The Stanford Daily: Stanford Medicine professor (José Montoya) fired for violating University rules of conduct (june 2019)

It was even more shattering to learn, through the June 4 Stanford Daily article, that it was members of my Stanford ME/CFS team who experienced some of my behaviors as attempts at unsolicited sexual acts, harassment, and misconduct.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised that he didn't know the identity of his accusers throughout the investigation until after he'd been fired and read it in the the Stanford article.
 
I just put that observation up there, without meaning anything by it. It doesn't necessarily mean that there was anything wrong with the investigation, for example they could have had enough evidence / witnesses without having to call members of the ME/CFS team. I've no idea how Stanford investigates such matters.
 
TiredSam said:
I'm surprised that he didn't know the identity of his accusers throughout the investigation until after he'd been fired and read it in the the Stanford article.
Click to expand...
It is not uncommon that complainants’ identities are not revealed to the one the complaint is about. I think it is meant to address people’s fear about coming forward, but unfortunately I think it can also have the effect of not allowing a fair hearing.
 
Source: Stanford Daily
Date: June 6, 2019
Author: Julia Ingram & Claire Wang
URL:
https://www.stanforddaily.com/2019/...gizes-cites-cultural-differences-for-conduct/

Medicine professor fired for sexual misconduct apologizes, cites cultural differences for conduct
----------------------------------------------------------

Stanford Medical Center professor Jose Montoya, who was fired after a University investigation found that he had violated University code of conduct policies related to sexual harassment, misconduct and assault, said he 'sincerely apologize' to anyone who he 'offended,' in a statement to The Daily sent by his lawyer David Nied.

Montoya, who formerly directed the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) Initiative, added that the events that occurred since March - when a group of affected women first raised their concerns to Stanford - have been a 'huge surprise. It was even more shattering to learn, through the June 4 Stanford Daily article, that it was members of my Stanford ME/CFS team who experienced some of my behaviors as attempts at unsolicited sexual acts, harassment and misconduct,' he wrote.

continued at link
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TiredSam said:
I'm surprised that he didn't know the identity of his accusers throughout the investigation until after he'd been fired and read it in the the Stanford article.
Click to expand...

I wonder if identities were confidential in order to prevent harassment, etc.
For instance, before, during and after testifying at confirmation hearings for (US) Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh, Dr. Blasey Ford was subjected to intense harassment, had to hire security, she and family had to leave their own home for many months......
 
Well, now this is national news.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/stanf...-alleged-sexual-misconduct-that-got-him-fired

I almost can't believe that he'd put this response out there. "I didn't know any better because..." I mean, I don't want to dogpile in the same context as this tweet, or some others we will likely soon see, but this statement is so tone-deaf it's really hard to imagine it came from someone who was a well-respected professor, researcher, and clinician at one of the most prestigious universities anywhere.

 
Three Chord Monty said:
Well, now this is national news.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/stanf...-alleged-sexual-misconduct-that-got-him-fired

I almost can't believe that he'd put this response out there. "I didn't know any better because..." I mean, I don't want to dogpile in the same context as this tweet, or some others we will likely soon see, but this statement is so tone-deaf it's really hard to imagine it came from someone who was a well-respected professor, researcher, and clinician at one of the most prestigious universities anywhere.

Click to expand...

Exactly why i called his attorney a fool. You don't make things worse, you try to contain the damage your client has done and make proper amends if possible :emoji_face_palm:
 
zzz said:
Dr. Montoya has released a statement concerning the events of the last week. I of course can't judge its accuracy, but it definitely puts forward a different story than what has been reported in recent articles, and is hard to reconcile with his firing from a tenured position. Here is his statement:

Dr. Montoya Responds to the Events of the Last Week
Click to expand...
Blaming 'cultural differences' seems like a real cop out. Stanford University would not have fired him if it were simply a matter of him being overly affectionate with the people he was working with. They did an investigation first, and must have had adequate proof that he was doing more than hugging a few women.
 
As we learn more about Montoya, I can't help but see parallels with nearby UC Berkeley astronomy professor Geoffrey Marcy just a few years ago. There are differences certainly (Marcy's victims were mostly female postdocs and students). In a culture of silence, some tenured professors have gotten away with such behavior for years or decades.

