Ladies and gentlemen of the Academy, nobody should have to worry about a colleague turning the building into a herpetarium.
NYT article doesn’t advance our knowledge of weirdo Amy Bishop Anderson very much, although the story involving the gun keeps evolving. Now, it appears that she may have done a little target practice on her own.
As Sarah W. has pointed out several times, James Anderson’s claims that they were cleared in a letter from ATF appear unsupported by his documents. Instead, we find:
Mr. Anderson initially insisted to The New York Times that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives had sent him and his wife a letter clearing them in the pipe bomb case, but the law enforcement official said it was extremely unlikely the bureau had sent such a letter. Mr. Anderson later produced a letter from his lawyer, Robert Harrison, dated June 2000, saying that the United States Postal Service was “closing the file” on its separate investigation.
Dr. Bishop also arrived in Huntsville with a padded résumé, giving the impression that she had worked at Harvard two years longer than the university’s records indicate.
*******
“Her attitude was not, ‘I’m going to have to go find another job,’ ” said Eric Seemann, an assistant professor of psychology. “It was more like, ‘When are these idiots going to clear this up?’ ”
She lobbied for a revote in the department, badgering people for support, her colleagues said. They disputed an assertion by her husband after the shooting that Dr. Bishop had won the appeals process and the provost had overruled the decision. The appeals process identified only a minor procedural problem, which was remedied, they said. Last November, a university spokesman said, her appeal was finally denied.
According to her attorney, she has no recollection of the massacre. They both seem to have a little trouble with the truth.
