US Dep't of Ed & UAlbany communication re: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. I hereby request the following records:

All communication between the United States Department of Education and the State University of New York at Albany concerning OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University] and OCR's deliberations (if any) over their potential conflict of interest given Secretary Arne Duncan's appointment of UAlbany Provost Susan Phillips to the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality on the recommendation of SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher and Philips' involvement in the case given her failure to ever respond to, e.g., e-mails of May 19, 2012 10:15 AM, May 19, 2012 11:10 AM, and July 1, 2012 9:28 AM.

I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as I believe this request is in the public interest. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.

In the event that fees cannot be waived, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 20 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Christopher Philippo

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #13-01195-F.

Thank you for your help.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #13-01195-F.

Thank you for your help.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #13-01195-F.

Thank you for your help.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #13-01195-F.

Thank you for your help.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #13-01195-F.

Thank you for your help.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #13-01195-F.

Thank you for your help.

The following would appear to pertain to me, as someone who’d filed complaints during that period:

"each of the individual campuses that OCR visited must reexamine all sexual harassment/violence complaints filed during and since academic year 2011-2012. SUNY must report to OCR the actions it will take to correct problems identified in the manner in which these four campuses handled those complaints, which may include providing individual remedies for students.”
https://http//www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-reaches-agreement-state-university-new-york-address-and-
https://web.archive.org/web/20131101193909/http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-reaches-agreement-state-university-new-york-address-and-

SUNY and the U.S. Department of Education are both already knowingly in violation of the agreement by letting the written threats sent to me and my family by e-mail and by Certified Mail via the United States Postal Service stand, are they not?

Add to that the refusal so far of the U.S. Department of Education to answer my questions about their decision in my case, despite having invited questions and the refusal so far to comply with this FOIA request for documents pertaining to my case: https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/us-dept-of-ed-ualbany-communication-re-ocr-case-no-02-12-2157-4876/ - which is actually the second time I’ve requested documents; no denial has been issued, the request has simply been ignored - at the expense of constitutional rights and the rule of law.

When will my questions be answered, my FOIA request fully complied with, and actions taken to address the threats UAlbany sent me and my family, and the criminal facilitation and obstruction of justice committed by members of SUNY system administration and others?

>From: Ellermann, Marti
>Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 9:57 AM
>To: Abbruzzese-Werling, Nedra; [my e-mail address - CKP]
>Cc: 'Thayer, Janet'; Reilly, John (Univeristy at Albany)
>Subject: RE: UAlbany Concerns raised in October 12th e-mail
>At some point, need to stop responding.
>Marti Anne Ellermann
>Deputy General Counsel
>Office of General Counsel
>State University of New York
>SUNY Plaza
>Albany, New York 12246
>marti.ellermann@suny.edu
>518-320-1306

>From: Christopher Philippo [my e-mail address]
>Subject: Re: UAlbany Concerns raised in October 12th e-mail
>Date: November 5, 2012 at 10:03:44 AM EST
>To: "Ellermann, Marti" <Marti.Ellermann@suny.edu>, "Abbruzzese-Werling, Nedra" <Nedra.Werling@suny.edu>
>Cc: Richard Anderson <Richard.Anderson@ed.gov>, "Kiang, Gary" <Gary.Kiang@ed.gov>
>Deputy General Counsel Ellerman, to whom are you addressing your comment about the need to stop responding?
>I've cc'd the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights; are you unaware that they're involved - did George M. Philip not inform you?
>Christopher K. Philippo

>From: "Ellermann, Marti" <Marti.Ellermann@suny.edu>
>Subject: RE: UAlbany Concerns raised in October 12th e-mail
>Date: November 5, 2012 10:05:01 AM EST
>To: "Abbruzzese-Werling, Nedra" [my e-mail address - CKP]
>Cc: "Thayer, Janet", "Reilly, John (Univeristy at Albany)" <jreilly@albany.edu>
>I suggest no response.
>Marti Anne Ellermann
>Deputy General Counsel
>Office of General Counsel
>State University of New York
>SUNY Plaza
>Albany, New York 12246
>marti.ellermann@suny.edu
>518-320-1306

Christopher K. Philippo

---
"the State is not an insurer or guarantor of the safety of SUNYA students"
McEnaney v. State of New York, 267 AD 2d 748 - NY: Appellate Div., 3rd Dept. 1999. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14949034404515783354
---
"Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act" 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f) (17)

"Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to permit an institution, or an officer, employee, or agent of an institution, participating in any program under this subchapter and part C of subchapter I of chapter 34 of title 42 to retaliate, intimidate, threaten, coerce, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the implementation of any provision of this subsection."
---
“Make you the world a bit better or more beautiful because you have lived in it.” - Edward W. Bok

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #13-01195-F.

Thank you for your help.

I received a response to the FOIA request from OCR by mail on December 5, 2013. Though it is quite belated relative to the original date of request (I'd requested a number of things directly prior to requesting them through Muckrock on April 7, 2013), I must thank the Office for Civil Rights for sending as much as they did in response to my FOIA request. I wish answers to my questions had also been provided, since OCR's determination had after all invited questions.

The evidence in the 281 pages, as I continue to review them, is compelling that SUNY Albany did not comply with OCR’s Data Request, if OCR did indeed fully comply with the FOIA request - and I am willing to believe that OCR did comply. I wish I had seen all of this much earlier.

OCR's Data Request (page 14 of 281) required UAlbany to "provide description of the complainant's complaint(s), and to whom the complainant complained" and "a description of the University's response, the date of the response, and the names of University staff who responded. Prove all relevant documentation the complainant submitted as well as any documentation University staff generated, including but not limited to: letters, notes, internal memoranda, electronic mail messages, and other records." I reported the sexual harassment to numerous people over the course of the semester beginning in early October 2011: professors, advisors, the department chair, and others - as the university encourages students to do. All of them were obliged to report that to the Office of the Vice President for Student Success (Christine Bouchard):

“The best thing you can do for the student is to listen to and believe them. […] If the student is not willing to have their name released, it is still your obligation to contact the Office of the Vice President for Student Success, 518-956-8140, to report that an assault has occurred as well as the general time, date and location of the assault.” http://www.albany.edu/counseling_center/sexualviolence/how_to_help.shtml

"Sexual assault is a broad term that includes [...] sexual harassment"
http://www.albany.edu/counseling_center/sexualviolence/sexualassault.shtml

I doubt if any of them reported each instance of sexual harassment, sexual assault as UAlbany defines it, when I reported them as it was their "obligation" to do. Jeanette Altarriba specifically claimed in her e-mail of November 21, 2011 10:30:41 AM EST “As you brought issues to my attention, they have been addressed through internal mechanisms to do so.” There is no evidence that I can see that the issues were ever addressed through internal mechanisms or otherwise. The bulk of the response seems to pertain to the university's coordinated retaliation for my having reported academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation, and numerous false allegations by faculty or staff.

