To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Sent: 6/22/2010 4:15:47 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Subj: Mold Concerns Taint UCD Dorm Project – Health News Story – KCRA Sac
Dear Ms. MacDonald (General Counsel, Regents UC) and Ms. Griffiths (Chief of Staff),
Does the above UC Davis dorm situation have anything to do with the Regents of the UC’s failure to act to remove the influential UC name from the US Chamber’s mold publication that, as I have evidenced for you, is used in litigation to deny liability for claims of illness in workers and occupants caused by moldy buildings?
Thank you in advance for your reply.
What the Regents of the UC were informed of, May 15, 2010, by scientists, physicians and hygienists of how the influential UC name is being used to bias the courts against the sick and injured:
What the General Counsel, Regents of the UC has been told and evidenced of on June 10, 2010, of how the UC name is being used to deny liability for mold induced illnesses and instill bias in the courts.:
What the Regents replied with on June 16, 2010, refusing to remove the UC name from the US Chamber Mold publication.
What they were told again on June 16, 2010 about the implications of racketeering:
In a message dated 6/16/2010 6:57:10 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, SNK1955@aol.com writes:
Dear Ms.Ly and Ms.MacDonald, (General Counsel for the Regents of the UC)
Thank you for your reply. I don’t think you are comprehending the matter or the serious implications from the matter. The University of California name should not have been on the US Chamber of Commerce’s “A Scientific View of the Health Effects of Mold” in the first place.
Dr. Saxon has given sworn testimony that he did not author this paper that was a paid for hire piece initiated by a think-tank, the Manhattan Institute, on behalf of the US Chamber of Commerce. It was specifically written to be made accessible to judges.
Nowhere is Dr. Saxon’s name mention within the contract or the billable hours for the creation of this paper. The UC was not a party to the contract of this paid for hire work purportedly done by a Regents of the UC employee. California Education Code section 92000 prohibits the use of the University’s name in a way that implies,,,an affiliation that does not exist. The evidence indicates an affiliation that does not exist, yet falsely stated as existing on a publication of the US Chamber of Commerce.
The University of California name, which is a valuable resource to lend credibility to any publication, has been misused as a recognized brand name to instill bias in the courts. That bias, that has been mass marketed by the US Chamber of Commerce is that the courts are to find all claims of illness or death from mold are only being made because of “trial lawyers, media, and Junk Science”.
I am not attempting to tell the UC what they must do. What I am trying to tell you, is that it is just a matter of time before some smart plaintiff attorney connects the dots and the University of California finds themselves named in a lawsuit for aiding and abetting the US Chamber of Commerce and financial stakeholders of moldy buildings to perpetrate a fraud on the courts.This would occur by the Regents failing to protect the appropriate usage of a valuable resource, the influential UC name, from being misapplied to instill bias in the courts, in a manner that is adverse to the health and safety of the American public. It could be perceived as grounds for a racketeering claim against the University.
Under the policies established that govern the stewardship of how UC resources are use, “E Use of University Resources..The University of California has a responsibility for the stewardship of University resources.” It is not good stewardship to leave the University open for such liability by allowing the resource of the UC name to be left on a political and sectarian publication of which it is evidenced the UC had no involvement in authoring in the first place.
All that I am interested in, is that the UC name not be misused to instill bias in the courts against the sick and injured. I hope this helps to clear up the matter and why it is of the utmost importance the UC act to protect the UC name from being misused in a false affiliation with the US Chamber of Commerce; and to protect the valuable resources of the UC from being dragged into litigation for willfully assisting the US Chamber of Commerce to instill bias in the courts.
As a taxpayer in the State of California, I urge you to reconsider your position of what is required of the UC to protect the valuable resource that is owned by the state, namely the University of California.
Political Action Committee – National Apartment Association (NAA) files Amicus Brief in mold case (two infant deaths in mold filled apt – Wasatch Prop Mgmt) citing US Chamber/ACOEM ‘litigation defense report’ to disclaim health effects of indoor mold & limit financial risk for industry