So okay he’s had to give a chunk of that back because he stole it. Fine. We at the University of South Carolina are still proud as punch! Charles Bennett’s a winner and Northwestern had him but NU had to pay “$2.93 million in July 2013 to settle claims that the University ignored a whistleblower’s concerns about Bennett,” and I guess all the hoo-haw didn’t sit too well with NU because Bennett had to scoot.
So he became a free agent and we got him! Score one for USC!!
************
November 7th, 2014 at 5:54PM
The following is a comment from Roy Poses. I’m adding it for him since my software for some reason is failing to post it:
‘I am not sure what to make of this settlement.
The case itself is very odd. See:
http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-mystery-of-northwestern-settlement.html
http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-mystery-of-northwestern-settlement_20.html
I admit to having argued that corporate settlements may suggest guilt even if they include no acknowledgement of wrongdoing. Why would a corporation settle a case for hundreds of millions when it might cost only a few millions to successfully defend it, if the corporation believed that winning would be likely?
On the other hand, individuals rarely have a few millions to defend a case lying around. It may make more sense for an individual to settle for an amount that will not cause bankruptcy in cases in which a successful defense might cost enough to cause bankruptcy.
So I am not sure what this settlement means.’