Here’s How Geoff Marcy's Sexual Harassment Went On For Decades
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/azeenghorayshi/how-harassment-stays-secret

ETA: There are more curious parallels. Like Montoya, Marcy also entered a field (exoplanets) that was considered at the time to be a career deadend. Exoplanets was a field with decades of false "discoveries' that didn't hold up to scrutiny. But with the emergence of better technology, the exoplanet field gained credibility and eventually became a very hot area of research. Like Montoya, Marcy rose to the highest level in his field and helped to validate it.

And just as Marcy's bad behavior was not about astronomy, Montoya's bad behavior is not about ME.
 
Last edited:
TigerLilea said:
Blaming 'cultural differences' seems like a real cop out. Stanford University would not have fired him if it were simply a matter of him being overly affectionate with the people he was working with. They did an investigation first, and must have had adequate proof that he was doing more than hugging a few women.
Click to expand...

BurnA said:
This is an assumption.
He is still innocent under the law.
Click to expand...
This goes without saying.
None of us know the details, so let's not speculate.
Click to expand...
The next steps are akin to there will be either a meeting or a legal challenge. If it goes to court then there will be determination of guilt or innocence. If instead they work out a deal with the DA then that will be binding.

If there is an informal meeting instead the will present their evidence and Stanford and their lawyers and Montoya and his lawyer will have to make a deal of some sort, if the evidence is poor he might get his job back, if its strong they will negotiate the next moves, whether its to drop any legal challenges, some kind of restitution or voluntary retirement or whatever they come up with.

So all this being the case and the fact that its hard to get rid of a tenured researcher at Stanford the facts to date (plus the non apology apology) suggest this is not a case of no harm no foul. I hope there was no crime committed but we shall see what happens and if he committed crime(s) i hope he sees consequences and his victims get the proper supports.
 
Date: June 7, 2019

Author: Tasneem Nashrulla

URL:
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/tasneemnashrulla/stanford-professor-fired-sexual-misconduct

A Stanford professor fired over sexual misconduct allegations cited his 'Hispanic Heritage'
----------------------------------------------------------
A veteran professor of medicine, Jose Montoya, apologized for not 'appreciating the difference' in social norms between the US and his native Colombia.

Jose Montoya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University who was fired last week over sexual misconduct allegations, attributed his behavior to the difference in 'evolving' social norms in the US and the culture of his native Colombia. Montoya, who began teaching at Stanford in 1990, said that he had treated both men and women in Stanford communities with 'respect, professionalism, and the affection proper of my Hispanic heritage,' according to a statement his lawyer sent to the Stanford Daily after his May 30 termination.

More at link
 
Esther12 said:
Spending time reading the stupid things some people say about ME/CFs on twitter was one of the most depressing weeks of my life. There are these pockets of idiotic certainty that I'd been entirely unaware of.
Click to expand...

I just happened to see this from Cort about a number of accounts promoting conspiratorial views re Montoya all being from the same IP address:

Cort Johnson on June 6, 2019 at 9:06 pm
Sockpuppet Alert

Someone requested that I look at the IP addresses associated with the comments because some of the commenters seemed to be posting similar posts.

That person was right. It turns out that over the past two days Frank, Jeff, Bill, Karen, Bob and Li have been using different emails and different identities to post from the same IP address; i.e. it appears that one person is taking different names to make their point. This is fundamentally unfair because it makes it appear that more people share their views than really are.

15 posts have come from that IP address over the past two days. Yesterday was the first time anyone from that IP address has ever commented on Health Rising.

Because it’s impossible to know the proper name of the person the name on their comments has been changed to “From IP address 75.155.221.124”

Whoever you are – you’ve made your point. Posts from that IP address will no longer be allowed.
Click to expand...

Who knows what was going on there, but it does illustrate how easy it easy for someone to create a bad impression.
 
Barry said:
Am I right in thinking S4ME also double checks if multiple users originate from a single IP address?
Click to expand...
Yes, but only as a part of our efforts to keep spammers out. A shared IP address would, in general, raise our suspicions in that regard but wouldn't necessarily prevent membership, one good reason for shared IP addresses would be if multiple members of the same family wanted to sign up to the forum.
 
Esther12 said:
I just happened to see this from Cort about a number of accounts promoting conspiratorial views re Montoya all being from the same IP address:



Who knows what was going on there, but it does illustrate how easy it easy for someone to create a bad impression.
Click to expand...
If people are curious, I looked up that IP, and it seems to come from Canada, and doesn't seem to be a VPN. So it's some Canadian fellow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom