The Pretender Part 2

Shortly after Dr. Schwartz’s book was published, he received a demand letter from an attorney hired by Dr. Athena Kolbe outlining what they claimed to be over 100 factual inaccuracies. This letter threatened that legal action would be taken if Dr Schwartz did not make changes that satisfied Dr. Athena Kolbe. Instead of making the demanded changes, Dr. Schwartz responded to the letter countering every point of contention made by Dr. Athena Kolbe. The explanations give even far more context to the chapter of his book. After sending his letter to Dr. Athena Kolbe’s lawyer, he never received any additional response from her attorney nor was he sued for defamation.

Below is the original letter with the inline responses that Dr. Schwartz provided to Dr. Athena Kolbe’s attorney.

Schwartz Responses to Kolbe 7-31-2017 Redacted by bcswhistleblower on Scribd

For transparency, we are also including the original letter sent by Dr. Athena Kolbe’s attorney below. However, this letter is also part of Dr. Schwartz’s reply as his responses are inline so for the sake of time and brevity, we would recommend just reading Dr. Schwartz’s reply letter.

7-24-17 Letter to Dr. Schwartz (H0470357xA16D5)_Redacted by bcswhistleblower on Scribd

Bradley J. Schram
I loward Hert-z
Viclor M. Noiris
Robert P. Geller
Steve J. Weiss ‘
Waller J. Piszczatowski
Jeffrey A. Robbins •
Kennelh F. Silver
Richard H. Schloss
Gerold P. Cavel lier
Michael J. Rex
Eva T. Cantarella
Lisa M. Kavolhuno ‘
Steven P. Jenkins
Polrlcia A Slomler
Alexander Sto flond •
Lisa D. Slern
Elizabeth C. Thomson
Gory M. Remer •
Lourie s. Raab
Daniel W. Rucker
Jon M. Calvert
Joseph A. Bellanca
Matthew J. Turchyn
Delia A. Miller
Fallon Yoldo
Amerique Pl)ilyow
HERTZSCHRAMPC
www.hertzscl1rarn .com
p.s1a,nlt1@l1~rtzscl1mm.co111
July 24, 2017
VIA U.S. MAIL & EMAIL:
schwartz833@vahoo.com
timotuck@gmail.com
Timothv Tuckerman Schwartz
Dear Dr. Schwartz:
north:
(mail cenler)
1760 S. Telegraph Rd
Suile 300
Bloomfield Hills, Ml 48302
ph: 248.335.5000
tax: 248.:J35.3346
downtown:
Cl1rysler House
719 Griswold SI.
Suite 820-128
Delroit, Ml 48226
Ph: 313.438.5001
fox: 313.438.5002
Of Counsel
Richard S. Victor
Judge Edward Sosnick !RET.)
1 Also t,l.emoe, of “Iv a 0.(:. !!ors
: .1\1$0 Mernb@i’ of nr>, i:i,;1·
~ AhoC.P.A or.d ll . . \’\, ,n rorOl•i:,
• A”K)>,,1omt::e• c* Ch-0 fxl
I have been retained by Dr. Athena Kolbe to address the numerous defamatory statements
contained in your book entitled The Great Haiti Humanitarian Aid Svvindle, recently published by
CreateSpace Independent Publishing (an Amazon.com company) and distributed in e-book form
by Amazon Digital Services LLC and il1 hard copy form by Amazon.com, Inc.
lt is astonishing that you wrote and then published a book replete with egregious
defamatory content. The various libelous statements are addressed as they appear in your
publication. I have annotated the relevant portions of your book, enclosed herein. The numbers
below correspond to the numbers I have placed next to scans of your publication in the enclosed
aimex.
{I 10~70250.1)
Chapter 8 -The Rape Epidemic
1. You incorrectly state that “in 2006 Wayne State University graduate student Athena
Kolbe .. . “. Dr. Kolbe was not a graduate student when this was publi shed. At this
point in time she had already completed her second Master’s Degree.
2. You baselessly claim Dr. Kolbe’s “findings were radically biased in favor of
Aristide.” This is not accurate. The findings in this study were not biased in favor
or against former President Jean Be1trand Aristide or his supporters. ln fact, as you
know. the study did not measure any violence or human rights violations which
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 2
(H0• 70250. l)
took place during President Aristide’s tenure, but began after he was deposed in
2004.
3. Herc you make one of many false assertions that Dr. Kolbe changed her name. Dr.
Kolbe did not change her name to Athena Kolbe. This was the name given to her
at birth and it appears on her birth certificate.
4. Dr. Kolbe has not lied about, manipulated, or exaggerated data, nor is she “inclined”
to do so. Your accusation is baseless.
5. Dr. Kolbe is not now and never has been a criminal. She has never been arrested or
charged with a crime and she has not committed any crimes. These statements are
defamation, per se.
6. Dr. Kolbe has never conducted a research study or been affiliated with a project
titled “The University of Michigan Survey.”
7. Again, you falsely state that Dr. Kolbe changed her name to Athena Kolbe. See #3
above.
8. You wrongly claim that the “only evidence” of a “true rape epidemic” was
produced by Dr. Kolbe. This is not true. Her research was not the only evidence of
high numbers of sexual assaults after the 2004 coup. You know that you previously
discussed with Dr. Kolbe that evidence of high rates of assault was also found by
others. both before and after the study you reference by Drs. Kolbe and Hutson.
Their study was published in the Lancet in 2006. Other evidence for an increase in
sexual assaults came from journalists, the United Nations, international
organizations, in peer-reviewed academic journal articles by scholarly researchers
(both Haitian and foreign), and the Haitian government.
9. You continue your false presentation of Dr. Kolbe by claiming that she is or was
‘”ensconced in local politics.” Although she does vote in local elections in the
United States, Dr. Kolbe is not now and never has been involved or “ensconced” in
local politics, either in Haiti or at home.
10. Ors. Kolbe and Huston have never conducted a survey which asked about rapes
only committed in 2004 nor which found that 20 percent of respondents had been
raped in both 2004 and another year. Drs. Kolbe and Hutson have never coauU1orcd
a research study which disaggregates rapes by year. Yom statements are
fa lse.
HERTZ SCHRAMPC
Jul y 24, 20 17
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz.
Page J
(1104707.50 I)
11 . You deceptively state that the re is a ·’ huge question” over Dr. Kolbe’ s data that you
furthe r clairn she and Dr. IT utson “and everyone e lse” ig nored. You then describe a
common fo rm of potential bias in s urvey resear ch related to reliance on respondent
report. As Drs. Kolbe and Hutson pointed out in the ir p aper, rely in g on respo nd ent
report is a lways a limi tation o f any survey, whi c h is well known in academia.
Contrary to your stat eme nt that tJ1e potentia l bi as of responde nt r eport was ignored,
it was clearly disc ussed by Drs. Kolbe and Hutson as a li mitati on in the article about
th is survey that you cited. Drs . Kolbe and Hutso n did not fo rce re spondents to
prov id e evide nc e of the sex ua l assault they reported. Thi s is standa rd, as was their
discussion of re spondent rep011 as a limitation. Whi le this may be a “huge question”
t o yo u, it is not so me thing that Drs. Kolbe and Hu tson have ignored, nor is this form
of potential bias in survey research so mething that scholars would consid er reason
to summarily d ismi ss findings ofa re search stud y, as you h ave advocated.
12. You wrong! y write that Dr. Kolbe a nd “six other University [sic] professors” w ho
worked on the 20 10 post-quake st udy we re professors. Dr. Kolbe was not a
professor at th e time and not everyo ne who wo rked o n this project was a professor,
nor did they claim to be.
I 3. You inaccuratel y write that none of those r esearch ers, o ther tha n presu mably Dr.
Ko lbe, h ad “any prio r experience studying or researching IIaiti .” This is not true.
14. You falsely claim that Dr. Kol be docs not speak F rench o r Creole. However, this is
n ot tru e, and yo u have prev iousl y a ffirmed that Dr. Kolbe is flu ent in Haitian Creole
and you have prev iously stated th at you are unab le to as sess h er French language
skill s.
On Novembe r 3, 2 011. yo u comp le ted a n exte rna l language assessment of Dr.
Kolbc·s written, spoken, and oral comprehe ns ion skills in Haitian C reole. You did
thi s fo r the Social Scie nc e R esearch Coun sel as part or her appli cation for a
grad ua te fe llo wsh ip. On thi s signed form , yo u identified yo urself as ” Timothy T.
Schwartz , PhD – schwa rtz833@yahoo.com … Anthropology Fellow a t Museo d e
Hombre. D o minican Republi c.” Yo u then go on to d escribe yo ur experience in
Haitian Creole and to state th at you are qua lified to as sess D r. Kolb e’s langu age
ski ll s in Ha itian C reo le. On this fo rm , yo u certi fied that Dr. Kolbe was ” highl y
pro fi cie nt ” in H aitia n Creole.
On th is fo rm , yo u further st ated that altho ug h D r. Kolb e had pro vid ed evid e nce of
fo ur yea rs of French instru ction and has ” intermediate” Ou ency acco rd ing to a
written onlinc Fre nc h language examinat ion , th at yo u, Timo th y Sch wartz, are
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 4
{H0470250. l}
unable to assess Dr. Kolbe’s French language skills because yoll do not speak
or understand the French language.
In March 20 12, you completed a similar language evaluation for another fellowship
,,.,,here you stated that Dr. Kolbe has professional working fluency in .Haitian Creole.
In your attached letter for this evaluation you stated that Dr. Kolbe has a “working
knowledge” of “French (reading)” and “intermediate” ” French (oral
comprehension)” skills.
Fu1t her, in a skype conversation with a third person doing research in Haiti, in June
20 12, you stated that Dr. Kolbe is “surprisingly fluent” in Creole and that though
she would not be able to do simultaneous translation for this this third person, you
said Dr. Kolbe “speak[s] enough [Creole] to help [this person] get [their work] done.”
15. Dr. Kolbe did not ” live with orphans” for 12 years in Haiti. She worked with street
children, not orphans, and that was only for the first three years that she was in
Haiti.
16. Here you wrongly claim that Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues “jumped on the rape
bandwagon”. However, looking at the dates of the research studies in question, this
is not possible. The study to which you were referring was conducted, but not
published, before the reports of sexual assault were publicized. Dr. Kolbe and her
colleagues independently found the same thing that journalists and other
researchers also fo und.
17. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues did not conduct the survey that
they conducted. This is a I ie. The study was fielded and the findings analyzed and
reported, as has been described by authors in numerous reports. Hard copy and
electronic files of all completed study instruments are on file with the University,
should this matter be litigated.
18. Here you mischaracterize the study you seek to criticize. Dr. Kolbe and her
colleagues conducted a study of a six-week period, during which there was crisis
and displacement. This is not the same as doing a national study to estimate an
annual rate of sexual assault, which is what you are inaccurately claiming by saying
that Dr. Kolbe and colleagues estimated “7% of all women annually” were raped.
This study by Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues is not one which can be used to calculate
national annual rates of any particular crime nor should it be used to do so. Their
study was geographically limited to the areas they surveyed and did not include a
population sample which was nationally representative. Your statements are a gross
mischaracterization of their research findings.
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 5
(HD•70250.l)
19. In this section, you misstate both the study methodology and fielding. The study
methods and fi elding procedures were clearly explained in various reports which
you have cited and used elsewhere. Your misrepresentation here, in an attempt to
bolster your argument, can only be seen as intentionally dishonest.
20. You wrongly accuse Dr. Kolbe of reporting ”suspicious” research findings.
However, it is false to claim Dr. Kolbe’s findings arc suspicious.
Chapter 9 – “Politics of Data: The Pretender”
21 . The chapter title uses the term “The Pretender.” The chapter is about Dr. Kolbe. It
is false to state she is a ”pretender.”
22. The insertion of the word “sic” into the quote falsely implies that Dr. Kolbe was
wrong about the number of street children, the fact that she was working with
children, or the fact that the children were homeless. There is nothing in the quote
that is inaccurate or a mistake.
23 . You erroneously state that Dr. Kolbe left Haiti in 1997 and did not return until 2004.
This is not accurate.
24. Dr. Kolbe has never claimed to be a “war correspondent. ‘ This, as well as other
information in your book, was taken from a Wikipedia article that she did not author
and for which she is not responsible. In this instance, and others, you present the
material from Wikipedia as if they were statements made by Dr. Kolbe and then
attempt lo refute the statements whi le accusing her of lying about such information.
In this instance, again, Dr. Kolbe has never claimed to be a “war correspondent.”
As you know, Dr. Kolbe worked for an international news wire service and covered
social issues, typically those related to children and youth. While she did work in
some areas where there had been wars, reporting on war has never been in her title
nor has it been the focus of her work.
Additionally, Dr. Kolbe never worked “on the front lines” in Croatia, Iraq,
Afghanistan, and Vietnam. She reported on lraq and Afghanistan before 9/1 1 and
her reporting focused on youth culture, education, food security, and gender issues.
The reporting she did in Croatia was about economic development, not war. Her
reporting from the Middle East, during times when there were activities occurring
which could be construed as war, focused on religion, culture, and youth issues,
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 6
(110470250. 1)
while her reporting on Iraq and Afghanistan post 9/11 was all on social and
economic issues, not war.
Dr. Kolbe’s reporting in Vietnam was on child labor, ethnic minority children and
youth, and migration, not on war. Dr. Kolbe was born in l 976, ten months after the
Vietnam War ended, so she was not alive, much less working as a journalist, during
the Vietnam War. She has never claimed to be a “war correspondent,” much less a
war correspondent in the particular countries mentioned.
25. You state that Dr. Kolbe moved to Michigan in 2004. This is not accurate.
26. You state that Dr. Kolbe “enrolled under the name, not of Lyn Duff, but of Athena
Kolbe.” This is not accurate.
Dr. Kolbe’s academic records from high school and undergraduate university years
use the name ·’Athena Lyn Duff-Kolbe” in her official records and transcript, as did
her social security card, driver’s license, and school identification cards.
Though she had a DBA (“doing business as”) declaration with the IRS stating that
she worked as a journalist publishing under the name ·’Lyn Duff,” Dr. Kolbe’ s
academic records clearly used both of her parent’s last names and her full first name
on the records. For personal reasons unrelated to politics or research or Haiti, in the
late l 990s, Dr. Kolbe decided to drop her mother’s surname, Duff, from her
hyphenated last name. She did this legally and openly. During a period of transition,
all of her identification listed both of her parents’ surnames and the amendment
page of her passport listed her “also lrnown as” name as “Athena Lyn Duff-Kolbe.”
When applying for grnduate school (for all tlu·ee of the graduate schools she
attended and graduated from) Dr. Kolbe, of course, informed the universities of her
hyphenated name. They were also aware because it was the name used on her
undergraduate records and was still the name listed on her social security card.
There is nothing dubious or suspicious about Dr. Kolbe’s actions.
27. You present the use of Dr. Kolbe’s given name as something that was done with
malicious intent. While it is true that she continued to publish using her mother’s
maiden name, this is standard practice in journalism. Once a journalist establishes
themselves as a writer using a particular byline, it is ill-advised to change that byline
even if the writer gets marr.ied, divorced, or otherwise begins to use a different name
in his/her personal life. However, Dr. Kolbe complied with both the spirit and the
letter of the law by info rming her employers, university. and the IRS (as well as her
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 7
28.
29.
30.
31.
{l i00702SO, l)
friends) of her full name. This was not secret, as you imply, nor was it unusual for
a published author to continue using their original byline. fndeed, Dr. Kolbe’s social
media accounts still include her byline as an “also known as” name. She has never
hidden this.
You falsely state the research referenced found that 46 percent of killings and 28
percent of sexual assaults attri buted to authorities, paramilitaries, and gangs that
supported the new government. These numbers are pure fiction and clearly do not
appear anywhere in the referenced article.
You wrote, “none of the raping or killing was attributed [sic] to the … Aristide
government.” Drs. Kolbe and Hutson did clearly state that suppo11ers of President
Aristide had been accused of human rights abuses (they wrote: “Leaders in the
interim Haitian government, members of the Civil Convergence political
movement opposing the Aristide government, and other political groups have
countered with claims of rampant human rights abuses by Lavalas partisans and
pro-Aristide gangs in the country’s impoverished urban neighborhoods”). Drs.
Kolbe and Hutson did not claim that President Aristide’s partisans never committed
any rapes or murders. Your statement is false.
You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author claimed the “far right ruling elite
was engaged … in a frenzy of raping and killing on a scale undocumented anywhere
in the world.” They did not label the groups or ruling class as “far right.” They
estimated that 8000 people were killed and 35,000 were sexually assaulted in 22
months and thus, contrary to yo ur false assertion, this does not constitute an
“undocumented scale.”
You claim that Drs. Kolbe and Hutson captured data on the experiences of Haitian
citizens during the Aristide presidency but then used that data to say that no human
rights violations were attributed to the Aristide government. This is not true. The
study you are discussing did not capture data during the time before the Aristide
government was deposed and thus, it would have been impossible for Drs. Kolbe
and Hutson to have found that the Aristide administration was responsible or not
responsible for human rights violations. The study period was during the
administration of Latortue, a different government administration than Aristide’s
administration.
You falsely assert that Dr. Kolbc’s research claimed one-sided violence. This is
not true. In fact. the claims were just the opposite. The research study, with initial
findings published in the Lancet, illustrated that many of types of violence were
being reported, some criminal, some political, some domestic/personal, and that
people from all pm1s of society were being victimized, not just partisans of one
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 201 7
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 8
{H0470250.1)
group or another. This, by the way, was the foc us of a publicly available master’s
thesis using this data set which was provided to you in 2011 by Dr. Kolbe.
However, you have chosen not to reference that information here because it does
not support your false narrati ve. This second piece did what the Lancet paper did
not: it looked at what groups of people were most likely to be victims of violence
and crime. Dr. Kolbe is co-authored on a conference presentation (as are two of the
other professors you criticize) where the presentation examined targeted violence
and specifically illustrated, statistically, that the vio lence was not one-sided. Dr.
Kolbe and her colleagues have never claimed or posited that violence was onesided
and your assertions to the contrary are false.
33. You pose two inaccurate hypothetical reasons why a person’s name might differ
from his/her reporter byline. Neither of these suppositions are accurate explanations
of what occurred. You are fu lly aware of the accurate basis for the difference
between Dr. Kolbe’s byline and her name because you personally discussed it with
her.
34. It is entirely false to claim that Dr. Kolbe concealed her identi ty.
35. You wrongly claim that Dr. Kolbe “concealed her identity” because she was
threatened with death by British people involved in a conspiracy. This is not
accurate and does not reflect the events as they were reported at the time. The death
threats and harassment happened after the study was published, nearly a year after
the research was completed. There’s no relationship between Dr. Kolbe’s choice
regarding her name and the later death threat. In fact, she never assumed that she
would receive a death tlm:at and was surprised when it happened.
36. Your summary of the Emrnesberg article is inaccurate in myriad ways:
a) There is no mention anywhere in the article of Scotland Yard, disposable
cell phones or a British ex-con;
b) Dr. Kolbe never claimed there was some British conspiracy; and
c) You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe said Scotland Yard “dropped the issue.”
This is false. Dr. Kolbe never claimed this and she never made any
statements about Scotland Yard in the article.
37. The lancet never stated that Dr. Kolbe concealed her identity or concluded that she
·’should not have concealed a double identity.,.
38. You falsely write ·’critics noted that the person who reviewed the data.” You fail to
identify such critics, because none exist.
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24,2017
Timothy Tuckerrnru1 Schwartz
Page 9
(Ho•10,so.11
39. You falsely claim that Dr. Trzcinski “joined” Dr. Kolbe ”mining the data” to get
publications needed for tenure. However, at the time Dr. Kolbe worked with Dr.
Trzcinski. in 2007, Dr. Trzcinski had been tenured since the 1990s.
40. You falsely state that Wayne State administrators “were not so forgiving.” This is
not true. First, there was nothing to forgive. Second, Dr. Kolbe was honored for
her research in Haiti at graduation, including being awarded the Ellen Zwerling
thesis award, an annual award for the best thesis in the school.
41. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe was terminated from her PhD program and “sent
off with a master’s degree.” There is no truth to this. Wayne State University
(WSU) did not have a PhD program at the time that Dr. Kolbe was completing her
MSW. The doctoral program at WSU’s School of Social Work did not start until
the year after Dr. Kolbe graduated. Dr. Kolbe was never a matriculated student in
WSU’s social work PhD program, though she did lake a few classes in the doctoral
program during the year she was preparing to statt a PhD at the University of
Michigan. Dr. Kolbe was offered a place in the WSU PhD program in 2008 but
opted to attend the University of Michigan instead.
Dr. Kolbe has never been expelled or forced out from any program.
furthermore, she was not “sent off” after she finished her MSW. Instead, the dean
created a paid research ass istant position for Dr. Kolbe, so that she could stay and
assist professors with research at WSU for another two years. She left that position
voluntarily, two years later. Dr. Kolbe was never fired or expelled.
42. You falsely characterize the use of HURIDOCS, a standardized reporting system
for human rights violations and crime. This tool is a typical tool used for a
household crime and human rights surveys, both in the US and in developing
countries. This is the same process you have used to obtain household level data.
You used the same methods that you are criticizing here. Since 2011 , you have
been hiring some of Dr. Kolbe’s enumerators to field much of your research.
43. Because the research process was standard practice, the Lancet editors, and those
they had peer review the paper, correctly had no issue with the data collection
process.
44. You state that Ors. Kolbe and Hutson ‘s point was that “the govenu11ent was doing
this.” Though you claim they say or argued this, they did not. Further, that was not
their point. As both Ors. Kolbe and [lutson stated in interviews at the time, and is
evident in their arti cle. they were more interested in what the United Nations was
doing in its interactions with Haitian citizens, not the government.
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 10
{H0470250 !)
45. You falsely characterize how the research occurred; that “everyone in the
neighborhood would have known,” etc. However, that is not accurate. The authors
gave people the option of meeting with them privately for the study interview. This
was stated at the time, in interviews and in the article.
46. You falsely stated that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did not follow ethical guidelines
from the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO gives multistage interviews as
one option, but as you know, this is not the only option available to collect data on
sensitive topics. In fact, it is apparent from your own work that you do not always
do multistage interviews. The Wayne State University’s Institutional Review Board
(lRB) did the ethics review of the proposed study, and decided that one time contact
was the best option to minimize risk, including the risk of psychological distress,
to study patticipants. Drs. Kolbe and Hutson fo llowed the WSU IRB’s guidance
which was done in accordance with WHO’s guidance.
4 7. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did not comply with the informed
consent process.
48. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did not give people the option of
being interviewed in private places and away from their home, when in fact they
did this and this is reported in the article.
49. You falsely claim that Drs. Kolbe and Hutson did not follow ethical guidelines by
interviewing people under the age of 17. However, as clearly stated in the article,
no one under the age of 18 was interviewed.
50. You falsely assert that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did not seek approval or advice
from anyone before conducting the research. Actually, the study protocols and
instrument were reviewed by eight academic researchers external to Wayne State
University (WSU) and four within WSU. lt was also reviewed by the WSU
Institutional Review Board (lRB) and by the staff person at the school of social
work who served as the liaison to the !RB.
In addition, in Haiti, the research protocols and instrument were reviewed by four
researchers/experts, two of whom wrote letters with comments and suggestions.
Drs. Kolbe and Hutson voluntarily went through a further review process by the
Haitian government and secured written permiss ion from the Haitian government
(led by PM Latortue al the time) to conduct this research. During this review
process, they were full y info rmed of Dr. Kolbe’s previous work in Haiti as a
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 11
(H0470 250. I)
journalist and discussed their concerns about how to guard against potential
respondent bias in U1e data collection process. The Haitian government also
requested that Drs. Kolbe and Hutson add a few survey questions, which they did.
The Haitian government provided Dr. Hutson with a letter authorizing him and Dr.
Kolbe to field the study and later requested copies of the data and preliminary
findings, which. they provided.
During the survey translation and back translation process Drs. Kolbe and Hutson
consulted with academics who focus on Haitian Creole language, including one who
authored one of the largest dictionaries of the Haitian Creole language, and they
devoted more than a month to testing and perfecting the translation of the survey so
that it accurately represented the questions they wanted to ask and the HURIDOCS
classification categories for human rights violations.
51. Your statement is false. On page 2 of the Lancet article, it states “This study was
approved by the Wayne State University Human Investigations Committee.” The
Wayne State University Human Investigations Committee is the approved
institutional review board approving the ethical conduct of research for faculty,
staff, and students at WSU. This information is readily available on the internet.
52. Again, you fa lsely state that children were interviewed, when they were not. As
the arti cle states, “The survey was administered to whichever adult household
member present had had the most recent birthday.” (emphasis added) An adult is a
person over the age of 18.
53. You fa lsely claim that it’s “highly unlikely” that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author
fielded the survey. Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did the smvey. If this matter is
litigated, the Uni versity has paper copies of all of the survey instruments as weU as
all electronic fi les associated with the data in storage.
54. Your statement is false. One limitation of survey research is that people are less
likely to di sc lose being sexually assaulted during a face-to-face interview; there’s
no evidence that people are likely to fal sely state they have been raped. In the
article, Drs. Kolbe and lJutson acknowledge this, noting that they probably
undcrcounted the number of sexual assaults because some people might not want
to tell a stranger that they were raped.
55. The terms “credibility gap” and “suspect history” about Dr. Kolbe are utterly false.
She does not have a “crcdi bility gap” or a “suspect history.”
56. You fa lsely claim Dr. Kolbe is an “academic fraudster.” Dr. Kolbe has never
committed academic fraud or any fraud.
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 12
(fl0470ZS0. l)
57. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe invented data. This did not occur.
58. You falsely assert that “not a single one” of the people Dr. Kolbe collaborated with
had ever been to Haiti or spoke Haitian Creole. These statements are untrue. For
instance, you collaborated with Dr. Kolbe, and you claim to speak Haitian Creole.
Many of the people Dr. Kolbe collaborated with she met in Haiti. Some are Haitian.
Some are foreigners. Many speak Creole and/or French. Others have learned Creole
since going to Haiti.
59. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe’s personal history is “inve nted,” and then you cite
Wikipedia. Dr. Kolbe did not create the Wikipedia entry about herself. Some of the
information on that page is inaccurate. The only time Dr. Kolbe edited the
Wikipedia page about herself was to request that the page itself be taken down and
to report/correct vandalism of the Wikipedia page which was purp01tedly done by
you or someone using the same IP address as you.
60. You falsely claim that the ACLU sued Dr. Kolbe’ s school. This is not accurate.
They intervened with phone calls and letters to inform the principal that it was not
permissible to suspend a student for running an underground school paper. There
was no lawsuit. Nor has Dr. Kolbe ever stated that there was a lawsuit.
61. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe left South Pasadena Junior High school before
completing 8th grade. Dr. Kolbe completed 8th grade and then started as a full-time
undergraduate student at California State University, Los Angeles the following
fall.
62. You fa lsely state that Dr. Kolbe was one of the “last people” to get shock treatment
for being homosexual. That practice, unfortunately, continued for years after Dr.
Kolbe escaped from Rivendell Hospital in Utah in 1992. This was well documented
in news media repo1is at the time.
63. You inaccurately state that Dr. Kolbe began her journalism career at the age of 18
by working at Pacifica Radio’s KPF A. In fact, she began working and publishing
as a journalist before the age of 18, with an internship at the San Francisco
Examiner and the Tenderloin Times. She continued to publish while working at
Paci ric News Service under the editorship of Sandy Close. She did not start at
KPFA then as you wrongly clajm, and in fact did not work in radio until 1994.
64. After summarizing Dr. Kolbe’ s adolescent years, you egregiously and falsely state
none of the aforementioned events happened. As evidence for yo ur false claim that
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 13
(110470250.1)
events did not occur you deceptively write that “stories of her exploits only exist
on Wikipedia, online biographies, and chat records that Duff may very well have
written herself. None of these references . . . can be traced to legitimate
publications.”
However, the events you describe are very well-documented, which is how the
detai ls were put online in biographies and chat logs and Wikipedia.
For instance, these events and Dr. Kolbe’s adolescence were the subject of a 20/20
episode, which aired twice (the second time with an update on Dr. Kolbe’s work in
Haiti). She was on the Oprah show twice, once with her lawyer from the National
Center for Lesbian Rights, discussing these events. There was a made-for-TV
movie produced, based loosely on Dr. Kolbe’s story, and a campy gay comedy
entitled “But I’m a cheerleader,” which was inspired by Dr. Kolbe’s story.
