "Sex on a
Saturday Night" which new students are required to attend) that Anscombe Society
students and others have been working with Princeton's Vice President for
Student Life Janet Dickerson to reform. Fortunately, on this point too I can
provide documentary evidence. (As to the highly responsible way that the
Anscombe students have conducted themselves in seeking reforms, please ask Vice President
Dickerson.)
Among Blumenthal's gross falsehoods (echoed by Grant Gallicho on
Commonweal), is that I began by attacking the administration and then
later changed my tune in order to claim credit for assisting the detectives in
solving the case. As to whether I (and the Anscombe students) did play
important roles in assisting the detectives, ask Charles Davall, Alvan Flanders,
and any of the administrators at Princeton who were involved. Again, there is
no need to take my word for it. As to whether I changed my tune, ask Kathleen
Deignan. She will confirm that on Friday---that is, even before anyone
suspected Nava was perpetrating a fraud---I was
defending the administration''s handling of the matter and offering to
write a letter to the student newspaper saying that the administration's actions
were exemplary. When the article in the
New York Sun appeared, I
wrote a letter to the reporter praising the administration's handling of
the case and criticizing her story for
depicting the administration in a negative light. So, you see Blumenthal and
Gallicho simply couldn't be more wrong. They evidently published what they
wanted to be true about me and the Anscombe students, but it turns out
to be, once again, the very reverse of the truth.
And there is another very important point on which Commonweal
bloggers and Max Blumenthal have managed to get things completely wrong. Their
portrayal of the Anscombe students could not be farther from the truth. The
overwhelming majority of events touching on political or moral questions on
Princeton's campus tend to promote the liberal point of view, and there are
numerous student advocacy organizations on that side of the political spectrum.
Surely that comes as no surprise to you. On questions of sexual morality and
marriage, Anscombe students have worked to ensure that there is a hearing for a
competing perspective by sponsoring lectures and discussion groups, and even
offering to co-sponsor balanced intellectual events with groups that take
positions opposed to theirs. They do not engage in hate speech or abusive
rhetoric, nor do they rely on appeals to revelation or mere tradition (much less
emotion or other subrational factors). Following the example of the late
Elizabeth Anscombe, they make calm and rational arguments, and have won the
respect of administrators as well as many faculty and fellow students. Time
after time, I have been told by liberal students: "While I disagree with
everything that the Anscombe Society stands for, I'm grateful they're on campus
because they make me think and challenge my presuppositions." Moreover, the
organization has attracted some of Princeton's most outstanding students. It
was created in 2005, and two of its officers---Christian Sahner '07 and Sherif
Girgis '08---have won Rhodes Scholarships.
In the Nava episode (as the comments of Charles Davall and Dean
Kathleen Deignan make clear), the Anscombe students conducted themselves
admirably. Three in particular—Sherif Girgis, Kevin Staley-Joyce, and Jonathan
Hwang—demonstrated extraordinary strength, wisdom, and character. In my
opinion, they are the true heroes of the story. At every step, they showed
great sensitivity and compassion towards Francisco Nava, even as they worked
with Detective Flanders and others to determine whether someone they had known
as a friend had perpetrated a grotesque fraud. Then, on Monday night, these
young men on whom Francisco had imposed profound anguish and misery sat with him
in the presence of University officials, quietly listened to his apology, and
offered him ungrudging words of forgiveness, consolation, and encouragement. I
was filled nearly to bursting with admiration for them. Commonweal blogger David Gibson should have
checked with Princeton's administrators (Dean Deignan, for example, or Vice
President Dickerson) before cruelly libeling these students with the charge of
"kicking [Nava] to the curb." But again, don't take my word for it. Please
make the calls.
There are lessons in this case about jumping to conclusions
instead of waiting for the evidence, and about seizing on opportunities to
politicize tragedies in the hope of blackening those with whom one disagrees. I
hope that writers for Commonweal and the Nation will learn the lessons. Checking with me about the facts would have been an
elementary courtesy. Checking with the leadership of Princeton's campus
security and with the persons in Princeton's administration responsible for
coordinating its actions was something any responsible journalist would have
done.
I respectfully request that you
post this letter on the Commonweal blog
and MoJ. In case you prefer for any reason
not to phone those Princeton University officials who can substantiate
each of the claims I have made, I will copy Charles Davall and Dean Deignan on this message with a request to write to you if anything I have said is
in even the slightest respect inaccurate.
Best
wishes,
Robby
===========================================
Robert P.
George
McCormick Professor of
Jurisprudence
Director, James Madison Program in
American
Ideals and Institutions
Princeton University
244 Corwin Hall
Princeton, NJ 08544
(609) 258-3270
(609) 258-6837 (fax)
