Han.d1, Tulsa (10/9/2008 8:43:11 AM)

Things poeple do with other peoples money.

Graychin, Eucha (10/9/2008 9:06:11 AM)

This mediation is required by the judge. It isn't a voluntary negotiation towards settlement. Perhaps the headline is a bit optimistic.

My sense has been that the plaintiffs want more than money - they want to air the dirty laundry that ORU has managed to keep hidden so far. We haven't seen, and may never see, the audit report that was delivered in the wake of the Roberts' resignation. If the issue was "only money," I think that ORU would have settled by now.

Ready, (10/9/2008 9:24:06 AM)

I disagree with the previous poster. This lawsuit is ONLY about money. With the other gentleman that settled, it was about more than money. He wanted his job back, got it and was reinstated. Good for him and for ORU for doing the right thing. The remaining plaintiffs and their lawyers are only in this for a monetary shakedown. I hope ORU's knees don't get shaky and that they don't blow a wad of cash on these money-grubbers.

WHAT???, Tulsa (10/9/2008 9:25:17 AM)

Another example of how "Christian" The evangelical movement is.

Anne M. Green, Tulsa (10/9/2008 11:58:44 AM)

Graychin - Ready was correct in saying that "the other gentleman" (Dr. John Swails) really just wanted his job back, which he loved and from which he felt he was wrongly discharged. He is not the vindictive kind, who unlike the other pair (and their attorney), indeed want MORE than money. They want to "damage" ORU in what ever way the can. Whether it is through a sizable financial judgment, or through extended litigation, or bad press. It sure looks like pure revenge at this point.

However, you referred to "dirty laundry" that ORU has "managed to keep hidden" so far. I would like to make sure that your statement is clarified. There is NO AUDIT REPORT from BEFORE the new governance. There were only recommendations given to the OLD BOARD OF REGENTS by an outside law firm. It is not accurate to keep stating that ORU is hiding anything or trying to cover up what happened BEFORE the changing of the guard. There was NO OFFICIAL AUDIT, NOR A REPORT to publish.

The NEW BOARD of Trustees, has since done a complete audit of its finances, and it WILL BE made public. May I suggest you go to the ORU website and look for video from a webcast done recently in which Mart Green answers questions from Alumni, including questions about the financial audit done AFTER the new board took over.

Graychin, Eucha (10/9/2008 5:17:01 PM)

The former ORU Board of Regents received a verbal report in January 2008 of an audit performed by Miller & Chevalier, a Washington DC law firm, with the help of Pickens Snodgrass Koch LLP, an Arlington, TX accounting firm.

It is highly unusual for an audit report not to be given in writing - unheard of in my experience. It seems obvious that it was always intended that this unusual audit would remain within the scope of the attorney-client privilege, i.e. secret. The results of that audit have never been made public. Are we to understand that ORU's new Board of Trustees has never heard the findings of that audit either? I don't believe that. It will be impossible for the new Board of Trustees board to fix past problems if it is unaware of what those problems were.

The findings of Miller & Chevalier remain a closely guarded secret.

Observer3, T.B.D. (10/9/2008 5:30:29 PM)

I for one think the "dirty laundry" should be made public. Isn't it the public's donations that have been used and abused? Donors and those thinking of donating to ORU deserve to know what's been going on there. And those people who have been bamboozled by Richard and Lindsay need to know the truth before they give any more money to their "ministry."

Mar, Tulsa (10/9/2008 7:49:22 PM)

I agree with Observer3. I hope the plaintiffs don't settle, otherwise we will never know actually what went on at ORU ala Richard Roberts, maybe even ala Oral.