Dr. Kolbe was featured in numerous newspaper and magazine articles at the time
of these events including in the San Francisco Examiner (which published a threepart
series on her and other youth being incarcerated in out of state psychiatric
hospitals for being gay), the San Jose Mercury News, and the gay press in a number
of cities. There were books and academic journal articles written about Dr. Kolbe’s
legal case and about aspects of what happened to her specifically, as well as to other
children who were victimized at Rivendell hospital.
See, for instance:
Abinati, A. (1994). Legal challenges facing lesbian and gay youth. Journal of Gay
& Lesbian Social Services, 1(3-4), 149-169.
Asen, R. (1996). Constructing the objects of our discourse: The welfare wars, the
orphanage, and the silenced welfare mom. Political Communication, 13(3), 293-
307.
Blumenfeld, W. J. Chri stian “Conversion Therapies” & Catholic “Third Way”:
Immaculate Deceptions.
Braatz. J. (1996). Uncommon Heroes: A Celebration of Heroes and Role Models
for Gay and Lesbian Americans. Harvard Educational Review, 66(2), 405.
Cruz, D. B. (1998). Controlling desires: Sexual orientation conversion and the
limits of knowledge and law. Southern California Law Review 72, 1297.
Duff. L. (1996). I Was a Teenage Test Case. California Lawyer, 16, 47.
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 14
{H0470250.l )
Goishi, M. A. (1996). Unlocking the closet door: protecting children from
involuntary civil commitment because of their sexual orientation. Hastings Law
Journal, 48, 1137.
J-fearst, A. (1995). Public issues, private lives. Columbia Journalism Review, 34(3),
17-19.
Hicks, K. A. (1999). Reparative therapy: Whether parental attempts to change a
child’s sexual orientation can legally constitute child abuse. American University
Law Review, 49, 505.
Holmlund, C. (2005). Generation Q’s ABCs. Contemporary American Independent
Film: From the Margins to the Mainstream, 153.
Kemena, B. (2000). Changing homosexual orientation? Considering the evolving
activities of change programs in the United States. Journal of the Gay and Lesbian
lvfedical Association, 4(2), 85-93.
Lea[, S. M. (1996). How Voluntary is the Voluntary Commitment of Minors-Disparities
in the Treatment of Children and Adults under New York’s Civil
Commitment Law. Brooklyn Law Review, 62, 1687.
Molnar, B. E. (] 997). Juveniles and psychiatric institutionalization: Toward better
due process and treatment review in the United States. Health and human rights,
98- 11 6.
Valentine. S. (2008). Queer kids: A comprehensive annotated legal bibliography
on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning youth. Gay, Bisexual,
Transgender, and Questioning Youth.
Many of the accounts referenced above describe, in excruciatmg detail, the
circumstances of what happened to Dr. Kolbe and of her journey from the time she
started corning out as a lesbian and running an underground school paper in the 8th
grade, tlu·ough her late teens and early 20s (what you refer to as her “legacy years”).
These news accounts include docrn11ents, quotes, and extensive interviews with
many people involved in aspects ofDr. Kolbc ‘s journey including the lawyers from
the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Legal Services for Children who
represented Dr. Kolbe when she was a child, her social workers, staff and a teacher
from the hospital in Utah where she was treated to change her sexual orientation at
the age of 15 and 16, staff from the homeless youth services programs in San
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 15
(HM70250.1}
Francisco that advocated for her, and the foster family that became her legal
guardians.
Your argument that Dr. Kolbe’s current research should be dismissed because you
believe she created a false history, is based on what you falsely claim is a lack of
evidence from reputable sources about these events. However, this stage of Dr.
Kolbe’s lik is very well documented.
65. You falsely assert that between the ages of 18-24 Dr. Kolbe had only one full year
of formal education. This is not true. She graduated from college in 2000, at the age
of 24, having spent three years in community college and two years in a four-year
bachelor’s degree progrnm.
66. Again, you are holding Dr. Kolbe responsible for content on a Wikipedia page that
she did not create. Dr. Kolbe never claimed to have been a “front line war
correspondent” in each of these countries and Wikipedia does not state thi s. As a
reporter, she covered many topics, most related to children and youth, but other
subjects as well, and a quick search on LexisNexis, as well as a look through the
archives of the wire service and of Pacifica radio, would document the times and
places she traveled and worked, which includes these countries and many others.
67. You claim that Dr. Kolbe did not help found Radyo Timoun. You state she worked
for Rad yo Timoun but was fired. This is not true. As a teenager, Dr. Kolbe worked
with a radio engineer in Berkeley, CA to build a transmitter which she then brought
to Haiti and set up with the help of an electrician on the roof of Lafanmi Sela vi. She
then trained a group of street children to use the radio equipment and conduct live
broadcasts. She continued to offer training and raise money by organizing
fundraisers and writing grants for Radyo Timoun and by organizing opportunities
for Radyo Timoun child journalists to visit the United States for training and to
speak at conferences. She continued this volunteer work with Radyo Timoun
thrnugh 1999. These activities, individually and collectively, can easily be
describing as helping “found” the radio station.
Dr. Kolbe wrote about this experience at the time in the San Francisco Examiner
and discussed it at several conferences, on radio interviews on KQED and KPF A,
and on the radjo prngram Democracy Now. Other ai1icles and media about Radyo
Timoun also mention Dr. Kolbe’s role as a youth reporter in working with street
children to start the radio station.
Dr. Kolbe was not an employee of Radyo Timoun nor was she ever fired from
Radyo Tirnoun. ln the footnotes here, you say thal Dr. Kolbe was fired or quit from
HERTZSCHRAMPC
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 16
{tl0<70250.1} KPFA, but KPFA is not connected to Radyo Timoun in any way, nor was Dr. Kolbe ever fired from KPF A. Dr. Kolbe has never been fired from employment. 68. This assertion is without factual basis. The ACLU’s involvement in this matter is addressed above. Also, the account related to Dr. Kolbe ‘s creation of an underground school newspaper is in the Columbia Journalism Review, as well as in several books and other forms of media about her life story. See, e.g. Hearst, A. ( 1995). Public issues, private lives. Columbia Journalism Review, 34(3), 17-19. 69. Your statements regarding the Pasadena High School newspaper are false. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe has lied about events in her childhood and that she did not start an underground school newspaper called “The Tiger Club” in 1988. The evidence you give is that you say you called the Pasadena High School newspaper and that their name is the Tiger Club and that they were founded in 1913. This is a lie. The Pasadena High School newspaper is the called the Chronicle and it has been published since 1915. The South Pasadena High School newspaper is cal led the Tiger, not the Tiger Club. The tiger is the school mascot. The name of the underground school paper that Dr. Kolbe started in 8th grade, was, in fact, the Tiger Club. 70. In this section, you again falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe, changed her name to Kolbe. She did not change her name to Athena Kolbe, as this was the name given to her at birth. 71. You false ly claim that there is “no evidence” Dr. Kolbe ever had a hyphenated last name. However, she had a hyphenated last name on fo llowing documents as well as many others, some of which are public. This is a small sampling of the many documents which list Dr. Kolbe’s hyphenated last name. a) School transcripts including school yearbooks and a published school photo directory b) California State Identification card, issued in 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1998 c) California State driver’s license, issued in 1999 d) The California State High School Proficiency Examination certificate from 1991 e) Academic transcri pts from California State University ( 1990 and 1991), San Francisco City College ( 1992 and 1993), and Laney College (1994-1999) HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 17 {H0470250 I} f) RTD student bus pass issued by the Los Angeles Regional Transit District in 1989, 1990, and 1991 g) Ilollywood, CA public library card issued in 1990 h) San Francisco public library card issued in 1992 i) OakJand public library card. issued in 1995 j) Driver’s learning permit, issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles in San Francisco in 1994 k) Listed telephone number in the San Francisco white pages, 1994-2002 1) Social security card m) Press pass for the Republican National Convention, First Union Center Philadelphia, issued in 2000 n) State medical insurance identification cards issued while Dr. Kolbe was in foster care in 1989, 1990, 1992, 1993, 1994 and then Dr. Kolbe’s MediCal post-foster care benefit cards issued in 1995 and 1996 o) Application to a journalism training program at UC Berkley, 1995 p) Temporary press credentials issued by the Los Angeles Police Department and press pass for the Democratic National Convention, both issued on August 11 , 2000 q) KPFA identification card and press passes issued in 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002 r) Press access card for Vietnam, issued in 1998 s) Temporary press pass for China, issued in 1997 t) Government Press identification card for Israel from the years l 999-2004 u) Visa application for Brazil in 1998 v) Visa appli cation for travel in India applied for in 1997 and granted in 1998 w) International vaccination card for yellow fever issued in 1998 and again in 2003. which states that Dr. Kolbe is a journalist and her name is “Athena Duff-Kolbe” x) School ID for Peralta Community College District, issued in 1995, 1997, and 1999 y) Bus permit ce11ifying that Dr. Kolbe is a person with a hearing disability, issued in 2004 z) Dr. Kolbe’s savings account, mutual fund account, and IRA aa) federal and state income taxes filed 1994 through 2004 (at which point Dr. Ko]be’s accountant began filing the documents as “Athena Duff-Kolbe” doing business as “Lyn Duff”; this continued through 2009). bb) A letter of invitation and letter of sponsorship from a local journalism school for Dr. K.olbe’s application for a visa to India in 1997 cc) Temporary press credentials for the White House, issued in 1999 dd) Press pass for the Republican National Convention held in San Diego, issued in 1996 HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 18 (H0470250.l ) 72. Your claim that “no one” ever investigated Dr. Kolbe’s early years is a blatant lie. Dr. Kolbe’s life before the age of 25 was scrutinized by dozens, maybe hundreds, of journalists, researchers, academics, and government administrators. The legitimacy of her experiences during these years is already well established. 73. You state that Dr. Kolbe’s study published in the Lancet was a case of”questionable journalistic ethics, if not ouh·ight fraud.” Again, this is false. There is no evidence of fraud because Drs. Kolbe and Hutson did not commit fraud. Additionally, the article they wrote was a peer-reviewed academic research article, not a journalistic piece and thus, there was no “journalistic ethics” issue involved in its publishing. 74. Here you claim that what you are recotmting is ” not really about Kolbe/Duff’ but you are in fact recounting things about Dr. Kolbe. 75. Your entire paragraph is false. Your accusation that Dr. Kolbe opened the door for criminals is patently false. Ftuther, she is not a pseudo-scholar. Dr. Kolbe has not misled or lied to people. 76. You repeat the falsehood that Dr. Kolbe was pushed out of Wayne State University. This is not true. 77. You falsely state the basis of the critique of your data. Dr. Kolbe and her co-author said is that it was inconceivable that your data was representative, not because of who funded it, but because of the methods you employed and that you had described in publicly available rep01ts. 78. Here you falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues refused to engage in a discussion with you about death estimates. This is a blatant lie. Not only did Drs. Muggah and Kolbe discuss their methodology and findings with you at length in person. Dr. Kolbe also engaged in a written correspondence with you about this topic. This written discussion is documented in Mars Lundhal’s 2013 book “The Political Economy of Disaster: Destitution, Plunder and Earthquake in Haiti” where he quotes email correspondence and conversations between Dr. Kolbe and you. Dr. Kolbe provided these emails to Dr. Lundhal with your permission and you also fo rwarded Dr. Lundhal a number of emails which included correspondence with Dr. Kolbe about this very issue. Some of that correspondence from you, however, contradicts statements you make here about Dr. Kolbe and her research. 79. You falsely claim. that the referenced study may never have been done, when in fact it was done. HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 20 17 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 19 (H0470250. l} 80. You inaccurately describe the methodology used by Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues. Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues interviewed the original respondent or another person from their house if that person had died. Also, respondents provided data on themselves and all other household members. 8 l. You have wrongly and clearly misapplied the University of Miami study (about injuries) to their study, whjch included deaths and injuries related to the earthquake, and also included deaths and injuries unrelated to the earthquake which happened in the weeks fo llowing the earthquake. Your statement does not accurately reflect the relationship of the findings in Dr. Kolbe’s publication to the University of Miami’s survey findings. Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did not say that children were more likely to have been i11jured than others, they said that children were more likely to have died from their injuries. And this is backed up by the other research as well. Young children and the elderly are more likely to die from certain types of injuries common with earthquakes. 82. You make a definitive statement premised on your having done 100 surveys in Haiti, that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author could not have possibly done what they did. This is a baseless assertion and plainly false. 83. The Kochar quote, from an article published tlu·ee years after Dr. Kolbe’s study, is about comparing differences in recovery rates between children and adults for the exact same injury. Dr. Kolbe did not do this, as children and adults did not necessarily have the same kind of injuries. They were not comparing recovery rates from one uniform type of injury. Your use of this quote is misleading and dishonest. 84. In their study, Dr. Kolbe and colleagues stated that deaths post-quake could not be easily attributed to the earthquake. You set up a false dichotomy comparing 3% from the CDC with Dr. Kolbe and colleagues study which repotied 25%, as if 25% of the people who died, died because of the ea1ihquake. This is not true. 25% of the sample of dead people (those who were alive in late 2009 but dead in early 20 l 0), died during or after the ea1thquake. Dr. Kolbe and colleagues did not claim that those people each died from the earthquake, and in fact, they cited specific examples of people who died from other things, like diarrhea. The 3% figure from the CDC is a different kind of study, which estimated excess deaths directly attributable to the emihquake. Your comparison is dishonest. 85. You falsely claim that Ors. Kolbe and Hutson did not follow ethical guidelines and that chi ldren were interviewed. However, as clearly stated in the article, no children under the age of J 8 were interviewed. Ethical guidelines were carefully followed, as described in the article, to minimize psychological and social risks to the HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 20 participants including limiting the time spent interviewing, giving the respondent the option of a private or alternative place to do the interview, and offering to come back to interview later when the respondent could speak in private. 86. Again, you falsely make an accusation stating that the survey ‘·dicln ‘t occur.” This is not true and there is no evidence to support this assertion. 87. You falsely state that “few to no scholars” cited this study. This is not accurate. The study was commissioned by the UN Development Program. A number of international and national actors contributed to the creation of the survey including the World Bank, the Haitian government, and the UN mission in Haiti. They widely used the data and it was integrated into (and cited in) the Post-Disaster Needs Assessment in Haiti. The analysis was also widely cited in the press and in scholarly publications. A quick google search illustrates that 77 publications cited just one of the numerous publications using data from this survey in 2010. 88. You falsely claim that Drs. Kolbe and Muggah were “not satisfied” with the Associated Press coverage of their research and “sensed opporttmity” so they began publishing their own articles; the example you give is of an op-ed that that was published in the Guardian. This is a false characterization of how and why Drs. Kolbe and Muggah wrote this op-ed for the Guardian, which was authored before the Associated Press article was written. 89. You falsely claim that Drs. Kolbe and Muggah ‘·never let on” that they had conducted the research cited in this quote themselves. This is a lie. Drs. Kolbe and Hutson cited their other previous studies. 90. You falsely claim that Ors. Kolbe and Muggah never “let [sic] on to readers” that they were citing their own research. This is false. The online version of the op-ed had a link to the study cited so that when readers clicked on the sentence they were taken di rectly to the Lancet aiticle which clearly identifies Dr. Kolbe as one of the authors. The in-text citation was included by Drs. Kolbe and Muggah but was removed by the New York Times editor prior to publication, however a hypertext link to tbe study was included. 91 . In this section, you repeat the lie you made previously, that Dr. Kolbe was not an accomplished journalist at a young age. You claim that she only “fantasized” about being a ”journalist for the world ‘s most important mainstream media outlets.” Between 1994 and 2000, when Dr. Kolbe was working in print journalism, she was published in a number of mainstream media outlets including the Washington Post, the San Francisco Examiner and other large daily papers. This was not her first HERTZ SCHRAMPC Jul y 24 , 20 17 T imothy Tuckerman Sc h wa rtz Page 2 1 (MIM70250.ll article in a major daily paper. And it was nol. as you claim, a foray back into journalism: Dr. Kolbe wrote an opinion piece as a g uest writer. som ething that is common fo r acad emics. Despite th at fact that it was published in the Ne-.,,11 York Times , she did not write a jomnalistic article and she i s no longe r working as a journalist, she does not cla im to be doing so or want to do so. 92. Your asserti on, again, that Dr. Kolbe was terminated from Wayne State U niversity is fa lse. 93. Your claim that Dr. Ko lbe was not in the so uthern pat1 of Hai ti during this week is false. Incredibly, you know this is the case, because you spoke with Dr. Kolbe via Skype twice that week. You spoke with the guardian and others at the home you s h ared w ith Dr. Kolbe at that time a nd they told you she was unavailable to do a favor for yo u because she was in the South doing research . You also discussed, at leng th. the s ituation w ith the woman w ho was sexually assaulted, who you argued (at the time) had not been raped, but was just regretting a vo luntary sexua l encounter. Your s tatements about Dr. Kolbe’s medical condition and her alleged limitations a re reckl ess and false. 94. Again, you falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe, and/or Ors. Kolbe and M uggah made up an event that never occurred. However, it did occur. The New York Times editor verifi ed th e facts before they publish ed the o p-ed , including obtaining a copy of the medical report 95. You assert th at Dr. Ko lb e s peaks no French and very li ttle C reo le, which is false. See above. 96. You falsely claim that Dr. Kol be and her co-author li ed, fa ls ified data, and “p rojected ” th e msel ves to be a place w here they were not. T hi s is not true. 97 . Your statement that Dr. Kolbe lied and duped people, The New York Times , and academic journals is false. 98 . Here again. you accuse Dr. Kolbe of .. ma king up” her researc h. T his is a lie. Dr. Kolbe ha s never ·’made up ” re searc h data, a nalysis, or findin gs. 99. Your title false l y implies that Dr. Kolbe is a li ar and that she chose to work in loca tion w he re sh e could not be cal le d a liar. HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 22 (H0470150. l) 100. You falsely state that no one did, could, or would check Dr. Kolbe’s data. This is not true. Your own book states that, at least one of Dr. Kolbe’ s studies was heavily checked. You offer zero evidence that no one has or could check her data. Some of the data Dr. Kolbe has collected is publicly available and is used by others. For a number of studies, the funders have required checks of the data including processes by which they accompany the enumerators, interviewing the enumerators when Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues are not present about their data collection methods, tracking the OPS coordinates and locations of the interviewers while they are in the field, and a number of other methods to assure that data collection happens as planned and that data is accmate. These methods have been described in previous studies as well. You have zero firsthand experience or knowledge to say that Dr. Kolbe’s data was not been checked by others. 101. Dr. Kolbe has never fabricated data. This is a lie. l 02. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe collected data which was either not verifiable or that she did not verify the data. The steps used to verify data were clearly outlined in a m1mber of Dr. Kolbe’s publications, as were the steps that were used during fielding to assure accurate data collection while protecting the rights of human rights victims. To state that “no one checks the survey” is false. I 03. You falsely state that none of Dr. Kolbe’s colleagues speak Haitian Creole or know her enumerators. This is not true. Many of her colleagues speak Haitian Creole and her enumerators are known by each other, by the rest of the research team. Further, you actually know some of them, because you hired some of them to be enumerators for your own surveys. Many of the enumerators have worked on projects for other researchers, including some who are living and working in Haiti full-time. l 04. You have falsely stated that human rights priorities dictate that researchers cannot divulge informant’s names. This is a clear and intentional misrepresentation, as is your assertion that every survey begins with a promise that the person’s name will be kept secret is not true. Some surveys begin this way, but not all surveys are anonymous and confidential. In fact, for some of the surveys Dr. Kolbe performed, she required contact information including names and phone numbers in addition to addresses or the OPS coordinates of the individual’s home. In fact, the one study you worked on for the World Food Program for which Dr. Kolbe was the primary investigator included collection of the respondents’ names and national identity numbers. You are intentionally misrepresenting Dr. Kolbe’s work. Researchers may or may not divulge names depending on the circumstances and what has been HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 23 {H00702~0.1) dictated by the IRB. Dr. Kolbe conforms to the standards required by the funders and the university employing her. 105. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe has “transformed” back to being a journalist. She is not a journalist any more, nor has she claimed such. 106. Dr. Kolbe·s data is not bogus, shoddy, and manipulated. 107. Your statement that Dr. Kolbe is the “sole owner” and “chancellor” ofETS is false. As you know, you and Dr. Kolbe co-directed ETS when it was first founded. Following your resignation in 2013, Marie Puccio became a co-director. Dr. Kolbe has never been the sole owner or sole chancellor of ETS, nor has she ever been a chancellor. Her title is the Director of Social Work Education. I 08. You claim that Dr. Kolbe “cleverly crafted” the description of the ETS as a “internationally supported degree granting institution”. However, this wording was written by you, not by Dr. Kolbe, in a proposal for the creation of ETS that you submitted to a potential collaborator. 109. Here you claim that Dr. Kolbe “associated” ETS with the University of Michigan (‘”U or M”), and that during the first year most students believed that they were attending U of M. During this time, you were the co-director of ETS and thus equally responsible for conummicating to students. In any event, Dr. Kolbe never misrepresented the relationship of ETS to U ofM and certainly never told students they were attending U of Mor earning a degree from U ofM. She is not responsible for any misrepresentation by you. Dr. Kolbe is grateful for the support that U of M’s School of Social Work dean and faculty gave in the creation of ETS but she has never misrepresented a relationship that did not exist. In fact, some students have stated that you were the one who told them that the program was paii of U of M and one provided an email where you made this statement. There is no evidence that Dr. Kolbe ever stated this and there are many years of emails, statements, and letters to students and others in which Dr. Kolbe continually corrected your misrepresentations about her, ETS, and U of M. 110. You falsely state Dr. Kolbe wrote/said that the course of study at ETS is a prerequisite to “becoming ‘licensed social workers.”‘ You put ‘ licensed social workers· in quotes as if you were quoting Dr. Kolbe, however, this is not a quote. There is not Ii censure of social workers in Haiti, thus, the program of study at ETS does not result in a social work license in Haiti. The ETS program of study does, however. prepare students for some aspects of social work Ii censure in the United States, should they choose to obtain a social work license abroad. HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 24 {Ho•102s0.11 111 . Your statement in this portion of the text is also false. There are only a handful of students who have work/study scholarships. As you know, your statements about the tuition costs, scholarships, and who scholarships were offered to, are also false. 11 2. Your statement that people were “fooled” is groundless. You have no evidence to support this statement. ] 13 . You falsely state that “U.S. researchers came to the school and paid Kolbe/Duff for room, board [sic] and Kreyol lessons given ay the unpaid student teachers.” No one has ever paid Dr. Kolbe for room/board in Haiti or Creole lessons. The Creole Language Program is operated by ETS and has never been directed by Dr. Kolbe. Furthermore, you falsely claim that Creole classes are taught by “unpaid student teachers.” Creole instructors are paid and receive a salary which is substantially higher than the average salary for teachers. Creole language instructors also receive housing, partial board, paid training, paid vacations, health insurance, and/or a tuition waiver, in addition to their salary 114. You falsely state the credentials of the faculty at ETS. All academic classes at ETS are taught by a professor who has a graduate degTee in his/her field of academic study. Social work practice classes are taught by people who have an MSW plus two years of post-MSW practice experience. The only classes which might be taught by someone who does not have a Masters’ degree are basic computer and typing classes, or beginning level English language classes, though such classes do not fulfill degree requirements at ETS and are offered for professional development purposes only. Many ETS professors have PhDs and all academic classes which count towards the degree programs are taught by people with a Master’s Degree or higher. ETS does not discriminate against Haitian facu lty; qualified Haitian faculty arc also welcomed to teach at ETS. 11 5. There is no licensme of universities in Haiti. Nor is there a body in the United States which licensed universities located in Haiti. 116. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe has no association with Haitian academics. This is not true and you lack evidence to support this assertion. 117. Your assertion that Sergio Balistra obtained his PhD from the State University of Haiti is not true. He was a research assistant on a project at the State University of ·Haiti . However, he obtained his PhD elsewhere. Neither he nor Dr. Kolbe has not ever claimed otherwise. HERTZSCHRAMPC July24,2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 25 (H0470250, l} 11 8. You lack any foundation to claim that Dr. Kolbe’s colleagues did not ever met Sergio J3alistra. As you know, you did not know Dr. Kolbe during the relevant time period. Nor did you know the people Dr. Kolbe worked with during this time. Nor have you spoken to “everyone” about Mr. Balist:ra. 119. You falsely claim that “since transfonning herself into a scholar” Dr. Kolbe had no connections with Haitian academics except for one person who you claim does not exist. However, this is false. You have no evidence or information on what connections Dr. Kolbe did or did not have then or what connections she has now. As an active member of the Haitian Studies Association she has long standing relationships with a number of Haitian academics. Your statement is simply false. 120. You claim that in 2013, students at EIS “began to realize” that the school had “no accreditation inside or outside of Haiti.” This is a false statement on several levels. First, there is no accreditation process for universities in Haiti, there is only a vohmtary process of recognition by the Ministry of Education. There is no body which accredits schools of social work in Haiti. Therefore, it would be impossible for ETS, or any other school of social work (including the Haitian State Uni versity”s school of social work) to have obtained accreditation. Secondly. your statement is false because you claim that students “began to realize” – there was no process of realization which took place because students were always fully informed with regular communication from the ETS faculty about the process of government recognition in Haiti and where EIS was in that process. 12 1. You fa lsely claim that in January 2014, ETS students wrote to a University of Michigan dean, Laura Lein to complain. This is entirely fal se. No letter or email was written or received by Dr. Lein as you have desc ribed. In October of 1994, a woman who had dropped out of EI S after failing her first semester of classes, who was at the time employed by you, wrote (purportedly at your behest) an unsigned email from a newly created anonymous email address sent from an lP address that was also used by some of your employees. However, this person was not a student at EIS and had not been for some time. 122. Your assertion that Dr. Kolbe retroactively increased tuition is false. None of the ETS facul ty, including Dr. Kol be, or anyone else, ever retroactively increased tuition for ETS students. The tuition for ETS has never changed since the day that the degree program was opened by you and Dr. Kolbe. HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 26 IH0470250 !) 123. This is a blatant lie. No one was expelled from ETS for not being able to pay their bill. Students were given payment plans starting their first term and some students took time off and then returned when they could pay their bi ll. No one ” lost” their credits. ff a student earned the credits then they have credit for the classes they took. 124. This is yet another example of a lie that you told at the time and which you have now put in print. At that point, the degree program at ETS had only been open for two years, not three, so this is not accmate. Also, since you claim that Dr. Kolbe retroactively increased the annual tuition by $100 USO, this would only be $200 that students who started in 2012 would have to pay, not $900. However, even with your math errors, the statement is still false. No student was told retroactively to pay more tuition. 125. Again, this is a false accusation. No student has ever lost credits for courses that they took and passed at ETS. The only way a student can ” lose credits” is by failing a course. 126. You claim that 29 students “challenged” Dr. Kolbe by refusing to pay their tuition and writing a letter to the US embassy to complain about Dr. Kolbe. This is false. No such events ever took place. 127. Herc you false ly state that the US Embassy did not respond to the “challenge” of 29 students, but that Dr. Kolbe did. This is false. Dr. Kolbe did not respond to any such events because these events did not occur. 128. The email that you quote appears to have been altered by you or someone else after it was received by Professor Puccio. This is not the email that was received by Professor Puccio. Additionally. yo11 falsely state that the letter was “inadvertently circulated to the entire student body.” This is again, false. It was a private emai l sent to Professor Puccio which was stolen by an employee of your colleague, Erika Childs. Ms. Child’s employee hacked Professor Puccio’s email account, forwarded this and other emails to ETS students, to Ms. Childs, and to your employee, Keely Brookes, who both then disseminated them widely despite being told by Professor Puccio of this theft from her email account. This was a private email obtained through illegal hacking, not one that was sent publicly as you falsely imply. It was not shared with ETS students by Professor Puccio or Dr. Kolbe, nor was the content something that they themselves endorsed. HERTZ SCHRAM PC July 24, 20 17 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 27 {H0~70250.1) 129. Your statement that “students” recanted allegations is false because no student made allegations and thus, no student recanted the said aJlegations. The allegations to which you refer were made by yom employee, who was not an ETS student. 130. You falsely claim that students asked Dr. Kolbe for a meeting with Jennifer. No student ever asked Dr. Kolbe or anyone else in the ETS administration for a meeting, face-to-face or otherwise, with Jennifer Balistra. The only person who requested a meeting was your employee, Keely Brookes, who then did not show up for the meeting. You also falsely state that Dr. Kolbe told students that Jennifer Balistra was sick and therefore unable to meet. This is a lie. Dr. Kolbe never made these statements and students who wanted a meeting with her could have asked her directly. 131. Your statement that Dr. Kolbe has claimed that Jennifer was paraplegic or introvctted is false. 132. Your statement here is false. Jennifer’s Facebook page had a lot of photos of her baby, vacation photos, and photographs of events. Her page included photos of ETS students in a group photo of her Creole class, which included some ETS students in it because they were Creole instructors. 133. Herc again, you repott events and details that did not occur and which are not true. Jennifer Balistra’s accounts for gmail, google for classroom, and the Schoology learning management system were created by your daughter, Almathe Jean, who set up the account at the request of Professor Puccio, a standard practice for new students and faculty members at ETS. Ms. Jean, who left ETS several weeks before the events you are recounting occurred, created a password for this gmail account (the password was not changed until late 2014). lf an incorrect photo was used, or if Jennifer’s actual photo was replaced, it was by your daughter Almathe, a disgruntled former employee of ETS or by someone with whom your daughter shared the login information Furthermore, you claim that “tech-savvy students popped the picture into Tineye” and discovered it was a cropped stock photo. However, this is also not true. It was done by you, not a student, and then you told others, including some ETS faculty members and your daughter about it, and they then shared the what you had done with others. HERTZ SCHRAM PC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 28 (H0470250.1} 134. No ETS students ever told Dr. Kolbe or anyone else at ETS that they thought Jennifer did not exist. This accusation originated with you and is has never been discussed by any ETS student (current or former) with Dr. Kolbe. Furthermore, you fal sely claim tbat somehow in response to this accusation being made to Dr. Kolbe, that Jenni fer Balistra’s Facebook and Google accounts were “gone the next day.” This is again false. Her Facebook and Google accounts were still active as recently as late 2015. 135. Again, you claim that Jennifer Balistra does not exist. She does and this accusation is false. There is no evidence to support your accusation other than your lies and a Gmail account registered in Jennifer Balistra’s name to which you had access through your daughter. 136. Here you falsely claim that in reaction to some events which never occtm-ed (a fictional complaint made to the Ministry of Education) (“MOE”), that Dr. Kolbe then began to work on getting official recognition for ETS. Again, this is lie. There was no complaint by ETS students to the MOE so no action was taken in response to events which did not occur. Furthermore, you know that Dr. Kolbe and you both began the process of official recognition in the beginning of 2012, when ETS first began offering a degree program. Lastly, since there was never any complaint by students to the MOE, the ministry never intervened nor did anyone fear that they would do so. 13 7. Your narrative is full of lies. First, Dr. Kolbe and the ETS leadership team first submitted a request for recognition to MOE in 20 12, the year the degree-granting programs were created, not in 2014 as you claim. Second, this request was not done in response to student concerns. It was filed during the first term ETS was opened, while you were still a director at ETS and before you started creating concerns for the students by lying to them about Dr. Kolbe and encouraging them to drop out of school. Third, ETS has never been run by a board. Fou11h, the director of ETS is Haitian and Dr. Kolbe and Professor Puccio (who are US citizens) are members of the leadership team but are under the leadership of a Haitian director. Fifth, the leadership team has never included any other “University of Michigan graduate students.” There has always been a Haitian on the leadership team. HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 29 (H04702SO 1) 138. You write “Kolbe would soon learn that foreigners could not get a license to open a private University [sic] in Haiti.” This is false. Several universities in Haiti have been opened by foreigners including one which was opened the same year as ETS, whose director was also an American PhD candidate in the United States at the time. Furthermore, there is no “license” needed to open a university, there is only a voluntary process of recognition by MOE. 139. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe “learned” that only someone with a PhD could open a university. This is not true. Dr. Kolbe did not learn this as this is not true. 140. You falsely write that a graduate student in the United States came to you with information about the name of the ETS director. This is a lie. The person who told you is not a graduate student nor does that person live in the United States. Secondly. it appears that you deliberately misspelled the name the ETS director, “Sophonic,” whose name is neither suspicious nor ft.mny. 141. ln this section, you false ly state that Dr. Kolbe has produced “shoddy” data and is “preying on impoverished Haitians.” Neither of these accusations are true. 142. You falsely stated that Dr. Kolbe “twice claimed and provided evidence for a Haitian rape epidemic more severe than any known on earth at the time.” This is not true. There were other conflicts with much higher rates of sexual assault than those in Haiti. 143. In this section, you accuse Dr. Kolbe of giving a firsthand accow1t of helping a rape victim for which you claim she was not present. This accusation is false. Dr. Kolbe was present, and you know that she was because she discussed this with you at length at that time. Your response at the time was to summarily dismiss the report the enumerator made of rape. In fact, you responded by advising Dr. Kolbe not to take action because the woman who was raped likely “f -eked him and then regretted it.” You then gave Dr. Kolbe an example of a time you yourself had been accused of a rape which you claimed you did not commit. 144. You falsely claim that ETS is a “gatekeeper” for research. ETS bas no say in whether people conduct research in Haiti, nor has the leadership of ETS, including Dr. Kolbe, ever attempted to do so. HERTZ SCHRAM PC July 24. 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 30 (110470250.1) 145. You stale that Dr. Kolbe “positioned” ETS to the “status of research gatekeeper” by means of a sitting on an ethical review board. Then you falsely claim this board approved research that Dr. Kolbe did which would not have been approved in the United States. This is false. First, the ethical research committee at ETS did not exist in 2006, 2009, or 2010, the three years during which studies were conducted. Secondly. all tlu·ee of these studies were approved by the institutional review boards of the universities with which Dr. Kolbe was affiliated at the time: Wayne State University in 2006 and the University of Michigan in 2009 and 201 0. Third, there are several ethical review boards in Haiti that primarily review and act as gatekeepers for foreign researchers; the Ethical Research Committee (ERC) at ETS is not one of them. The ERC at ETS primarily reviews research proposals by ETS students, not foreigners. 146. ETS is not a “fake” university. 147. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe sits on a board which has power to filter other people’s research in Haiti. Dr. Kolbe is not and never has been on a board which does this, nor is this the role of the ethical review board at ETS which primarily reviews and provides feedback on student research proposals. 148. You fal sely claim that four foreign researchers and graduate students wrote letters of complaint to the University of Michigan School of Social Work. This is not true. Two letters were sent, one from you, and one from your employee, Keely Brookes, co-signed by your daughter’s then-roo1mnate, Erika Childs. 149. You falsely claim that “none” of the two letters was responded to. This is not true. A representative of the University of Michigan School of Social Work spoke at length to your employee, Keely Brookes, about the content of her letter. Not finding the complaints credible is not the same as not responding to them. 150. Your assertion that Dr. Kolbe lied to people or financially exploited them is false. 151. You fa lsely stated that Dr. Kolbe has been accused of providing substandard education. In fact, Dr. Kolbe has never been accused of substandard teaching. She has received very high student evaluations of her teaching both in Haiti and in the United States. HERTZSCHRAN\PC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 31 Endnotes (M0470250.l} 152. You claim that Drs. Kolbe and Hutson did not say how they defined rape. This is not true. They were very clear about how rape and sexual assault were defined in all pub] ished reports. In fact, you criticize this earlier in your book and also quoted from the portion of the study which defined rape. Ors. Kolbe and Hutson used the HURlDOCS standardized classifications for defining sexual assaults and differentiated between assaults which included penetration with penis, fingers, or other objects, forced oral sex, unwanted sexual touching, and other actions. This was clearly stated in the article. 153. Here you falsely state that two different reports, written at different times and for different audiences, were actually the same report. 154. You inaccurately state that Dr. Kolbe and colleagues’ research found something that they did not find. You are attempting to reinterpret their findings but clearly lack the statistical skills to so. Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues never said that rate of sexual assault would hold or that 7% of all women would be sexually assaulted in a one-year period. This is something that you claimed, and then falsely attributed to Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues. 155. Here you falsely state that the six other authors on the paper you described are university professors. This is not true nor has anyone ever claimed this was the case. 156. This is false. Ors. Kolbe and colleagues never put the percentage of people who were sex ually assaulted at ;3% of those sampled or 6% of all females. This typographical enor was made by someone else and was corrected before publication and in all circulated copies of the article. 157. This is a false representation of Dr. Kolbe and colleagues’ research. They never conducted a study which interviewed people once and tJ1en again four years later and found that five of 29 people who reported a sexual assault in the first survey reported another sexual assault in the second survey. You again appear to have invented information. 158. Here again you falsely claim Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues did not conduct the survey whi ch they fielded. HERTZ SCHRAMPC Jul y 24 , 2 01 7 Timothy Tuckerma n St: hwartz Page 32 ( K0470250.1) 159 . You falsel y cla im th at Dr. Kolbe issued a tlu·eat of v iolence . You also ath·ibute thi s to an e motional response which Dr. Kolbe did n ot express or fe el. Dr. Ko lbe did not advocat e for or agains t violence in thi s instance ; she was as sig ned a sto ry b y her produce r, conducted the interview, and then an e ditor transcribed the intervie w, chose the title , and di stributed it without Dr. Kolbe be in g involved or e ven being in fo rm ed of s u ch. Dr. Kolbe ‘ s motivation in conducting the interv iew was to fulfill her j o b as a journali st; she is not responsible for the st atem ents mad e b y tho se whom she inter v iewed and she has not publicly expressed agree m ent or di sa g reeme nt w ith su ch s tatem ents. 160 . You a p pear to have made up most of the content of thi s n arrative. Dr. Ko lbe never claime d th at s uch Bri tish p eople were battling ea ch other and reac hing across the Atl anti c to harass h e r and Dr. Hutson . N or is there any me ntion in th e atticles o r sta tements ma de by Dr. K olbe of Scotland Yard or individuals being ” sophisticated eno ugh ” to e v ade Scotland Yard. 161 . Here yo u fa lsely c la im that Dr. Kol be to ld t he Institutiona l Rev iew Board one thing a nd then did another. This is not true. Ev erything that w as reported to the IRB wa s d o ne a nd everything that w as clone w as re ported to the JRB. 162. You u se tbi s fo otno te as e vidence o f a fal se state me nt you mad e earlier that Dr. K olbe was ” fire d” from R adyo Tim o w1. You then seek t o cast doubt on whethe r the e vents d escribed in thi s section ever took place. T he event s as d escribe d by Dr. Kol be are accurate. Dr. Kolbe resigne d from KPF A in 1997 in the midst of a he ated uni o n-m ana geme nt conflict over contract renewals . S he was asked several times t o return and later did so. 163 . Thi s fo otnote follo ws a section of your book in whi ch you fal sely c laim that Dr. Ko lbc’ s ea rl y life sto ry is not true and tha t thus , he r research as an adult in Haiti shoul d be d ism issed . You furthe r try to cast d o ubt on Dr. Kol be’s integrit y b y sayin g tha t she may hav e been th e pe rson to h ave written th ese co mme nts OT p os ts a nd pu t the m o nline. H owever , Dr. Kolbe did no t write the posts or comme nts w hich yo u have r eferen ced . 164. Dr . Kolbe d id not post her resigna tion letter from KP F/\. online. It was posted by Lyn G erry (w ho is no t, a s you implied , a person create d b y Dr. Ko lbe). Nor did Dr. HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Sclrwartz Page 33 (H0470250.1) Kolbe make this post from Mark S. Bilk, a person she does not know. He was apparently aware that Dr. Kolbe was a torture survivor because of the extensive press coverage of her story and the story of other gay youths forcibly subjected to aversion therapy at the time. Furthermore, you put the term “tortured” in quotes to imply that Dr. Kolbe was not t011ured . In fact, she was, and this is well documented despite your baseless assertions that such events never took place. 165. This fo llows a section in which you claim that Athena Kolbe is not Dr. Kolbe’s real name. In fact, this is Dr. Kolbe’s name which she was given at birth by her parents. 166. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe never used her hyphenated name prior to 2006. However, this name, Athena Lyn Duff-Kolbe appears on numerous documents and is easily found in a number of sources. It is the full name used in the court records for her guardianship and associated hearings to prevent her from being subjected to further anti-gay to1ture in 1992. This form of Dr. Kolbe’s name appears in a number of places during the 1980s and 1990s as previously mentioned. 167. You accuse Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues of referring to themselves as a “team of North American researchers” as an ” academic slight” of your team. This is false. And, it is impossible, since Dr. Kolbe and her team completed and published their research, describing it as such, long before you did and therefore did not know that in the future you would decide to conduct a similar study. 168. Here you falsely claim a conspiracy took place where a woman that Dr. Kolbe has never met, Amy Wilentz, who had strong opinions about the earthquake death to ll influenced her husband, a man you say is an editor at the Los Angeles Times who happens to edit the opinion editorial page, to solicit or accept an editorial by Drs. Kolbe and Muggah which casts your research in a negative light. This is a false narrative of what took place. Drs. Kolbe and Muggah do not know Ms. Wilcntz and they did not work with a male editor in the submission and approval of their editorial, so it would not be possible that they worked with Ms. Wilentz’s husband. When their editorial was published it was a female editor, who has no relationship to Ms. Wilentz, who accepted and edited their piece. HERTZSCHRAN\PC July 24,2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 34 (H0470250. l) This op-ed was submitted to several newspapers and the authors made the decision to have it published with the Los Angeles Times. 169. Here you give a long narrative falsely claiming that Dr. Kolbe does not speak Creole or French. You fu11her state that Glen Smucker corroborated this. However, either yo u have lied or Dr. Smucker lied. Dr. Smucker has never spoken with Dr. Kolbe in Creole; they had lunch and only spoke English during the lunch, as they are both English speakers. He would have had no context for evaluating whether or not Dr. Kolbe speaks Creole. You claim she is not functionally fluent in Creole and that she has never systematically tried to learn Creole or French. However, these are all li es. You have previously affirmed that Dr. Kolbe is fluent in Haitian Creole. 170. Dr. Kolbe does not offer Creole language courses to foreigners. These classes are offered by ETS. Dr. Kolbe does not direct the Creole language program and has no role in the program’s leadership or day-to-day functions. 171 . You state that Dr. Kolbe has been living and working in Haiti for 27 years. This is not accurate. 172. Again, here you have made false statements about research that Dr. Kolbe conducted and its findings. You have never seen the complete WFP dataset as it is proprietary and it was not given to you. The pai1 of the data you had access to was the portion you collected. However, your data had to be deleted from the dataset as you did not follow the study protocols for sampling. Further, this was a study of program participants and beneficiaries, not the general public. Thus, the results cannot be generalized to the population as a whole. 173. Again, here you falsely accuse Dr. Kolbe of not producing credible research. However, the only evidence you produce for this is false or based on your own poor statistical skills and misinterpretation of statistics. 174. This narrative of your initial contact with Dr. Kolbe is far from the truth. You were hired and paid by the WFP, not by Dr. Kolbe or her colleagues, or the University of Michigan as you have fa lsely claimed on your CV. Dr. Kolbe never offered you $ I 0,000 cash to do a one-week survey. Dr. Kolbe never hired, paid, or employed you. And your “work” was never used in this study though you may have still been paid. You refused to fo llow the survey fielding protocols and the data you collected HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 35 {►10d70250. 1 ) had to be recollected by others who actually followed the sampling procedures correctly. 175. You continue your false naffative with another lie, claiming that after Ors. Muggah and Kolbe published the op-ed in the Los Angeles Times criticizing your research, that Dr. Kolbe then initiated contact with you. This is, of course, not true. A copy of your ema i I to her, sent on June 16, 2011 , is be! ow: From: Tim Schwartz [mailto:schwartz833@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 8:33 PM To: athenadk@aol.com Cc: kolbe@umich.edu Subject: haiti, surveys Athena, I’m not sure where to begin. I’ve been meaning to get in touch with you for several weeks now. As fate would J1ave it, when the controversy over the death count began I had just finished looking over your Lancet article. I had fallen into the same trap that so many people must have fallen into. I had read some reference to you being a rabid Artistide pa11isan, implying that the survey was inflated to suit your politics, and so I didn’t take it seriously. So–this is the fate part–as I was realizing what an error I made, I was unwittingly already in the process of getting the same sort of discrediting response to my work …. Just thought I would share that. What l was hoping to discuss with you is some of the details of the ‘Lancet survey’–as everyone now refers to it–and some of your other work. Just so you know where I am coming from here, the Lancet survey sounds well done. It’s clear you knew/know what you’re doing. And the results make perfect sense to me. It certainly corroborates what all of us who are familiar with Haiti at that time would have expected in terms of numbers. I plan on referring to it a chapter i am writing for a book and so that’s why I am hoping to get some more clarifications. Hope that you will find time to respond. Tim Timothy T Schwartz (PhD) 176. This is a bizarre narrative of events that is clearly false and bears no resemblance to the facts. which are clearly documented in emails between you and Dr. Kolbe. You engaged in a lengthy email and in-person discussion of the results, during which it became very clear to Dr. Kolbe that you lacked the statistical skills to fully HERTZSCHRAN\PC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 36 {H047D2S0.1) understand or discuss the research process in which she was engaged. However, the discussion, including the emails between you and Dr. Kolbe, is quoted in a book titled The Political Economy of Disaster: Destitution, Plunder and Earthquake in Haili. 177. This narrative of events is false and you appear to have made up the events you say took place. These conversations and interactions did not occur. The survey instrument and translation for this particular study was provided by WFP and Mr. Noel did not play the role in it that you have described. Nor did Mr. Noel disappear for months. 178. Here again you fa lsely claim that Dr. Kolbe does not read Creole. You add to that accusation that Mr. Noel, who was at the time a university student, was illiterate. These are both false statements. 179. You falsely stated that Dr. Kolbe “discovered” this case and that it occurred during the fielding of this study, and you follow that up with saying it somehow impacted the fielding of this study. However, this is a false representation of events. Events did not occur in that order, at that time, and in the way in which you have portrayed them. Furthermore, you claim that Dr. Kolbe used an appeal to emotion to distract from the creditability of her research; this is also false since the events did not occur as you have described, there was no question about the credibility of Dr. Kolbe’s research, nor was there a distraction from the non-existent question of credibility. 180. This is another false narrative of events. The WFP survey instrument for this study was provided by the WFP and translated by them. The final instrument including translations and back translations was checked and finalized by the WFP. There was no radical modification based on you being hired or after you were hired. You are referring to a minor event when the wrong copy of a survey was photocopied and the rcsemch team returned to the office to collect the correct copy. 181. You falsely claim that the events you described, which did not occur as you described Lhem, resulted in this survey “melti ng down” or beingseen as not important, or being pushed aside. This is false. Since the events did not occur as you have described them there was not subsequent melt down or change in priorities or importance regarding this survey. HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 37 {H0470250.l l 182. Here you describe a series of events that never occurred. You did not work on a study which also involved Dr. Hutson. Dr. Hutson never flew to Haiti and never refused to meet with Byron Poncesgura. Since these events did not happen, Mr. Poncesgura was not “furious” for being “shirked.” Dr. Kolbe was the lead investigator on the study which you worked on, not Dr. Hutson. You did not get to meet Dr. Hutson because he was not there, these events that you claim happened did not occur. Dr. Hutson never hung up on anyone when talking about surveys for this study nor was he upset about surveys in this study since he was not involved in thi s study in any way. You were not hired as, nor did you work as, a “field director” for this study. This study was not “a mess” nor was it ” bogus.” There was extensive follow-up by and with WFP regarding this study for more than a year afterwards. 183. You claim that Je1mifer Balistra was an administrator at ETS. She was not. She was a volunteer instructor. 184. There is no position at ETS called “head of staff’ nor has a 27-year-old high-school educated Haitian woman been in a supervisory position at ETS. You are referring to your daughter, Almathe Jean, who was an administrative assistant and receptionist at ETS. She was not a head of staff. 185. You claim that Jennifer Balistra “first appeared” in February 2014 in response to an accusation of unwanted sexual advances by Kolbe. This is false. Firstly, at this point Jenni fer Balistra, had volunteered off and on at ETS for more than a year and completed a Creole language program at ETS, to which you had initially referred her. Secondly, Dr. Kolbe never made sexual advances towards your daughter, Alma the Jean, who you refer to here as a “27-year-old high-school educated Haitian woman” nor was she ever accused of having done so. Ms. Jean did not complain to a “US Doctoral student” from the University of Michigan or from any another tmiversity, nor was such as person (a doctoral student from Michigan) “newly signed on” as an administrator for ETS. You then include the as evidence an email you present as being sent from Jennifer Balistra to this ” U.S. doctoral student” who supposedly was from the University of Michigan. I lowevcr, the text you present has been altered by you or someone else. Furthermore, the person to whom this email was sent has never been a doctoral student and nor has this person ever been affi liated with the University of Michigan. HERTZ SCHRAM PC July 24, 20 I 7 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 38 IH0470250.I) The US doctoral student from the University of Michigan who was at ETS at the time that Ms. Jean resigned from her position was another person entirely and this person did not receive any complaints from Ms. Jean nor was she the recipient of this email in either its original or in this, its altered form. 186. You have misrepresented the content, context, and the circumstances under which this email was written, why, and how it was received. Fu11hermore, the version you have published has been altered from the original version that Professor Puccio received. 187. Dr. Kolbe is not and does not claim to be a ” longstanding emineJ1t scholarly authority on Haiti.” Nor is she the chancellor of ETS. ETS does not have a Chancellor. Dr. Kolbe is the Director of Social Work Education under the leadership of the university director and as a member of the leadership team. Dr. Kolbe has never “cowed” foreign academics. 188. Here you falsely claim that graduate students had complained about ETS and/or Dr. Kolbe. This is fal se. No graduate student has complained about ETS or Dr. Kolbe in her role at ETS to the University of Michigan, to ETS, or to anyone else associated with ETS. The two individuals you referenced as having been graduate students (your employee, Ms. Brookes, and her friend/roommate Ms. Childs, are not graduate students and were not graduate students at any time during their tenure with ETS. 189. Here you again, falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe is not fluent in Haitian Creole though you yourself have ce11ified several times that she is fl uent in Creole. 190. You claim that Dr. Kolbe is unqualified to “weigh” in on academic research topics in Haiti, which you describe as being “far afield from her own supposed expertise as food security.” Dr. Kolbe has extensive training and experience including with research. teaching, and social work interventions in the areas you mention. These experiences, such as a doctoral degree, various master’s degrees, years of work experience in social work, and other experiences, both inside and outside of Hait i, qualify her to weigh in on the various subjects you mention. 191. You fal sely claim that Dr. Kolbe’s data has never been vetted. This is not true. HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 39 Pursuant to MCL 600.2911(2)(b), you are hereby requested to immediately, but no later than 5 p.m. EST one week from the date of this letter, publish retractions in the following manner and take the following actions: lH0470250.l) 1. You arc hereby requested to immediately cease and desist selling and/or distributing your book as it is currently published. This must occur no later than one week from the date of this letter. 2. Publish a retraction in bold print on the Create Space website about the book which states ”The first version of this book contained numerous false and defamatory statements by the author about the work, research, life, and activities of Dr. Athena R. Kolbe. ln addition, the author made many other false and defamatory statements about Enstiti Travay Sosyal akSyans Sosyal (the Institute of Social Work and Social Science) in Haiti, and about individuals associated with this organization. The author apologizes for the damage this caused to the reputations of people, especially to Dr. Kolbe, and to organizations and individuals in Haiti.” This statement must be included in any future versions of your book and should remain prominently displayed on the website for as long as this book is offered for sale. You must also immediately make a formal request to Amazon.com to update its description of your book to include the above statement. 3. You must also publish a retraction in bold print on the homepage of your own website: tirnotuck.com, which reads “Recently I wrote a book entitled The Great Haiti J-lumanitarian Aid Swindle. This book included nearly 200 false and defamatory statements about research on and in Haiti and those who conduct such research. ln particular, the book included many false and defamatory statements about the work, research, life, and activities of Dr. Athena R. Kolbe, her colleagues, and organizations with which she has served. As the author, I apologize to Dr. Kolbe and regret the damage these false statements may have caused to the reputations of people and organizations who are working to improve well-being and access to education in Haiti.” 4. You must distribute by email and/or postal mail in bold print, a statement to all purchasers or online borrowers of either the electronic version of your book or the hard copy version of your book which reads “Recently you purchased, borrowed, or read online a book entitled The Great Haiti Humanitarian Aid Swindle. This book included nearly 200 false and defamatory statements about research on and in Haiti and those who conduct such research. In particular, the book included many false and defamatory statements about the work, research, life, and activities of Dr. Athena R. Kolbe, her colleagues, and organizations with which she has served. The author apologies and regrets the damage these false statements may have caused to HERTZSCHRAI\APC July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 40 the reputations of people and organizations who are working to improve well-being and access to education in Haiti.” 5. Further, al l false and defamatory statements must be removed from your book before it is offered again for sale or dish·ibution. A copy of all retractions sent and/or published must be sent to Patricia Stamler via first class mail and via email at pstamler@hertzschram.com. FAILURE TO PUBLISH A RETRACTION CONSISTENT WITH THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS WILL ENTITLE MY CLIENT TO OBTAIN ACTUAL DAMAGES AND TO SEEK EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. This letter has been copied to Amazon.com, On-Demand Publishing, LLC and Create Space with the express request that those entities take appropriate legal action to prevent further publications of the defamatory statements addressed in this correspondence. PAS/ss Enclosures cc: Dr. Timothy Schwartz SocioDig 11 754 East Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 cc: Dr. Timothy Schwanz Research Refuge 85 NW 94th St Miami Shores, FL 33 150 {H047D250.I) Very truly yours, HERTZ SCHRAM PC atricia A. Stamler HERTZSCHRAMPC July 24, 20 17 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 41 cc: Amazon.corn Legal Department 410 Terry Avenue North Seattle, WA 98 I 09-5210 (206) 266-1000 cc: On-Demand Publishing LLC CreateSpace 4900 Lacross Road North Charleston, SC 29406 cc: CreateSpacc Legal Department P.O. Box 81226 Seattle, WA 98108 {H04702S0, 1) July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 42 CHAPTER 8 1 2 3 4 5 At the end of this era. in 2006, \\’a:,1H:> State l niversity graduate student
Athena Kolbe and her professor Ro~·ce Hutson conducted what came to be
knO\\ll as the “Lancet Sune-‘·”: a 1,260 household stt1’\e) of \ iolence in Portan-
Prince, the results of which got published in the prestigious Bri tish
medical journal. The Lancet. It was the onl_\ published attempt of a statistical
Aristide news as Duff. And her findings \\·ert> rndicall_\ biased in fm or of
Aristide. suggesting that the new right go\ emment was using rape ns a
political weapon, an argument that fl ew in the face of what the mainstream
press and e \ en KOFA\ lY had been sm-ing.
But there were some prnblems.
First off. Kolbe, it turned ont, \ms an Aristide partisan and activist leftist
journalist who the year before publishing the sm, e) had changed her name
from L_\n Duff to Athena Kolbe, all the \\·hile continuing to publish proAristide
news as Duff. And her findings were radically biased in favor of
There is no question that Kolbe/Duff was inclined to manipulate,
e:-.aggernte and e, en outright lie about h er data. That would become clear in
suhsPmlPnt studies imss \ enhll’es. T op, ott> C’Onsi e, idence of true mp<> epidemic was high!_\ questionable, produced b:
an acth ist journalist Aristide supporter who changed her name and was
ensconced in local politics. :.Ieanwhile. all the data coming from credible
8 The on!_\ e\ ian acti\·ist journalist Aristide supporter who changed her name and was I
ensconced in local politics. :.Ieaim-hile, all the data coming from credible
Haitian feminist organizations and the Haitian police suggested that the U.S.
was. at best. about the same. and possibly far worse than Haiti.
9 I The onl_\ e, idence ol true rape epidemic was high!_\ questionable, produced b_\
an acti\ ist journ11list Aristide supporter who changed her name and was
ensconced in local politics. ~Ieam,·hile. all the data coming from credible I
10
rapect’? \\ e don t know that answer. Its mterestmg that m a subsequent
S\lt’\e\ (The l’nh ersit~ of ~Iichigan Sune_\ ). 20 percent of Kolbe and
Hutson’s reported victims also claimed to ha\ e been ,ictims of rape in 2004. – –
11
Moreo\ er, there was a huge question hanging 0\ er 1′:olbe aud Hutsou·s
data, oue they and e\’eryone else seemed to ignore. The question was this: if
the St11″\ e_\ had e\ en been cnn·ied out then- after 10 _\ ears of t•iktilll politics
and campaigns; after all the free education, medical cai·e, stipends, and tnnel
allowances for l’iktim: and considering the fact that their sune_\ had been
conducted Ill precisel_\ the same neighborhoods as the 1•ikti111 benefit –
{H0470250.1)
I
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 44
programs-ho,,· man\’ of those inten iewed were, \\-itb hope of gammg
benefits. disposed to lie and say that the~ or someone in their famil~· was
raped? We don’t know that ru1s,,·er. Ifs interesting that in a subsequent
Sllr’\’e\ (The Cni, ersin · of i\1ichigan Surwy), 20 percent of Kolbe and
Hutson·s repo1ted ,·ictims also claimed to haw been victims of rape in 200 4.
And ifs interesting that while other sh1dies and anecdotal e,·idence suggests
that the o, erwhelming number of sexual assnults were perpetrated by people
know11 to the ,·ictim, more than 75 percent of K:olbe/ Duffs and Hutson’s
respondents claimed to ha,e been attacked by criminals they did not know.
But in the end ,,·e do not know the ans,,·er to ho,,· many of Kolbe/ Duff and
Hutson’s respondents lied in hopes of beco1ning recipients of aid for t•iktim.
We cnn assume that in the poorest neighborhoods of the poorest country in
the \\·estern hemisphere. where USAID bad engaged in a multi-million dollar
,-iktim compensation program enduring six years, some respondents ,rnuld
be quick-thinking enough to tell a smveyor who ani, eel out of nowhere at
their doorstep that. yes. there were l’iktim in the house.Wfil ~ f;&fil
12
Kolbe/ Duff \\’::IS also back on the scene. With her came Robe1t r.J uggah of
I the Small :\.11ns Suf\ e~ and si:-.. other l’ni, ersit: professors, Hone of whom had
am prior e:-..perience stud,·in_g or researching Haiti. Indeed. Kolbe herself.
13
Kolbe/ Duff ,n-1s also bark on the scene. \\”ith her came Robert l\I11ggah of
the Snrnll A.nns Sun e~ nnd sh other l’ni\t?rsit) professors. none of 1″110111 had
an~· prior e:-..perience studying or researching Haiti. Indeed, Kolbe herself.
14
an~ prior e:-..perience stud~ ing or resenrching Haiti. Indeed, Kolbe herself,
alter I’.? : ear~ working in Haiti and Ii, ing ,,ith orphans, did not speak Creole
or French. But backed ,,ith financing from the l’nited );°ations and the
15
an~ prior l’ l. perit•nte stud_\i11g or rc-~earching Haiti. Indeed. Kolbe herself.
after 1~ ~ ears work ing in Haiti and Ji, ing ,,·ith orphans. did not speak Creole

16
or French. But backed with fina ncing from the l’uitecl Nations and the
l’niwrsi~ of :\I ichignn , Kolbe/Duff and her followers jumped on the rape
{H0470250.1)
I
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz
Page45
17
18
19
20
I
Chapter 9
21
22
(H0470250.1)
band wagon. Significant!) outdoing her 2006 study. Kolbe and the professors
at least once in their lifetimes- pales in comparison. But for anyone \\’ho
kne\\’ Haiti and ,ms paying attention, the findings \\’ere exceeded in absurdity
onh b_, Kolbe and the professors’ claim the, lwd actual!-‘ conducted the
snr\’e_\ . Here·s what they say the_\· did. I
b:md wagon. Significant!) outdoing her :2006 study. 1′:olbe :rnd the professors
concludE>d that in the si., weeks follm\·ing the earthquake women, girls,
toddlers and babies li\ing in Po11-an-Prince were being raped at an annual rate of seH•n oercent of all females. The Democratic Reoublic of the Congo- I
T\\’o months before the earthquake Kolbe and l\luggah had carried out a
snn·ey of 1,800 randomly selected Port-au-Prince households. The, llO\\’
claimed to ha,·e revisited the e:-.rict same households, found the occupants nud
interdewed them. Let me make this dear: si:… weeks after the earthquake the~
sent the same in ten iewers to \ isit the same respondents to evaluate postearthquake
conditions and incidence of crime, and the: found 93 percent of
them, and all in the space of two weeks. This, was a moment in time when 30
percent to 40 percent of the Port-au-Prince population was li, ing in camps,
another 25 percent had fled the capital for the countryside. and 10 percent
had left for 1Iiami and the Dominican Reoublic. No one questioned their
daim. Ill get back to Rolbe. et al., and their suspicions srn, e> findings in the
next chapter. For no\,·. lef s finish “ith the rape epidemic. r~-31 ~ li.=l ~ L…::sJ –
Politics of Data: The Pretender
Over three and a half years I worked and often lived with the
children of Lafanmi Selavi, a shelter for some of the nation’s
quarter of a million homeless children [sic]. It was there that
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tucke1man Schwartz
Page 46
Duff left Haiti in tQ23
I Now a seasoned war correspondent who had covered front lines in Croatia,
Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam, Duff had come to set the record s traight.
24
Duffs reports had little to no impact Aristide remained in exile and the
UN proceeded to install an interim government highly sympathetic to
Aristide’s right wing enemies. H was at this point, sometime in 20 04, in the
midst of writing the a1ticles cited above, that Duff went to Michigan and
enrolled in Wavne State Universitv’s School of Social Work. She enrolled
25
Ansuae s ngnr wmg enemies. It was at mis point, somenme m 2004 , 111 me
midst of writing the articles cited above, that Duff went lo Michigan and
enrolled in Way11e State University’s School of Social Work. She enrolled
under the name, not of Lyn Duff, but Athena Kolbe_(3.lli] \Vhile
matriculating as Athena Kolbe, she continued to publish a1ticles as Lyn
Duff, increasingly focusing on the topic that had proven so politically
– .Cl: –• !~–.: .. ._ _____ , :, __ ,I. – —- – — . . . . ! l ! .1,. _ . __ _ • _ _ __ .._ _ _ ___ ___ … ____ .. I:~• 1 ~ .L! .. 11_ .
26 –
under the name, not of Lyn Duff, but Athena Kolbe.UJ.YJ While I
matriculating as Athena Kolbe, she continued to publish aiticles as Lyn
Duff, increasingly focusing on the topic that had proven so politically
effective in toppling the 1991-1994 military junta: accusations of politically
motivated rape. She issued repo1ts such as:
27
All that’s pretty shocking. But what made the study e,·en more shocking j
was thal 46 percent of the killings and 28 percent of the sexual assaults were
attributable to authorities. gangs, and paramilitaries that supported the new
government. All the res t were attributable to non-aligned criminals. Putting
28
government. All lhe rest were attTihutablc to non-aligned criminals. Putting
it another way, none of the raping or killing was attributable to the deposed
leftis t Aristide government, the leader of which Duff was so fond. None of it.
Nol to the deposed government or to its supporters. And what that meant, if
29
(H0470250.l }
I
I
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 47
government. All the rest were attributable to non-aligned criminals. Putting
it another way, none of the raping or killing was attributable to the deposed
leftist Aristide government, the leader of which Duff was so fond . None of it.
Not to the deposed government or to its supporters. And what that meant, if
30
government. All the rest were attributable lo non-aligned crimi nals. Putting
it another way, none of the raping or killing was attributable to the deposed
left ist Aristide government, the leader of which Duff was so fond. None of it.
Not lo the deposed government or to its supporters. And what that mea nt, if
31
As for the Lancet Su rvey and its claims of one-sided violence, a British
32
The implication of using two names was that, at best, Duff did not want
people to challenge her scholarly findings based on her political sympathies.
At worst, the implication was that she had contli\·ed the data and she did
not want anyone to know that she had used the status of scholar to
fraudulentlv gain svnmathv for Aiistidc. Fearing: the worst of the two
33
news and repair Aristide’s reputation.”L:5:5.!J It was right about then that
Kolbe/ Duff claimed she was herself becoming a victim. [33£1
”You are a dog … you should die. We are going to necklace you,” a voice
whispered over the phone. Kolbe/ Duff reported the threats to Jeb Sprague
and Joe Emesberger, who like Duff, were two advocate-journalists who had
devoted themselves to defending Aristide and his h \iCe-toppled populist
~ .. … ‘ . ,· I
governmen t. Sprague and Emesberger published Kolbe’s account in the
online journal Counter Punch, entitling it, .. Death Threats Against La ncet’s
Haiti Human Rights Investigator. ”
Suddenly it was eminently logical that Duff would ha\’e concealed her
identity. She could die. The people who were after her \vere, rather
‘ . – ‘
34 – – — –
{H0470250.1)
I
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tucke1man Schwartz
Page 48
35
(H0470250.l)
news and repair Aristide’s reputation.”l:331.J It was right about then that
Kolbe/ Duff claimed she was herself becoming a victim_[33_g] “You are a dog … you should die. We are going to necklace you,” a voice
whispered over the phone. Kolbe/ Duff reported the threats to Jeb Sprague
and Joe Emesberger, who like Duff, were two advocate-journalists who had
devoted themselves to defending Aristide and his twice-toppled populist
Ir –
government. Sprague and Emesberger published Kolbe’s account in the
online journal Counter Punch, entitling it, ~Death Threats Against Lancet’s
Haiti Human Rights l n\’estigator.”
Suddenly it was eminently logical that Duff would have concealed her
identity. She could die. The people who were after her were, rather
obviously, precisely those who had outed her. The voice that had threatened
her on the phone had a British accent. The Lancet was a British journal. The
Haiti support group to which Charles A1thur had belonged was British.
Charles Arthur was British. And now a British voice was whispering death
threats over the phone. It did not take a genius to conclude that Charles
Arthur might be part of a British conspiracy. There were other accusations
of death threats from London. According to Kolbe/ Duff, a major
investigation ensued. Scotland Yard got involved and tracked the calls to a
British ex-con whom “someone” had hired lo make the threats and who had
been using disposable cell phones. Arthur, now on the defensive, denied
having an}1hing to do 1\ith pursuing Kolbe, saying that the accusations
wPrP “tntalh- <‘ntPs,orir-,i llv ,inn 11nPn11ivnr-~llv 11ntn1P .. [333] July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 49 36 37 38 (H0470250.1) news and repair Aristide’s reputation.·,L:3JlJ It was right about then that Kolbe/ Duff claimed she was herself becoming a victim. [33g] “You are a dog … you should die. We are going to necklace you,” a voice whispered over the phone. Kolbe/Duff reported the threats to J eb Sprague and J oe Emesberger, who like Duff, were two advocate-journalists who had I devoted themselves to defending Aristide and his twice-toppled populist —————–‘ government. Sprague and Emesberger published Kolbe’s account in the online journal Counter Punch, entitling it, “Death Threats Against Lancet’s Haiti Human Rights Investigator.” Suddenly it was eminently logical that Duff would have concealed her identity. She could die. The people who were after her were, rather obviously, precisely those who had outed her. The voice that had threatened her on tl1e phone bad a British accent. The Lancet was a British journal. The Haiti support group to which Charles Arthur had belonged was British. Charles Arthur was British. And now a British voice was whispering death threats over the phone. It did not take a genius to conclude that Charles Arthur might be pa1t of a British conspiracy. There were other accusations of death tl1reats from London. According to Kolbe/ Duff, a major investigation ensued. Scotland Yard got involved and tracked the calls to a British ex-con whom “someone” had hi red to make the threats and who had been using disposable cell phones. Arthur, now on the defensive, denied having anything to do with pursuing Kolbe, saying that the accusations were, “totally, categorically and unequivocally untrue_,,[333] In the end it was impossible to tell what was and what was not true. For whatever reason, Scotland Yard had, according to Kolbe/Duff, dropped the issue- if they had ever really been involved. According to The Lancet, they issue-if they had ever really been involved. According to The Lancet, they concluded that Kolbe should not have concealed her double identity. But they could otherwise detect no irregulaiities in the data. Critics noted that the person who reviewed the data for them was none other than Kolbe and Hutson’s Wayne State University colleague and co-author, Eileen Trzcinski – who would soon join them in mining Haiti for data and publishing refereed academic articles needed to get tenure. As for Wayne State July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 50 they cot1ld othe rwise detect no irregularities in the data. Critics noted that the person who reviewed the data for them was none other than Kolbe and Ht1tson’s Wayne State University colleague and co-author, Eileen Trzcinski – who would soon join them in mining Haiti for data and pt1blishing refereed academic articles needed to get tenure. As for Wayne State 39 they could othe rwise the person who reviewed the data for them was none other than Kolbe and Hutson’s Wayne Stale Unh·crsi ty colleague and co-author, Eileen Trzcinski – who would soon join them 111 mining Haiti for data and publishing refereed academic articles needed to get tent1re. As for Wayne State — refereed academic articles needed to get tenure. As for Way11e State University administra tors, they were not so fo rgiving. They terminated 40 reterecd academic art1ctes neectect to get tenure. As tor Wayne Mate University administrators, they were not so forgiving. 111ey terminated Kolbe’s PhD program, sending her off with a Master’s degree. 41 If anyone Ill me nouse nau oeen rapeu. I.I me responaem repnea yes, me researcher was supposed to ask what exactly the rapist used to perpetrate the c1ime: penis or another object? Then they were supposed to ask where the rapist put the penis or other object: was it in the ,·ictim’s mouth, anus, vagina? Kolbe and Hutson were quite frank about it: The majority of sexual assaults perpetrated involved penetration of the victim’s mouth, anus, or Yagina with the perpet rator’s genitalia or some other object (92-1%; 95% CI 86·6-97-6). The remainder of assaults involved sexual touching witJ10ut penetration and the forced watching of I sexual acts. [Lancet 2006 p sl Ifs stunning that the prestigious Lancet was not taken to task for this, or that no one even seemed to notice. First off, we are talking about a highly 42 It’s stunning that the prestigious Lancet was not taken to task for this, I or that no one eYen seemed to notice. First off, \\’Care talking about a highly sensitive tooic: traumatized victims who were still liYin!! in fear of the 43 — (H04702S0.1) l I July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz Page 51 ………………………… t” . ….. . .. .. …. …….. -………….. ………….. …., ………. .. ._._ ……………. ·· ··· ·o …………… ~· .. .. …. perpetrators. Indeed, Kolbe and Hutson·s point was that the government was doing this. But the same government was sti11 in control when the findings were published. And e\’eryone in each neighborhood would have . – – 44 – – findings were published. And eve1yone in each neighborhood would have known who was inte rviewed. Jt would not have been a secret. But even without the obvious danger, even if the interim government and its thugs had by that point been removed – and they had not- il was highly questionable in terms of academic ethics. If Kolbe and Hutson had followed ethical guidelines from the World Health Organization, they would have had to conduct multistage interviews. They would have had consent forms and private interviews in safe spaces removed from the respondent’s home. And : 6. . ……. 1.J l-~ ……. 1- …… ….. .,.. ……. -. —-… 4_.: ___ _ “- -=—– .. i.. … .. , __ ,c _c .. 1_ … ‘”–=–‘”=–” t.. …. : _ _ 45 W l lJIVUl lilt: UlJVIUU:, u,1111,e1 1 eveu II Ult: llllt:lllll l,V Vt:llllllt:lll ctLlU n :, llllll,:, had by that point been removed – and they had not-it was highly questionable in terms of academic ethics. If Kolbe and Hutson had followed ethical guidelines from the World Health Organization, they would have had to conduct multis tage interviews. They would have had consent forms and p rivate interviews in safe spaces removed from the respondent’s home. And it would have been even more stringent given that half of the “victims” being I grilled were children under 17 years of age. None of this was even mentioned in the Lancet article. [334) 46 questionable in terms of academic ethics. If Kolbe and Hutso n had followed ethical guidelines from the World Health Organi zation, they would have had to conduct multistage interviews. They would have had consent forms and private interviews in safe spaces removed from the respondent’s home. And it would have been even more stringent given that half of the “vict ims” being 47 {H0470250.l) I I I July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz Page 52 , , ~ , questionable in terms of academic ethics. If Kolbe and Hutson had followed ethical guidelines from the World Health Organiza tion, they would have had to conduct multistage interviews. They would have had consent forms and private interviews in safe s paces removed from the respondent’s home. And it would have been even more stringent given that half of the “victims” being grilled were children under 17 years of age. None of this was even mentioned in the Lancet article. [33.4] 48 questionable in terms of academic ethics. If Kolbe and Hutson had followed ethical guidelines from the World Health Organization, they would have had to conduct multis tage interviews. They would have had consent forms and private interviews in safe spaces removed from the respondent’s home. And it would have been even more stringent given that half of the “victims” being grilled were children under 17 years of age. None of this was even mentioned in the Lancet article. (33J] 49 – …. – Indeed, Kolbe and Hutson haI seeking approval or addce from anyone. In lheir acknowledgements, the I rr- 1• . ‘ … · -♦ •. • ‘ .. ‘ I so .. – institution. Nor did the Lancet editors make any mention of the Institutional Ethics Review Committee, considered obligatory for social researchers doing surveys, particularly surveys that touched on such sensitive topics as rape and murder, and particularly when children are involved. 51 mslltut1on. Nor dtd the Lancet editors make any mention ot the Institutional Ethics Review Committee, considered obligatory for social researche rs doing surveys, particularly surveys tha t touched Oil such sensitive topics as rape and murder, and pa1ticularly when children are involved. 52 {H0470250.l} I i July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 53 But for those readers who are concerned, don’t be. It is l1ighly unlikely that anyone ever asked those questions and, if they did, it is even more unlikely that Haitians who were political rape victims were telling perfect strangers the answers. They would have been no more welcoming than ,….. ,..,…..,…..1 .,… :_…._ V.-.l’h …. ‘,.,. 4-\.., ,….,.. l.,,……..,… ,…4-…., .. , ….. ,.., f t\,..,,1..,.,… ;., l\..r :.,.i..: ………….. t> … .._ +.-1…, ,… _, +h …. +1,.. .. 1 … …..
53
But for those readers who are concerned, don’t be. It is highly unlikely
that anyone ever asked those ques tions and, if they did, it is even more unlikely
that Haitians who we re political rape victims were t elling perfect
strangers the ans\vers. They would have been no more welcoming than
people in Kolbe’s then hometown of Detroit, Michigan. But then that’s the
– –
54
THE CREDIBlLITY GAP
I A Suspect History I 55
aoour l\.OJOe/ uurr s rescarcn ano surveys. Ano wnac s mosr 1nceresnng aoom
all this is not so much that Kolbe/Duff might be an academic fraudster, but
what it tells us about the credibility of research in the humanitarian sector
in Haiti. With the publicity and the publications in big time academic
. .. ..
56
back to that in a moment. .First, a closer look at Dutt, her past and what
sl1e·s been up to since the earthquake suggests that if she invented the
Lancet Survey data, it was likely not the first time she had done something
like that.
57
,,11ul J\ ‘- V lhJ \.I J U VV\.I\ lU …….. , ……… ,v111 \.J V I ,…..,., ….. ,u\..11 tll \.JI ….. 11\,11.IHIIII\.Ull.Ull “‘”-‘”‘-Vl
111 Haiti. VVith the publicity and the publications in big time academic
journals like the Lancet, other PhD”s were att racted to Kolbe. There were
soon PhD”s and professors clambering aboard her research wagon. Although
not a single one of them had ever before studied Haiti or spoke Kreyol, their
academic credent ials would bolster Kolbe’s credibility and, in turn, the
access she gave them to original data would bolster their careers. rll get
-· – .. .
58 –
{H0470250. l}
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 54
back to that in a moment. Firs t, a closer look at Duff, her past and what
she’s been up to s ince the earthquake suggests that if she invented the
Lancet Survey data, it was likely not the first time s he had done something
like that.
According to Wi1..ipedia, Lyn Duff began her life in the public eye as an
eighth-grader in a South Pasadena Junior High School when she was kicked
59
– -· – — – — — — ——-o — – —–o· – —– — – – r – r — —– – – ·– – -.:J –
Club. The Ame1ican Civil Liberties Union came to her rescue, sued the
school, and won. But instead of going back to South Pasadena Junior High,
60
school, and won. But instead of going back lo South Pasadena Junior High,
Duff went straight to California State University, Los Angeles (CSU LA). She
I
.
61
IJutt went straignt to Calltorn1a ::>tate u niversity, Los Angeles lC:::iU LAJ. ::>Ile
soon declared herself gay, whereupon her mother committed her to a Utah
I
mental institution and she became one of the last people in the U.S. to ever
get shock therapy for being homosexual. After six months in the mental
62 –
book called Uncommon Heroes published in 1994 by Fletcher Press. And
then in 1994, as recounted, at the tender age of 18, she began a journalist
career with Pacifica Radio’s KPFA, first coming to Haiti to found Radio
Timoun, and then going on to publish articles in the San Francisco
Chronicle, the San Francisco Examiner, Salon online, the Utne Reader,
Sassy lvlagazine, Washington Post, Seventeen. the Miami Herald and the
Notinnnl (;nthnlir RPnnrtpr_[33_6.] 63
(H0470250.l}
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 55
64
(H0470250. l)
out of sch ool for founding an underground newspaper called The Tiger
Club. The American Civil Liberties Union came to her rescue, sued the
school, and won. But ins tead of going back to South Pasadena .Junior High,
Duff went straight to Califo rnia State Univers ity, Los Angeles (CSU LA). She
soon declared herself gay, whereupon her mother committed her to a Utah
mental ins titution and she became one of the last people in the U.S. to ever
get shock therapy for being homosexual. After six months in the mental
institution she escaped, got back to California where she lived homeless for
a while, was then adopted by a gay couple, legally divorced her parents and
became a hero of the gay community. She even made it into the pages of a
book called Uncommon Heroes published in 1994 by Fletcher Press. And
then in 1994, as recounted, at the tender age of 18, she began a journalist
career ·with Pacifica Radio’s KPFA, first coming to Haiti to found Raclio
Timoun, and then going on to publish articles in the San Frnncisco
C/ll'(mic/e, the San Francisco Examiner, Salon online, the Utne aeader,
Sassy MGgazine, Washington Post, Seue11tee11, the Miami Herald and the
Nal iollal Catholic R eP.,orler. [33.§] lt’s quite a sto1y. And if one reads the Wikipedia ent1y about Duff, born
in 1976, she had, between the ages of 18 and 24 and with only one year of
formal university educa tion, accomplished what most journalists would
hope to do in a lifetime. Quoting Wikipedia:
13y the late 1990s, Duff was a well-established international
journalist with postings in Haiti, !fil.a.cl, Croat ia, several
African countries, and Vietnam. After the United States
invaded Afghanistan, she traveled to the front lines as one of
the few non-embedded Western journalis ts.
So that’s the Lyn Duff s tory. But there are some problems with it. The
s tories of her exploits only exist on Wikipedia, on line biographies and chat
records that Duff may very well have wri tten herself. None of the references
in Wikipcdia are sources that can be traced to legi timate publications. With
the exception of Haiti, there is not a single article written or referenced or
remembered where a reporter by the name of Lyn Duff or Athena Kolbe
So, if anyone had investigated Duffs past – and apparently no one ever
did, not even the journalis ts and activists who de fended her- there were
good reasons to suspect the legitimacy of Duffs early legacy years. But what J
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tucke1man Schwaiiz
Page 56
It’s quite a story. And if one reads the Wikipedia entry about Duff, born
in 1976, she had, between the ages of 18 and 24 and with only one year of
fo rmal university education, accomplished what most journalists would
hnnP tn rln in” lif,.timP n 11ntino v\TiL-in p,l j,.,.
65
in Wikipedia are sources tJ1at can be traced to legitimate publications. With
the exception of Haiti, there is not a single article written or referenced or
remembered where a reporter by the name of Lyn Duff or Athena Kolbe
\\Tote about any of the countries where she was supposedly a front-1.ine war
correspondent. Not even KPFA Radio in San Francisco published a report
where Lyn Duff or Athena Kolbe is mentioned in association with any of the
Wikipedia cited war-tom countries, other than Haiti. Nor was she the
founder of Radio Timotm. She worked for Radio Timoun but was fired.
66 –
V\’ llCJ. C L)H L’Ull Ul r’\UtC H d. .l’\.UIUC: 1.::, lllt:llllUllt:U HI <1.:)~V\…1t1.l1UH Hllll c:lUJ V1 UlC Wikipedia cited war-tom countries, other than Haiti. Nor was she the founder of Radio Timou11. She worked for Radio Timoun but was fired. 67 [33_7.] And when I followed up on claims about the Civil Libeities Union and Pasadena Junior High School newspapers, I found nothing there either. The 68 – —- L0 J✓-J And when I followed up on claims about the Civil Libe1ties Union and Pasadena Junior High School newspapers, I found nothing there either. The reporter I contacted at the school newspaper found no one who remembered her. As for The Tiger Club- the underground school newspaper the Wikipedia entry claims she was expelled for founding-it is Pasadena High’s school newspaper. It was founded in 1913, shty-three years I before Duff was born. Moreover, after changing her name to Kolbe she 69 Detore Vutt was born. Moreover, alter c11ang111g tier name to Kolbe she claimed in the interview published in Counterpunch that Kolbe had been L her father·s surname, and that “in late 2004 Kolbe decided to go by her father’s surname rather than the h)11henated name she had been us ing 70 —— – (H0470250.l} I I I I I July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz Page 57 betore Uutt was born. Moreover, atter changmg her name to Kolbe she claimed in the interview published in Counterpunch that Kolbe had been her father’s surname, and that “in late 2004 Kolbe decided to go by her father’s surname rather than the hyphenated name she had been using previously.” The problem with that claim is that nowhere is there any evidence of her ever having used a hyphenated last name. Ever. Not in published articles or online chat rooms or in her job with Radio Timoun. Not even on Wikipedia is there any evidence that she ever used a h,mhenated last name. Indeed. to this dav (12/ 6 / 2016) there are senarate 71 So, if anyone had im·estigated Duffs past-and apparently no one eYer did, not even the journalists and activists who defended her-there were good reasons to sus pect the legitimacy of Duffs early legacy years. But what ronrPrn,; , 1._ hPrP j._ wh::it shP ::inrl tho’-P who ,vork with hPr h::ivP hPPn 11n to 72 . the humanitarian sector in Haiti. The 2006 Lancet study appears to have been a case of questionable journalistic ethics if not outright fraud. But what I happened in the years since is arguably far more revealing. I want to remind I 73 I – —–· —- – – – ,—- —– – — J- — —– — – – —— — — – – y —o·– ——· – — —- happened in the years since is arguably far more revealing. I want to remind the reader again that what I’m recounting here is not really about Kolbe/Duff. It’s about the whole aid and scholar industry and 74 – manufacturing of data that supports what the NGOs and UN agencies are doing in Haiti and, not least of all, how pseudo-scholars and the international tnedia’s indiscriminate promotion of their data supplanted serious methodologists and opened the door to opportunists and perhaps even criminals, such as Duff may well be, and in doing this, made helping the poor in Haiti that much more difficu lt. How can we help when we have not a clue what’s really going on’? And worse, how can we help if we’re being misled and lied to? 75 – followi ng the Lancet blowout and getting pushed out of Wa)-11e State University, Kolbe/ Duff enrolled in a PhD program at the University of 76 — – – —— – (H0470250.l) I I July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 58 77 78 79 {H0470250.l) — — – – – ~c — — –,, – – – — — – – – — – – ——- — —- —– – — — the “the pot calling the kettle black.” They went on to say that it was “inconceivable” that the BARR Survey had been representative and touted their own survey that “had support from the United Nations and the International Development Research Center” and was overseen by “our North American-Haitian team of researchers.’,[341] With their study-the University of iviichigan Survey-they were able to ”carefully examine tl1e The irony of these declarations was that neither Kolbe, nor Muggah nor any of the other co-authors ever contacted me to discuss the survey. They ne,·er asked me about my methodology. And they never discussed with me theirs. 1 then sent to the authors of the academic study- via Kolbe- an explanation of the BARR methodology along with a list of inconsistencies I had found with their sur\’ey findings. I requested a discussion. No “vigorous discussion of estimates” ever ensured. Not even an e-mail. death implications for potential aid recipients.” But the irony of Kolbe and Muggah themselves having written and published this proclamation in the LA Times, the largest metropolitan newspaper in the U.S. and the newspaper with the fourt h largest ci rculation, is that they may very well never have even done the University of Michigan Survey, the very survey they were using to give themselves authority to write the article and criticize me and the work I participated in_[3f!l] July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz Page 59 80 (H0470250.l) have successfully located and interviewed 1,674 of 1,800 of their original survey respondents, people Lhey didn’t even know, all in a space of 14 days. And given that the same researchers estimate that 120 of the original interviewees were dead, they had in fact contacted 99.6 percent of the original living sample. I can attest from having done more than 100 surveys in Haiti that this wouldn’t be possible if the two surveys were done back to back during the best ohimes. It certainly did not happen six weeks after the earthquake. Ac; for the findings: Kolbe, Muggah, Hutson and the professors claimed their findings revealed 0.37 percent of the population had been raped in six weeks. That’s a figure 20 times greater than Kolbe and Hutson had found in 2006-a figure that itself, as seen, was So times the so-country UN reported average in 2002. They found that six times as many children o to 12 years of age had been killed in the earthquake as people over 12 years of age, something so peculiar that it would have made the eaithquake demographically unique in the world. Specifically, based on the population s tructure, the expected proportion of dead was one child under 12 years of age to every 2 people killed over 12 years of age (30 percent of the population at the time of the earthquake was under 12 years of age and 70 percent were over 12 years of age). Moreover, a University of Miami study found the opposite, “the proportion of children with severe injuries under the age of 18 is noticenbly less than in the total population: -l3JA] Similarly, Kolbe and Muggah et al., found that children o to 12 years of age were 11 times more likely to have died of injuries after the quake. Yet July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz Page 60 81 82 83 84 {H0470250.l) They found that six times as many children o to 12 years of age had been killed in the earthquake as people over 12 years of age, something so peculiar that it would have made the earthquake demographically unique in the world. Specifically, based on the population structure, the expected proportion of dead was one child under 12 years of age to e\·ery 2 people killed over 12 years of age (30 percent of the population at the time of the earthquake was under 12 years of age and 70 percent were m·er 12 years of age). Moreover, a Uni\·ersity of l\·liami study found the opposite, “the proportion of children with severe injuries under the age of 18 is noticeably less than in the total population: ·[3M1 Similarly, Kolbe and Muggah et al., found that children o to 12 years of age were u times more likely lo have died of injuries after the quake. Yet a CDC study of survival rates in improvised post-earthquake hospitals found more adults died from injuries. And Handicap Internationalwhich sent people to hospitaJs and studied the issue-found that it was in fact adults over 18 years of age who most suffered inj uries. And that’s original living sample. I can attest from having done more than 100 surveys in Haiti that this wouldn’t be possible if the two surveys were done back to back during the best of times. It ce rtainly did not happen s ix weeks after the earthquake. As for the findings: … numerous observations have shm\11 that patients from the pediatric population recoYer more frequently a nd more fu lly than similarly injured adults. Although this might be euphemistically ascribed to the ·’physiologic reserve” of the child, it suggests that injured children respond exceedingly well to preservation of cerebral oxygenation and perfusion. Principles and Practice of Trauma Care (Kochar 2013 :445y(345] Kolbe and Muggah et al., claimed to have found that 25 percent of a]l people who died from the emthquake were not immediately killed but died in the month following the earthquake from injuries. The CDC came up with a figure of 3 percent that died in the five months following the earth quake, including from diseases. July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 61 In at least one respect, what Kolbe and the professors reported, or the likelihood that the survey even occurred, doesn’t matter. Few to no institu- 85 In at least one respect, what Kolbe and the professors reported, or the likelihood that the survey even occurred, doesn’t matter. Few to no institutions or scholars cited the figures at the time. Nor did the media pounce on this pa1ticular study. One can only conclude that, because the data was so out of whack with what we knew from other surveys, they simply dismissed it. But. those findings were uncriticallv committed to one of the largest 86 Not satisfied with the Associated Press coverage and sensing opportunity, Kolbe and Muggah began publishing their own articles. Regarding their finding of skyrocketing violence they wrote in London’s The Guardian 87 ‘ J Kolbe and l\l uggah were not finished. Never letting on that they had in fact done the survey, they ci ted themseh·es: Recent surveys conducted by the lgarape Institute [presided over by Muggah] reveal that despite some fluctuation, it has shifted upwards to roughly 7..2._p~r IQQ,llilQ….Qy hit~ Julx. By 88 York Times Sunday Edition, no less-Kolbe and Niuggah did the same thing they had done in their article in The Guardian on sk)Tocketing homicide rates: they referenced their owu work. This time it was Kolbe’s. Without ever letting on to readers that it was in fact her research, Kolbe and l\foggah cited her earlier studies as evidence that there was indeed a massive rape epidemic in Haiti. Specifi cally: 89 In doing this, in using her credibility as scholar and UN researcher, Kolbe had done something that she apparently only fantasized about 12 years earlier: she transformed herself into a journalist for the world’s most important mainstream media outlets. Once in that role, she then validated 90 {H0470250.l} I I I I I July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz Page 62 important mainstream media ou tlets. Once in that role, she then validated her academic work, not least of all that which had gotten her terminated at ·wayne State University. It was genius. 91 – For skeptical readers, however, there were problems, even vv:ith the rape account. First off, if the rape ever occurred, Kolbe and Muggah were nowhere near it. Kolbe/Duff, the woman who claims to have been “on the front lines in Afghanistan” and to Vietnam, Croatia, and Iraq, would not have been able to participate; obesity, a heart condition, and heavy dependence on medications preclude that. Indeed, she might not s urvive the “3-hour drive” over Haiti’s bad roads, especially those where the rape occurred in the South of Haiti. And even had she been there, the fact that she speaks no French and very little Kreyol means she would not have unders tood much about what was going on and cettain]y would not have been doing the talking herself. As for Muggah, he speaks no Kreyol, but he does speak French and he could probably jog the 3-hour drive. But he wasn’t there either. He was in Brazil, where he lives with his family and runs his Igarape Institute, “a think and do tank devoted to evidence-based policy and action on complex security, justice and development ch a1lenges in Brazil, Latin America, and Africa:·[353] It’s fantastic to me that Robert Muggah, as wel1 as al] the cited professors would lie; that they would put their reputations and careers on the line and delibe rately falsify data and even project themselves to places where tlwv WP.rf> not. So whv did thf>v do it? T s11snpc-t thP.v onlv mirti;:illv did it . T
92
It’s fantastic to me that Robert Muggah, as well as all the cited professors
would lie; that they would put their reputations and careers on the line
and deliberately falsify data and even project tl1emselves to places where
they were not. So why did they do it? I suspect they only paitially did it. I
suspect that it was Kolbe/Duff who was doing most of the lying. And this
brings us back to what so ails the aid industrv. encourages the untruths
93
the South of Haiti. And even had she been there, the fact that she speaks no
French and very little Kreyol means she would not have understood much
about what was going on and certainly would not have been doing the
talking herself. As for Muggah. he sneaks no Krevol. but he does sneak
94 –
{H0470250.1)
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 63
It’s fantastic to me that Robert Muggah, as well as all the cited profes-
I sors would lie; that they would put their reputations and careers on the line
and deliberately falsify data and even project themselves to places where
they were not. So why did they do it’? I suspect they only partially did it. I
suspect that it was Kolbe/Duff who was doing most of the lying. And this
95
weve seen over ana over mrougnour mis oooK ana maKes H poss101e ror
someone like Kolbe to dupe major newspapers of the world and prestigious
academic journals: it was what everyone in a position to disseminate
r .. ‘ . , ~ ‘ ~· ~ ” ‘ ‘
96
THE VERY SPECIAL PlACE \VHERE NO ONE CAN CALL YOU A
LIAR
For people who don’t know, Kolbe had stepped into a very special niche
for people who like to make things up. No one did, could, or would check
97
THE VERY SPECIAL PLACE WHERE NO ONE CAN CALL YOU A
LIAR
For people who don”t know, Kolbe had stepped into a ve ry special niche
for people who like to make things up. No one did, could, or would check
98
For people who don’t know, Kolbe had stepped into a very special niche
for people who like to make things up. No one did, could, or would check
her data. Not even her colleagues, none of whom spoke Haitian Creole or
99
I So Kolbe might well have been fabricating it all. Or at least paying for
100
{H04702S0.l)
I
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 64
101
102
103
104
{H0470250.l)
I
For people who don’t know, Kolbe had stepped into a very special niche
for people who like to make things up. No one did, cou1d, or would check
her data. Not even her colleagues, none of •.vhom spoke Haitian Creole or
even knew her surveyors. This is true for several reasons. First, it’s
unethical. Human 1ights priorities mean researchers cannot divulge
informants’ names. Every survey begins with a promise that the information
and identity of the respondent will be kept secret. In cases such as surveys
on crime, political opinions, and human rights abuses, the logic is obvious:
to divulge the identity of respondents might open them up to retribution. No
one checks the survey. No one knows what the original respondents really
said or even if they really existed: prime turf for sloppy work, liars or
activists bent on making a case for their cause. [35.4] So Kolbe might well have been fabricating it all. Or at least paying for
data that she herself had not verified. And then she was publishing it and
n <:ino it tn n,::,1,-p rnn l’l11 <:inn<: th::it <:::>ti<:fi<>rl th<> n<>t>rl<: nf h <>r rlit>nt<: tht> ::iirl
her data. Not even her colleagues, none of whom spoke Haitian Creole or
even knew her surveyors. This is true for several reasons. First, it’s
even knew her surveyors. This is true for several reasons. First, it’s
unethical. 1-1 uman rights priorities mean researchers cannot divulge
informants· names. Every sun ·ey begins with a promise that the information
and identity of the respondent \’viii be kept secret. In cases such as surveys
on crime, political opinions, and human rights abuses, the logic is obvious:
to divulge the identity of respondents might open them up to retribution. No
one checks the survey. No one knows what the original respondents really
said or even if they really existed: prime turf for s loppy work, lia rs or
acti\iSts bent on making a case for their cause.[354] readers. Hu t it gets worse.LJ;:);:)J Kolbe/ Outt’s use ot social media, her
transformation back to being a journalist and her publication of stellar
art icles based on what could only have been bogus or at least extremely
shoddy and manipulated survey data was only part of her brilliance. Her
————————————-
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 65
readers. But it gets worse. LJ::>::>J Kolbe/ Duffs use of social media, h er
transformation back to b eing a journalist and her publication of s tellar
a rticles based on what could only have been bogus or at least extremely
shoddy· and manipulated survey data was only part of her brilliance. Her
105
Wilh Kolbe as sole owner a nd cha ncellor, ETS offered Haitian youth
h:i r hPlor’s clPl!rf’f’S. ,ind PVPn 111:isli>r’s df’l!rees in social work. P<‘PS wPrP
106
To encou rage enrollme nt, Kolbe cle\’erly crafted the description of the
school as an “Inte rnationally supported degree-granting educational insti tution
located in Haiti”‘ that provides “a four-year course of s tudy for the
107
becoming “li censed social workers.” She also associated the school with the
University of l’vlichigan. Indeed, for the first couple of years most students
thought they were attending the University of Michigan. She offered all
,.. .,,,1,….Y”\f.r ,-r”‘\ .,…n, . ;,,,.._.-. … ,..,.),. ,…} ,.. … ,..}-.\1″\I”‘ f •l-.,” ,~.-,.,, ) fnA , . ,~ .. .-. ~ 1, l”\r”IA _… ..-. ,~ r n.•~ror• n ••’ 1),,t
108
To e ncourage enrollment, Kolbe cleverly crafted the description of the
school as an “Internationally supported degree-granting educational institution
located in Haiti” that provides “a four-year course of study for the
Bachelor in Social Work (BSW)/Bachelor of Arts (BA) or the Master in
Social Work (MS\V)/l\faster of Arts (MA) degree,” all prerequisites to
hP<‘omini> “li <‘Pn,Prl ,ori,11 wnrkPr<- – ShP ;,ilc:n ,1,,ori::itPrl thP i::C’hnnl with thP 109 thought they were attending the UniYers ity of Michigan. She offered all students 50 percent scholarships (the real fee was$ 1,000 per semester). But to get the scholarship, the hopeful young Haitian student had to s ign a contract committing lo se,·eral hundred hours of work-study each semester – ,\ithout oav. 110 access to the ETS school research facilities at reasonable prices. The U.S. I I researche rs were as foo led as the Haitian students. Most read the – – 111 – — — —-l {H0470250,l} July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 66 J , J ‘ J school were credible. U.S. researchers came to the school and pa id Kolbe/ Duff for room, board and Kreyol lessons given by the unpaid student teachers. Meanwhile, although the school was an “English language 112 – , ~ . . teachers. Meanwhile, although the school was an ”English language University,” the courses were run almost entirely by Haitians, none of whom had anything beyond a high school diploma and all of whom were instructing the students m Kreyol or translating English to Kreyol for Kolbe/ Duff and the graduate students. [35fil 113 – 114 The school had no license. Not from the United States. Not from thLJ ~ a itian governn:i ent. In fac~, de~pi~e-claimin_g i_n her_~nline_!ntro_duct_i~~to_ Haitian government. In fact, despite claiming in her online introduction to the University that it was founded in association with, “only a handful of foreigners as well as several dozen Po1t-au-Prince based Haitian social workers,” neither the school nor Kolbe had any association wilh Haitian academics at all. Since transforming herself into a scholar, the one 115 academics at alJ. Since transforming herself into a scholar, the one connection Kolbe had to a Haitian academic was before the earthquake when she allied \vith Haitian professor Sergio Balistra. Balistra had gotten his PhD from the State University of Haiti where, according to a biography of the authors for a paper he was to give with Kolbe at the American Public Health Association, he was a member of the fac ulty in the Department of Sociolog_y. The problem with that is that the University of Haiti had no PhD program at the time. The Sociology Department never had a faculty member named Sergio Balistra. And none of Kolbe’s Haitian assistants ever met Sergio Balistra. Following the earthquake, Kolbe would report that Sergio had been tragically killed in the disaster. The University of Michigan commemorated his passing. Kolbe/Duff wrote the eulogy. [35:z] 116 {H0470250.1) July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz Page 67 program at the time. The Sociology Department never had a faculty member named Sergio Balistra. And none of Kolbe’s Haitian assistants ever met Sergio Balistra. Following the earthquake, Kolbe would report that Sergio 117 – academics at all. Since transforming herself into a scholar, the one connection Kolbe had to a Haitian academic ·was before the earthquake when she allied vvith Haitian professor Sergio Balistra. Balistra had gotten I 118 .. .. _. __ –·- –i- – — — —·–r-, ….. —- —– – – r … ·— ••· ·-·– – • · · · – ·· ….. — __ .,. _ .. __ ··-·- — would come crashing down around Kolbe. Sometime in late 2013 students I began to realize that the school had no accreditation inside or outs ide of Hai li. ln January 2014, the students wrote to a series of University of – -· . . .. . . . – . . – – .. – – 119 Haiti. In January 2014, th e students wrote to a seri es of Uni,·ersity of Michigan administrators, including then dean of the School of Social Work, Laura Lein, complaining that they thought they were studying under the ausoices of the Universitv of Michigan. The\’ 1wt no resoonse. 120 When the students complained directly to Kolbe/Duff, she made them even angrier. In a move that ma ny students in terpreted as punishment, Kolbe retroactively increased tuition rates, telling students they now had to pay $600 per semester- an extra $100 more than the s tandard $500 tuition. And thev had to Dav it. not onlv for the uocoming semesters. but for 121 (H0470250.1) I July 24, 2017 Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz Page 68 122 {H0470250. l } THE. GREAT HAI fl HUMANITARIAN AID SWINDLE Haiti. In J anuary 2014, the students wrote to a series of University of Michigan administrators, including then dean of the School of Social Work, Laura Lein, complaining that they thought they were studying under the auspices of the University of Michigan. They got no response. When the students complained directly to Kolbe/Duff, she made them even angrier. In a move that many students interpreted as punishment, Kolbe retroactively increased tuition rates, telling students they now had to pay $600 per semester- an e>..ira $ 100 more than the standard $500
tuition. And they had to pay it, not only for the upcoming semesters, but for
every semester they had ever attended the school. This meant that students
who had been at the school for three years had to cough up US$900 or have
their studies terminated and get no credit.
The students, still hopeful that someone would honor their years at the
Institute of Social Work, faced their first major dilemma: challenge Kolbe by
not paying and, if they were wrong, lose the credits they had worked for; or
pay and keep hoping.
Twenty-nine of them challenged her. They didn’t pay. They wrote a
letter to the U.S. Embassy complaining that Kolbe had defrauded them.
The Embassy never responded to the students. But Kolbe did.
It was right about this point in ti me that another Balistra appeared. This
Balistra wasn’t Haitian. She was from Agua Caliente, Peru. Her name was
J ennifer and it just so happened that she was married to a member of the
U.S. fo reign service who worked at the U.S. Consulate in Haiti. Balistra
intervened. She sent an e-mail to Kolbe and her paitner in the school, Marie
Puccio. The message explained how Balistra’s husband had discussed the
sh1dent’s complaints with his fellow consulate officials. The officials had
assured Balistra’s husband that they knew all about Kolbe and ETS (the
Haiti acronym for the school), they had “a great impression of you, Marie,
Rob [Muggah], etc. and appreciate all the work you are doing in Haiti. They
have no negative views on you or on your work.” The consulate was also
aware of the “erratic behavior” of some students and if the students did not
get together and recant the accusations of their disgrun tied colleagues,
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 69
,-~J ‘t” …………… y-• .., ………. -~ .. -… … …. .. ……………. “‘ ………….. ……………. .. ………….. ………… ….. … ~ .. ………… _.. ….. ‘YJ’V’V
tuition. And they had to pay it, not only fo r the upcoming semesters, but for
every semester they had ever attended the school. This meant that students
who had been at the school for three years had to cough up US$900 or have
their studies terminated and get no credit.
123
tuition. And they had to pay it, not only for the upcoming semesters, but for
every semester they had ever attended the school. This meant that students
who had been at the school for three years had to cough up US$900 or have
I their studies terminated and get no credit.
124
The students, still hopeful that someone would honor their years at the
Institute of Social Work, faced their first major dilemma: challenge Kolbe by
not paying and, if they were wrong, lose the credits they had worked for; or
pay and keep hoping.
125 – – – – –
Twenty-nine of them challenged her. They didn·t pay. They wrote a
letter to the U.S. Embassy complaining that Kolbe had defrauded them.
126 –
letter to the U.S. Embassy complammg tllat Kolbe hact ctetrauctect them.
The Embassy ne\’er responded lo the students. But Kolbe did.
127
{H0470250.l)
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz
Page 70
128
(H0470250.l)
intervened. She sent an e-mail to Kolbe and her partner in the school, Marie
Puccio. The message explained how Balistra’s husband had discussed the
student’s complaints with his fellow consulate officials. The officials had
assured Balistrn’s husband that they knew all about Kolbe and ETS (the
Haiti acronym for the school), they had “a great impression of you, i\larie,
Rob [l\luggah] , etc. and appreciate all the work you are doing in Haiti. They
have no negative views on you or on your work.” The consulate was also
aware of the “erratic beha\ior” of some students and if the students did not
get together and recant the accusations of their disgruntled colleagues,
“students from ETS will likely not be able lo gel visas to the U.S. at all.”
Specifically, the person al the consulate explaining all this lo Balistra·s
husband concluded that, and this is all a direct quote from the letter:
… the only way for them lo resolve this would be lo send a
letter that clearly states:
The e-mail was sent in their name but was not autho1izcd by
them.
They don’t agree with the views expressed in the letter.
They arc not being exploited at ETS or by the ETS
administration.
Whatc\’er concerns they have about their social work education
can and are being resolved by the administration in
Haiti. That they recognize that all social work students have
problems with the unpaid internship requirements in social
work educa tion.
They are being treated with respect and are not accusing
anyone Athena, Marie or anyone else at ETS of lying to them
or abusing them. That they were not forced lo sign papers or
agreements by the ETS staff against their will.
That they are salisli ed with the progress being made lo gel
recognition from the Ministry of Education.
That they apologize for the unprofessional behavior of others
however, the other individuals listed on the c-rnail arc not
actually ETS students.
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tucke1man Schwartz
Page 71
That they apologize for the unprofessional behm·ior of others
however, the other individuals listed on the e-mail are not
actually ETS srudents.
That the individual or indh·iduals who sent the letter may
have other reasons to send it; that students are sometimes
upset when they obligated to lea,·e school for financial
reasons or for other reasons.
That they hope this does not tarnish the good reputation of
ETS and the faculty, staff, and students of ETS.
The letter was inadvertently circulated to the entire student body.[35.8] I [359] – – – . – … .. ..
Many of the students, fearing they would lose their college credits and
worse, be fo rever denied a visa to go to the U.S., did recant. But some of the
129
worse, be foreYer denied a visa to go to the U.S., did recant. But some of the
more clever studenl’> asked Kolbe/Duff if they could have a face to face
meeting with J ennifer Balistra. Kolbe told them Balistra was s ick. When
130
meetfog ~,ith J ennifer Balistra. Kolbe told tl1em Balistra was sick. When
they persisted, Kolbe told them that Balistra was in fact a paraplegic
introvert and couldn’t come to the school. Some oftl1e students then ,,·ent to
131
introvert and couldn’t come to the school. Some of the students then went to
Jennifer Balistra’s Facebook page where they found o,·er one hundred
pictures of themscl\’es-thc ETS students. There were no pictures of anyone
but ETS students. None of Peru or Jennifer’s family or friends. There were
not even a ny pictures of J ennifer Balistra herself. The only picture the
132 — — — – –
{H0470250.l}
I
I
I
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz
Page 72
133
134
(H0470250. l}
but E’J’S students. None ot Peru or Jenrnter s tam1ly or tnends. There were
not C\’en any pictures of J ennifer Balistra herself. The only picture the
students could find of Jennifer Balistra was on her Gmail account. In that
picture Jennifer appeared healthy and she had a young Peruvian-looking
child next to her. When one of the more tech-savvy students popped the
picture into Tineye-a photo search engine-the picture turned up on OYer
1,; sitPs. I t was :1 nonnPrl stiwk nhntn. Wlwn tlw sl11rlP11ts wPnl h:ick to
15 s ites. It was a cropped stock photo. When the s tudents went back to
Kolbe and said they didn’t believe that Balistra even existed, Balistra·s
Facebook and Google accounts were gone the next day, as were any mention
of hPr on ETS sitP.s. SnciJuly 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckennan Schwaitz
Page 73
135
136
(H0470250.1}
l HE GREAT HAITI HUMANITARIAN AID SWINDLE
ETS and the faculty, staff, and students of ETS.
The letter was inadvertently circulated to the entire student body.[35.8] [359.] Many of the students, fearing they would lose their college credits and
worse, be forever denied a visa to go to the U.S., did recant. But some of the
more clever students asked Kolbe/Duff if they could have a face to face
meeting with Jennifer Balistra. Kolbe told them Balistra was sick. When
they persisted, Kolbe told them that Balistra was in fact a paraplegic
introvert and couldn’t come to the school. Some of the students then went to
Jennifer Balistra’s Facebook page where they found over one hundred
pictures of themselves-tl1e ETS students. There were no pictures of anyone
but ETS students. None of Peru or J ennifer’s family or friends. There were
not even any pictures of Jennifer Balistra herself. The only picture the
students could find of Jennifer Balistra was on her Gmail account. In that
picture Jennifer appeared healthy and she had a young Peruvian-looking
child next to her. When one of the more tech-savvy students popped the
picture into Tineye- a photo search engine-the picture turned up on over
15 sites. It was a cropped stock photo. When the students went back to
Kolbe and said they didn’t believe that Balistra even existed, Balistra’s
Facebook and Google accounts were gone the next day, as were any mention
of her on ETS sites. Suddenly Balistra had never existed at all ( except for the
fact that much of these pages had been saved).
Apparently undaunted, but anticipating the eminent intervention of the
Haitian Ministry of Education-to whom the students had also been complaining-
Kolbe put together a board of American scholars and applied to
the Haitian Ministry of Education for a license. On the board was herself,
her partner, and several other the University of Michigan graduate students,
none of whom had a PhD at the time. Kolbe would soon learn that
foreigners could not get a license to open a private University in Haiti. Only
Haitian citizens could do that. And to open a University someone had to be
a PhD Being a graduate student was not enough. According to a U.S.
f acebook and Google accounts were gone the next clay, as were any menti on
of her on ETS sites. Suddenly Balistra had never exis ted at all (except for the
fact that much of these pages had been saved).
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 74
Apparently undaunted, but anticipating the eminent intervention of the
Haitian Ministry of Education-to whom the students had also been complaining-
Kolbe put together a board of American scholars and applied to
the Haitian :Ministry of Education for a license. On the board was herself,
1–. ,…..,. .,…,.,,’9″‘ … …,.,..H. n..-…-l …,.,…,u.-. ..,,..,1 r.. -1-h.-. …. +-1 … …,, TT….,,;, .. ,… ,~~;h, ,..+ 1\.f; .-.1..,;,…..,…., .,,.,~n.4.,1″‘½-n rh,rln.,–.-f.~
137
Apparently undaunted, but anticipating the eminent intervention of the
Haitian l\’Iin istry of Education-to whom the students had also been complaining-
Kolbe put together a board of American scholars and applied to
the Haitian Ministry of Education for a license. On the board was herself,
her partner, and several other the University of Michigan graduate students,
none of whom had a PhD at the time. Kolbe would soon learn that
138
the Haitian Ministry of Education for a license. On the board was herself,
her partner, and several other the University of Michigan graduate students,
none of whom had a PhD at the time. Kolbe would soon learn that
foreigners could not get a license to open a private University in Haiti. Only
Haitian citizens could do that. And to open a Universitv someone had to be
139
none ot w11om 11ae1 a l:’tUJ at tne ume. K.OIDe WOUid soon tearn tnar
foreigners could not get a license to open a private University in Haiti. Only
Haitian citizens could do that. And to open a University someone had to be
a PhD Being a graduate student was not enough. According to a U.S.
140
I a PhD Being a graduate student was not enough. According to a U.S.
– –
graduate student who worked with Kolbe, the next application was in the
name of a Haitian PhD, a woman who had the first and rather suspicious, if
humorous, name of Sophony (So-Phony).
141
Kolbe/ Duffs story would not be anything more than that of one more
foreign oppo1tunist cranking out shoddy data and preying on impoverished
I Haitians in a country where there are few enforced administrative laws, if it
142 … —
{H0470250.l}
I
I
I
.
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz
Page 75
sector and the United Nations security forces. She had hvicc claimed and
provided evidence for a Haitian rape epidemic more severe than any known
on earth at the time. She had brought those epidemics to life in a detailed
143
on earth at the time. She had brought lhose epidemics to life in a detailed
firsthand account of trying to help a rape victim for which she was not
present. She was also making a play to pos ition her School of Social Work
– –
144

present. She was also making a play to position her School of Social Work
(ETS) to the status of research gate keeper by means of a sitting ethical
review board over which she presided and lhat would give her the power to
filter the research of other scholars working in Haiti while approving
145
present. She was also making a play to position her School of Social Work
(ETS) to the status of research gate keeper by means of a sitting ethical
review board over which she presided and th at would give her the power to
filter the research of other scholars working in Haiti while approving
research fo r herself, at least some of which would never have been allowed
in the U.S. (such as the 2 0 06, 2009, and 2010 studies of rape). And perhaps
146
– ~- – – people or baiting them with sweetness and sympathy. She had accomplished
it by baiting them ,vith promises of original research and publications and
facilitating access to Haiti and to CV-buildjng experiences at a fake
University. She made a good first impression. But she had left in her wake
147
.J.&.1. -., \..1.l\.,l..l’I.A. 1..IVVV\.,1.11. \. VI. 1.l ) lllb 1,.V 11’-.I.P U 1. U J-.1….,_ ‘t l.’–‘ “‘-.l&ll. I. V I. ,, 1 J. 1 ‘-i .1. ..,I. J. .._, l t l.,.h ,J II VI.-
present. She was also making a play to position her School of Social Work
(ETS) to the status of research gate keeper by means of a s itting ethical
review board over which she pres ided and that would give her the power to
filter the research of other scholars working in Haiti while approving
research fo r herself, at least some of which would never have been allowed
in the U.S. (such as the 2006, 2009, and 2010 studies of rape). And perhaps
148 —–
(H0470250.1)
I
I
I
I
.
