Subject:	FOCAS questions


Date:	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:33:33 +0000
From:	Joseph Villarosa <alphanalyst@catskill.net>

Dear FOCAS
I’m on your website now and would like to potentially donate funds
BUT I’ve been burned in the past
So I have a few questions PLEASE, before I donate
Keep scrolling down for two images

I see via an earlier chipin/paypal that FOCUS posted (see WAY below) that you are somehow linked to UNC (focas@unc.com)? I’m confused, FOCAS is a 501c3, so what is the relationship with UNC?
You say donations are tax deductible, but UNC is NOT a 501c3. I’m confused (see below)
Does my money do to FOCAS or to UNC and THEN to Focus?
Do you have a license to Solicit funds? According to the NC Secretary of State, you do not. Perhaps I searched incorrectly or used the wrong organzational name. Do you have another name? Should I search for a UNC related hybrid name? Please advise.

See two images below
I’m ready to donate, but I need to ensure all is legit
Thanks
PS: Your website needs to have an email address

Subject:	Re: FOCAS questions
Date:	Fri, 19 Nov 2010 16:58:52 -0500


To:	Joseph Villarosa <alphanalyst@catskill.net>

I have talked to the Charitable solicitations department. The statute clearly says that we are exempt. Their interpretation is that we should file with them so that they can certify that we are exempt and they have just sent out a letter asking us to file. They are aware that thousands of groups in NC with minimal income do not file and there is no penalty for failure to file if the organizations income is less that $5,000

We have NEVER had income of $5000 in a year and will not this year unless you give us over $2500. In that case we will have to file next year,paying a fee based on THIS year's income as stated in the statute. You can verify this by calling the charitable solicitations office
The money for the Robeson suit was set aside and ALL money collected was used for that purpose. The collection of this money falls within the FOCAS charter and under Federal law is tax deductible. No one was "duped" and if you say that, it is slander.

I presume that you have misstated your intention in your original letter and have some connection with the lawsuit; never the less, we would be delighted to receive your contribution. We will file with CSL at the end of the year and expect to be certified as exempt again.
I am interested to know what your connection is with the Robeson law suit. We believe that we have done a great public service in aiding the lawsuit and I hope that you agree.

Elliot

On 11/20/10 5:10 PM, "Joseph Villarosa" <alphanalyst@catskill.net> wrote:

Dear Friends at UNC
I believe the attached complaint against Dr. Cramer is very clear.
Please review.
Thank you
- joseph villarosa

From: Thorp, Holden
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 10:55:16 AM
To: alphanalyst@catskill.net
Subject: RE: Complaint against Professor Elliot Cramer

Mr. Villarosa,

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I have corresponded with legal and they’ll be in touch tomorrow.

Holden

From: Strohm, Leslie Chambers
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 12:44 PM
To: Carney, Bruce William
Subject: FW: Complaint against Professor Elliot Cramer -- Request to Access Email

Bruce,

I (and others) received the attached communication over the weekend regarding Elliot Cramer. I’d like to know what role, if any, Elliot played in the email exchanges.

The University Policy on the Privacy of Electronic Information (http://www.unc.edu/campus/policies/elec_info.html) provides that, with the approval of this Office and the Provost, the University can access employee email files in order to investigate possible violations of University policy.

I write to ask your approval to permit me to review Prof. Cramer’s email correspondence with Mr. Villarosa.

If you have any questions or concerns about this request, please feel free to call me.

Thanks for your consideration.

Leslie

From: Carney, Bruce William
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 12:56:22 PM
To: Strohm, Leslie Chambers
CC: Carney, Bruce William
Subject: RE: Complaint against Professor Elliot Cramer -- Request to Access Email

You have my permission. I recall the episode earlier that was a major problem.

So far as I can tell, he is not formally part of UNC anymore, and isn’t even listed

on the emeritus portion of Psychology’s faculty lists.

---Bruce

Dec 6, 2010, 3:46 PM, "Elliot Cramer" To Leslie Strohm

Re: Joseph Villarosa

Sorry you've been bothered by this guy; I'm learning more and more about him. He is a real nut. I've just been chatting with Calley Gerber of Gerber Animal Law Center who has been harassed by him too. I'll write him from my ATT address from now on; let him complain to them about me.

Elliot

Subject:	Re: Joseph Villarosa
Date:	Tue, 7 Dec 2010 01:04:34 +0000
From:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>
To:	Elliot Cramer <cramer@email.unc.edu>

Elliott,

Thanks. That should help.

Leslie
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Dispute with Mr. Villarosa

December 12, 2011 10:14 PM, Strohm, Leslie Chambers wrote:

Dear Dr. Cramer,

I've been copied on quite a bit of email correspondence today that indicates your dispute with Mr. Villarosa is escalating.

I appreciate your email message last week letting me know you would be using a private email account from now on.

Would you please take care not to use any University resources, including email or websites, in communications that are

addressed to Mr. Villarosa or that in some way implicate him, directly or indirectly.  Your issues with him are a

private matter, and the University should not be drawn into it.

Thanks,

Leslie Strohm

Subject: Dispute with Mr. Villarosa

Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 23:40:39 +0000

From: Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>

To: Elliot Cramer <cramer@email.unc.edu>

Dear Dr. Cramer,

It has been a month since we’ve been in touch with one another. Thank you for following through on your commitment to use private resources and accounts, instead of your University account, to continue your dispute with Joseph Villarosa.

1672.

When the University receives a receive a complaint about a possible violation of these policies, we do an investigation. Pursuant to the University Policy on the Privacy of Electronic Information (http://www.unc.edu/campus/policies/elec_info.html), your email files were reviewed. What we found is that, since 2004, you have regularly used your “unc” account to set up and manage a PayPal account on behalf of FOCAS and to solicit monetary gifts from donors and potential donors to FOCAS.

This is a violation of University policy. The penalties for violation of the policy include restricted access or loss of access to the University computer network.

If my understanding of the facts is incorrect, please let me know right away. If my understanding is correct, then you may either relinquish your “unc” account, effective immediately, or I will work with the University’s Information Security Office to disable your account. Please let me know how you would like to proceed.

