6 ms·

The original story explains how this was likely a jealous colleague at GT, who called in the state guns to get revenge. The prosecutor's extreme delay and then

The original story explains how this was likely a jealous colleague at GT, who called in the state guns to get revenge. The prosecutor's extreme delay and then "accidentally" losing the case on a "miscalculation" of statue of limitations was because they had no case and were too embarrassed to admit it. If there were justice here, charges would be brought against whoever in the university demanded this malicious false prosecution.

clamprecht 10y ago
A case of "no skin in the game." Neither the prosecutor nor the snitch had anything to lose.
jacquesm 10y ago
Fortunately academia is populated by self-less souls searching for absolute truths only. I always wonder why the jealousy is so strong in those circles, it's not as if there is much at stake other than reputation and ego. I've seen quite a few examples of this in real life by now and it's much worse than industry in some ways.
- ianai 10y ago
  Ego/jealously know no bounds. Society should really try to get a handle on it as a 'group effort'.
- tacon 10y ago
  "Academic politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small." [1] http://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/08/18/acad-politics/ http://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/08/18/acad-politics/
- Spooky23 10y ago
  The lower the stakes, the more vicious the infighting.
- koolba 10y ago
  People will do disgustingly stupid things to chase meaningless internet points. It's understandable that more real world intangibles like reputation would see similar actions.
downandout 10y ago
The responsibility to determine whether the state has a reasonable chance at winning a trial prior to requesting an arrest warrant falls squarely on the shoulders of prosecutors. Because the stigma and expense of even a failed prosecution like this one is so extreme to the defendant, there need to be consequences for prosecutors when they proceed with cases where the statute of limitations has clearly expired or other obvious problems barring a successful prosecution exist. Unfortunately, prosecutors cannot be put in jail for being utter failures at their jobs, and successfully suing them is nearly impossible, so these people got away with seriously damaging someone's life and career for nothing. It happens everyday throughout the US at both the state and federal levels. Sadly, until laws are changed to allow jail time for willful prosecutorial misconduct, it will keep happening.
- rayiner 10y ago
  I don't think it's correct to say that the statute of limitations has "clearly expired." The alleged fraud included among other things having invoices his company owed submitted to GT for payment. The dispute was about whether the statute of limitations ran from when he put in the orders or submitted the invoices, or when GT later paid them. I also don't think it's fair to presume bad faith on the part of the prosecutor. Outside the loosey-goosey world of incubators and academia, having your employer pay off invoices for your side business (or personal expenses) is classic white collar fraud.
  - x0x0 10y ago
    Yeah, everyone but Laskar (even other profs in the article) pretty much agree that he stole $50k. See the quotes from peers saying that eg this was an overreaction, or that their university would have handled it internally, but that all agrees with the facts. Laskar stole $50k. Maybe other places slap people on the hands for doing that, but that doesn't make this prosecution wrong. The fact remains, Laskar stole the $50k. And as for prosecutorial misconduct, if you discover someone stole $50k, it's nothing like misconduct to go see what else he or she may have stolen.
    - 10y ago
bmelton 10y ago
And this is why I make it a point to sincerely believe in the innocence of every person not convincingly convicted of a crime, and even extend compassion to those who were found guilty for the panoply of reasons for which the jury / prosecution / system might have been rigged / biased / broken. It seems like we make sport of being able to determine the guilt or innocence of people from the comfort of our homes, armchair style, and I do my level best to ignore those discussions wherever possible, or to chime in only for the purpose of reminding them that in America at least, we're supposed to be deemed innocent until proven guilty, and that we aren't privy to proof. Moreover, I subscribe to Blackstone's adage that it's "better to let 10 guilty persons go free than one innocent person suffer." If more of us were willing to extend such grace to those accused of crimes, perhaps fewer people would have their lives ruined by the wake of a wrongful allegation.
johnnyhillbilly 10y ago
I assume this is one-sided, but since Dr. Laskar didn't get to present his side of the case in court, I believe it's appropriate to link to it: http://joylaskarstory.com/chronology/ http://joylaskarstory.com/chronology/

clamprecht 10y ago

A case of "no skin in the game." Neither the prosecutor nor the snitch had anything to lose.

jacquesm 10y ago

Fortunately academia is populated by self-less souls searching for absolute truths only. I always wonder why the jealousy is so strong in those circles, it's not as if there is much at stake other than reputation and ego. I've seen quite a few examples of this in real life by now and it's much worse than industry in some ways.

ianai 10y ago
Ego/jealously know no bounds. Society should really try to get a handle on it as a 'group effort'.
tacon 10y ago
"Academic politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small." [1] http://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/08/18/acad-politics/ http://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/08/18/acad-politics/
Spooky23 10y ago
The lower the stakes, the more vicious the infighting.
koolba 10y ago
People will do disgustingly stupid things to chase meaningless internet points. It's understandable that more real world intangibles like reputation would see similar actions.

downandout 10y ago

The responsibility to determine whether the state has a reasonable chance at winning a trial prior to requesting an arrest warrant falls squarely on the shoulders of prosecutors. Because the stigma and expense of even a failed prosecution like this one is so extreme to the defendant, there need to be consequences for prosecutors when they proceed with cases where the statute of limitations has clearly expired or other obvious problems barring a successful prosecution exist. Unfortunately, prosecutors cannot be put in jail for being utter failures at their jobs, and successfully suing them is nearly impossible, so these people got away with seriously damaging someone's life and career for nothing. It happens everyday throughout the US at both the state and federal levels. Sadly, until laws are changed to allow jail time for willful prosecutorial misconduct, it will keep happening.

rayiner 10y ago
I don't think it's correct to say that the statute of limitations has "clearly expired." The alleged fraud included among other things having invoices his company owed submitted to GT for payment. The dispute was about whether the statute of limitations ran from when he put in the orders or submitted the invoices, or when GT later paid them. I also don't think it's fair to presume bad faith on the part of the prosecutor. Outside the loosey-goosey world of incubators and academia, having your employer pay off invoices for your side business (or personal expenses) is classic white collar fraud.
- x0x0 10y ago
  Yeah, everyone but Laskar (even other profs in the article) pretty much agree that he stole $50k. See the quotes from peers saying that eg this was an overreaction, or that their university would have handled it internally, but that all agrees with the facts. Laskar stole $50k. Maybe other places slap people on the hands for doing that, but that doesn't make this prosecution wrong. The fact remains, Laskar stole the $50k. And as for prosecutorial misconduct, if you discover someone stole $50k, it's nothing like misconduct to go see what else he or she may have stolen.
  - 10y ago

bmelton 10y ago

And this is why I make it a point to sincerely believe in the innocence of every person not convincingly convicted of a crime, and even extend compassion to those who were found guilty for the panoply of reasons for which the jury / prosecution / system might have been rigged / biased / broken. It seems like we make sport of being able to determine the guilt or innocence of people from the comfort of our homes, armchair style, and I do my level best to ignore those discussions wherever possible, or to chime in only for the purpose of reminding them that in America at least, we're supposed to be deemed innocent until proven guilty, and that we aren't privy to proof. Moreover, I subscribe to Blackstone's adage that it's "better to let 10 guilty persons go free than one innocent person suffer." If more of us were willing to extend such grace to those accused of crimes, perhaps fewer people would have their lives ruined by the wake of a wrongful allegation.

johnnyhillbilly 10y ago

I assume this is one-sided, but since Dr. Laskar didn't get to present his side of the case in court, I believe it's appropriate to link to it: http://joylaskarstory.com/chronology/ http://joylaskarstory.com/chronology/