J
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwaiiz
Page 76
149
150
151
152
Endnotes
153
(H0470250.1}
scores of disgruntled Haitian students and staff, as well as foreign
researchers and graduate students, at least four of ,.vhom had written letters
of comolaint to the Universitv of Michigan School of Social Work. Chief
scores of disgruntled Haitian students and staff, as well as foreign
researchers and graduate s tudents, at least four of whom had written letters
of complaint to the University of Michigan School of Social Work. Chief
among their complaints was that Kolbe was lying to students, financially
exploiting them, and that the education they were getting was substandard.
None ever got a response. In 201s she was awarded her PhD from the
of complaint to the University of .Michigan School of Social Work. Chief
among their complaints was that Kolbe was lying to students, financially
exploiting them, and that the education they were getting was substandard.
of complaint to the University of Michigan School of Social Work. Chief
among their complaints was that Kolbe was lying to s tudents, financially
exploiting them, and that the education they were getting was substandard.
tru1 Obviously, how many rapes occm in any pmticulnr
country and over any particular period of time will depend
on how rape is defined. The definitions va ry widely. In
some countries penetration is necessary. In oth er countries
any forcible sex is considered rape. It is not clear how
Kolbe and Hutson defined rape. They did not say.
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 77
154
155
(H0470250.l)
~ The name of the Kolbe/ Hutson post-earthquake report
was “Assessing needs after the quake: Sexual \iolence,
property crime and property damage.” The full citation is,
Kolbe, A.R., Shannon, H., Levitz, N, Muggah, R., Hutson,
R.A., James, L., Puccio, M., Trzcinski, E., Noel, J .R., Miles,
B. (2010). “Assessing Needs After the Quake: Se:-..”Ual
Violence, Property Crime and Property Damage.” Geneva:
Small Arms Survey.
http://new-research.socia1work.wa}ne.edu/ index.php?
option=com_content &view=article&id=1712 :assessingneeds-
after-the-quake-sexual-violence-property-crimeand-
propertydamage&
catid=295:publications&ltemid=58A Study by
the University of 1Iichigan and the Small Arms
Survey
But elsewhere they published it as:
Kolbe, A.R., Hutson, R. A., Shannon, H.A., Trzcinski, E,
Miles, B., Le,itz, N., Puccio, M., James, L., Noel, J.R.,
.Muggah, R. (2010). “Mortality, crime and access to basic
needs before and after tl1e Haiti earthquake: a random
survey of Port-au-Prince households.” 1\!Iedicine, Conflict
E5l According to Kolbe et al 2011, .3 per cent of a general
population sample reported being a victim of se:\.”Ual
violence in the six weeks after the earthquake. ,vith all but
one case involving a female victims, this mean that it could
be extrapolated to infer that if it continued it would be an
annual rate of 7% of all women. (See: Kolbe, Athena R.,
Royce A. Hutson , Harry Shannon , Eileen Trzcinski, Bart
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 78
~ In the original draft of their study Muggah, Kolbe and
the other 6 University professors who co-authored the
156
ldl In the original draft of their study Muggah, Kolbe and l
the other 6 UniYersity professors who co-authored the
report put the number of people raped at 3 percent of
those sampled, 6% of females. The en-or ,vas corrected in I
the published version. j
157
comes from the past: of the 29 households where peop1e
reported son1e fan1ily n1en1ber had been assaulted, 5 of
the1n reported the smne thing in the survey four years
earlier.
158
But then, as discussed at length in Chapter 8, there is good
reason to belieYe the surve.v, never occurred .
See: Kolbe, Athena R., Royce A. Hutson , Harry Shannon ,
159
{H0470250.1}
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tucke1man Schwartz
Page 79
160
(H04702S0.1}
!.:U!.l At a certain point, seemingly fed up with the lack of
sympathy from the intenrntional community, Duff issued
what sounded like a threat that Aristide’s supporters were
now justified in launching violent reprisals entitling an
article, “\Ve \Von’t Be Peaceful and Let Them Kill Us Any
Longer” (Interview with Haitian Activist Rosean Baptiste,
interviewed by Lyn Duff, 4 November 2005).
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 80
161
{H0470250,l}
w lt seems rather bizarre that the British ‘vvere suddenly
battling each other over Haitian politics and reaching
across the Atlantic to menace American scholars who
didn’t agree with them. The last British ambassador to
Haiti, Gerard Corley-Smith, was expelled in 1962 because
he complained about treatment of foreign nationals. The
British ha\’e not seemed to care much about Haiti since.
Nor are there many Haitian immigrnnts in Britain. At the
time of the Lancet report there were 164 of them. It’s
unlikely that there is British immigrant in all of Haiti. And
the British government never reopened an embassy.
Today, Haiti doesn’t have an embassy in Britnin nnd
Britain does nol have one in Haiti. The Haiti Support
Group for which Arthur was associated is a non-partisan
British organization that supports civil sector
organizations and is itse1f supported by British NGOs like
OXFA.M1 Christian Aid and Amnesty International and
members. It has not taken sides with either the right or the
left: not in the near civil war that was brewing at the time,
nor in their presentation today of who did what and was
more at fault for Haiti’s nnderdeYelopment. Indeed,
putting aside Graham Greene’s noYel The Comedians, it
was probably the first time in at least 100 years that
anyone or anything British had been mixed up in Haiti
politics. It was all about an article \vritten in a medical
journal. Suddenly you had Brits making death threats and,
ostensibly, sending fake bombs and dead rats to the U.S.
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 81
162
163
{H0470250.1)
And they were sophisticated enough not to get caught by
Scotland Yard.
Lm.l In the subsequent surveys, that of 2009 and 2 010, the
10 authors claimed that “This study was approved by the
University of Michigan Institutional Review Board.” If it’s
true, shame on the University of Michigan. But it’s hard to
believe it could possibly true. More likely is that they told
the review board one thing and then did another.
Ul:1
In fact, Duff had resigned from KPFA in 1997. She claimed
in her resignation letter that managenrnnt had 1nistreated
her. Specifically, in a confrontation over the release of
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tucke1man Schwartz
Page 82
164
{H0470250.l)
an interesting commentary accusing the woman who had
pressured Duff and apparently fired her of exploiting the
fact that Duff had been ‘”tortured~, apparently a refenmce
to her shock treatments when institutionalized in Utah.
Here are the comments:
From: m … @netcom.com (~lark S. Bilk)
i\Iessage-Id: <.1997o41812 … @netcon112.netcom.com>
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 83
{H04702S0.l}
Subject: L)11 Duffs History and Resignation
To: progress … @tango.rahul.net
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 05:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
This is L)11 Duffs resignation letter. She was a reporter
with “Flashpoints” on KPFA.
Thanks for posting this, Lyn!
It is worthwhile to look up L)11 Duff in DejaNews and
Alta Vista.
For example, at this \Veb page 1s an interview she did
\\1th Jean-Bertrand Aristide:
http://www.pacificnews.org/yo/issnes/ 1996/6.2/ cluffaristide.
html, “This is the Family of God”: An Interview
with Jean-Bertrand Aristide by L)11 Duff
Regarding the reason she left KPF A, Lyn has described on
Flashpoints and on national TV, how, as a 15 (I think) year
old lesbian, she was kidnapped by thugs hired by her
parents, and imprisoned in a mental hospital in Utah
(ironically called Rivendell) run by extremely homophobic
Mormons.
She and hundreds of other homosexual kids \Vere variously
subjected to drugs, electroshock, solitary confinement for
days on end. sometimes in the dark, “four-point
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 84
{H0470250.l}
restraints” (hand cuffs and leg irons), “aversion
therapy>’ (being forced to breathe mnmonia while looking
at pictures of people of the same gender), and were held
down and sat on by strong adults and scremned at violently
for hours at a time. They were told that they were mentally
ill perverts and child-molesters and would never be able to
live happy lives unless they changed.
All this was done to the1n solely to force them to stop being
ho1nosexual, v,hich was the only reason they were put in
the facility. Of course it failed, and several of those who1n
Lyn knew personally c01n1nitted suicide as a result of this
treatlnent, which is *still* being used there on gay and
lesbian teenagers.
Lyn is in fact a survivor of prolonged torture, and has told
her story in public in various forums, including KPFA. It
seen1s extremely likely that (certainly by last Fa11) Alnina
Hassan knew Lyn’s history, and, consciously or
unconsciously, subjected her to the same kind of prolonged
authoritarian screa1ning, threats, and verbal degradation
that she knew L}n had experienced before, and that would
reawaken in her the sa1ne feelings of te1Tor.
This is unforgivable.
https://groups.google.c01n/fon1m/ # !
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 85
165
166
167
{H0470250.1}
‘:)/j/ ~VlU
mfil As if all this is not enough, the name Athena Kolbe also
just happens to be a combination of nomenclature for the
Greek goddess of wisdom, useful arts, and prudent
vvarfare-Athena- and the Catholic patron saint of
journalism-Saint Maximilian Kolbe.
!:.w.1 The exact hyphenated name that Duff claimed to ha\’e
been using is “Athena L)11 Duff-Kolbe.” But prior to 2006
that name ne\·er appears in any of her Haiti reports, nor
anywhere else.
~ I can only understand the reference to their “team of
North American researchers as a kind of self-promotion
and academic slight of my team. My team was composed of
me, a Haitian Ph.D. and one from Martinique. But for
those who care about degrees and pedigrees- I don’t- the
Haitian was Yves Francois who got his Ph.D. in Sociology
from Columbia UniYersity in NYC and from Martinique,
Eric Calpas, who got his Ph.D. in Sociology from Sorbonne
in Paris.
I
1
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 86
168
169
(H0470250.l}
wil As for why Kolbe had published Opinion pages of the
LA Times, of all places, as it turns out that editor of the LA
Opinion pages is none other than the husband of Amy
Wilentz, author of the Rainy Season, the major work
defending the rise of Aristide. \Vilentz and Lyn Duff were
both ad\’oca.te-journalists working \A.rith Aristide in the
mid-1990s. \Villentz was unhappy ,,rith the death toll
contro\’ersy and the negative impact that many thought it
had on Haiti recovery effort.
u.;,u To be exact, Duff/ Kolbe, speaks no French, a
smattering of Kreyol and she understands even less than
she speaks. I would estimate her Kreyol at the linguistic
capacity of a 3- year-old, an observation corroborated by
the many students I know who have worked with her and
by Glen Smucker, another U.S. Ph.D. fluent in Kreyol who
was baffled by how she has accomplished so much in Haiti
while so linguistically limited. Indeed, I was rather stunned
to learn this myself when I first met her. This is a person, a
scholar no less, who has been working and intermittently
lived in Haiti for 27 years. Yet, she is not functional in the
common language. Nor does she make any pretense
otherwise. She uses translators \Vith her students and she
does not participate in teaching Kreyol to foreigners in the
courses she offers. Indeed, to my knowledge Duff/ Kolbe
has ne\’er made an eff01i to systematically learn Kreyol or
French.
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz
Page 87
otherwise. She uses translators with her students and she
does not participate in teaching Kreyol to foreigners in the
courses she offers. Indeed, to my knowledge Duff/ Kolbe
170
to learn this myself when I first met her. This is a person, a
scholar no less, who has been working and intermittently
Ji,·ed in Haiti for 27 years. Yet, she is not functional in the
171
inconsistencies. Their WFP survey of Cash-for-\Nork
participant turned up only 3 of 51000 individuals in the
earthquake strike zone who had lost a fellow household
member in the earthquake. If they had used that as a
sample to estimate the number of people killed, they would
have 2:otten 0 .000 dead. That should have been enou2:h to
172
community and l 1 either remained silent on findings or,
I more often, accepted them. No one was \’etting the process.
No one \Vas questioning the findings. Perhaps they simply
assumed that being academics from no fewer than five U.S.
and Northen1 European institutions the co~authors of the
study must be credible.
173
(H0470250.1)
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 88
174
175
176
{H0470250.l)
Lli:l I know far more about Duff/ Kolbe’s work than fits
appropriately into the main te:xi. But it should be
documented somewhere, hence this endnote. I had in fact
worked with Duff/ Kolbe on the \t\TFP survey mentioned
earlier. After Muggah and Kolbe published the Op/Ed in
the LA Times criticizing me, Kolbe contacted me. I took the
opportunity to plug for the “vigorous discussion of
estimates” but she ,.,,·as evasive, promised to pursue the
issue with the other professors and never got back to me.
Not on that anyway. \Vhat she did was pay me to nm one
of the \VFP smYeys. In effect, they had slammed me and
my credibility in a major U.S. Newspaper and then called
and offered me S10,ooo cash to do a 1-week survey. At this
point I had been black-listed by USAID and vvas out of
work. I took the job. One of the first things I did was asked
earlier. After Mnggnh and Kolbe published the Op/ Ed in
the LJ\ Times criticizing me, Kolbe contacted me. I took the
the LA Times criticizing me, Kolbe contacted me. I took the
opportunity lo plug for the “vigorous discussion of
estimates” but she was evasive, promised to pmsue the
issue with the other professors and never got back to me.
Not on that anyway. \\That she did was pay me to run one
I
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 89
177
178
{H0470250.l}
work. I took the job. One of the first things I did was asked
to see the questionnaire they had already applied to 5,000
respondents. The questionnaire was incoherent, both
grammatically and linguistically. There was no way that a
Haiti speaker could have had any idea what they were
asking about. Roger Noel1 co-author or the earlier
1it:ichigan Study was responsible for the questionnaire.
vVhen I insisted I could not be associated lvith the survey
questionnaire and that my surveyors could not apply it,
Kolbe called Noel and told him to come back with his
surYey team to the United Nations log base in Port-au-
Prince. He subsequently had “car problems.” We wouldn’t
see him again for several months. This meant a lot of
things. This was November 2011, they’d already done
5,000 surveys, and the instrument is incoherent. This also
meant that Duff/ Kolbe who had been working in Haiti at
this point for 17 years, and doing surveys for 6 years, had
no idea what was on the survey instrument. She was not
literate in Kreyol and neither, apparently, was Noel ve1y
literate. That particular survey subsequently melted down
5,000 surveys, and the instrument is incoherent. This also
meant that Duff/ Kolbe who had been v,orking in Haiti at
this point for 17 years, and doing surveys for 6 years, had
no idea what was on the sur\’ey instrument. She was not
literate in Kreyol and neither, apparently, was Noel very
literate. That prui.icular survey subsequently melted down •
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 90
179
180
(H0470250,l)
literate. That particular survey subsequently melted down
when Duff/ Kolbe discovered a case of a World Vision
employee who had been using food to induce a 14-year old
girl to have sex with him. Suddenly the survey was not so
important. More pressing was the 14-year old, something,
whether true or not, Duff/ Kolbe recounted to me had
reduced the assistant WFP country director, Stephen
Kearney, to tears. \Vhatever the motivations behind the
discovery and the reactions, it was the type of development
we see oyer and o\·er in Kolbe’s history, an appeal to
emotional and politically charged events that dish·act
everyone from the credibility of research. One more thing
we see oYer and over in Kolbe’s history, an appeal to
emotional and politically charged events tlrnt distract
everyone from the credibility of research. One more thing
all this meant, apparently WFP had never had anyone
li terate check the survey instrument. Not before nor after
the surveys \\’ere done. Nor apparently, did they ever detect
that the questionnaire had been radically modified after I
was hired.
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 91
181
{H0470250.l)
literate. That paiticular survey subsequently melted dovvn
when Duff/ Kolbe discovered a case of a World Vision
employee who had been using food to induce a 14-year old
girl to lun-e sex ,1,,ith him. Suddenly the survey was not so
important. w1ore pressing was the 14-yenr old, something,
whether true or not, Duff/Kolbe recounted to me had
reduced the assistant \VFP count1y director, Stephen
Kearney, to tears. vVhateYer the motivations behind the
discovery and the reactions, it was the type of development
we see over and over in Kolbe’s hist01y, an appeal to
e111otional and politically charged events that distract
everyone from the credibility of research. One 1nore thing
all this meant, apparently vVFP had never had anyone
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 92
182
183
(H04702S0.1)
One interesting aside to all this is that while I \\·as basically
kept in the eaves, I became friendly at the time ½1th the
new WFP director responsible for surveys, Byron
Poncesegura, who had read and appreciated another book
I had written, Travesty i11 Haiti. At some point Royce
Hutson who was apparently a principal consultant flew to
Haiti to meet \vith \VFP about the surveys. But he never
met with Byron, who was furious about the incident, i.e.,
about being avoided. Nor did I get to meet Hutson. After
Hutson left mentioned that Hutson was so upset about the
surveys that he had hung up the telephone on her. Again, I
was nothing more than a very highly paid field di rector for
a very small part of the overall survey and I was largely
kept in the dark, but what all this suggested to me was that,
a) Hutson and the University professors must have realized
the survey was a mess, if not bogus, and b) \·VFP never
really followed up on anything to do with the survey, not
the data, nor the questionnaires. No even after Byron had
been shirked by the Principal Consultant.
!..h[} So not to overwhelm the reader, 1\·e omitted some facts
regarding Balistra. She first appeared as a new
administrator in e-mails to the students when Kolbe’s head
of staff-a 27-year-old high-school educated Haitian
woman- accused her of unwanted se~ual advances (from ——————– ———
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckennan Schwartz
Page 93
184
185
186
(H0470250.l}
ll:ifil So not to overwhelm the reader, J\·e omitted some facts
regarding Balistra. She fo·st appeared as a new
administrator in e-mails to the students when Kolbe’s head
of staff-a 27-year-old high-school educated Haitian
,..,·oman-accused her of unwanted se:\”llal advances (from
Ll’ifil So not to ovenvhelm the reader, J’ye omitted some facts
regarding Balistra. She first appeared as a new
administrator in e-mails to the students when Kolbe’s head
of staff- a 27-year-old high-school educated Haitian
woman- accused her of unwanted sexual advances (from
Kolbe). Sti11 thinking the school was somehow more than
Kolbe’s own concoction, the woman complained to a US
Doctoral student from the University of Michigan and
newly signed on administrator for ETS. Balistra introduced
herself in an e-mail to the U.S. doctoral sh1dent:
From: Jennifer Balistra[mailto:balistra.jennifer.ets@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 11:41 A.11
Llld But through ber position as ostensibly longstanding
e1ninent scholarly authority on Haiti and chancellor of ETS
she cowed the foreign academics. Her apparent supp01t
frorn the University and her seem mg omniscient
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 94
187
188
{H0470250.l)
From: J ennifer Balistra
<balistra.jennifer.ets@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Sep 2 1, 2014 at 3:17 PM
Subject: LO “;sa situation
To: Athena Kolbe <kolbe.athenn.ets@gmail.com>, Marie
Puccio <puccio.marie.ets@gmail.com> Good afternoon. Sorry for the delny in responding and for
calling you ten times like a stalker this morning.
As I said earlier, I asked my husband to intervene
regarding the LO visa situation …..
I spoke t11is morning with Suzanne who explained a few
things:
1) The embassy in PAP as a great impression of you, Marie,
Rob, etc. and appreciate all the \York you are doing in
Haiti. They have no negative vie..,vs on you or on your work.
2) ETS has developed a poor reputation at the consulate
because of the erratic behavior of your students, the
constant e-mails and phone calls from students claiming to
U2!ll But through her p os1t1on as ostensibly longstanding
eminent scholarly authority on Haiti and chancellor of EIS
she cowed the foreign academics. Her apparent support
from the Unh·ersity and her see111mg omniscient
The students had complained. Graduate students had
complained. Many had written to University of Michigan
July 24, 2017
Timothy Tuckerman Schwartz
Page 95
189
190
191
(H0470250.l}
and gotten no response. Not even remotely fluent in
Haitian Kreyol1 she none the less became an expert on
and gotten no response. Not even remotely fluent in
Haitian Kreyol, she none the less becan1e an expert on
Haitian securitv and crime. Even the United Nations
Intelligence agency was listening to her and follmving her
research. And she weighed 111 on in a ½1.ldly
disproportionate degree of subjects as far afield from her
mvn supposed e.\.-pertise as food security. Indeed, she
would weigh in at critical moments \vith supposedly valid
survey data- that was never vetted-to encourage a
flooding of Haiti with food aid in 2012, something

1
From: Timothy T Schwartz, 7/31/2017, 4:05 pm. EST.
This document contains point by point response to a demand for retraction made ostensibly by
Athena Kolbe’s lawyer.
I begin with the introductory letter f rom Patricia A Stam/er, the lawyer:
Bradley J. Schrom
Howard Herl2
Victor M. Norris
Rooer1 1>. Geller
Sieve J. Weiss ‘
Woller J. PiSZCLOIOwski
Jeffrey A. Robbins ‘
Kcnnclh r. Silver
Richard H. Schl~s
Gerold P. Covellier
Michclel J. Rex
• Eva T. Canlcrello
Lisa M. Kovolhuno ‘
s 1even P. Jen<ins
Polric:io A. Slomler
Alexander Slollond ‘
Lisa o. Siem
Elizabeth C. Thomson
GoryM. Remer·
Lourie 5. Raab
Doniel W. Rucker
Jon M. Colvert
Joseph A. llellanco
MOllhew J. Turchyn
Delio A. Miller
Fallon YOldo
Amcrique Pliilyow
Dear Dr. Schwartz:
HERTZSCHRAMPC
www.herlzschrorn.com
p,mmle1@hem…-l1r.1n1.con1
July 24, 2017
VIA U.S. MAIL & EMAIL:
schwaitz833@yahoo.com
timotuck@gmail.com
•)0rlh:
(man c.orlor~
1160 s. felegropr Rd
Suite 30C
Bloomfield Hills. Ml 4830.:
ph: 248.335.500C
fox: 248.335.334<‘:
downlown
Chrysler t louse
719 Griswold SI.
Suilo 820 12E
DelrOil. Ml 4822(:
ph: 313.438.5001
fox: 313A38.5002
Of Counse
Richard S. Vic i~
Judge Edward Sosnick ,~ET I
1 >,tio Me-nbe, oi ~to t. o.c. f’Of!
:A~~~,to,uffu.!~
‘Aho C P;. ono ll ,~ ir r,, ,011U1
‘ lo iQM(rnt)vr c,t(.)h,o~
I have been retained by Dr. Athena Kolbe lo address the numerous defamatory statements
contained in your book entitled The Great Haiti Humanitarian Aid Swindle, recently published by
CreatcSpace Independent Publishing (an Amazon.com company) and distributed in e-book form
by Amazon Digita l Services LLC and in hard copy form by Amazon.com, Inc.
It is astonishing that you wrote and then published a book replete with egregious
defamatory content. The various libelous statements are addressed as they appear in your
publication. I J,avc a,motated the relevant portions of your book, enclosed herein. The numbers
below correspond to the numbers I have placed next to scans of your publ ication in the enclosed
annex.
2
In the text below, I have cut and pasted the Lawyer/Kolbe’s commentary and then, in italicized
script, I respond to the points. But first I begin with a summary overview of my opinion
regarding their accusations
Summary Overview
In attempting to expedite an understanding of this conflict I would like to begin by pointing out
that 90% or more of Kolbe’s points have nothing to do with defamation and should not concern
a court. Here is the logic,
First, there are many issues revolving around academic debate. One academic trying to punish
another academic for engaging in a debate over the merits of data and methodologies and
questionable findings has no place in the courts.
Second, there are extensive complaints from Kolbe that I did not accurately recount her personal
history. I’m of the opinion that this is irrelevant as well. My logic is that Athena Kolbe, also
known as Lyn Duff, is a public personality. She claims to have been on Orpah Winfrey twice, to
have been the inspiration for a movie, she’s in books, there are Wikipedia entries for both
Duff/Kolbe personalities. She has a conspicuous online presence as both Lyn Duff and Athena
Kolbe. She is a public person and appears to have made a concerted effort since early
adolescence to be so. I built my profile of her based mostly on those online accounts accessible
to me and the average internet user. I also built it on actually knowing and talking to her. In
effect, I tried to confirm her accounts with what I found online. I’m careful to cite the sources– if
not in the main text then in the footnotes– and to point out the difference between what she
told me and what came from online sources. And I don’t think I in any way malign her in
recounting her biography, particularly her early history. The only negative point I make is that I
couldn’t find any credible online sources to corroborate details. And I couldn’t. And that seems
rather suspicious. And given what has been published and what I discovered about her more
recent past, I argue that I’m justified in being suspicious. She has responded to that with an
extensive list of publications and public appearances she made as an adolescent. If that’s the
case, if she is such a high profile personality and its widely public, that makes my
characterization of her early years based on the available online sources I found irrelevant.
Moreover, her early history is a very minor point, not a major part of the presentation.
Third, Kolbe is especially adamant that I have provided inaccurate accounts of a political
controversy in Haiti at which she was at the center. This occurred when she was a young adult.
But once again, I got all significant information about that controversy and her role from
published accounts available online, all of which are duly referenced. She appears to be seeking
grievance against me for all the accusations that were launched at her during what was a highly
explosive political issue, one the then president of Haiti publicly commented in the Miami Herald
and accused Duff/Kolbe of hiding her identity, falsifying data in favor of his political opponent.
In effect, I do not believe that anyone can hold me accountable for recounting the controversy.
3
Finally, the main issue seems to me to be about a school she has launched in Haiti and her
behavior in recruiting students for that school and in stifling any criticism from students. She
claims it is a “University.” In the book I wrote—that contains chapters Kolbe is demanding I
retract– I document how the school has no approval from the state, nor license, how she
implied and represented it as an internationally recognized degree granting program, how
students have accused her of extorting them, creating false internet accounts and fictitious
administrators, one a family of a US consulate official who threatened to prevent student who
opposed her from ever obtaining visas to the US. And yes, this “may” indeed be “criminal”
behavior. It seems to me that this is the crux of the issue and I would encourage whoever reads
this to take the accusations with the utmost seriousness. We are talking about lower income
youth in Haiti, one of the poorest countries in the world. They earnestly believe, and provided
me with overwhelming evidence that they were duped and conned, misled to believe they were
attending an international accredited University for which many worked for free
(“scholarships”) in hopes of getting internationally recognized diplomas. Data on the
“University” web sites and given to me by US graduate students who came to help teach at the
University corroborate the claims, as does Kolbes plea online for support for “scholarships.”
This is no small matter. Many of these students feel cheated out of precious and scarce tuition
money and they feel cheated out of years of their youth. Some of them studied, paid and
worked scholarships for three years before they realized they were attending a bogus
institution. In seeking to redress their grievances, they were unable to get assistance or support
from the essentially inert post-earthquake Haitian legal system, nor from US Embassy or Kolbe’s
Alma Mater, the University of Michigan. The only hope they have stop the type of exploitation
they believe Kolbe and people like her are carrying out in Haiti is to tell their story. And so they
did tell their story, to me. And they brought me abundant and overwhelming evidence that their
story is accurate and correct, including emails messages. And as mentioned, it is corroborated
by online claims from the School, from Kolbe herself, as well as my own personal experiences
working with the school at its inception. All is carefully documented in the book, additional
detail is provided below, and additional documentation can and will be provided if and when
necessary.
I would also encourage whoever reads this to first consult the original manuscript, a chapter
written largely about Athena Kolbe. The chapter is better organized and better referenced than
the current document. It will inform the reader of the primary issues discussed in this document.
(note that in the chapter all references, emails, and other are in the endnotes)
One final point here, regarding Kolbe’s “University” in Haiti and misleading students: in addition
to email correspondences, letters and webpages—most of which are referenced in the book–
we can provide abundant signed statements from students and staff regarding actions Kolbe
took, threats, sources of emails, probable invention of a consulate official who did not exist, a
school official who did not exist….. And while we cannot bring the students to Michigan or
Florida or wherever– as most do not have visas– there are currently 4 former School
4
administrators/associates, all fluent in English, who have visas, and who have expressed interest
in testifying to the accuracy of accounts in the book and points made above regarding Kolbe.
Kolbe reports in the referenced publication that she was Wayne State graduate student when
she undertook the study. If she was no longer a student of Wayne State University when she
published in 2006 that seems an insignificant point. It does not impugn her reputation one way
or the other. And the mistake on dates is reasonable.
The explanation and data are in the chapter. And I’m not really saying it. I’m only reporting on
the controversy. It was major controversy. There is a published letter from a former President of
Haiti condemning Kolbe and Hutsons’ study, declaring it discredited. Have you asked him for a
retraction? He and other people of notable reputation and stature—good and bad, depending
on your politics– called the study bogus, part of a well financed Artistide campaign… And I fail
to see what this has to do with defamation. These are academic and political issues that have
nothing to do with defamation. Indeed, attempts to put these points into a claim for defamation
quite an insult to freedom of speech, frivolous, indicates a very poor understanding of obvious
rights or, at best, and attempt to SLAP. A waste of my time and that of any legal authority who
might see this.