Thanks,

Leslie Strohm

Leslie Chambers Strohm

Vice Chancellor and General Counsel

Subject:	Re: Dispute with Mr. Villarosa
Date:	Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:29:00 -0500
From:	Elliot Cramer <cramer@email.unc.edu>
Organization:	University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
To:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>

Dear M. Strohm:

This is not true at all; I did not set up the paypal account and I did not manage it. In fact, I have had nothing to do with the paypal account until recently, following the death of Margaret Mauney who did set it up and manage it on her own account. My association with FOCAS began in 2004 but, I believe, the paypal account was set up some years later. The only contact with UNC was that Paypal sent me notices of contributions to FOCAS and I forwarded these notices to Pat Sanford, starting in October 5, 2009; I see 25 emails to me and all but five are since May and are related to the Robeson County animal shelter which Rep McElraft has been involved with. I believe that this is in the category of "incidental personal usage by faculty, staff, and students". In fact, my association with FOCAS is in the nature of public service since FOCAS is organized under State law as a public charity, not a business see
http://www.secretary.state.nc.us/corporations/Filings.aspx?PItemId=5699875 . I believe that University faculty are encouraged to engage in public service.

It took a while for them to make this change but it has been in place for some time. I have set up another alias and have instructed them to contact me at the address Focas@bellsouth.net although it surely it not a violation of university policy for businesses to write me.

I have read the University policy and I am at a loss to know how any of this can be construed as a violation of University policy. If you still believe that it is, I would like you to specifically cite what, in the policy, I have violated.

This investigation is a result of harassment by Joseph Villarosa who is now the subject of a complaint to the FBI for internet harassment. I was assured by Professor Bill Reppy that "the folks at UNC recognize a nut case when they encounter one." Evidently I was mistaken. You can read about Villarosa on my website http://www.ourpaws.info/joe.htm It needs some updated as a result of continued harassment and death threats towards Susan Barrett due to her involvement with the Robeson County shelter. I have no dispute with Villarosa; he has harassed me for the same reason and you are his unwitting tool.

I will appreciate your promptly resolving this issue and notifying Mr. Villarosa that I am not in violation of University policy. He does not write me anymore but, I am told, I receive occassional mention on Facebook in connection with his harassment of others. I am sure that you have better things to do than deal with a nut like Villarosa.

Elliot. M. Cramer

-------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------

Date:	Mon, 17 Jan 2011 23:48:08 -0500
From:	Elliot Cramer <cramer@email.unc.edu>
Organization:	University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
To:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>,
CC:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>,

I have logged onto the FOCAS paypal account and I see that our first paypal transaction was on 3/25/2008, not 2004 as you say. I see about 45 contributions since then, an average of about 1.3 per month; 20 of these were in connection with the Robeson shelter which was a special case for which we did NOT solicit. We have never mentioned Robeson County on our website and contributions through our website for Robeson specifically mentioned that they were for the Robeson County lawsuit. Thus we solicited an average of about .7 contributions per month on a non-UNC website. I had no occasion to write Paypal about ANY of these though I probably received emails from paypal, notifying me of the contributions.

It is thus incorrect to say that I "have regularly used your “unc” account to set up and manage a PayPal account on behalf of FOCAS and to solicit monetary gifts from donors and potential donors to FOCAS." I did not set it up the account; I did not start managing the account until the end of December; I see only two emails to Paypal about FOCAS and I do not believe that I have ever had occasion to write them before. One of the says

Thank you very much. I presume that the following (FOCAS@unc.edu) has yet to be changed on the "contribute" link

FOCAS@UNC.EDU

This should never have been on there in the first place and it would not have been, had our treasurer properly set up the paypal account. I did not authorize it and I had no knowledge of it. In any event, I do not believe that the use of a UNC email address implies any connection between the organization and UNC.

I find this statement under the University's Policy for Use of University Resources in Support of Entrepreneurial Activities

"For the purpose of this policy, "entrepreneurial activities" performed by a member of the university faculty as part of University duties are activities that contribute to the university's economic development, technology transfer or other public service goals."

I believe that Rep. McElraft will verify that FOCAS has been serving "a public service goal" in its help with the Robeson shelter and our activities in support of the Orange County Animal Shelter. She is also familiar with the harassment of Joseph Villarosa.

Elliot M. Cramer

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------

Subject:	Your help
Date:	Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:32:06 -0500
From:	Elliot Cramer <cramer@email.unc.edu>
Organization:	University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
To:	Holden Thorp <Holden_Thorp@unc.edu>

Holden

I last spoke to you in September 2009 when I suggested that we
might arrived at some compromise with regard to YWC that would
minimize damage to the University. You said that you would get
back to me after talking to your "PR people". You never did get
back to me and it is clear that your "PR people" gave you bad
advice. Putting "elliot cramer" "youth for western" into google
gives 1700 hits.

As you know, on Monday night I received an outrageous Email from
Leslie Strohm saying that "your email files were reviewed. What
we found is that, since 2004, you have regularly used your "unc"
account to set up and manage a PayPal account on behalf of FOCAS
and to solicit monetary gifts from donors and potential donors to
FOCAS". This utterly false statement was NOT based on a review
of my email files but was based on emails from Joseph Villarosa,
an obviously mentally disturbed individual with his own agenda
who has been harassing me and others (including Professor Bill
Reppy of the Duke Law School) because of our connection with the
Robeson County Shelter Lawsuit. Villarosa has no knowledge of
who set up the FOCAS PayPal account or how I have used my "unc"
email account. As I wrote Ms. Strohm on Monday,

"I did not set up the paypal account and I did not manage it. In
fact, I have had nothing to do with the paypal account until
recently, following the death of Margaret Mauney who did set it
up and manage it on her own account. My association with FOCAS
began in 2004 but, I believe, the paypal account was set up some
years later. The only contact with UNC was that Paypal sent me
notices of contributions to FOCAS and I forwarded these notices
to Pat Sanford, starting in October 5, 2009"

In a follow-up letter I noted that

"I have logged onto the FOCAS paypal account and I see that our
first paypal transaction was on 3/25/2008, not 2004 as you say.
I see about 45 contributions since then, an average of about 1.3
per month; 20 of these were in connection with the Robeson
shelter which was a special case for which we did NOT solicit."

The PayPal account is associated with a non-university website -
www.friendsofocas.org of a non-profit charitable organization.
We did not solicit funds for the Robeson County lawsuit but did
permit others to contribute to FOCAS with the understanding that
their contributions would be used to help support the lawsuit.
Villarosa has harassed EVERYONE who is in any way associated with
the lawsuit. My association with FOCAS is clearly in the nature
of public service and I have, in fact, been invited by Robeson
County Commissioner David Edge to meet with him to discuss our
suggestions for improvement of the shelter.