For example, there are e-mails sent by Clarence L. McNeill and Jeanette Altarriba referencing a non-existent "cease and desist order", "'cease and desist' order," "order to 'cease and desist'" that I was alleged to have violated twice (which I could not have violated, because I'd never been sent one). The alleged "cease and desist order" they're referring to McNeill's December 6, 2011 "Good Morning" e-mail in which "cease" and "desist" do not appear, in which he recommended I voluntarily refrain from certain actions, a recommendation McNeill made in violation of university policy: "Victims shall: [...] Be free from any threat of retaliation or other attempt to prevent the reporting of sexual misconduct; [...] Be free from unwanted pressure from campus personnel to: [...] Refrain from reporting sexual assaults for any reason, including the fear of unwanted personal publicity." http://www.albany.edu/studentconduct/27173.php Clarence L. McNeill had also made an exception to his (improper) recommendations, "the right thing to do is to refrain from talking about [the professor you reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation] to ANYONE at UA with exception of those you have already initiated contact with (e.g. ODI, DRC, Vice Provost Office)." (page 178 of 281). The people I'd contacted, my professors, advisors, the Disability Resource Center, were all parties I had already initiated contact with, and were as such covered by that exception (not that the exception is all that relevant because the recommendation to refrain from contact was contrary to policy). I've used "Nonresponsive" below for some redactions that did not indicate why they were redacted in addition to those explicitly stating "Nonresponsive"; there might be some typos in my transcriptions:

* Clarence L. McNeill to [Nonresponsive] Jeanette Altarriba, December 5, 2011 6:42 PM “I am instituting a cease and desist order between Philippo and [the professor Christopher Philippo reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation]" (page 214 of 281)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, December 6, 2011 2:30 PM: "I'm following up on the 'cease and desist' order alluded to below. [The professor Christopher Philippo reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation] has asked if there have been any developments regarding the issuing of this order at this point in time.” (page 214 of 281)
* Clarence L. McNeill to Jeanette Altarriba, December 7, 2011 9:26 AM Subject "Cease & Desist" (McNeill changed the subject of his December 6, 2011 9:51 AM e-mail to me from "Good Morning" to "Cease & Desist" and did not inform Jeanette Altarriba he'd done so)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, December 7, 2011 5:10 PM "Clarence, are you at a phone number where I might reach you right now? Jeanette” (I see nothing in the response to the FOIA request giving descriptions of substance of telephone conversations, even though it ought to have been included)
* Jeanette Altarriba to [Nonresponsive], Estela M. Rivero, [Nonresponsive], Clarence L. McNeill, [Nonresponsive], Sue R. Faerman, December 8, 2011 12:09 PM: "As you may know, the student was issued a 'cease and desist' order earlier this week, which you shared with me and with Professor [Nonresponsive - probably the professor Christopher Philippo reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation] [...] The message below and the attached message are in direct violation to that order.” (page 146 of 181 and page 157 of 281)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, Estela M. Rivero, [Nonresponsive], Sue R. Faerman [Nonresponsive], December 8, 2011 1:30 PM: "In light of this student's failure to adhere to the 'cease and desist' order [...] I am not opposed to barring this student from access to campus [...] We are at a critical level of safety concern within the Department of Communication and Professor [Nonresponsive - probably the professor Christopher Philippo reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation], in particular, is feeling maximum discomfort with the current situation.” (page 156 of 181)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill [nonresponsive], December 8, 2011 4:00 PM: "Note that the second file above was one of the two documents that is in direct violation of the 'cease and desist order that had been administered to Christopher by Clarence McNeill.” (page 122 of 281)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, Estela M. Rivero, [Nonresponsive], Sue R. Faerman [Nonresponsive], December 9, 2011 11:59 AM:"Christopher Philippo [...] was issued an order to 'cease and desist,', violated that order twice [underlining and bold emphasis of "twice" in original]" (page 123 of 281 and page 126 of 281)
John M. Murphy to Jeanette Altarriba, Christine Bouchard, [Nonresponsive], Clarence L. McNeill, [Nonresponsive][Nonresponsive][Nonresponsive]@albany.edu, July 11, 2012 9:16 AM: "We are doing are best to manage his foil requests as well as other issues relating to a cease and desist order that prohibits him from entering the Social Science Building where the Communications [sic] faculty reside." (page 56 of 281)

The fraudulent December 9, 2011 "cease and desist order" (as John M. Murphy maintained it to be in his e-mail of July 3, 2012 3:48 PM), indicated that it was issued due to my alleged violation of the (non-existent) December 6, 2011 cease and desist order: "I have been notified that you violated the 'cease and desist' order I imposed on December 6, 2011." The August 3, 2012 cease and desist letter refers to the December 9, 2011 fraudulent document as still being in effect, which in turn refers back to the non-existent December 6, 2011 cease and desist order and to McNeill's December 8, 2011 10:39 AM threat, "Continued attempts to discredit/disparage [the professor you reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation] will only provide him fuel in a civil/criminal arena and make you out to look like you are harassing him (and now possibly Dr. Altarriba). Please take this as a final warning. You need to forget about [the professor you reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation]". Mr. McNeill's unwelcome December 3, 2013 11:06 AM e-mail maintains his August 3, 2012 threat is still in effect, "As you may recall, you are to contact me for any issues or requests that you have with the University at Albany", which means the December 9, 2011 threat is still in effect, and the December 8, 2011 threat is still in effect, and the December 6, 2011 fraudulent cease and desist order is still in effect, etc. It is difficult to see how maintaining such things could be in compliance with anything lawful or constitutional, in compliance with university policy, law, the agreement between SUNY and OCR, etc.

It is worth restating that Jeanette Altarriba forced me to remain in that course as a condition of receiving my degree and graduating despite my repeated complaints to her over the course of the semester of the professor's academic dishonesty and sexual harassment and the degree of distress the professor's academic dishonesty and sexual harassment were causing me. She encouraged me to continue to report the professor's academic dishonesty and sexual harassment to her. She had claimed to me in writing that she had "addressed" the academic dishonesty and sexual harassment I'd reported to her - even though the evidence (and the professor's escalation of offensive, unprofessional, and alarming behavior) suggests she never did, and she refused to answer the question of how she'd addressed everything when I'd asked her directly.

* Debbie A. Bourassa to CKP, October 6, 2011 11:43:28 AM: “Your request for a DARS exception for COM 265 is DENIED.” [A DARS exception would have permitted me to drop the class; instead the department forced me to remain in the class in order to receive my degree]
* CKP to Jeanette Altarriba October 6, 2011 12:07:35 PM “I am having a great deal of difficulty with Professor […] to the point that I was hoping it might be possible to be granted a DARS exception from the theory requirement (I have taken a higher-level theory course, which perhaps could be used in its stead).”
* CKP to Jeanette Altarriba, October 11, 2011 12:30:50 PM “I expect it will continue to be a stressful course”
* CKP to Jeanette Altarriba, October 21, 2011 9:35 AM “There are those who’ve said to me just keep my head down and graduate, but the thought that nobody would care or do anything about egregious problems is too distressing to me to tolerate silently as I might have done in the past. The distress of taking it to this point, of meeting with you, keeping you informed as you requested, is actually far less by comparison.”
* Jeanette Altarriba to CKP, November 9, 2011 3:55:32 PM “Thank you for writing, as you have every right and have been encouraged, to do so […] Do not consider that you have become any kind of 'target' [for retaliation] as some have suggested, that's simply not the case."
* Jeanette Altarriba to CKP, November 21, 2011 10:30:31 AM: “As you brought issues to my attention, they have been addressed through internal mechanisms to do so."

What does UAlbany's "Victims of Campus Sexual Assault: Statement of Principles and Rights" mean when in practice UAlbany had coordinated retaliation, including the e-mailing and mailing of threats from the campus to a student (later alumnus) and his family, for reporting sexual harassment and retaliation for having reported sexual harassment when UAlbany defines sexual harassment of as a form of sexual assault?

"Victims shall: [...] Be free from any threat of retaliation or other attempt to prevent the reporting of sexual misconduct; [...] Be free from unwanted pressure from campus personnel to: [...] Refrain from reporting sexual assaults for any reason, including the fear of unwanted personal publicity." http://www.albany.edu/studentconduct/27173.php

What does UAlbany's policy on retaliation mean when the Director of Conflict Resolution and Civic Responsibility Clarence L. McNeill has denied that retaliation is reported to him while he was engaging in retaliation?

Clarence L. McNeill to CKP and CKP's mother, December 9, 2011 12:44:30 PM, Subject: "RE: retaliation?": "This would not be reported to me. That would be ODI."

"Any threat of retaliation or other attempts to prevent the reporting of sexual misconduct will be prohibited and is subject to disciplinary action. Reports of retaliation should be made to the Director of Conflict Resolution and Civic Responsibility (518-442-­5501) and/or the Associate Director of Residential Life/Quad Supervisor (518-442­-5875) who will assist in filing a complaint for university disciplinary action.
"Definition: Retaliation is an intentional act taken against an individual who initiates any sexual misconduct complaint, including stalking or intimate partner violence, pursues legal recourse for such a complaint, or participates in any manner in the investigation of such a report. Any act of retaliation is prohibited and is subject to judicial referral."
http://www.albany.edu/studentconduct/27173.php

I need to know how UAlbany's failure to comply with OCR's Data Request will be addressed and how UAlbany and SUNY doing nothing about the threats sent to me and my family - indeed even encouraging Clarence L. McNeill to continue writing me in what would seem to be violation of the agreement between OCR and SUNY and what was in violation of my own repeated instructions to UAlbany and SUNY. Likewise, I want to see something from SUNY sent to me (which should also be sent to other victims and witnesses) indicating that SUNY is at least presently working a response to the agreement that "each of the individual campuses that OCR visited must reexamine all sexual harassment/violence complaints filed during and since academic year 2011-2012. SUNY must report to OCR the actions it will take to correct problems identified in the manner in which these four campuses handled those complaints, which may include providing individual remedies for students." http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-reaches-agreement-state-university-new-york-address-and-

The questions I'd asked remain; some formatting differences will necessarily occur herein (emphasis, for example, will be lost) and I've removed e-mail addresses.

From: Christopher Philippo
Subject: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University]: no "cease and desist order"?
Date: February 5, 2013 at 1:08:00 PM EST
To: Ryan Milligan, Richard Anderson, Gary Kiang

You had invited questions about your determination and further discussion at the close of your January 23, 2013 letter; I appreciate that. I do indeed have at least a few questions, numbered below.

"OCR determined that the Director did not issue the complainant a cease and desist order, as the complainant alleged" (bold emphasis added).

QUESTION #1: What is the date of the cease and desist order you wrote that I had alleged that I had been issued yet which you determined I had not been issued?

QUESTION #2: How did you determine that Mr. McNeill had not issued me a cease and desist order?

Clarence L. McNeill himself wrote in his December 9, 2011 e-mail attachment ChrisPhilippo.doc:

"I have been notified that you violated the 'cease and desist' order I imposed on December 6, 2011 […] The cease and desist is still in effect" (bold emphasis added).

It was Mr. McNeill alleged that he'd sent me a "'cease and desist' order" on December 6, 2011. I maintain he had not done so and I don't believe he has the legal right to issue cease and desist orders anyway.

I'd understood the December 9, 2011 e-mail attachment to be a "'cease and desist order," as Mr. McNeill had claimed in his December 9, 2011 12:44 PM e-mail that it was "a more formal cease and desist/campus restriction letter", and since he had claimed that his December 6, 2011 e-mail (which was not a cease and desist order at all) had been a "'cease and desist' order" it stood to reason that something he referred to as "more formal" and for which he'd used his letterhead was a "'cease and desist' order" (and that he would claim that it was were I to violate it or if he wanted to claim I'd violated it).

John M. Murphy himself stated in his July 3, 2012 3:48 PM e-mail with the subject line "C&D Order" (emphasis added) which was a subject line he had chosen and not I, in relevant part:

"Mr. McNeill did in fact issue you a cease and desist order dated December 9, 2011 directing you to have no contact with Professor Barberich and in which he noted a copy to Police Chief Wiley, Professor Barberich and your student file […] As previously indicated the “order” is legitimate, valid and enforceable by the University Police Department" (bold emphasis added).