Once again this is part of the controversy I was recounting. It was all over the press. The plaintiff
was a practicing activist- journalist under one name and then started publishing on the same
political issues but as a scholar and under a different name. The suggestion to many observers—
Chapter 8 – The Rape Epidemic
I. You incorrectly state that Hin 2006 Wayne State University graduate student Athena
Kolbe .. . ” . Dr. Kolbe was not a graduate student when this was published. At this
point in ti rue she had already completed her second Ma.stcr’s Degree.
2. You baselessly claim Dr. Kolbe’s ‘”findings were radically bjased in favor o[
Aristide:· This is not accurate. The findings in thjs study were :10t biased in favor
or against former President Jean Be1trand Aristide or his supporters. ln fact, as you
know, the study did not measure any violence or human rights violations which
took place during President Aristide’s tenure, but began after he was deposed in
2004.
3. Here you make one of many false assertions that Dr. Kolbe changed her name. Dr.
Kolbe did not change her name to Athena Kolbe. This was the name given to her
at birth and it appears on her birth certificate.
5
including the president of Haiti– was that she was attempting to fraudulently influence Haitian
politics. References are in the chapter. I can send you many more if you’re interested. Or you
could just do an internet search. And once again these are academic issues. I fail to see how
reporting on the controversy had anything to do with defamation.
One more time, that was the controversy. She was being accused of just that, manipulating
data, lying…. Even the president of Haiti was weighing in on it. Just take 30 seconds and Google
it. And indeed, it is all highly suggestive that indeed made up data. But at this point in the text
I’m impartial about it. I’m only reporting on the controversy. Where these issues become
important to me, or where I add new data is at the later part of the chapter when I discuss her
school. For that I report claims from the students, claims from the school website, emails… The
relationship between these earlier controversies and what I write about later is that we see this
apparent pattern of deceit and exploitation of social media repeated over and over with
additional studies, data and articles she went on to publish.
I never said she was a criminal. What I say is that the evidence suggests that she may have
engaged in criminal behavior. That possibly includes making up data, but I certainly includes
knowingly misleading Haitian students into thinking they were getting an internationally
accredited education, inventing administrators and facebook pages to intimidate the students,
fabricating emails and information from the US Embassy. All this is well documented and we are
confident that we have the forensic digital evidence. It will be provided when legally required.
Across the top of the academic article is written “University of Michigan/Small Arms Study. And
once again, I fail to see what this has to do with defamation. This is nitpicking. It’s academic.
4. Dr. Kolbe has not l ied about, manipulated, or exaggerated data, nor is she •’inclined”
to do so. Your accusation is baseless.
5. Dr. Kolbe is not now a11d never has been a criminal. She has never been arrested or
charged with a crime and she has not committed any crime:s. These :slatements are
defamalion, per se.
6. Dr. Kolbe has never conducted a research study or been affiliated with a project
titled “The University of Michigan Survey.”
7. Again, you falsely state that Dr. Kolbe changed her name to Athena Koibe. See /./3
above.
6
Well, I’m not sure what hairs are being spliced here. She in fact told me that she did change her
name. I don’t know if it’s true, but she told me she legally changed her name. But that’s not the
point here. Once again, I’m reporting a widely published controversy. I’m getting data from the
internet and articles. Did everyone who published on this issue have to retract their statements?
Did she prove to them and publish a declaration and evidence that she had not changed her
name? If so, I did not find that online, not in newspaper articles or even interviews with her. And
the bottom line here, she was using two different names. She was not just publishing as a
journalist under the name Lyn Duff, and then became a scholar as Athena Kolbe. But we’re not
talking simply pen name. Prior to 2006 everyone in Haiti—including President Aristide—knew
her as Lyn Duff. That was her personal name. But then she became Athena Kolbe, the scholar.
And she did not declare different name. She changed her name in her personal life as well… So it
appears that for a while she was actually trying to be two people. Can a person have two
names? I don’t know if that’s legal, but it’s certainly suggestive of deception. My 11 year old
can figure that out. And there is no evidence that is public, online, that she had ever used the
name Athena Kolbe prior to the mentioned and highly controversial study.
Once again, this is an academic issue. Are you guys threatening to sue me for making an
academic argument or defamation? I’m trying to imagine scholars suing one another for
making academic arguments. It would be the end of the academy. But I do find it interesting
and telling that the writer is trying use this venue to squelch any criticism at all of anything
negative that has been said or written about her. This is clearly about much more than
accusation of defamation and these types of attacks/defenses seem to me powerful
corroboration of the behavior I describe in the book.
8. You wrongly claim that the “only evidence>’ of a “true rape epidemic” was
produced by Dr. Kolbe. This is not true. Her research was not the only evidence of
high numbers of sexual assaults after the 2004 coup. You know that you previously
discussed with Dr. Kolbe that evidence of high rates of assault was also found by
others, both before and after the study you reference by Drs. Kolbe and Hutson.
Their study was published in the Lancet in 2006. Other evidence for an increase in
sexual assaults came from journalists, the United Nations, international
organizalions, in peer-reviewed academic journal articles by scholarly researchers
(both Haitian a11d foreign), and the Haitian government.
7
Ditto. Google it. Kolbe herself talks about how she got death threats, dead rat in the mail.
Hutson got a fake bomb. The president of Haiti was complaining in the press about her… All
this is documented in the chapter. And really, it’s very hard to take this sort of points seriously.
She was very much ensconced in politics. She had been close to the deposed president. She is
quoted talking about it. I quote her in chapter. She went on Pacifica radio half a dozen times
with highly charged political reports about attacks on the press, death squads, campaigns of
political rape. All this is well documented. Whether or not Kolbe/deliberately engaged in
manipulation of data for political reasons, I can’t and don’t say for sure. What I say is that it
sure looked like it. And plenty of other people thought so. And once again, these are academic
issues and political commentary that should have nothing to do with defamation.
Kolbe and Hutson did a study of rapes over 22 months between 2004 and 2006. I did the math
and turned those calculations into annual indices of rapes per 100,000 population. It’s math and
it’s a normal thing to do. I did that so that I could compare for the reader the rates she and
Hutson came up with for Port-au-Prince to international rates to show how absurdly high those
rates were. They were higher than the highest rates in the world. I’m rather surprised the writer
doesn’t get that or see why that would be useful. In any case, once again, these points are
academic and seem to me to have nothing to do with defamation.
9. You continue your false presentation of Dr. Kolbe by claiming 1hat she is or was
‘”ensconced in local politics.” Although she does vote in local elections in ~he
United States, Dr. Kolbe is not now and never has been i11volved or ”ensconced” in
local poliLics, eiLher in Haiti or at home.
10. Ors. Kolbe and Huston have never conducted a survey which asked about rapes
only committed in 2004 nor wl11ch tound that :.w percent of respondents had been
raped in both 2004 and another year. Drs. Kolbe and Hutson have never coauthored
a research study which disaggregates rapes by year. Your statements are
false.
8
“Deceptively”? Is that the correct word? This is very good point and it really does not have
anything to do with the data. It has to do with the history of rape in Haiti, US government
subsidies to rape victims that created an inclination for potential beneficiaries to lie about being
raped. I devote a great deal of attention to this issue and it has nothing to with Kolbe and
Hutson or defamation. Read the chapters. It’s all in there. All well documented.
As for the rest of the complaint (second paragraph), I never said they forced anyone to respond
questions. That’s an odd thing for the writer to claim. Seems to me there is some kind of
misreading of the text. I did however go on to point out that it was dangerous and not in the
interest of victims to ask them about rape and who raped them when in fact, as the authors
claim, many had been raped by authorities or paramilitaries who were still in power. This is a
painfully obvious point. To conduct a major survey like this, going into neighborhoods and
interviewing victims while their assailants govern them puts those people in danger. I do surveys
for academics and aid organizations all the time, some of those surveys are on crime and I know
that most academics are sensitive to the safety of respondents and ta that it would be
considered egregiously unethical to put them in this kind of danger. I’ve also discussed this very
issue and what Kolbe and Hutson did and it’s appalling. In fact, it was the Haiti director of a
major NGO who first brought the to my attention. She was aghast that they had done this. But
once again, its very difficult for me to see what this has to do with defamation.
This is yet another rather insignificant point that seems to me has nothing to do with
defamation. But to clarify anyway, there were nine people listed as authors. Eight of them are
associated with Universities. Kolbe was a PhD candidate. That leaves seven. Puccio too was a
11. You deceptive ly state th c. t there is a ·’huge questio n” over Ur. Kolbe’s data that you
fo rth er daim she and Dr. Hutson ·’and everyone else” ignored. You then d escribe a
common form of potentj a\ bias in survey research related to reliance on respondent
rcpo11. As Drs. Kolbe and Bulson pointed ou t in their paper, relying on respondent
rl:port is a lways a limitatio n of any survey. wh ic h is we ll kn own in acade mi a.
Contrary to your statement tha t the potential bi as of rcs pomknt report was igno red,
it was clearly di sc ussed by Drs. Kolbe and H ut so n as a l imitati on in the aiticle about
this survey t hat you cited. Drs. Ko lbe and Hutson did not force responrlcnts to
prov ide evidence of th e sexual assalilt they reported. This is standard, as was their
discuss ion ofrespondcnt report as a li mitation . While :h is may be a “huge 4uestion”
1c you, it is not something that Ors. Kolbe and Hutson have ignored, nor is this fo rm
of potenti al bias in survey research something that scholars would consider reason
tu summarily dismiss findings of a research study, us you have advocated .
12. You wrongly write that Dr. Kolbe and “s ix oth:.:r University [sic] professors” w ho
worked on the 2010 post-quake study were professors . Dr . Kolbe was not a
professo r at the t ime and not everyone w ho worked on this project was a pro fesso r,
uur Jiu they claim to be.
9
PhD Candidate. That leaves 6. If all six are not professors, then ok, it’s not perfect. But
interestingly, on the article there is a listing of all 8 authors, all have Universities associated with
their names, suggesting that the intention was to imply to unwary reader that they were in fact
professors, thereby raising the esteem of the authorship. Below is the author ship listed at the
head of the article.
Athena R Kolbe (University of Michigan), Robert Muggah (Small Arms Survey), Royce A. Hutson (Wayne
State University), Leah James (University of Michigan), Marie Puccio (University of Michigan), Elieen
Trzcinski (Wayne State University), Harry Shannon (McMaster University), Naomi Levitz (Wayne State
University), Roger Jean Noel (MABO Children’s Home, Bon Repos)
The only one who speaks Creole is Roger Noel. He’s Haitian. To my knowledge he has not
education beyond highschool, if that. He was responsible for the incoherent questionnaire I
discuss elsewhere. As for Kolbe’s Creole competence, I just assumed she spoke Creole. She
claimed to have been working in Haiti since 1994. She spent 3.5 years at an orphanage. But she
rarely spoke Creole in front of me or anyone else I know and when she did it was was short, like
ordering food. She teaches in English with a translator… The first time I realized she was
functionally incapable of speaking the language was when she was talking to a maid. That was
sometime in 2012. She could not intelligibly pronounce nor string a sentence together. The maid
had no idea what she was talking about… In any case, this is an insignificant point. If it needs
confirmation, students and faculty from her supposed University corroborate this. I can supply
signed statements from them. We were all somewhat puzzled by it.
And to be exact, this is what I say about her Creole capacity at the time,
To be exact, Duff/Kolbe, speaks no French, a smattering of Kreyol and she understands
even less than she speaks. I would estimate her Kreyol at the linguistic capacity of a 3-
year-old, an observation corroborated by the many students I know who have worked
with her and by Glen Smucker, another U.S. Ph.D. fluent in Kreyol who was baffled by
how she has accomplished so much in Haiti while so linguistically limited. Indeed, I was
rather stunned to learn this myself when I first met her. This is a person, a scholar no
less, who has been working and intermittently lived in Haiti for 27 years. Yet, she is not
functional in the common language. Nor does she make any pretense otherwise. She
uses translators with her students and she does not participate in teaching Kreyol to
foreigners in the courses she offers. Indeed, to my knowledge Duff/Kolbe has never made
an effort to systematically learn Kreyol or French. (page 453)
13. You inacc urately wr ite that none o f t hose researchers, other than presumab ly D r.
Ko lbe, had –any p 1for exp e rien ce s tudy in g or re searching JJa it i.” Thi s is not true.
10
I have absolutely no recollection of any of this. I would like to see the documentation. If it did
occur, I was not the one to apply the test. I could not know whether Kolbe took years of French
instruction unless she provided documentation. I certainly did not test her. As I mentioned, I
would come to learn through interacting with her, seeing and listening to her interact with
Haitians that she was functionally not capable of communicating at a level above that of a 3
year old. And in my opinion, yes, that means you do not speak the language. Once again, this
came as surprise to me because I assumed she was fluent based on her claimed and reported
experience in the country, supposedly working and living there intermittently since 1994. It is
also a source of ongoing consternation for those Haitians who have to deal with her. So if I ever
14. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe docs not speak French or Creole. However, this is
not lrue, and you have previously affirmed that Dr. Kolbe is fluent in Haitian Creole
and you have previously stated that you are unable to assess her French language
skills.
On November 3, 2011. you completed an external language assessment of Dr.
Kolbc’s written, spoken, and oral comprehension skills in Haitian Creole. You did
this for the Social Science Research Counsel as pan of her application for a
graduate fellowship. On this signed form, you identified yourself as “Timothy T.
Schwartz, PhD – schwartz833@yahoo.com … Anthropology Fellow at Museo de
Hombre. Dominican RepLtblic.” You then go on to describe your experience in
Haitian Creole and to state that you are qualified to assess Dr. Kolbe’s language
skills in Haitian Creole. On this form , you certified that Dr. Kolbe was “highly
proficient” in Haitian CreoJe.
On this form. you forther stated that although Dr. Kolbe had provided evidence of
four yeaJs of French instruction and has “intermediate” fluency according to a
written onlinc French language examination, that y OLL, Timothy Schwartz, are
unable to assess Dr. Kolbe’s Ftcnch language skills because you do not speak
or understand the l<“rench lan guage.
In March 2012, you completed a similar language evaluation for another fellowship
where you stated that Dr. Kolbe has professional working fluency in Haitian Creole.
ln your attached letter for this evaluation you stated that Dr. Kolbe has a “working
knowledge” of “French (reading)” and ” inlermediate” “French (oral
comprehension)” skills.
Fmther, in a skype conversation with a third person doing research in Haiti, in June
2012. you stated that Dr. Ko lhe is “surprisingly fluent” in Creole and that though
she would not be able to do simultaneous tTanslation for this this third person, you
said Dr. Kolbe “speak[s] enough [Creole] to help [th.is person] get [their work] done: ‘
11
said that she was “surprisingly fluent” I was “surprisingly mistaken.” And regarding her literacy,
she was totally illiterate in Creole, as attested by the experience with the WFP questionnaire. It
was one of the early flags regarding her patterns of deception. She had sent surveyors out to do
5,000 interviews with an incoherent questionnaire. Elsewhere in these pages she admits that
happened but she says it was questionnaire that had mistakenly gotten into a pile. How an
incoherent questionnaire gets reprinted hundreds of times and given to surveyors who are then
sent to the field, I don’t know. Does not seem plausible. I think she’s tripped herself up on that
one. And again, with all the supposed time and experience in Haiti and given that she is an
academic, she should have mastered the language long ago. I can provide ample testimony
from Haitian students and US graduate students.
I don’t know where this comes from. At the outset of the chapter it states very clearly that she
claimed to have lived on and off in the orphanage for 3.5 years. If somewhere it says “12 years”
it’s a typo. Here’s what I say in the very first paragraph of the chapter,
While working on creating the radio station, Duff lived in a Port-au-Prince orphanage
owned by then President Jean Bertrand Aristide, newly returned from exile. Duff would
live in the orphanage and help with the children for the next three and a half years.
(page 237)
This is another academic point that should have nothing to do with defamation. I painstakingly
document the history of rape accusations in the book. And regarding Kolbe, she had made
similar “findings” as far back as 2006. She had also published about it as a journalist under the
name of Lyn Duff.
15. Dr. Kolbe did not ”live wilh orplmns” for 12 years in Haili. She worked with street
children, not orphans, and that was only for the first ~hree years that she was in
1 Tai ti.
16. Here you wrongly claim that Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues “jumped on the rape
bandwagon”. However, looking at. the dates of the research studies in question, this
is not possible. The study to which you were referring was conducted, but not
published, bafore the reports of sex ual assault were publicized. Dr. Kolbe and her
colleagues independently found the same thing that journalists and other
researchers also found.
12
I did not say they did not conduct it. I said they may never have conducted it. And I give a lot of
very good reasons to believe they may not have. Including the impossibility of conducting a
survey in 2 weeks time, six weeks after the Haiti earthquake, when some 20% of the respondent
were not even in Haiti, and some 50% were in the countryside or encampments. Yes, very
suspicious. I can provide correspondence from Columbia University Professor and recognized
world authority on disasters who also finds it suspicious. And the results were absurd. This is all
in the chapter and documented. And ultimately, I never said they did not conduct the survey.
And elsewhere I say very clearly that they may simply be accepting data from surveyors who did
not do their jobs. I say this in several places. And I point this out in endnotes. And Kolbe herself
told me that one of the people who hired her for the survey had incidentally caught a surveyor
filling out questionnaires in a tent, alone, with a beer in his hand. They were not even trying to
catch him. What would have happened if they checked on the others? And I know from having
worked with Kolbe that in at least one major WFP survey they had done 5,000 surveys with an
incoherent questionnaire mentioned earlier. I had just been hired. Her survey supervisor left
with a team and several hundred questionnaires. I pulled one out of the box after he left and
was appalled to see that it made absolutely no sense in Creole. It would not even have been a
good first draft. Someone barely literate had tried to write a questionnaire. Again, this is after
they had conducted 5,000 surveys. Kolbe could provide no explanation She was embarrassed.
We recalled the team that had left—they did not want to come back. Meanwhile, I took the
survey instrument home and spent the night fixing it with my team. That in itself suggested they
had never done the survey. And I know from her survey employees that she has never vetted or
checked on data. No follow up. I could go one and on. If we go to full disclosure I can almost
certainly supply statements from surveyors to this effect, including those who helped me correct
the mentioned survey questionnaire. But in the end, it should not be necessary because the
findings from the data make no sense (I detail that in the chapter), and, I did not state factually
that she lied or invented those surveys, but that she may have and that the data and
impossibility of the logistics suggest so.
17. You false ly clajm that Dr. Kolhe and her colleagues did hot conduct the survey that
they conducted. This is a lie. The study was fielded and the find ings analyzed and
reported, as has been described by authors in numerous reports. Hard copy and
electronic files of all completed study instruments are on file with the University,
should this matter be litigated.
13
Once again, I did the math and turned the rate they estimated in the 6 weeks after the
earthquake into an annual rate. If I did not do that, the rate has no reference, it’s just a number.
But turning it into an annual rate allows us to compare it to rates all over the world. We can
understand just what it means to us, just how bad was it. That’s defamatory? I would add that,
once again, these are academic issues. To my knowledge no scholar ever has or ever would or
ever could sue another scholar because they called into questions their findings and
methodologies.
I could offer an extensive response to this but it simply has nothing to do with defamation. I can
not imagine a court caring about our survey methodologies.
Academic and amply documented.
18. Herc you mischaracterize the study you seek lo cnt1c1ze. Dr. Kolbe and her
colleagues conducted a study of a six-week period, during which there was crisis
and displacement. This is not the same as doing a national study to estimate an
annual rate of sexual assault, which is what you arc inaccurately claiming by saying
that Dr. Kolbe and colleagues estimated ”7% of al I women annually” were raped.
This study by Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues is not one which can be used lo calculate
national annual rates of any particular crime nor should it be used lo do so. Their
study was geographically limited to the areas they surveyed and did not include a
population sample which was nationally representative. Your statements are a gross
mischaracterization of their research fi ndings.
19. In this section, you misstate both the sh 1dy rnethodology and lielding. The study
methods and fielding procedures were d early explained in various repo1is which
you lrnve cited and used e lsewhere. Your misrepresentation here, in an attempt to
bolster your argument, can only be see:, as intentionally di shonest.
20. You wrongly accuse Dr. Kolbe of reporting “suspicious” research findings.
Hovvever, it is false to claim Dr. Kolbe’s findings are suspicious.
14
Amply documented and a reasonable inference given the school she founded and controlled has
no recognition, implies on the website that it is international, that “someone” at the school
invented people who apparently do not exist , overwhelming evidence for all this, including
emails, internet statements, accusations from Haitian and US students, accusations from her
staff.. See the chapter and below notes
This is academic argument, not defamation. And no, there is no evidence that there were
250,000 street children in Port-au-Prince, not now and not in the 1990s. The figure is probably
closer to 10,000. Nor was “Dr Kolbe” a doctor at the time. Nor was she a recognized expert in
statistics on street children. And really, “Dr. Kolbe” is going to sue me for taking issue with her
claim that there were 250,000 street children.
That’s what I gleaned from conversations with her and from her online biographies and
Wikipedia (which in these pages and accusations she admits to be aware of and hence should be
accurate). It’s documented. And I hardly see what this has to do with defamation.
Chapter 9 – ·’Politics of Data: Tbe Pretender”
21. The chapter title uses the tenn “The Pretender.” The chapter is about Dr. Kolbe. Tt
is false to state she is a ”pre~encler.”
?.2. The insertion of the word “sic” into the quote falsely implies tha1 Dr. Kolbe was
wrong about the number of street children, the fact that she was working with
child:en, or the fact that the chi ldren were homeless. There is nothing in the quote
that is inaccurate or a mistake.
23. You erroneously state that Dr. Kolbe left Haiti in 1997 and did not return until 2004.
This is not accurate.
24. Dr. Kolbe has never claimed to be a “war correspondent.” Tliis, u::; wdl as other
info rmation in your book, was taken from a Wikipedia article that she did not author
and :u r which she is not responsible. In this instance, and others, you present the
material from Wikipedia as if they were statements made by Dr. Kolbe and then
attempt to refute the statements while accusing her oflying about such information.
15
Whether through her own efforts—as I suggest in the chapter — or others, Duff and Kolbe both
are very public figures. She makes that case in this document. As Lyn Duff she claims to have
been on Oprah Winfrey twice, that she was the inspiration for a movie. And one only need
google her to see that she has a highly public profile. But even without that, I explain that I got
the information from Wikipedia. And I know from conversations that she’s aware of the
Wikipedia and edits it. And she admits so in her accusations. So, if claims of not being a front
line war correspondent were false, why didn’ she edit them out? Moreover, her presences on
Wikipedia as both Kolbe and Duff and Wikipedia’s refusal, as she claims, to take the entries
down, are more evidence for her being a public personality. In any case, I never say they’re false
or true. I say they are indeed suspicious. And the reason I say that is because there are no online
articles of her having written about anything in any of those places….
I got this from conversation with her and from online accounts. That’s when she went to Wayne
State. She and internet accounts put her in Haiti from 1994 to 1997. Between 1997 and 2004
she was traveling and in Israel half time. Perhaps it might be more accurate to say she moved to
Michigan fulltime in 2004. But this seems a trivial issue.
ln this instance, again. Dr. Kolbe has never claimed to be a “war correspondent.”
As you know, Dr. Kolbe worked for an international news wire service and covered
social issues, typically those related to children and youth. Wh_ile she did work in
some areas where there had been wars, reporting on war has never been in her title
nor has it been the focus of her work.
Additionally, Dr. Kolbe never worked “on the front lines” in Croatia, Iraq,
Afghanistan, and Vietnam. She reported on lraq and Afghanistan before 9/1 1 and
her reporting focused 011 youth culture. education. food security, and gender issues.
The reporting she did in Croatia was about economic development, not war. Her
reporting from the Middle East. during times when there were activities occurring
which could be construed as war. focused on rel igion. culture. and youth issues,
whi le her reporting on lraq and Afghanistan post 9/11 was all on social and
economic jssucs, not war.
Dr. Kolbc’s reporting in Vietnam was on child labor, ethnic minority children and
youth, and migration, not on war. Dr. Kolbe was born in 1976, ten months after the
Vietnam \Var ended, so she was not alive, much less working as a journalist, during
the Vietnam War. She has never claimed to be a “war correspondent,” much less a
war correspondent 111 the particular countries mentioned.
25. You state that Dr. Kolbe moved to Michigan in 2004. This is not accurate.
16
Regarding Lyn Duff enrolling in Wayne State under the name Kolbe, this is what I gleaned from
highly published controversy. And she published her academic work under Kolbe. If I got this
wrong, I think it’s a fair mistake. That’s what was being stated in online sources. There is even
interviews with her to this effect.
Regarding my claim that she had never used the hyphenated name Duff-Kolbe, I did not check
her social security card or school enrollment records. I doubt I could get to them. And I think
having to do so would be an undue burden on a researcher. And in the very public controversy
over her having two identities, Duff preceded Kolbe. And moreover, Duff and Kolbe are both very
public figures. As mentioned, and as she claims in these pages, as Duff, she was on television
talk shows, an inspiration for a movie, and she was a highly published journalist, so I searched
the internet exhaustively for the name Lyn Duff-Kolbe, Kolbe-Duff and found nothing that
appeared to be here. And in her defense during published interviews—when accused of
changing her name– did she specify that he only used the name on SS card and licenses and as
school enrollment. She said that had been her name, the one she used before becoming a
journalist. So my assumption was that if this highly public figure left no online trace of having
ever used a hyphenated name, then she wasn’t using it. I might have been technically wrong,
but I was being as truthful as I could be, and given her high public profile, it’s a reasonable
mistake. Indeed, publicly and professionally it’s true. Professionally she had never used the
26. You state that Dr. Kolbe “enrolled under the name, not of Lyn Duff, bul of Athena
Kolbe.” This is not accurate.
Dr. Kolbe’s academic records from high school and undergraduate university years
use the name ·’Athena Lyn Duff-Kolbe” in her official records and transcript, as did
her social security card, dri ver’s license, and school identification cards.
Though she had a DBA (“doing business as”) declaration with the IRS stating that
she worked as a journalist publishing under the name ·’Lyn Duff,” Dr. Kolbe’s
academic records clearly used both of her parent’s last names and her fu ll first name
on the records. For personal reasons umelated to politi1,;s or research or Haiti, in the
late 1990s, Dr. Kolbe decided to drop her mother’s surname, Duff, from her
hyphenalcd last name. She did this legally and openly. During a period of transition,
all uC her identification listed both of her parents’ surnames and the amendment
page of her passport listed her «also known as” name as “Athena Lyn Duff-Kolbe.”
When applying for graduale school (for all three of the graduate schools she
attended and graduated from) Dr. Kolbe, of course, informed the universities of her
hyphenaled name. They were also aware because it was the name used on her
undergraduate records und was still the name listed on her social security card.
There is nothing dubious or suspicious about Dr. Kolbe’s actions.
17
hyphenated name. So, her claim that it was a perfectly natural for her to use one name while
operating as an activist-journalist and at the same time publish explosive academic and highly
political charged survey finding is dubious, indeed, very suspicious. One does not have to be a
journalist to see that. But to make matters worse, we’re talking about a woman trained in
journalism. She didn’t know that something was wrong with what she was doing? Hmm. Look,
I’m not the only one to be appalled by this. As mentioned earlier on, this was a major
controversy in Haiti. Under her new name, Kolbe managed to publish highly explosive political
data on Haiti, data that could have and seemed target to encourage US military intervention,
data demonstrating that Lyn Duff was right, and she published it in one of the world’s most
prestigious medical Journals (Then British Lancet). Once again, we had the Haitian president
weighing in on the controversy.
Once again, yes, many reasons to suspect her use of two names. But just the same, it’s a highly
public controversy that I was recounting. If repeating the details—with references in the
endnotes– makes me guilty of defamation, you should sue the former president of Haiti and all
the academics and political commentators who weighed in on the controversy.
27. You present lhe use of Dr. Kol hc ·s given name as something that was done with
malicious intent. While it is true that she continued to publish using her mother’s
maiden name, this is standard practice in journalism. Once a journalist establishes
themselves as a wr itet using a particular byline:, it is ill-advised to change that byline
even if the wri ter gets married, divorced, or otherwise begins to nse a different name
in his/lier personal life. However. Dr. Kolbe compiied with both the spirit and the
teltcr of the law by info rming her employers, university. and the IRS (as well as her
friends) of her fu ll name. This was not secret, as you imply, nor was it un
a published aulhor to continue using their original byl ine. Indeed, Dr. Kolbe
media accounts still include her byline as an “also known as” name. She t
hidden this.