I do not think that faculty, staff, and students will take kindly
to the knowledge that their private emails are being subjected to
scrutiny because of harassment by an obviously mentally
disturbed individual such as Joseph Villarosa. Ms. Strohm was in
contact with me about the numerous emails to her, you, and
general administration from Villarosa. She could have raised any
concerns with me before invading my privacy. It does not speak
well of her that she would take the word of someone such as
Villarosa over a faculty member with over 25 years of service to
the University. I doubt that Susan Ehringhaus would have handled
this matter in this way.

I have expected to hear from Ms. Strohm that this matter has been
resolved, based on her obviously false information. I thought
that I would hold off on making a public records request until I
asked you to resolve this issue. I consider this to be
harassment by the University and an inappropriate use of
University resources at a time when the University has many
pressing issues. Some might relate this to the YWC debacle. I
do not think that the University needs this kind of publicity
again.

I hope that you can resolve this quickly and I will be happy to
talk to you on the phone about these issues.

Elliot

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Strohm, Leslie Chambers
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 4:27 PM
To: Kirby, Brenda W; Davis, Nancy K
Subject: RE: Your help

Thanks. We did look at his emails, with permission from the Provost. We did not just rely on the allegations of Mr. Villarosa. I will respond to his messages as soon as I have a chance. I knew that he would take exception to what I wrote – which is why I wrote only to him and gave him a chance to clear up any fact statements that he thought were in error. He replied to my email, cc’ing a number of other people.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject:	Villarosa
Date:	Mon, 14 Mar 2011 12:22:36 -0400
From:	Elliot Cramer <cramer@email.unc.edu>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
Organization:	University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
To:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>
CC:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

On 1/17/2011 6:40 PM, Strohm, Leslie Chambers wrote:

Dear Dr. Cramer,

It has been a month since we’ve been in touch with one another …

----
I have never received a reply to this. You may be interested to know that a restraining order has been issued against Villarosa; see
http://www.ourpaws.info/joe

The authorities in New York are willing to extradite him for communicating threats; The SBI and FBI are also involved

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

________________________________________________________________________

Subject: University Website
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:07:05 +0000
From: Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>
To: Elliot Cramer <cramer@email.unc.edu>

Dear Dr. Cramer,

Mr. Villarosa has contacted the University again to complain
about your use of University resources to continue your dispute
with him. I've looked at the website you maintain on the
University network and see that there is a link to a website for
the Piedmont Animal Welfare Society (PAWS), which includes a link
to a website that contains references to Mr. Villarosa. Would
you please remove - immediately -- from any University resources
any links to material referencing Mr. Villarosa, either directly
or indirectly. Your issues with him are a private matter, and
the University should not be drawn into it.

I believe you now use private email accounts to continue your
disputes with others. And, I acknowledge that the website you
maintain on University resources is clean on its face. It is the
links that continue to be problematic.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Leslie Strohm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Date:	Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:54:56 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>
CC:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>, acoble@email.unc.edu

Subject: Is there intelligent life in the office of your general counsel

Holden:

As you know, last January Ms. Strohm wrote me with false
statements about my misuse of University computing services.
This was entirely based on the claims of a mentally disturbed
individual, Joseph Villarosa, who has since been cited in
Forsyth County for internet harassment. See
http://www.ourpaws.info/joe

Without consulting me, she searched through my personal emails on
the University server but has not been able to find ANYTHING to
substantiate her claims. She wrote

"Pursuant to the University Policy on the Privacy of
Electronic Information
(http://www.unc.edu/campus/policies/elec_info.html), your
email files were reviewed. What we found is that, since
2004, you have regularly used your "unc" account to set up
and manage a PayPal account on behalf of FOCAS and to solicit
monetary gifts from donors and potential donors to
FOCAS. ...If my understanding is correct, then you may either
relinquish your "unc" account, effective immediately, or I
will work with the University's Information Security Office
to disable your account."

As you know, I wrote her back immediately on January 17, denying
all of her false claims. Until this day I received no reply from
her and still have received no justification for her searching
through my private emails or for any of her claims. There is no
justification.

Now she states

"I've looked at the website you maintain on the University
network and see that there is a link to a website for the
Piedmont Animal Welfare Society (PAWS), which includes a link
to a website that contains references to Mr. Villarosa. ...
I acknowledge that the website you maintain on University
resources is clean on its face. It is the links that
continue to be problematic. ...Would you please remove -
immediately -- from any University resources any links to
material referencing Mr. Villarosa, either directly or
indirectly."

Evidently Ms. Strohm claims that if I have a link to a link to a
link ... to a link that references Mr. Villarosa, this is a
violation of University policy. This is absurd and outrageous.
I would appreciate your telling Ms. Strohm that there must better
ways for her to spend her time, other than harassing a retired
University professor. I note that President Ross recently said
that an e-mail search is “incredibly time consuming”. I wonder
about the cost of using University resources to investigate
my private emails without first asking me to respond to Villarosa's
false claims.

You will find my previous correspondence with Ms. Strohm
on http://www.ourpaws.info/strohmw.htm

Some time ago you sent a letter to the University community about
free speech.
http://www.unc.edu/chan/chancellors/thorp_holden/041509freespeech.php

It seems to me that Ms. Strohm has been violating my free speech
rights.

I would appreciate your intervention in this.

Elliot

From: Strohm, Leslie Chambers

Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 8:37:50 PM

To: alphanalyst@catskill.net

Subject: Professor Elliot Cramer

Dear Mr. Villarosa:

Dr. Elliot Cramer retired from the University of North Carolina

at Chapel Hill in May of 1994. He is not our employee, and we

have no responsibility for his actions.

As a retired faculty member, Dr. Cramer is granted access to a

UNC email account and is permitted to maintain a limited webpage.

The University does not monitor the content of the email accounts

or webpages maintained by retired faculty.

I have received no information to indicate that Dr. Cramer has

used his UNC email account to correspond with you or to

correspond with others about you in recent months. If you have

evidence to the contrary, please let me know.

I have looked at Dr. Cramer's personal webpage, which is

mentioned in your email. I see no reference to you whatsoever.

I am sorry that your ongoing dispute with Dr. Cramer has caused

you great distress. Your recourse is directly with Dr. Cramer.

He alone is responsible for his words and his actions. This is

not a University matter.