Mr. Murphy cc'd that e-mail to Vice President for Student Success Christine Bouchard, who'd given him the job of researching and answering my questions over my objection that she should do so herself (since Mr. McNeill and Mr. Wiley report to her, not to Mr. Murphy). Mr. Murphy cc'd that e-mail to Mr. McNeill and "Chief" J. "Frank" Wiley and "President" George M. Philip. Not one of them wrote me to contradict Mr. Murphy's claims. Unless you have sent all of them your letter, they are presumably still under the impression that the December 9, 2011 e-mail attachment ChrisPhilippo.doc is a "'cease and desist order" and (at least according to Mr. Murphy, and Mr. Wiley did not contradict him) and further the University at Albany Police Department are presumably still enforcing (if Mr. Murphy was being truthful) the December 9, 2011 e-mail attachment ChrisPhilippo.doc as a "legitimate, valid and enforceable" "cease and desist order."

QUESTION # 3: Is your January 23, 2013 letter a determination that the December 6, 2011 e-mail that Mr. McNeill alleged was a "'cease and desist' order" is not a cease and desist order?

If the answer is yes, we're in agreement. He'd claimed in writing that it was one, but it quite clearly was not even a cease and desist letter.

QUESTION # 4: Is your January 23, 2013 letter a determination that the December 9, 2011 e-mail that Mr. Murphy alleged was a "'cease and desist' order" is not a legitimate cease and desist order?

If the answer is yes, we're in agreement there too. I've maintained for quite some time that it's fraudulent, which the written statements from Jeremy Clapper, Benjamin Nagy, and J. "Frank" Wiley would seem to support provided that those men were not lying to me about UPD not having any documents, print or electronic, pertaining to me which they did not send to me in response to my FOIL request.

If it was not a cease and desist order, why did Mr. McNeill not correct me in December 2011 when I'd referred to his December 9, 2011 e-mail attachment ChrisPhilippo.doc as an "order"? Why did Mr. McNeill not correct John M. Murphy when Mr. Murphy e-mailed me and Mr. McNeill on July 3, 2012 3:48 PM and Mr. Murphy claimed, in reporting the results of his investigation, that the December 9, 2011 e-mail attachment ChrisPhilippo.doc was a "'cease and desist' order"?

QUESTION #5(a): Is your January 23, 2013 letter a determination that I'd alleged Mr. McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail and his letter dated August 3, 2012 but actually postmarked August 7, 2012 was a "cease and desist order"?

(b): IF YES, then if I had referred to the August 3, 2012 e-mail and letter as a "'cease and desist' order" in error, perhaps you'd be able to refer me to where I'd done so?

In writing you and speaking to you, I don't recall that I had alleged the e-mail and letter dated August 3, 2012 was a "'cease and desist' order". Certainly I was being ordered, but in his August 3, 2012 4:19 PM e-mail Mr. McNeill referred to his attachment and letter as "a formal cease and desist letter" and in the attachment and in the physical letter he used the phrase "cease and desist" without including the word "order" as part of the phrase. The phrase "cease and desist" repeated when he referred to his December 9, 2011 e-mail attachment ChrisPhilippo.doc as a "cease and desist notification", a phrase that did not appear in ChrisPhilippo.doc or in the e-mail to which it had been attached. As such, I'd understood the communication dated August 3, 2012 to be a "cease and desist letter".

I think my correspondence with SUNY Albany in which I pointed out the difference between a cease and desist order on the one hand and a cease and desist letter on the other, and my skepticism that Mr. McNeill had the legal right to issue the former, might have contributed to Mr. McNeill not using the word "order" in his communications dated August 3, 2012. Perhaps judicial administrators ought to be people who've made at least an amateur study of law, if not a degreed one.

I'd referred to an "e-mail", "attachment", "letter", "communication", "document", "prohibition", and "cease and desist". I couldn't find where I'd ever referred to it as a "cease and desist order".

September 17, 2012 9:06 PM:
• "letter postmarked August 7, 2012"
• "letter postmarked August 7, 2012"
September 17, 2012 4:32 PM:
• "August 3, 2012 e-mail and letter postmarked August 7, 2012"
• "August 2012 communications"
September 17, 2012 3:21 PM:
• "August 3, 2012 e-mail and attachment, subsequently mailed […] postmarked August 7, 2012"
• "August 2012 communication"
• "August 3, 2012 e-mail and August 7, 2012 letter"
• "August 2012 communication"
• "August 3, 2012 e-mail and August 7, 2012 letter"
August 27, 2012 1:55 PM:
• "August 3, 2012 e-mail's 'cease and desist'"
• "the August 3, 2012 prohibition"
August 20, 2012 3:41 PM
• "Mr. McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail"
• "McNeill's August 3, 2012 document"
• "Mr. McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail"
• "McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail"
August 20, 2012 10:08 AM
• "Mr. McNeill has forbidden me to communicate with the Disability Resource Center, so it seems to me that I cannot reply to Jessica Koehler's August 3, 2011 e-mail which pertained to the final exam and my attempts to determine whether it really had been cancelled or not. I'm not at all sure what e-mail Ms. Koehler was replying to, however; that in itself was something I was going to ask her."
August 15, 2012 phone conversation:
• "The August third letter"
August 14, 2012 12:46 PM:
• "August 3, 2012 e-mail and intimidating letter I received (a signed copy of the document that had been attached to the e-mail), also dated August 3, 2012 but actually postmarked August 7, 2012"

From: "Christopher Philippo"
Subject: Re: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University]
Date: September 17, 2012 9:06:07 PM EDT
To: "Milligan, Ryan", "Anderson, Richard"
From the above e-mail, in relevant part:
(his actual signature, which he did choose to put on the letter postmarked August 7, 2012, is not at all recognizable as his name) […] McNeill's letter postmarked August 7, 2012 with its further fraudulent claims and threats.

From: "Christopher K. Philippo"
Subject: Re: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University]
Date: September 17, 2012 4:32:50 PM EDT
To: Ryan Milligan, Richard Anderson
From the above e-mail, in relevant part:
I note that today is Constitution Day, and that my August 2, 2012 request was for oaths of office (including Altarriba, Barberich, and McNeill's) to the NY and US constitution, which McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail and letter postmarked August 7, 2012 had comprehensively denied in connection with my earlier sexual harassment and retaliation complaints. […] McNeill threatened litigation from Barberich on December 8, 2011 and in the August 2012 communications

From: "Christopher K. Philippo"
Subject: Re: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University]
Date: September 17, 2012 3:21:38 PM EDT
To: Ryan Milligan, Richard Anderson
From the above e-mail, in relevant part:
Clarence L. McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail and attachment, subsequently mailed to my mother's home where I reside postmarked August 7, 2012 (which is both my birthday and my mother's birthday, incidentally) […] McNeill's August 2012 communication prohibits me from communicating with every single person at UAlbany other than himself. That's pretty systemic, and given the high rank of the people he cc'd who one must presume support and approve of his actions, or even ordered his actions, very systemic indeed.

However, the August 2012 communication is not limited to those people […] The Archives didn't reply regarding the photographs, and I might have tried asking again if they'd be interested, but McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail and August 7, 2012 letter prohibit me from contacting them, even though the matter is unrelated. […] McNeill's August 2012 communication prohibits me from communicating with "any office, department, unit or employee at the University." […] the August 2012 communication ("the cease and desist notification of December 9, 2011 instructing you that you may no longer enter the Social Science Building on the University at Albany campus remains in effect indefinitely. This decision may only be reconsidered by me as the agent of the President of the University.") […] The December 9, 2011 order referred to in the August 3, 2012 e-mail and August 7, 2012 letter refers to a December 6, 2011 e-mail and a December 8, 2011 e-mail.

From: "Christopher Philippo"
Subject: Re: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University]
Date: August 27, 2012 1:55:11 PM EDT
To: Ryan Milligan, Richard Anderson
From the above e-mail, in relevant part:
No notice, hearing, evidence, witnesses, opportunity for appeal or expiration date in the case of the August 3, 2012 e-mail's "cease and desist" which had been true of the December 9, 2011 one as well. […] the August 3, 2012 prohibition McNeill e-mailed me about filing FOI requests or communicating with anybody at UAlbany, a day after I'd requested eighteen SUNY oaths of office that included McNeill's and Wiley's.

From: Christopher K. Philippo
Subject: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University]
Date: August 20, 2012 3:41:09 PM EDT
To: Ryan Milligan, Richard Anderson
From the above e-mail, in relevant part:
Mr. McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail […] McNeill's August 3, 2012 document […] Mr. McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail […] McNeill's August 3, 2012 e-mail.

From: "Christopher K. Philippo"
Subject: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University]
Date: August 20, 2012 10:08:01 AM EDT
To: Ryan Milligan, Richard Anderson
From the above e-mail, in relevant part:
Mr. McNeill has forbidden me to communicate with the Disability Resource Center, so it seems to me that I cannot reply to Jessica Koehler's August 3, 2011 e-mail which pertained to the final exam and my attempts to determine whether it really had been cancelled or not. I'm not at all sure what e-mail Ms. Koehler was replying to, however; that in itself was something I was going to ask her.

Our August 15, 2012 phone conversation:
CKP: "The August third letter, of course, is much more recent."
OCR: "Yes. Yes. And are you alleging that that's in retaliation for your having filed the sexual harassment complaint?"
CKP: "Yeah, I believe it's all part of the same thing, yeah."
OCR: "OK."
CKP: "I mean, it does even make reference to the December 9th order."
OCR: "Yes. OK, so we'll certainly be considering that as well."
CKP: "I remain quite concerned about further retaliation because in effect that's already been threatened. McNeill has twice referred to litigation about harassment… you know, this sort of prohibition on my communicating with anybody at the campus… like, I had received an e-mail from the Disability Resource Center asking me a question, and according to McNeill, like, I can't respond because he's prohibited that."

From: "Christopher K. Philippo"
Subject: Re: OCR Case No. 02-12-2157 [SUNY at Albany University]
Date: August 14, 2012 12:46:33 PM EDT
To: "Milligan, Ryan", "Anderson, Richard"
From the above e-mail, in relevant part:
I had been hesitating about sending the signed Consent Form in large part due to the recent intimidating August 3, 2012 e-mail and intimidating letter I received (a signed copy of the document that had been attached to the e-mail), also dated August 3, 2012 but actually postmarked August 7, 2012. Further retaliation is a concern not just for me, but for my family and friends as well. My mother, in particular, is very distressed about the situation. I don't know to what extent your office can prevent further retaliation, or quickly address it if it does occur.

Aside from the questions I have about your letter, of which there may be some more, there were some small parts of your letter I appreciated.

You'd written that "OCR determined that the complainant engaged in protected activity by filing complaints of sexual harassment against the Professor [untenured visiting assistant professor of Communication Michael W. Barberich] during the fall semester 2011". Thank you for that. I don't believe SUNY Albany had ever quite acknowledged that, at least not so explicitly as you had.

You added "OCR further determined that the Director [Clarence L. McNeill] was aware of this protected activity." Thank you for that as well.

It would still help considerably for me to see, in response to my FOIA requests, your data request to SUNY Albany, SUNY Albany's responses, and your deliberations (if any) over how to address the potential conflict of interest concerning SUNY Albany Provost Susan Phillips.

Sincerely,

Christopher K. Philippo

---

“Make you the world a bit better or more beautiful because you have lived in it.” - Edward W. Bok

With respect to question #4 above, in the FOIA response pages 71-72 of 281, there may be evidence (if it is genuine) that “Chief” J. “Frank” Wiley of the UAlbany Police had lied to me, lied to UAlbany Assistant Dean Brian E. Gabriel, and lied to the NYS Department of State Committee on Open Government in response to a FOIL request I’d sent them directly for anything they had pertaining to me.

My FOIL request to the UAlbany Police: "Any and all reports, e‐mails, logs, etc. received by, created by, or sent by UPD pertaining to or mentioning myself, Christopher Korey Philippo, Student ID: [...], from October 1, 2011 to present [April 30, 2012."
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Mt-S77wZKfWG9CQXdBSXlITzA/edit?usp=sharing

I was not looking for the retaliatory false police report filed by the professor I’d reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation; I did not know of it. I was looking for the fraudulent cease and desist orders (and things pertaining to them) that Clarence L. McNeill claimed to me and my mother that the UAlbany Police were enforcing, one of which Clarence L. McNeill claimed to us to have cc’d to “Chief” J. “Frank” Wiley personally; UPD’s response had nothing from Clarence L. McNeill, no cease and desist order, no cease and desist letter, or anything of the kind.

“Chief” J. “Frank” Wiley’s claim that the UAlbany Police had sent me everything:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Mt-S77wZKfSUhhRXRJMVBHaTQ/edit?usp=sharing

Pages Pages 71-72 of 281 indicate UPD had not sent me everything (as does their online crime log; they didn’t send or link copies of the entries there). Clarence L. McNeill had e-mailed “the [sic] all 3 Chief’s [sic]” the "Good Morning" e-mail he subsequently falsely claimed to me and others was a cease and desist order, the non-existent "order" that Clarence L. McNeill and others falsely claimed I'd violated. The "3 Chief's" would presumably be:
1) “Chief” J. “Frank” Wiley
2) Deputy Chief of Police Thomas J. Kilcullen
3) Assistant Chief of Police Paul M. Berger

* Investigator Jeremy Clapper to CKP, May 3, 2012 9:28 AM: “The reports you requested are attached in full satisfaction of the below request”
* Jeremy Clapper to CKP, May 4, 2012 1:33 PM: "When I refer to reports, I do mean any document that we have in our system [electronic and paper]. [...] Again, I rechecked the files and everything we have both digitally and on paper were the two reports that I sent you” (square bracketed text "[electronic and paper]" in original).
* Jeremy Clapper to CKP, May5, 2012 9:08 AM: "I checked again and there were no further reports that indicated your involvement."
UPD evidently has such a poor workflow that they don't know when responses have been made; Benjamin Nagy replied to my FOIL request without knowing Jeremy Clapper already has. UPD evidently has such poor policies, or such poor compliance with them, that both officers redacted the reports differently.
* Lt. Benjamin Nagy to CKP, May 9, 2012 1:59 PM: "Here are the only 2 reports that we have in our system which involve you."
Benjamin Nagy to CKP, May 9, 2012 4:32 PM: “This is all that I can provide you, because this is all that I have."
* J. "Frank" Wiley to CKP, Assistant Dean Brian E. Gabriel, and the NYS Dep't of State Committee on Open Government, May 18, 2012 9:34 PM: "Sir. Your FOIA [sic] request was satisfied on 050412. All your questions were answered in the response."

Wiley's claim that the request was satisfied: how is it not a lie, given, e.g. FOIA response pages 71-72 of 281? The claims of Clapper and Nagy may or may not be truthful depending upon whether records were withheld from them without their knowledge. Mr. Wiley's claim that all my questions were answered was a lie, e.g.:

* CKP to Jeremy Clapper, May 4, 2012 12:16 PM: "Had UPD informed the professor about the email to my faculty advisor? If not, and from the incident report [where he quoted it out of context] it would seem he had not learned of it from UPD, how would he have learned of it?"
* CKP to Jeremy Clapper, May 3, 2012 7:39 PM: "Is there not an additional record of some kind making mention of me also dated December 6, 2011? Is there not one (or more) dated December 9, 2011?"
* CKP to Benjamin Nagy and Jeremy Clapper, May 9, 2012 4:25 PM: "Given that there are no other documents of any kind in your system relating to me, electronic or paper, what, then, would it mean if I had received an e­mail on December 9, 2011, also cc'd to my mother's e­mail address in the e­mail header, from an @albany.edu account with a document attached that was on University letterhead? It made some false claims, made certain demands on the basis of those claims, stated 'I have taken the liberty of notifying the University Police', claimed it had been cc'd (as a letter or as a separate e­mail) to 'Chief Wiley, University Police' and that UPD were going to 'respond accordingly' if I did not comply.
"That e­mail and document had alarmed my mother and I considerably, as well as other family and friends. From what you and Jeremy Clapper have now both independent reported to me, that document was not in fact cc'd to Chief Wiley or anyone at UPD, and UPD were not committed to making me comply with the demands it because they did not even know about it? [...]
"Despite having my home street address on it, it was never actually sent to me at any point through the United States Postal Service, which I found odd. It was only ever sent as an e­mail attachment, even though my e­mail address was not on it, creating the impression for the record (were it actually on record!) that it had in fact been sent to me by US Mail. All three cc's had troubled me, but evidently it wasn't really cc'd to UPD or my student file, so the third cc might not have really been done either, even though it had been represented that all three had been done. I especially did not like the idea that the third party would have been provided with my home street address.
"I can send it if you want, or should someone else at UPD want to see it, let me know. I still feel rather nervous about the whole thing, and I suppose I still remain a tad skeptical that I'm being told the truth. However, it would indeed be a great relief to know that UPD had no knowledge of it and no involvement."
* CKP to Benjamin Nagy, May 9, 2012 7:23 PM: "My main concern is with the document that had been attached to the e­mail I was sent. It was something of the nature that would have to be filed by UPD; that I think would have to generate an incident report; that I think, given what had been alleged in it, would have to be reported under the Clery Act. I'd originally written in my request that 'I thought it particularly important to learn if there are any outstanding issues, obligations, restrictions, etc. of which I need to be made aware; anything I need to do, refrain from doing, or pay, etc.; anything I could appeal, etc. as I expect to receive my diploma soon.'
"Right now I am doubting whether the document is authentic. There's a good number of things about it that I find suspect: that I never received it through US Mail; that it addressed me as 'Christopher,' which is peculiarly informal and familiar for something purporting to be a legal document; that it was not in my Student File as had been alleged in it; that UPD (at least so far?) seemingly knows nothing about it, despite it claiming they would 'respond accordingly'; that UPD had never contacted me about it; that it doesn't appear in UPD's incident log despite other things of the same nature appearing there; that there was a contradiction in fact between what was written in the e­mail about the document and what was written in the body of the document. It indeed has quite a few other disconcerting elements that provoke reasonable doubts about its authenticity. There's no mention of my rights, no mention of a hearing or an opportunity for appeal, etc.
"In that document, it was alleged that I had committed criminal acts (the word 'criminal' is not used, but the acts alleged are criminal ones), however it does not describe those acts with any particularity, and does not cite any section of law. In it, UPD was being given instructions that I in turn was being told that UPD would enforce regarding me. It does not specify what UPD would do, only that they would 'respond accordingly,' the vagueness of which was particularly intimidating. What did that mean: warn me, arrest me, Taser me...? If UPD has something of that nature, wouldn't UPD have an obligation to inform me of it even without my making a US Freedom of Information Act/NY Freedom of Information Law/NY Personal Privacy Protection Law request, so that I knew that UPD genuinely was enforcing it, and what UPD required of me?"

