OXFORD UNIVERSITY TO TAKE LEGAL ACTION AGAINST DETTERLING...
I have contacted St John's College, Oxford University regarding Detterling's allegations that I 'cheated, stole, plagiarised and copied' during my studies for my degree which was awarded in 1978.
I have now had a reply from the university. I reproduce herewith an excerpt from this reply. My readers will find this most interesting indeed:
'Dear Mr ***
We have received your communication containing the false allegations from a Mr Detterling that you 'cheated, stole, plagiarised and copied' during your studies here, 1975 - 1978.
Oxford University takes very seriously any allegations of impropriety, dishonesty or malpractice in the running of its academic courses or any allegations that impugn the integrity of the university in the awarding of its degrees.
The university's lawyers have been now informed of Detterling's allegations and Mr Detterling will be immediately made aware of the legal action that will be embarked upon forthwith.'
So there you have it Detters. They are coming for you. And of course they have the resources to track you down. No place for a bottlejob to be. Don't pretend you are not quaking in your boots. Better run for the hills you big Nancyboy.
GENE,
PS
The Church of England is f**ked
Oh for God's sake grow up, you stupid bugger.
ReplyDeleteDo you SERIOUSLY expect me to believe this demented nonsense?
If you do, then your narcissism must have entered a psychotic phase.
Just ask yourself: who has been accused of impropriety, dishonesty or malpractice - you or the university? The answer is that you have; in which case the university would be investigating you.
The short answer is piss off, you daft shit.
"Just ask yourself: who has been accused of impropriety, dishonesty or malpractice - you or the university? The answer is that you have;"
DeleteNOT SO! Your allegations mean that the university was either negligent or complicit in dealing with my malpractice. You have impugned the good name of St John's - and you will be dealt with!
Furthermore it is on record that you described the degree awarded to me by Oxford University as 'bogus'. Methinks St John's have a watertight case against you. You are for the high jump.
ReplyDelete"Your allegations mean that the university was either negligent or complicit in dealing with my malpractice."
ReplyDeleteSo you admit to your malpractice?
And to think you once claimed to teach A level law. You idiot.
Well, you have just proved the truth of my allegations, in which case St John's will be much more interested in you than in me. Sorry if there are typos in this post, but I am crying with laughter at your stupidity.
See what I mean by "thick as well as nasty"
"Your allegations mean that the university was either negligent or complicit in dealing with my malpractice."
ReplyDeleteGood thing you never taught 'A' Level Law. The use of 'malpractice' here is in terms of your allegation - not in any way an admission. Read what the university replied: 'false allegations'.
"In terms of your allegation" my arse.
ReplyDeleteYOU wrote: "Your allegations mean that the university was either negligent or complicit in dealing with MY malpractice", an unequivocal admission of your malpractice.
"Read what the university replied: 'false allegations'."
Balls. The university never replied because you never wrote to them. And in any case, no legal officer in his right senses would write off allegations of a student's malpractice as false without having sight of what the allegations were.
You can't even construct a convincing pack of lies, you ignorant little shit.
What next? a personal letter from Suella Braverman?
What a pathetic little turd you are.
"Your allegations mean that the university was either negligent or complicit in dealing with MY malpractice", an unequivocal admission of your malpractice."
ReplyDeleteYou know I think you really mean this. You are not as bright as I thought you were Detters.
Your false allegation would, if true, mean either complicity or negligence by the university. This is not difficult to understand.
A very good thing you did not teach 'A' Level Law.
PS
The Church of England is F**KED.
Well done on at least trying to find a way to retreat from the bullying, bluster and threats with which you began today in a way which doesn't make you look like a complete tit. I may not be as bright as you thought I am, Gene, but you are the wannabe, not me. On the other hand I don't think I had realised today just how stupid you are.
ReplyDeleteYour bullying and bluster hasn't worked, of course, because you are as thick as you are nasty. For example:
"Your false allegation would, if true, mean either complicity or negligence by the university."
NONSENSE.
In the first place, my allegation was not false - it only echoed your original boast that you had cheated, stolen, plagiarised and copied during your studies for your degree which was awarded in 1978.
And in the second place, complicity or negligence by the university is not implied by your boast; merely that you expended effort and intelligence on disguising your cheating and plagiarism. Mechanisms for detecting plagiarism in 1978 depended purely on the erudition of the marker, which is why you got away with it.
Anyway, this is boring. Seeing off your pathetic threats is about as entertaining as hoping against hope.
And once more I am dictating the content of your blog. When are you going to give up?