Sincerely,

Leslie Strohm

Subject:	RE: Is there intelligent life in the office of your general counsel
Date:	Fri, 22 Apr 2011 17:06:53 +0000
From:	Thorp, Holden <holden_thorp@unc.edu>
To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu <ecramer@alum.mit.edu>
CC:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>, Coble, McKay <acoble@email.unc.edu>

Elliot,
I'm sorry that your disagreement with Mr. Villarosa continues. I know you will be disappointed in me for saying this, but I need to ask you to comply with Ms. Strohm's requests. We cannot afford to be drawn into your disagreement with Mr. Villarosa when we have so many important matters facing the university. If you cannot comply with Ms. Strohm's requests, I will ask IT to disable your email account and web page. I'm sorry that we were not to able to come to an amicable solution, but I'm very disappointed that you disparaged our general counsel in the newspaper, and I completely disagree with your assessment.
This will be my last response to you on these matters.
Holden

Subject:	my email account and web page
Date:	Sat, 23 Apr 2011 14:29:32 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Thorp, Holden <holden_thorp@unc.edu>
CC:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>

Holden,

The concern that has been raised by Ms Strohm regards a link to a
non-university website which itself has a link to
http://www.ourpaws.info/joe. Although Joseph Villarosa may find
this link objectionable, it is completely factual and truthful.
It is a response to Villarosa's internet harassment of me and
others. It in no way involves the University and cannot be
reasonably construed to be a violation of the UNC-Chapel Hill
Network Acceptable Use Policy (https://help.unc.edu/1672).

I am sorry that you have been drawn into this, but as you are Ms
Strohm's direct superior, I had no one else to contact. Since Ms
Strohm has a very large staff, I do not understand why she has
personally intervened. I suspect that one of her subordinates
would have looked into Villarosa's internet harassment more
carefully and would have disposed of this matter without
violating my privacy. I certainly did not intend that you, with
your busy schedule, would have to personally investigate this and
I regret that you have become personally involved.

Ms Strohm wrote me on January 17 saying "It has been a month
since we've been in touch with one another. Thank you for
following through on your commitment to use private resources and
accounts, instead of your University account, to continue your
dispute with Joseph Villarosa." In fact I have had no contact
with Villarosa since January except for sending him the link to
the newspaper article on a non-university account. I have never
had anything on my UNC website relating to him. Since Ms Strohm
did not respond to my explanatory Email of January 17 or several
later Emails, I assumed that she was too embarrassed by her false
statements to reply. I decided to let the whole thing drop until
her recent Email with her absurd command to delete the link to my
non-profit organization. I have had the link to the non-profit
state chartered organization PAWS on my UNC website for many
years. I have never before heard that a link to any legal
organization violates any University regulation.

Ms. Strohm has said "I believe you now use private email accounts
to continue your disputes with others. And, I acknowledge that
the website you maintain on University resources is clean on its
face." She adds "It is the links that continue to be
problematic." If Ms. Strohm believes that a "problematic" link
is a violation of any University regulation regarding IT usage, I
would like her to state the regulation and precisely how I have
violating it. I believe that even the Vice-Chancellor (and
Chancellor) must follow University regulations.

Joseph Villarosa and Ms. Strohm have created this problem. I am
an innocent victim; my only interest was helping the animals in
Robeson County. She should simply have told Villarosa that I am
not using any University resources for any dispute with him and
that the University is not involved in any such dispute. She
could solve this problem for you by telling him that now. No
good can come of this for you or the University. I see that my
article, in less than two days, has had 546 views and going up.
A number of colleagues and alumni have expressed disappointment
in the University's actions.

I have already filed a public records request for all Emails and
documents related to this. I have written the Faculty
Information Technology Advisory Committee saying

"I am concerned about the invasion of privacy by the University
General Counsel with regard to the University's Email system. I
would
appreciate your sharing this with members of the Committee and
taking whatever action you think is appropriate. I believe this
falls within your purview under 4-26"

I have been nominated to the Faculty Council and I suppose that I
could bring this matter up myself. If Ms Strohm is intent on
carrying out her threat, I would like to give notice of appeal;
I would think that the above committee might be the appropriate
venue rather than the UNC Board of Trustees. I request that any
action be delayed until my appeal is heard.

With regard to my disparagement of Ms. Strohm, she lied in
stating "What we found is that, since 2004, you have regularly
used your "unc" account ...". Were she a student, I would report
her for a violation of the Honor Code.

I have no current disagreement with Villarosa and the University
has never been involved in my disagreements with him. He,
evidently, is harassing Ms Strohm and she has the possible remedy
of seeking a no-contact order as did Susan Barrett
http://www.ourpaws.info/nocont-joe.jpg

This is a case of internet harassment by Villarosa and should not
require all this attention of the University's General Counsel.
You will recall that you owe me a phone call; I would be happy
to talk to you on the phone to see how we can resolve this, short
of my removing the link to the PAWS website.

Elliot

Subject:	What I have decided to do
Date:	Sun, 24 Apr 2011 22:39:47 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

Holden,

Because of my esteem for you, I have removed the link www.ourpaws.info and have modified my introductory statement to read

Elliot M. Cramer is an Emeritus Professor of Psychology in the L. L. Thurstone Psychometric Laboratory of the Psychology Department of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is a Board member of the Friends of the Orange County Animal Shelter (FOCAS) and the Piedmont Animal Welfare Society (PAWS).

You can drop my appeal of your decision but I am continuing to pursue the invasion of my privacy by Ms. Strohm

Best Wishes
Elliot

Subject:	Re: Dispute with Mr. Villarosa - how to make this go away
Date:	Mon, 25 Apr 2011 09:57:08 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>
CC:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

You can

1. apologize for reviewing my email files without first asking me for an explanation
2. change your policy so that you first seek an explanation from the offending party before reviewing her emails
3. acknowledge that I have not violated the personal use and acceptable use policies of the University

In return, I will consider the matter closed and will remove all references to you from all of my websites.

As a courtesy to Holden, I have removed the link that you have complained about, although I see nothing in the University policies that relates to links to legal organizations.

Elliot Cramer

From: "Strohm, Leslie Chambers" <strohm@emai1unc,edu>

Date: Wed, Apr 27, 2011 7:20 am Subject: Cramer

To: "Waddell. Stan Adolphus" <stan waddellf@unc.edu>

Hi Stan,

Holden and I are in agreement that Cramer's email account and affiliated web page need to be disabled

What information do you need from me? And how soon can this be accomplished? Holden wants to write Elliot and let him know right after the account is disabled.

Thanks. If you hnve questions, just give me acalL 343-1829

Leslie

From: Waddell, Stan Adolphus

Sent: Wednesday. April|27, 2011 9;17AM

To: Strohm, Leslie Chambers

Subject: Re: Cramer

Leslie,

I will use this email as executive approval and have this actions

taken immediately. This should be done by cob today-1 will email

you a confirmation message once complete.

Subject:	What is the problem now?
Date:	Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:28:15 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>
CC:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

I deleted the link you objected to but both my website and email
access have been blocked, even though you have made no complaint
about about my email usage

--
Elliot M. Cramer

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: What is the problem now?

Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 22:04:58 +0000

From: Thorp, Holden <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

To: ecramer@alum.mit.edu <ecramer@alum.mit.edu>,

Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>

Elliot,

The use of the university IT network is a revocable privilege.

You have embroiled the university in your personal issues and

diverted university resources from the things we really need to

focus on to a degree that is simply unacceptable. That is a

violation of the campus "Personal Use Policy."

I authorized IT Security to disable your university network

privileges. They will not be reinstated. As I said in my last

email, I won't be responding to any more of your emails. If you

want to go to my superior about this, that would be President

Ross.

I'm sorry it worked out this way.

Holden

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Violation of privacy and free speech at UNC

Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 23:40:20 -0400

From: Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>

Reply-To: ecramer@alum.mit.edu

To: Thorp, Holden <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

Holden,

I have not embroiled the university in my personal issues;

Joseph Villarosa, a known internet harasser, has embroiled the

University and Ms Strohm handled his complaint inappropriately by

going through my emails without consulting me and then lying

about what she found on January 17. She has never complained

about my emailing Villarosa; in fact, I had previously written

her, voluntarily saying that I would correspond with Villarosa

via a non-university account -

On Dec 6, 2010, at 3:46 PM, "Elliot Cramer"

<cramer@email.unc.edu<mailto:cramer@email.unc.edu>> wrote:

Sorry you've been bothered by this guy; I'm learning more and

more about him. He is a real nut. I've just been chatting with

Calley Gerber of Gerber Animal Law Center who has been harassed

by him too. I'll write him from my ATT address from now on; let

him complain to them about me.

Ms Strohm replied " Elliott, Thanks. That should help. Leslie"

I have not used University resources to involve him in any way

since then. You and Ms Stromn recently insisted that I remove a

link to a non-profit website www.ourpaws.info even though this in

no way violates the "personal use policy" and I have reluctantly

complied. Neither of you have EVER pointed to a statement in the

"personal use policy" that I have violated. Your problem is not

with me; it is with Joseph Villarosa and the inappropriate way Ms

Strohm has handled his complaint. You could have handled this

very simply yourself in January.

It is a sad day when the Chancellor of the University of North

Carolina sanctions the invasion of privacy and violation of free

speech rights of a retired professor.

Elliot

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject:	Invasion of Privacy
Date:	Sun, 15 May 2011 23:10:35 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	'ecramer@alum.mit.edu' <ecramer@alum.mit.edu>
To:	bruce@unc.edu

Bruce W. Carney, Provost

Bruce:

I have just received a copy of the attached email that you sent
to Leslie Strohm on November 22. As you can imagine, I was
disturbed and offended when I received an email from her two
months later with the false statement that

"Pursuant to the University Policy on the Privacy of Electronic
Information
(http://www.unc.edu/campus/policies/elec_info.html), your email
files were reviewed. What we found is that, since 2004, you
have regularly used your "unc" account to set up and manage a
PayPal account on behalf of FOCAS and to solicit monetary gifts
from donors and potential donors to FOCAS."

I am even more offended that you approved her hunting expedition
without first asking me for an explanation. Ms Strohm has NEVER
substantiated any of her allegations and, indeed, has never
answered my immediate response to her accusations. An Email from
Ms Strohm to Villarosa
(http://www.ourpaws.info/joe-april%2017.htm)
would seem to clear me of his allegations but I received this
only in a public records request.

Villarosa is a deranged person who has harassed me and others
because of our involvement with the Robeson County animal shelter
(see barrett to Lugar.pdf attached). My full correspondence with
Ms. Strohm and Holden Thorp may be found on
http://www.ourpaws.info/strohm

I presume that the "major problem" you refer to is the "youth for
western civilization" affair which is documented on
http://www.ourpaws.info/cramer/ywc/
Had Holden not listened to his "PR advisers" and Ms Strohm, that
issue would have been settled very quietly.

Other faculty have been as concerned as I have been about this
invasion of privacy, including your colleague Hugon Karwowski.
He believes as I do that the faculty should be informed of your
policy of allowing access to private emails without notification.
We believe that this outrageous policy should be changed. If you
are not willing to do this on your own initiative, I request that
it be brought up at the next Faculty Council meeting.

Subject:	a thought
Date:	Fri, 20 May 2011 19:25:28 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Carney, Bruce William <bruce@unc.edu>

Bruce

If access to my email and website should be magically restored, I
will remove all references to Holden on my website and cancel my
appeal to President Ross. Feel free to pass this on to anyone.

Elliot

___________________________________________________________________

Subject:	Can we put an end to this now?
Date:	Mon, 23 May 2011 11:05:55 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Laura B. Luger <lbluger@northcarolina.edu>
CC:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

I think that my email to Regina states the current situation very
clearly. Twenty months ago, the Chapel Hill Herald wrote

"I think the chancellor has overreacted, but I'm not going to
criticize the chancellor for this," said Elliot Cramer, emeritus
professor of psychology who was adviser to Youth for Western
Civilization. "I don't feel any ill will towards him,"

I told President Bowles that I thought Holden would be a great
Chancellor and my opinion of him has not changed. My feelings about
Ms Strohm are quite different; she and Villarosa are responsible for
all of this.

Elliot

Subject:	FIRE fax to you
Date:	Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:37:13 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

Holden:

I believe that you have received a letter on my behalf from FIRE.
As it happens there is a recent United States Court of Appeals
decision involving UNC-Wilmington which is relevant.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1562438.html

"The First Amendment protects not only the affirmative right to
speak, but also the "right to be free from retaliation by a
public official for the exercise of that right." Suarez Corp.
Indus. v. McGraw, 202 F.3d 676, 685 (4th Cir.2000)."

This is what FIRE is referring to and I believe that Ms. Luger
will confirm that this is the law. I am still doing scholarly
work http://www.ourpaws.info/cramer/legal.htm
and it is an inconvenience that I cannot access E-journals from
home. I have scarcely used University Email since January after
learning that it was being read by others; I am unlikely to use
it much in the future.

There is simply no reason for us to be involved in any
controversy; my disputes are with Villarosa and Strohm. I wrote
Bruce a few weeks ago saying, "If access to my email and website
should be magically restored, I will remove all references to
Holden"; that offer still holds.

Elliot

Subject:	Re FIRE press release - Can we end it now?
Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:31:19 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

Holden

I presume that you have seen http://thefire.org/article/13316.html

I have more material to add to my website and am preparing an ethics
complaint to the NC Bar regarding Strohm's false statements about
me. I have bent over backwards to keep you out of this dispute with
Strohm. She underestimated Bonnie and she is underestimating me. I
am prepared to go to Court over a clear violation of my
constitutional rights. I have done it before with the Animal
Protection Society; they lost their County contract and are
virtually bankrupt. See http://www.ourpaws.info/

I would much prefer to come to an amicable solution with you;
please call me this morning at 942-2503 if you would like to discuss it.

Elliot

_________________________________________________________________________

Subject:	RE: FW: Inquiry from Inside Higher Ed--follow up
Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:41:59 +0000
From:	Moon, Karen B <karen_moon@unc.edu>
To:	'Steve Kolowich' <steve.kolowich@insidehighered.com>

Steve,

Here’s what we can say today. You can attribute this to me.

The network is available for official university business. We acknowledge that employees may have some limited personal use of the network. But Dr. Cramer had been retired for 15 years, and his use of the network was exclusively personal. The use of the network is also a privilege. We chose to revoke that privilege because Dr. Cramer was drawing multiple university employees into his personal dispute with Mr. Villarosa.

Dr. Cramer’s assertion that the university acted out of spite is just wrong.

Karen Moon

Interim Director

UNC News Services

(919) 962-8595

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

From: Elliot M. Cramer

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 10:55 AM

To: Moon, Karen B

Subject: your email to inside higher ed

Since you are director of the News Bureau, you should get your facts

right. Students, faculty, and staff make extensive use of the email

system for personal use and have done so for years. My use was not

"exclusively personal" as Vice Chancellor

Leslie Strohm can attest since she looked through my emails. Even

though I have been retired for 15 years I have the title of

Professor Emeritus and am an active scholar. See

http://www.ourpaws.info/cramer/legal.htm

I did not draw "multiple university employees into my personal

dispute", Villarosa did. You can confirm this by looking at the

correspondence on my website http://www.ourpaws.info/strohm.htm

This false statement came from Strohm; she has made many other

false statements about me.

I will appreciate your sending in a correction to Inside Higher Ed.

Thank you,

_______________________________________________________________________

Subject:	restoration of IT access
Date:	Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:53:35 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	stan_waddell@unc.edu
CC:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>, Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>, tomross@northcarolina.edu

Stan:

I wrote you on June 13 saying "According to this, only my email
and website were to be disabled. I am unable to access e
journals at the library because my login is not accepted. Please
have that reinstated". I have received no reply.

I have just discovered that I am also unable to download programs
from the University website such as the antivirus program which
are available to students, staff, faculty, and retired faculty.

As I told you on the phone, the directive you received from
Leslie Strohm on April 27 stated "Holden and I are in agreement
that Cramer's email account and affiliated web page need to be
disabled". You told me that you were given for your files an
April 27 Email to me from the Chancellor stating "I authorized IT
Security to disable your university network privileges." This
was a personal letter to me and is in fact inaccurate. Based on
my public records request and my conversation with you, Holden
never made such a request but obviously discussed the issue with
Ms Strohm resulting in her request to you.

I understand that Holden is very angry with me because of the
Youth for Western Civilization affair which Provost Carney said
was "a major problem" and because of the harassment of the
University by Joseph Villarosa. Neither of these is my
responsibility. I cannot believe that Holden would be so
vindictive as to cut me off from access to library materials and
other materials necessary to my activities as a scholar and a
"continuing member(s) of the University community" as University
regulations say.

In any event, you have not followed the directive you received
from Ms Strohm and have clearly exceeded your authority. I
request that you immediately restore my access to IT network
privileges other than Email and my affiliated webpage which Ms
Strohm ordered disabled. I will seek redress on that issue
elsewhere.

Thank you;

Elliot

____________________________________________________________________

Subject:	RE: restoration of IT access
Date:	Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:13:32 +0000
From:	Waddell, Stan Adolphus <stan_waddell@unc.edu>
To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu <ecramer@alum.mit.edu>
CC:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>, Thorp, Holden <holden_thorp@unc.edu>, Ross, Thomas Warren <tomross@northcarolina.edu>

Dr. Cramer,

The access that you refer to is tied to your Onyen ID and password. There is not a practical way to separate the network access from email and file space access. So, in order restore journal and shareware access, the University would need to restore your Onyen. Having an active Onyen would restore your ability to use email or publish web sites. I have received no requests from University leadership to resend the email or file space blocks. As such, I am not able to provide the access you request.

Best Regards,

Stan Waddell, PMP, CISSP, ABD

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:	Re: restoration of IT access
Date:	Fri, 05 Aug 2011 15:15:07 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Waddell, Stan Adolphus <stan_waddell@unc.edu>
CC:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu <ecramer@alum.mit.edu>, Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>, Thorp, Holden <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

Stan:

I have held off replying to you until now because of Holden's

current difficulties. I understand your problem. Never the less,

you have acted on a request from Leslie Strohm which directed you

only to disable only my "email account and affiliated web page". It

may be that in view of your problem, Ms Strohm will decide to

rescind her order or she may decide to expand it to include all the

other services that are currently disabled. If my email and

internet access services are not restored, I shall be compelled to

sue both the Chancellor and Ms Strohm for violation of my first

amendment rights. Under the current circumstances I would have to

include you unless you receive specific authorization from Ms Strohm

for the expanded restriction. I hope that this issue can be

resolved, at least in so far as you are concerned.

Elliot

____________________________________________________________________

Subject:	RE: restoration of IT access
Date:	Fri, 12 Aug 2011 16:22:53 +0000
From:	Waddell, Stan Adolphus <stan_waddell@unc.edu>
To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu <ecramer@alum.mit.edu>
CC:	Strohm, Leslie Chambers <strohm@email.unc.edu>, Thorp, Holden <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

Dr. Cramer,

I have received clarification regarding your access to electronic resources at UNC Chapel Hill. I have been given guidance that the block
only applies to email and web space access. As you may recall from our previous communications, there is not currently a way to separate
the type of access you seek (i.e. journal access) from email and web space access. I am continuing to have discussions with the relevant
technical groups to see how we might accommodate you. I expect to have some news on that front next week. I will either call or send you
an update via email before close of business on Friday August 19th, 2011. Thank you for your patience.

Best Regards,

Stan Waddell, PMP, CISSP, ABD

ISO and Executive Director ITS Security

Response to Holden Thorp - UNC Faculty Council September 16, 2011

I am Elliot Cramer Emeritus Professor in the Department of Psychology. You will recall our conversations a few years ago in connection with my brief tenure as advisor to the conservative student group - Youth for Western Civilization. Following the distribution of scurrilous flyers on campus with my picture and home address, I replied in an email to the YWC President who was concerned for my safety. I was unconcerned but, to allay his fears, I referenced my background as a marksman. You considered this lacking in "civil discourse". My resulting resignation as advisor resulted in a great deal of negative publicity for you and the University which I regret.

More recently a false complaint by an animal rights activist in New York resulted in my emails being read by the University's general counsel Leslie Strohm, as I learned two months later. Provost Carney approved her request without contacting me, saying "I recall the episode earlier that was a major problem."

Although Strohm never produced any evidence of my misuse of the University's IT system, she insisted that I remove from my UNC website a link to a link to a link which referenced this person. On the same day she wrote him saying "This is not a University matter". I wrote you, complaining about her demand, but stated that "Because of my esteem for you, I have removed the link". I then asked her for a retraction of her false claims and an apology. Two days later you retaliated against me, saying that you were ordering IT to disable my email account and website because I had supposedly "embroiled the University in (my) private issues", where in fact it was this other person who sent hundreds of Emails to you and other University officials which you and they foolishly responded to. Your action also disabled access to Library E-journals related to my scholarly work.

I wonder how you justify this invasion of privacy, which ought to be of concern to the Faculty Council and all Faculty members and students, as well as your punitive action which violates my First Amendment rights of free speech. As you know I now have a private website with full documentation which I hope the faculty will review.

www.ourpaws.info/strohm.htm

______________________________________________________________

Appeals Court opinion on free speech - Mike Adams UNC-W http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1562438.html

The First Amendment protects not only the affirmative right to speak, but also the "right to be free from retaliation by a public official for the exercise of that right." Suarez Corp. Indus. v. McGraw, 202 F.3d 676, 685 (4th Cir.2000).

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Subject:	Re: statement to the Faculty Council
Date:	Fri, 16 Sep 2011 23:26:32 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>

To:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

Holden:

It was good to talk to you after the Faculty Council meeting. Attached is the statement I left for the Council members. I'm sorry I was not able to present it orally. I was told by Dr. Boxill that there would be an opportunity for faculty to make statements rather than just ask questions. I did not have an opportunity to say much in the question period. Your statement that the University has accommodated me is incorrect. It is true that I can now access other ONYEN services such as Library e-journals (after two months) but that is only because I told Stan Waddell that he had exceeded his authority in going beyond your order to disable my Email and my website and that I would be obliged to include him in any lawsuit against the University if these services were not restored. I have been told that something will be done about emails addressed to me at Cramer@unc.edu but this has not happened as yet. From January until recently such emails were forwarded due to my relying primarily on my Bellsouth account after discovering that Ms Strohm was reading my emails.

With regard to your claim that I have "embroiled the University in (my) personal issues", you may wish to look at this abbreviated record of emails which clearly shows that this is not true. Key Correspondence with UNC
A pretty much complete record is on Correspondence with Leslie Strohm and UNC officials

I understand that the Daily Tarheel will have an article on these issues on Monday. I don't understand why you would want to subject the University to still more bad publicity. I have offered to meet with you (or anyone else) to resolve our issues on a number of occasions and I repeated that offer to you personally this afternoon. The University has been involved in two disastrous lawsuits recently involving the Newspapers and Bonnie Yankaskas which has cost the University hundreds of thousands of dollars; Ms. Strohm's mismanagement is responsible for this and she is responsible for our difficulties, relying as she has on Joseph Villarosa's false claims which have not been substantiated. I cannot understand why you have chosen to involve yourself in this issue after I met her unreasonable demand. Sooner or later the University will be obliged to restore my e-mail access and website; I hope for your sake that it is sooner.

With my best wishes,

Elliot

Subject:	Will Threat of Legal Action Spur UNC to Restore Emeritus Professor's Rights?
Date:	Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:07:50 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>
CC:	Tom Ross <tomross@northcarolina.edu>, whargrove@brookspierce.com, bhyde@pittcomanagement.com, plclay@mit.edu, wlcaud@email.unc.edu, dcurtis@curtismedia.com, blount2@aol.com, alstongardner@yahoo.com, slerner@bluehillgroup.com, russell@blackrock.com, eddiesmith@gradywhite.com, Johntownsend829@msn.com, washington@klgates.com, macoope@live.unc.edu

As I told you last week, I'm still willing to discuss resolving this issue. There would have been nothing to resolve had Leslie Strohm told Villarosa initially (as she did on April 20) that

"I have looked at Dr. Cramer's personal webpage, which is mentioned in your email. I see no reference to you whatsoever. I am sorry that your ongoing dispute with Dr. Cramer has caused you great distress. Your recourse is directly with Dr. Cramer. He alone is responsible for his words and his actions. This is not a University matter. "

Yesterday, on First Amendment Day at the University, there was considerable discussion of Ms. Strohm's stonewalling the newspapers on release of what were obviously public records. Dan Kane of the N&O suggested that the University would have engendered considerable good will had she advised you to promptly release those records. She is the source of many of your problems and has cost the University many hundreds of thousands of dollars.

You will recall that you wrote me on April 22 saying "I know you will be disappointed in me for saying this, but I need to ask you to comply with Ms. Strohm's requests. We cannot afford to be drawn into your disagreement with Mr. Villarosa when we have so many important matters facing the university. If you cannot comply with Ms. Strohm's requests, I will ask IT to disable your email account and web page. I'm sorry that we were not to able to come to an amicable solution, but I'm very disappointed that you disparaged our general counsel in the newspaper, and I completely disagree with your assessment. "

On April 24 I wrote you saying "Because of my esteem for you, I have removed the link www.ourpaws.info" and, on the following day, wrote Ms. Strohm asking her to "apologize for reviewing my email files without first asking me for an explanation".