Apart from those, there's also the questions I asked of J. "Frank" Wiley that he refused to answer. The SUNY Police Manual requires members of the department to respond to all calls for help from the public, but they refused to help me when I reported McNeill's threats to them, the sexual harassment, the retaliation, etc.

To date, not one member of UPD has ever informed me of any orders they have concerning me that they are enforcing and have instead left me to believe what they stated to me: that they have nothing other than what they sent me. Likewise they have refused to reopen, correct, or amend the false police reports they filed and a false report summary they posted to their online crime log - where they do not appear to have indicated the disposition of the case (unfounded?).

On Dec 12, 2013, at 3:14 PM, Anderson, Richard <Richard.Anderson@ed.gov> wrote:

"With respect to your request for the recording of the witness interview, the recording doesn’t exist in OCR’s system of records. The recording was for the OCR staff member’s personal use, and was destroyed once the interview was memorialized in the document you received in OCR’s FOIA response."

I’m very sorry to hear that evidence concerning my complaint was destroyed. When exactly was the recording destroyed? A transcript, at least, ought to have been preserved and sent in response to the FOIA request?

“Vice Provost and Dean for Undergraduate Education Jeanette Altarriba, Dean, LC 30, (518) 442-3950”
http://www.albany.edu/academics/provost_office.shtml

“2013-present Vice Provost and Dean for Undergraduate Education University at Albany, SUNY”
http://www.albany.edu/psychology/files/CV_Altarriba_vita_1013.doc

How is it that Jeanette Altarriba was promoted? Jeanette Altarriba required me to remain in the class of a professor I’d reported to her for academic dishonesty and sexual harassment, continuing to be subjected to the professor’s offensive behavior as a condition of receiving my degree and graduating. I reported her quid pro quo sexual harassment, and she retaliated severely. Among other things, she informed other people, falsely, that I’d been sent a “’cease and desist’ order” (I had not) and that I had violated that non-existent “’cease and desist’ order.” Now she’s the Vice Provost and Dean for Undergraduate Education?

"the comprehensive resolution agreement commits SUNY and each of the 29 state-operated campuses, to initiate or continue the following actions: [...] Provide interim relief for the complainant, if needed”
http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-reaches-agreement-state-university-new-york-address-and-

Interim relief is going to have to involve the termination of Jeanette Altarriba’s employment and criminal charges against her.

* Clarence L. McNeill to [Nonresponsive] Jeanette Altarriba, December 5, 2011 6:42 PM “I am instituting a cease and desist order between Philippo and [the professor Christopher Philippo reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation]" (page 214 of 281)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, December 6, 2011 2:30 PM: "I'm following up on the 'cease and desist' order alluded to below. [The professor Christopher Philippo reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation] has asked if there have been any developments regarding the issuing of this order at this point in time.” (page 214 of 281)
* Clarence L. McNeill to Jeanette Altarriba, December 7, 2011 9:26 AM Subject “Cease & Desist” (page 47 of 281) [Clarence L. McNeill changed the subject of his December 6, 2011 9:51 AM e-mail to me from “Good Morning” to “Cease & Desist” and did not inform Jeanette Altarriba he’d done so]
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, December 7, 2011 5:10 PM "Clarence, are you at a phone number where I might reach you right now? Jeanette” [I see nothing in the response to the FOIA request giving descriptions of substance of telephone conversations, even though it ought to have been included according to the Data Request from OCR]
* Jeanette Altarriba to [Nonresponsive], Estela M. Rivero, [Nonresponsive], Clarence L. McNeill, [Nonresponsive], Sue R. Faerman, December 8, 2011 12:09 PM: "As you may know, the student was issued a 'cease and desist' order earlier this week, which you shared with me and with Professor [Nonresponsive - probably the professor Christopher Philippo reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation] [...] The message below and the attached message are in direct violation to that order.” (page 146 of 181 and page 157 of 281)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, Estela M. Rivero, [Nonresponsive], Sue R. Faerman [Nonresponsive], December 8, 2011 1:30 PM: "In light of this student's failure to adhere to the 'cease and desist' order [...] I am not opposed to barring this student from access to campus [...] We are at a critical level of safety concern within the Department of Communication and Professor [Nonresponsive - probably the professor Christopher Philippo reported for academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation], in particular, is feeling maximum discomfort with the current situation.” (page 156 of 181)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, December 8, 2011 9:40 PM, “We are waiting for some action to occur as a result of the violation of the order to cease and desist” (page 119 of 281)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Clarence L. McNeill, Estela M. Rivero, [Nonresponsive], Sue R. Faerman [Nonresponsive], December 9, 2011 11:59 AM:”Christopher Philippo [...] was issued an order to 'cease and desist,', violated that order twice [underlining and bold emphasis of "twice" in original]" (page 123 of 281 and page 126 of 281)
* Jeanette Altarriba to Estala M. Rivero, Clarence L. McNeill [nonresponsive], December 9, 2011 4:00 PM: “Note that the second file above was one of the two documents that is in direct violation of the ‘cease and desist order that had been administered to Christopher by Clarence McNeill. The second item that violated that order is also attached here” (page 122 of 281)
* John M. Murphy to Jeanette Altarriba, Christine Bouchard, [Nonresponsive], Clarence L. McNeill, [Nonresponsive][Nonresponsive][Nonresponsive]@albany.edu, July 11, 2012 9:16 AM: “We are doing are best to manage his foil requests as well as other issues relating to a cease and desist order that prohibits him from entering the Social Science Building where the Communications [sic] faculty reside.” (page 56 of 281)

---

“Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act" 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f) (17):

"Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to permit an institution, or an officer, employee, or agent of an institution, participating in any program under this subchapter and part C of subchapter I of chapter 34 of title 42 to retaliate, intimidate, threaten, coerce, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the implementation of any provision of this subsection."

Ms. Cook, I am willing to speak with you if you would provide a number, though I do have a preference for written communication.

