From:    SMTP%"PACARC-L%WSUVM1.BITNET@cmsa.Berkeley.EDU" 
To: Multiple recipients of list PACARC-L 
<PACARC-L%WSUVM1.BITNET@cmsa.Berkeley.EDU>
Date:         Sat, 26 Jun 1993 09:34:05 +0800
Subject:      comment

In reply to the following:
*****************************************************************

In-Reply-To:  <199306250134.JAA01566@uniwa> from "Hugh
Jarvis" at Jun 24, 93 09:25:29 pm 

The recent posting by Hugh Jarvis describes a supposed case
of suppression involving Dr David Rindos.  This is a highly
inaccurate version of these events. To single out but one
inaccuracy, far from any other department at UWA being
"enthusiastic" about Dr Rindos joining their staff, NOT A
SINGLE department has been willing to have him, despite
generous conditions offered by the university.  Anyone who
wants to know the truth should contact someone else at UWA,
such as the Vice-Chancellor, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Head
of Academic Board, Senate etc - unless they are ALL
believed to be involved in some conspiracy. 

Sandra Bowdler
University of Western Austral

***************************************************************** 

As a member of one of the departments at the University of
Western Australia which was unable to accept Dr Rindos I
feel that I must clarify the comment made in Professor
Bowdler's letter.  Unfortunately Professor Bowdler's note
could be taken to imply that our inability to accept Dr
Rindos in some way reflects on his academic standing,
quality, or integrity. 

This is not the case.

The University, through one of its senior academics did
indeed approach the members of the Department of Anatomy
and Human Biology at an extraordinary meeting to "offer" us
Dr Rindos. 

The members of the department were somewhat taken aback by
the terms of the offer and the conditions under which it
was made.  In contrast to Professor Bowdler's assessment we
felt that the offer was very poor in that no long term
commitment to funding Dr Rindos' was made. Furthermore we
were not given adequate time to assess the academic
implications of the offer. 

As such our department voted to reject the Universities'
offer SOLEY on the grounds that it was not viable
economically. At the same time we hoped we had made it
clear that this rejection was in NO WAY INTENDED TO REFLECT
ON DR RINDOS' ACADEMIC ABILITY OR STANDING. 

In other words given the same terms we would have rejected
Albert Einstein. 

Paul O'Higgins