Despite my complying with Ms. Strohm's unreasonable demand to "remove - immediately -- from any University resources any links to material referencing Mr. Villarosa, either directly or indirectly.", you directed Ms. Strohm to disable my It access. On April 27 she wrote Stan Waddell saying "Holden and I are in agreement that Cramer's email account and affiliated web page need to be disabled".

There can be no question but that this is retaliation for speech, in violation of my First Amendment rights. You may wish to review a brief chronology on http://www.ourpaws.info/history.txt
The main link is http://www.ourpaws.info/strohm.htm

Elliot

Subject:	The current situation
Date:	Wed, 12 Oct 2011 23:06:18 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Tom Ross <tomross@northcarolina.edu>
CC:	Laura B. Luger <lbluger@northcarolina.edu>, Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

President Ross:

As Ms Luger had requested, I want to keep you apprised of my situation.
Today's program on the "Speaker Ban" plaque was certainly
wonderful. I had a chance to chat briefly with the Chair of
the Board of Trustees, Wade Hargrove,
about his comments on the Tancredo affair; as you may know, I
was so appalled by that disruption that I agreed to be the
advisor to Youth for Western Civilization which sponsored
Tancredo's talk. I also had a chance to chat with Holden,
suggesting that this day would be an appropriate time to resolve
our differences. I do not believe that he has been getting
proper legal advice about his First Amendment obligations and I
suggested that he might talk to Ms Luger. He agreed to do so.

I admire Holden and I would prefer not to add to his legal
problems; he is correct that I have outside access to Email and
a website which I have now reorganized -
Dispute with Leslie Strohm - UNC Vice Chancellor and General Counsel Regarding Harassment by Joseph Villarosa
That is not the issue; the issue is the right to be free from
retaliation for speech. I believe that Holden is much more inconvenienced by all this
than I, but it is a matter of principle with me as much as the
Speaker Ban was with those students.

FIRE clearly believes that Holden is wrong (FIRE Press Release and Correspondence with UNC )
as does a former UNC law professor whom I have consulted. The key points
are summarized in a DTH letter to the editor.
My Response: UNC retaliated against Cramer’s free speech
Documentation for above

Between January 20 and April 16, my only email is my email to Strohm
on March 14 noting that I had not yet received a reply to my January 19
email to her. Villarosa sent many emails to multiple UNC officials.
It is difficult for me to understand how Holden can say that I have
"embroiled the university in (my) personal affairs".
He gave this as the basis for revoking my IT privileges.

Actually the First Amendment issue could have come up two years ago
when Holden asked me to resign as advisor to YWC because of my email
reply to a letter of concern from the Chapter President.
Correspondence Related to Youth for Western Civilization
That was an even clearer case of retaliation for speech.
I felt then that I did not wish to remain as advisor without
Holden's approval. That resignation created a great deal of
public disapproval for the University. I was defended by a
distinguished First Amendment Scholar.
A Law Professor's view

This situation is completely different and I hope we can resolve it now.
I am sure that Ms Luger will be familiar with the UNC-W precedent.
"The First Amendment protects not only the affirmative right to speak, but also the
"right to be free from retaliation by a public official for the exercise of that right."
Suarez Corp. Indus. v. McGraw, 202 F.3d 676, 685 (4th Cir.2000).
See http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1562438.html

Thank you.

Elliot

Subject:	Re: The current situation
Date:	Tue, 01 Nov 2011 12:35:18 -0400
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Laura B. Luger <lbluger@northcarolina.edu>
CC:	Peter Bonilla <peter@thefire.org>, Tom Ross <tomross@northcarolina.edu>, Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

I understand that Holden has been involved with the NCAA complaint and I have held off pursuing my issues with him. I have not heard anything resulting from his telling me that he would discuss the First Amendment issues with you. You should know that on January 19, Leslie Strohm wrote Brenda Kirby saying "Thanks. We did look at his emails, with permission from the Provost. We did not just rely on the allegations of Mr. Villarosa." That is a lie and is a violation of ethical standards of the North Carolina Bar; I understand that UNC officials have avoiding putting things in writing (according to the N&O) and nothing related to this was sent to me in response to my public records request. In fact there could be nothing confirming Villarosa's accusations since these allegations were false and Ms. Strohm did not refer to them in her later Emails to me or in her response to FIRE.

I wonder if you have had a discussion with Holden regarding the violation of my First Amendment free speech rights. I had hoped that, given the dedication to free speech represented by the "speaker ban" plaque, Holden might decide to restore my Email access and website without further action on my part.

Thank you.

Elliot

Subject:	Wouldn't you like to put an end to this
Date:	Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:37:07 -0500
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Holden Thorp <holden_thorp@unc.edu>

Holden:

I've been busy with an elderly brother and other matters and haven't had time to deal with my email account and website issues. Your ITS folks have been very nice to me when I've had problems with library access and other matters but I regret having to trouble them. As you recall, I complied with your demand of April 22 and I wonder if you would not like to put this behind us since I have NEVER done anything wrong. It seems to me that your only complaint against me is disparaging Leslie Strohm and asking her to apologize for making false accusations against me. That hardly justifies retaliation.

Elliot

Subject:	FYI
Date:	Wed, 15 Feb 2012 11:14:43 -0500
From:	Elliot M. Cramer <elliottcramer@bellsouth.net>
Reply-To:	ecramer@alum.mit.edu
To:	Holden Thorp <Holden_Thorp@unc.edu>
CC:	Tom Ross <tomross@northcarolina.edu>, Peter Bonilla <peter@thefire.org>

You may be interested in this invited presentation which I recently made to the House Select Committee on Racial Discrimination in Capital Cases. I make reference to our differences.
Statement to House Select Committee on Racial Discrimination in Capital Cases February 1, 2012

There was also an earlier related invited presentation
Cramer Statement to House Committee on the Racial Justice Act

and guest editorials related to the death penalty in North Carolina
Death Penalty Articles

as well as consultation with the Durham District Attorney on a murder trial and recent publications.
Legal Consulting

Leslie Strohm, in her response to FIRE stated that

"As you acknowledged in your letter, Dr. Cramer retired from the University in 1994. He is not an
employee of the University and has not been an employee for more than 15 years. As a result, Dr.
Cramer currently has no official business to conduct using the University Network. Access to the
Network for his personal, non-official purposes was provided to him solely as a courtesy.
FIRE Press Release and Correspondence with UNC

It seems to me that all of this is "official business" for a University professor, retired or not. Obviously her statement is untrue as were her allegations about me.
Key Correspondence with UNC