"'Dr. Phillips has been critical to improving the academic quality of the University at Albany and expanding opportunities for students,' said University at Albany President Robert J. Jones."
"UAlbany Provost Appointed to Second Term, Named Chair of National Advisory Committee." University at Albany-SUNY. December 16, 2013. <p><a href="http://www.albany.edu/news/45312.php">http://www.albany.edu/news/45312.php</a></p>

"RE: OK, so the December 9, 2011 cease and desist order I was sent is fake...?" CKP to Susan D. Phillips and others, May 19, 2012 10:15 AM. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Mt-S77wZKfeUFQNlNEa0lhX3M/edit?usp=sharing

"RE: OK, so the December 9, 2011 cease and desist order I was sent is fake...?" CKP to Susan D. Phillips and others, May 19, 2012 11:10 AM https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Mt-S77wZKfNElvN1pQQXJnNkU/edit?usp=sharing

"RE: Christopher Philippo" CKP to Susan D. Phillips and others, July 1, 2012 9:28 AM

From the above, mentioned as indicating the potential conflict of interest in the FOIA request, Ms. Phillips apparently was and is unconcerned about:
* a demonstrably false police report about an alleged imminent threat to a professor's own "personal safety" and the safety of approximately 160 students (the enrollment for the class) by an allegedly "unstable" and supposed wannabe "martyr" in a lecture hall on a campus where there'd once been a real campus shooter in a lecture hall (Ralph J. Tortorici). It was a police report that was evidently so obviously, indisputably false that the report gives no indication the police checked the lecture hall (which they would likely have found empty, since the class had been cancelled about a half hour prior to the filing of the false report, a fact the professor evidently did not disclose) or made any attempt to determine the whereabouts of the allegedly "unstable" wannabe "martyr" who was allegedly an imminent danger to the safety of 160 or so people.
* the above-referenced false police report being filed by visiting assistant professor Michael W. Barberich the day after he was tipped off by the head of the SUNY-wide judicial administrators group Clarence L. McNeill that he'd been reported outside the department above the chair, Jeanette Altarriba, who'd been permitting him to engage in academic dishonesty and sexual harassment all semester long and that I wanted to pursue the complaint - when the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights evidently had already been investigating SUNY in general and SUNY Albany specifically for mishandling sexual harassment and sexual assault cases.
* Clarence L. McNeill writing my mother and me indicating that he'd provided my mother's home address to Prof. Barberich after I'd reported him for multiple faculty ethics violations, sexual harassment, and retaliation (and after Barberich filed a false police report about me). I'd reported Barberich to Mr. McNeill, to Jeanette Altarriba, to the ODI (the director of which, Tamra Minor, is also the Title IX compliance officer), and others - as UAlbany policy indicates can and even should be done.
* supposed SUNY Albany Police Chief J. "Frank" Wiley having claimed the police had sent me everything I'd requested in a FOIL request and had answered all my questions, yet the police did not send the supposed cease and desist orders that Clarence L. McNeill claimed in writing to me and my mother that the SUNY Albany Police were enforcing and that Mr. McNeill had specifically claimed he'd sent to J. Frank Wiley personally. Mr. Wiley is a "Chief" who claimed he did not see the threats sent to me and to my mother as a police matter and that he'd forward the concerns to the "office for Student Rights and Responsibilities" - an office that does not exist. ( J. Frank Wiley in his e-mail "RE: OK, so the December 9, 2011 cease and desist order I was sent is fake...?" of May 19, 2012 5:16 AM "Given the nature of your concerns i [sic] suggest you contact the office of Student Rights And Responsibilities. This [sic] office is the more appropriate outlet for your concerns. I will forward your concerns to that office. With respect to your desire to submit corrects [sic] i [sic] will forward your communication to the appropriate person who will contact you." That Mr. Wiley would not have found a fraudulent document with his own name on it to be a police matter is, sadly, unsurprising. "SUNY police chiefs serve at the pleasure of the campus president, thus are motivated to keep crime stats down by any means […] SUNY can no longer afford to staff, or overstaff, a body, or overstaff, a body which is subject to inefficiencies, manipulation, cronyism, ill motivation and mismanagement." -- Peter Barry, VP & Legislative Director of NYS University Police Officers Union Local 1792 of the American Federation of State County & Municipal Employees AFSCME, Council 82 & AFL-CIO. (127-128). http://www.nysenate.gov/files/SUNY%20Testimony%20pt.%203.PDF Mr. Wiley is a "Chief" whose entire department had failed for many years to properly maintain a sexual offender registry (that it was finally updated seems to be due only to my repeatedly reporting it at the local, county, state, and federal levels), among other completely inexcusable and unforgivable failures (SUNY Albany is a university where at least two students have disappeared and have never been found, presumed murdered). Is any of that consistent with "improving the academic quality of the University at Albany and expanding opportunities for students"?

OCR did not deliberate over their potential conflicts of interest "given Secretary Arne Duncan's appointment of UAlbany Provost Susan Phillips to the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality on the recommendation of SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher and Philips' involvement in the case given her failure to ever respond to, e.g., e-mails of May 19, 2012 10:15 AM, May 19, 2012 11:10 AM, and July 1, 2012 9:28 AM" according to the response that was sent in response to the FOIA request. I consider it sadly possible that OCR did not do so, however if it is possible to appeal the response to the FOIL request, I think it is in the best interests of national institutional quality and integrity that I do so. The existence of records pertaining to that should be double-checked, and the extent of the "nonresponsive" redactions in what I was sent is problematic. All of the redacted material seems at a minimum relevant, and some of it outright critical to have left unredacted - in particular, if Ms. Phillips' name was redacted anywhere that would be extremely problematic.

This all should have been wrapped up in accordance with policy and law in 2011. I reported academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation: things students and encouraged and even required to report. I was threatened in response, and a threat was even sent to my mother. The threats have continued even after I graduated, and nothing seems to have been done to retract them despite the agreement between OCR and SUNY. OCR was unwilling to actually answer questions about their so-called "determination" and never provided specific information as to how they arrived at their determinations. OCR claimed that numerous people checked the validity of the determination before it was sent to me, but it is hard to believe that for many reasons, not least of which being that it refers to a non-existent "Social Sciences Department". There's a Social Sciences building, a College of Arts and Sciences, and a Communication department. That Richard Anderson, Gary Kiang, Erin Gimbel, and evidently others would make sloppy mistakes such as that and yet Mr. Anderson and Kiang claimed OCR had been very careful to check the veracity of everything they wrote in the determination, and that OCR would permit the threats sent to me and my mother in place is inexcusable. Aside from appealing the FOIA request, appealing the determination, filing another FOIA request for documents OCR did not send (including my original complaint, and records indicating how they arrived at their determination), also filing complaints about the unprofessional behavior and quality of work of Richard Anderson, Gary Kiang, and Erin Gimbel seems absolutely necessary at this point.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on April 7, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #13-01195-F.

Thank you for your help.