18
Part of the above was missing from notes, but I glean from the latter part that the point is that
the Kolbe and Hutson study was not biased and that because I imply that it was I’m guilt of
defamation. Once again, we’re talking about a major and highly public controversy. I cover it in
detail in the chapter. Yes, as an academic, a specialist in statistical methods and in Haiti, and
despite that fact that I was sympathetic to the Aristide regime, I find conclusions from the
survey absurd. I simply do not believe them. But I did not say that in the text. I recounted the
controversy and the logic of why so many other people did not believe them, especially everyone
who was against the Aristide regime. I explain and document this in the chapter. And I don’t
need to be a lawyer to know that this has absolutely nothing to do with defamation. These were
highly public issues that were played out in the press.
See above.
grnup or a nother. This, by the way, was the focus of a publicly available master’s
thesis using Lhis data set which was provided to you in 20 11 by Dr. Kolbe.
However, you have cl1osen not to reference that information here becau se it does
not support your false narrative. This second piece did what the Lancet paper did
not: it looked at what groups of peop le were most likely to be victims of violence
and crime. Dr. Kolbe is co-authored on a conference presentation (as are two of the
other professors you criticize) where the presentation examined targeted violence
and specifically illustrated, statistically, that the violence was nol one-sided. Dr.
Kolbe and her colleagues have never claimed or posited that violence was onesided
and your assertions to the contrary are false.
33. You pose two Lnaccurate hypothetical reascns why a person’s name might differ
from his/her reporter byline. l\either orthese suppositions are accurate explanations
of what occurred. You are :ully aware of the accurate basis for the difference
between Dr. Kolbe’:-; byline and her name because you personally discussed it with
her.
34. J: is emirely fa lse to claim that Dr. Kolbe concealed her identity.
35. You wrongly clain-, that Dr. Kolbe “concealed her identity’· because she was
fhrcflt~nerl with rleA.1 h by British people involved in a conspiracy. This is not
accurate and does not reflect the events as they were reported at the time. ·1 ‘he death
threat:; and h.arassrnent happened afLer the study was published, nearly a year after
the research was completed . There’s no relationship between Dr. Kulbe’s dmice
regarding her name and 1.he later ceath threat. In fact, she never assumed that she
would receive a death threat and was surprised when it happened.
19
I do not say I got that Scotland Yard information from Emmesberg Article. I got that from Kolbe
herself in a conversation. And all that is recounted in the Emmesberg article which is coming
from Kolbe/Duff herself—getting ‘outed’ by a British intellectual, claims of death threats from
British voice, dead rat in the mail, fake bomb in the mail—all that supports Kolbe/Duff having
told me that Scotland Yard was involved. If all that happened, wouldn’t Scotland Yard/police in
Britain have gotten involved? Again, I’m saying Kolbe said that. And given all that she said in
publication, I don’t see why anyone would doubt she said it. And I say in the text, that it’s her
side of the story. I was only trying to give as full an account of the claims and accusations as
possible given the information from published accounts from Kolbe and that I had gotten from
Kolbe herself during interviews. But whether this minor point about Scotland Yard it’s true or is
irrelevant. There is nothing about Scotland Yard that adds or detracts from the story or that
negative impacts Duff/Kolbe. I certainly don’t see how it relates to defamation. What’s relevant
is that Duff/Kolbe accused a British National of revealing her location online, she claimed that a
British voice called and subsequently threatened her, that she got a dead rat in the mail… Those
are the relevant points. And yes, it was all rather suspicious. And yes, it sounds like a British
conspiracy, does it not. It was also highly public and highly published account.
This is academic. And yes, they did. They said that she should have made her double identity
public…..
Really? I’m a critic and I know who reviewed the data and it was Kolbe’s colleague. And I am not
The only Haitianist. I have colleagues, many of them. We discuss these things…. And yes,
everyone I discussed it with finds it an appalling conflict of interest that a colleague of Kolbe at
36. Your summary of the Ernmcsbcrg article is inaccurate in :-nyriad ways:
a) There is no mention anywhere in the article of Scotland Yard, disposable
cell phones or a British ex-con;
h) Dr. Kolbe never cl.aimed there was some British conspiracy; and
c) You fa lsely state that Dr. Kolbe said Scotland Yard “dropped the issue.”
l his is false. Dr. Kolbe never claimed this and she never made any
statements about Scotland Yard in the article.
3 7. The lancer never seated that Dr. Kolbe concealed her identity or concluded that she
‘·should not have concealed a double identity.”
38. You falsely write “critics noted that tt1e person who reviewed the data.” You fo il rn
ident ify such critics, becallse none exist.
20
Wayne State would have been asked to review and judge her data in a situation a serious as her
being accused of contriving the data to infer with Haitian politics. I’m a little shocked that the
person who wrote the comment doesn’t see the logic. And I did not pull this out of thin air, who
reviewed the data is published. See the endnotes. Also, this is once again academic. I don’t see
how it relates to defamation.
Don’t see the point. Trzcinski—the one who had reviewed the data back in 2006-07 came back
to Haiti in 2011-12 and worked with Kolbe, publishing articles based on data gathered during
her surveys…. It’s referenced.
I got these accounts from Kolbe herself. She claims that Wayne State denied her all the credits
had earned working toward her PhD and pushed her out. If it’s not true, I’m not surprised. I
admit that I should have taken more care believing anything Kolbe/Duff told me. But in view of
the highly public and well documented controversy, it seems reasonable to believe. I may also
have some references for this. If we go to court I’ll check. For now I don’t see this as a major
39. You falsely claim that Dr. Trzcinski “joined” Dr. Kolbe ‘•mining the data” to get
publications needed for tenure. However, at the time Dr. Kolbe worked with Dr.
Trzcinski. in 2007, Dr. Trzcinski had been tenured since the 1990s.
40. You falsely stale lhal Wayne State administrators “were not ;;o forgiving.” This is
not true. First, there was nothing to fo rgive. Second, Dr. Kolbe was honored for
her research in Jlaiti at graduation. incl udi11g being c1warded the Ellen Z”verling
thesis award, an annual award for the best thesis in the ~choo;.
41. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe v.-as :erminated from her Ph!J program and “sent
off with a master’s degree.” T:1ere is 11u lrulJJ tu this. Wayne State University
(WSU) did not have a PhD program at the time that Dr. Kolbe was completing her
MSW. The cloctoral program at WSU’s School of Social Work did not stmt until
1hc year after Dr. Kolbe g1athiale,L fh. Kolbe wa~ never a matriculated student in
WSU’s social work PhD program, though she did take a few classes in the doctoral
program during the year she was preparing to start a PhD at the University of
Michigan. Dr. Kolbe was offered a piace in tl1e WSU PhD program in 2008 but
opted to attend the University of Michigan instead.
Dr. Kolbe has never been expelled or forced out from any program.
f urthcrmorc, she was not ” sent off ‘ after she fin isl1ed her MSW. lnstead, the dean
created a paid research assistant position for lJr. Kolbe, so that she could stay and
assist professors with research at WSU for another two years. She left that position
voluntarily, two years Inter. Dr. Kolbe was never fired or expelled.
21
point, especially in view of the overwhelming about of evidence that together supports a pattern
of deceit.
I have no idea what this is a reference to. I’ve never heard of HURIDOCS. But if it’s a reference
to ethics, what I do know is that you should be careful asking perfect strangers questions that
could be traumatic, should not ask children questions about sex or trauma without a carefully
controlled environment. And I do know that you should avoid the endangering the lives of
respondents. Those are standard ethics that all researchers are a ware of and share. Most of us
don’t need a standardized anything to know that. It’s human compassion, consideration for
others.
As for the Kolbe’s enumerators, yes, some have come to work with me. That’s in part how I was
able to verify things like Kolbe not being present on any surveys, never having vetted data…..
But to characterize them has ‘field much of my research’ is a misrepresentation.
This is academic debate. But I have almost no doubt that if we call up the editor of the Lancet
and asked him/her he would not agree that it’s ok to knock on doors in developing countries and
ask perfect strangers about rape, ask their kids about rape, and to do this when a substantial
proportion of the accused rapists are suspected to be none other than the governing authorities,
I might add authorities that the survey designer (Kolbe) had, under the name of Lyn Duff,
already accused of engaging in intense campaign of rape and murder. Did I miss something
there. Does HURIDOC say that’s ok. Does the writer not understand the gravity this?
42. Yot1 falsely characterize the use or HURIDOCS, u standardized reporting system
for hu,rnm rights violations and crime. This tool is a typical tool used for a
household crime and human rights surveys, both in the US and in developing
countries. This is the same process you have used to obtain household level data.
You used the same methocls that yoLl are criticizing J1ere. Since 2011, you have
been hiring some of Dr. Kolbe’s euutueraturs to fielJ rn ud1 ol’y11ur research.
43 . Because the research process was standard practice, the Lance/ editors, and those
they had peer review tl1e paper, correctly had no issue with the data collection
orocess.
44. You state that Drs. Kolbe and 1-lutson’ s point was that “the governme111 was doing
thi s.” Though you claim they say or arg–1ed this, they did not. Fl11ther, that was not
their poin t. As bolh Ors. Kolbe and Hutson stated in interv iews at the time, and is
evident in their article. they were more interested in what the United Nations was
doing in its interactions with IIaitian citizens, not the govenunent.
22
Their data was radically in favor of the Aristide government. They found that not single Aristide
partisan or former government authority had raped or killed. All the reports were on the current
government. Does Kolbe and Hutson think that would not be interpreted as unfavorable to the
government. This is another hairsplitting academic point that has nothing to do with
defamation. And it wasn’t even me who accused Kolbe and Hutson. I’m recounting a massive
debate that played out in the press, the internet, and academic forums. The writer would like to
suppress my right to recount the argument and add my own insights? We are not in a
repressive third world country here. This is the US. You, know, Democracy, freedom of speech,
right to debate, academic freedom. I find this really frightening.
Perhaps the writer does not know how things work developing countries. Social networks are
very dense. Strangers come into an urban Haitian neighborhood, go door to door asking
questions about rape… it’s not only not going to be a secret, it’s going to be a major topic of
conversations. And remember, we’re talking about a moment in time when Kolbe/Duff was
claiming the authorities were engaged in a massive campaign of repressions. The writer thinks
this is all ok? Are we on the same planet here? And I do not see this explanation about privacy
and an option for meeting elsewhere in the article.
I don’t have to accuse them of anything they provide all the data to make the conclusion. See
response to # 43. But once again, these are academic issues and debates about ethics. I fail to
see how they have anything to do with defamation….
I did not say that. I don’t know if they got consent. I would hope so. But what I said was that
there is no mention anywhere in the article about Ethical Review by Haitians or any Haitian
academic institution… Imagine French, Russians or Chinese coming to the US and going into
45. You falsely characterize how Lhe re;;earch occurred; that “everyone in the
neighborhood would have known,” etc. However, that is not accurate. The authors
gave people tbe option of meeting with them p rivately [hr the study interview This
was stated at the lime. in interviews and in the article.
46. You falsely stated that Or. Kolbe and her co-author did not follow ethical guidelines
from the World Health Organizati::m (WHO). WHO gives multista5e interviews as
one option, but as you knov,:, this :s Mt the only option available to collect data on
sensi Live Lu pies. ln fact, i l is apparent from your own work that you do not al ways
do multistage intervievv·s. The Wayne State “Un iversity’s Institutional l~eview Roard
({RB) did the ethics re view of Lbl: proposed study, and decided that one time contact
was the cest option to minimize risk, including the risk of psychological distress,
to study pait icipants” Ors” Kolb~ am! 1-hitson followed the WSU IRB’s guiJarn:.;e
which was clone in accordance wi1h WHO’s guidance.
4 7. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did not comply with the informed
consent process.
23
our neighborhoods and asking about rape, violence, government repression…. Without asking
even an academic if the questions and methods were ethically acceptable.
Repeat of #45
It’s not stated in the version I have.
48. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe and her co-autbor did not give people the option of
being interviewed in private places and away from their home, when in fact they
did this and th is is renorted in lhe arricle
49. You fa lsely claim 1ha1 Ors Kolhe 11nct Hurson did nol follow ethical guidelines by
i nterviewing people under the age of l 7. However, as clearly stated in the article,
no one under the age ol 18 was interviewed.
50. You falsely assert that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did not seek approval or advice
from anyone before conducting the research. Actually, the study protocols and
instrument were reviewed by eight academi_c researchers external to Wayne St.ate
University (WSU) attcl four within WSU. ll was also reviewed by the WSU
l nstitutional Review Board (liill) and by the staff person at the school of social
work who served as the liaison to the TRB.
In addition, in Haiti, the research protocols and instrnment vvere reviewed by four
rescar chcrs/expe1is, two of whom wrote letters with comments and suggestions.
Drs. Kolbe and HLttson voluntarily went through a further review process by tbe
Hai tian govenunent and secured written permission from the Haitian government
(led by PM Latortue at the time) to conduct this research. Dlliing t his rev iev.·
process, they were fully i nformcd of Dr. Kolbe’ s previo1.1s work in Haiti as a
journalist and discussed their concerns about how to guard agaimt potential
respondent bias in the data collection process. The Haitian government also
requested that Drs. Kolbe and Hutson add a few survey questions, which they did.
The;; Haitian government provided Dr. Hutson with a letter authorizing him and Dr.
Kolbe to field the study arid later requested copies of the data and preliminary
findings, whjch they provided.
During tl1c smvey translation and back t ranslation process Drs . Kolbe and Hutson
consulted with academics who focus on Haitian Creole language, including one who
authored one of the largest dictionaries of the Haitian Creole language, and they
devoted more than a month to testing and perfecting the translation of the survey so
that it accurately represented the questions they wanted to ask and the HURJDOCS
classification categories lor human rLghts violations.
24
That’s not how it works and Kolbe and Hutson know that. First, nowhere in the article does it
mention ethical review. Second of all, just because the president says you can do a survey does
not give you the right to ask any question you want and to endanger lives. If Donald Trump says
I can do a survey, does that mean I get to ask children anything I want? Also, a very interesting
aside is that the President of Haiti, like so many who have come in contact with Kolbe, would
come to feel tricked and deceived. Thirdly, Ethical Review does not mean chatting up a few of
your friends and colleagues. Thirdly, since when does Wayne State University professors have
the ethical authority to approve research in Haiti. Would they approve of that in the US? Would
it be ok for a University in PYongYang, North Korea to approve the ethics of research in the US?
Kolbe especially knows the demands that academics are asking of ethical review because she’s
tried to force it on others in Haiti. We have some interesting documentation on that. She used
one of the people she invented to push it on Haitian and US students. But once again, these are
ethical and academic arguments. I fail to see how they relate to defamation.
See above
Again, nowhere in the article does it say this. But plenty of references to details about children
being raped.
It’s not a factual statement. It’s an opinion supported by the logic mentioned above. As a
professional and an experienced expert in surveys, I doubt this one was ever conducted.
51 . Yom statemenl is false. On page 2 of the Lancet article, it states “This study was
approved by the Wayne State Uni versily Human Investigations Committee.” The
Wayne State University Tluman Investigations Committee is the approved
insli lulio11al review board approving Lhe ethical conduct of research for faculty,
staff, and students at WSU. This information is readily available on the internet.
52. Again. you falsely state that children were interviewed, when they were not. As
the art icle states. “The survey was administered to wh ichever adult household
member present had had the most Jecent birthday.” (emphasis added) An adult is a
person over the age of 18.
53 . You fa lsely claim that it’ s “highly unli kely” that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author
fielded the survey. Dr. Kolbe and he1 co-aulhor did lhe survey. 1f lhis matter is
litigated, the Universjty has paper copies of all of the survey instruments as well as
all elt:cLrnnic (i]es associated with the j ata in storage.
25
Interesting that you would say the statement is false. As if you are all seeing and all knowing. I
give an extensive argument in the chapter on rape about how “epidemic” rape accusations got
started during the early 1990s with the embargo against Haiti. Women seeking visas
increasingly claimed they had been raped because of the politics of their husbands. It was also
used as a political propaganda tool. After the embargo, the US gave millions in subsidies to
alleged rape victims. Women who could come up with two witness that attested to their having
been raped got stipends, free education for their children…. All this is carefully documented in
the book. It went on for some 6 years. When they cut the stipends off in 1998 or so some 14,000
women, supposed ‘viktim’, marched through the streets with signs demanding their stipends,
“long live money for vikitm.”. It all happened again in 2004…. And that’s why there would be an
inclination for people to say someone in the family was raped when they were not. And this is
what we saw once again after the earthquake. Guess you didn’t read the book.
Well, that should be for the reader to decide. I’m of the opinion that the evidence is
overwhelming.
I did not say that she is a fraud. I said that she may be. And based on the evidence in the book,
much of it from her and from her survey findings, sure looks like it. But again, that’s for the
reader to decide. She could write her own book.
I said that she may have invented data or that she may have simply accepted bad data.
54. Your statement is false. One li tuilatiun of survey research is that people are less
likely to disclose being sexually assaulted during a face-to-face interview; there’s
no eviuence lhuL peo11le are likely to falsely state they have been raped. In the
article, Ors. Kolbe and Hutson acknowledge this, noting that they probably
undcrcuunLed the number of sexuaJ assaults because some people might n.ot want
to tell a strn nger that they were raped.
55. The terms “cJedibiliLy gap” and “suspect l1istory” about Dr. Kolbe arc utterly false.
She dues nol have a ”credibility gap” or a “suspec1 hi story.”
56. You falsely claim Dr. Kolbe is an “academic fraudster.” Dr. Kolbe has never
committed acadern ic fraud or any fraud.
57. You falsely state that Dr. Kolbe invented data. This did not occur.
26
I dealt with this earlier. And no, Kolbe only uses Haitians with below University education. I
know of not a single educated academic collaborator. Of the two I know that she has copublished
with, one might not have finished high school (he’s the one who wrote the incoherent
questionnaire) and the other I suspect Kolbe invented because we can find no trace of his
existence and he has the same surname of the woman that we many students believe that
Kolbe did invent, Balistra.
I did not say she invented it. I said she could have. Anyone could put up a Wikipedia page about
themselves. Some people do. As for claiming that vandalized the site, I don’t understand why on
earth I would do something like that. It would get me nothing or nowhere. Also, that’s an
accusation that qualifies as defamation or slander, i.e. being a factual statement that you know
that whoever tried to take down your Wikipedia page did so from my IP address. I am 100%
certain that’s not true. Also, this appears to be and admission that Kolbe knew about the pages
and the content. So why didn’t she edit out the part that she claims is not true? Moreover, I just
contacted Wikipedia and the only reason they would not take down the page would be because
she is such a public personality. And so I would say that, what we are looking at is a consensus
of public knowledge about Duff and Kolbe, and hence I am in my right to use the source …
That’s what Kolbe told me. There is also reference to this on online bios so I assumed it was her
story. Seems a reasonable conclusion. But when I checked on the online ACLU page, there was
no reference to such a case having ever occurred. So, I concluded that it did not occur. In the
big sweep of things here, given the recurrent patterns of deception on the part of Kolbe, I don’t
see this as a major issue.
58. You fa lsely assert that ”not a single one” of the people Dr. Kolbe collaborated with
had ever been io Haiti or spoke Haitian Creole. These statementc:; Are nntrue. For
instance, you collaborated with Dr. Kolbe, and you claim to speak Haitian Creole.
Many of the people Dr. Kolbe collaborated willLi: ;ht: mt:! in Haili. Some are Haitian.
Some ai-e foreigners. Many speak Creole and/or French. Others have learned Creole
since going to Haiti.
59. You fa lsely state that Dr. K.olbe’s personal history is “invented.” and then you cite
Wtkipedia. Dr. Kolbe did not crnate the Wikipedia entry about herself. Some of the
information on that page is inaccurate. The only time Dr. Kolbe edited the
Wikipedia page about herself was to request that the page itself be taken down and
to report/correct vandalism of the Wikipedia page which was purpo1iedly done by
you or someone ·_tsing the same JP address as you.
60. You falsely claim that the ACLU sued Dr. Kolbe’s school. This is not accurate.
They intervened with phone calls and letters to inform the principal that it was not
permissible to suspend a student for rum1ing an underground school paper. There
was no lawsuit. Nor has Dr. Kolbe ever staled that there was a lawsuit.
27
This is hair splicing. So she finished the 8th grade and then went to the University rather than she
did not finish the 8th grade and went to University. Is that defamation?
Kolbe told me that she was one of the last people in the US to get shock treatments, so I put it in
the story. And in the end, I wasn’t able to verify any of her story, not with sources I thought
reliable. That’s the ultimate point. And that’s what I say. I don’t say it’s true or not. Just that I
can’t verify it. But here, whether or not she was the very last to get shock treatment is
incidental. I did not think enough of the point to pursue it. In fact, personally, I didn’t even
believe it. I thought they stopped all that stuff back in the 1960s. And if it’s true that they
continued shock treatments long after 1992, I’m somewhat appalled. But again, it’s just an
incidental point. Not sure what it has to do with defamation.
For the details here, I’m relying on internet accounts of this very public person. My point in the
end, as mentioned above, is that it wasn’t clear what was true. These comments about errors
highlight that point.
61. You fa lse] y state that Dr. Kolbe left South Pasadena Junior High school before
completing 8Lh grade. Dr. Kolbe completed 8th grade and then started as a full-time
undergraduate student at California State University, Los Angeles the following
fall.
62. You fa lsely state that Dr. Kolbe was one of the ”last people” to get shock treatment
for being homosexual. That practice, unfortunately, continued for years afi er Dr.
Kolbe e.si.:aped fn>m Rivendcll Hospital in Utah in 1992. This was well documented
in news media reports at the time.
63. You inaccurately ::,Lale that Dr. Kolbe began her journalism career at the age of 18
by working at Pacifica Radio’s KPF A In fact, she began working and publishing
as a journali st. before the Ae;e of 18, with an i nternship at the San Francisco
8xamincr and the Tenderloin Times. She continued to publish while working at
Pacifi\.’. Nt:w::, Service under the editorship of Sandy CJose. She did not start at
KPF/\ then as you ,,vrongly claim, and in fact did not work in radio until 1994.
64. After summarizing Dr. Kolbe’s adolescent years, you egregiously and falsely state
none of the aforememjoned events happened. As evidence for your false claim that
28
events did not occur yot1 deceptiveJy write thal ‘”stories of her exploits only exist
on Wikipedia, onl ine biographies, and chat records that Duff may very well have
written herself. No11e of these references . . . can be traced to legitimate
publications.”
However, the events you describe are very ,veil-documented, which is how the
details were put onl ine in biographies and cba1 logs und Wikipedia.
For instance, these events and Dr. Kolbe’ s adolescence were the subject of a 20/20
episode, which aired twice (the second time with an update on Dr. Kolbe’s work in
Haiti). She was on the Oprah show tw ice, once with her lawyer from the Natioual
Center for Lesbian Rights, discussing these events. There was a made-for-TV
movie produced, based loosely on Dr. Kolbe’s story, and a campy gay comedy
entitled ‘·But r m a cheerleader,” which was inspired by Dr. Kolbe’s story.
Dr. Kolbe was featured in numerous newspaper and magazine articles at the time
of these events including in the San Frand sc:o Examiner (which published a threepart
series on her and other youth being incarcerated in out of state psychialric
hospitals for being gay), the San Jose Jvfercwy News, and the gay press in a number
of cities. ‘There w<.m; books and academic journal articles written about Dr. Kolbe’s
legal case and about aspects of what happened to her specifi cally, as well as to other
children ,;vho were victimized at Rivendell hospital.
See. for instance:
Abinati. A. ( 1994 ). Legal challenges facing lesbian and gay youth . Journal of Gay
& Lesbion Social Services, 1(3-4). 149-169.
Asen. R. (1996). Constructing the objects of our discourse: The welfare wars, the
orphanage. and the silenced welfare mom. Political Communication, I 3(3), 293-
307.
BlumcnfeJd, °’JI!. J. Christian “Conversion Therapies” & Catholic “Third Way”:
Tmmaculate Deceptions.
Braatz, J. (1 996). Uncommon Heroes: A Celebration of Heroes and Role Models
for Gay and Lesbian Americans. Ilarvard Educational Review. 66(2), 405.
Cruz, 0 . B. ( 1998). Contro lling desires: Sexual orientation conversion and the
limits of knowledge and law. Southern Cal{(ornia L0111 Review 72, 1297.
Duff L. t i 996) . T Was a Teenage Test Case. Cal{jurnia Lowyer, 16, 47.
29
Goishi, M. A. (1 996). Un]ocking the closet door: protecting children from
jnvoluntary civil commitment because of their sexual orientation. Hastings Lcnv
Juurnal, -18, 113 7.
Hearst, A. ( 1995). Public issues, private lives. Columbia Journalism Review, 34(3),
17-19.
Ilicks, K. A. (l 999). Reparative therapy: Whether parental attempts to change a
chi ld’s sexual orientation can legally consti tute child abuse. American University
Lcrw RevieH’, -19, 505.
lJolmlund, C. (2005). Generation Q’s ABCs. Contemporary American Independent
Film: From the Margins to the Mainstream, 153 .
Kemena. B. (2000). Changing homosexual orientation? Considering the evolving
activities of change programs in the United States. Journal of the Gay and Lesbian
Nfedicaf Assucialiun, 4(2), 85-93.
LeRf, S. M. (1 996). How Voluntary is the Voluntary Commitment of Minors-Disparities
in the Treatment of Children and Adults under New York’s Civil
Commitment Law. /3ruoklyn Lav,, Review, 62, 1687.
Molnar, B. E. (l 997). Juveniles and psychiatric institutionalization: Toward better
due process and t reatment review in the United States. Health and human rights,
98-116.
Valentine, S. (2008). Queer kids: A comprehensive annotated legal bibliography
on lesbian, gay. bisexual, transgender, and questioning youth. Gay, Bisexual,
Trunsgender, and Questioning Yourh.
Many of the accounts referenced above describe, in excruciating detail, the
circumstances of what happened to Dr. Kolbe and of her journey from the time she
started coming out as a lesbian and running an underground school paper in the 8th
grade, through her late teens and early 20s (what you refer to as her ,: legacy years”).
These news accounts include documents, quotes. and extensive interviews with
ma11y pt:opk invulveu in asp~cls u[Dr. Kolbc’s journey including the lawyers from
the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Legal Services for Children who
represented Dr. Kolbe when she was a child, her social workers, staff and a teacher
from the l10 spjtal in Utah where she was treated to change her sexunl orientation at
the age or 15 and 16, staff from the homeless youth services programs in San
30
Well, I have to things to say to all that. First off, I stand by my conclusion that based on internet
research I found nothing to substantiate her bios. If you look at Wikipedia and you follow the
refences you’ll see that. And all the other references were chats or articles where the journalist
did not provide anything to substantiate her history. I did find a reference to 20/20 but I couldn’t
substantiate that. And if you go on the Oprah Winfrey website and search for ‘Duff gay lesbian’
you get nothing. Again, all you have to do is get online and you’ll see this.
My second point is that this extensive passage above—if it’s all true–substantiates that Duff is a
high profile, public personality—even more so than even I was aware– and so my not giving her
sufficient credit for her public appearances is insignificant. You can hardly call it defamation. I’m
trying to think of analogy. If I say that Sean Penn is a nobody who never played in any movies, is
that defamation? I don’t think it’s defamation. And I certainly did not set out to downplay
Duff’s fame. On the contrary, I would have been happier to find all those articles and interviews.
Perhaps the issue is that they were pre-2000s.
As stated in the text, “if one reads the Wikipedia entry….”
If Duff/Kolbe has an issue with Wikipedia she should sue them. But as stated elsewhere, she
knows about Wikipedia, she was in contact and edited her page, and if they would not remove it
, as she claims, that just supports the point that she’s a public personality as the criteria for
Wikipedia is to only refuse taking down a page if the person is notable. As for me, I wrote in the
Francisco that advocated for her, and the foster family that became her legal
guardians.
Your argument that Dr. Kolbe’s current research should be dismi ssed because you
believe she created a false history, is based on what you falsely claim is a lack of
evidence from reputable sources about these events. However, this stage of Dr.
Kolbc’s life is very well documented.
65. You falsely asse:·t that between the ages of 18-24 Dr. Kolbe had only one full year
of formal educ at on. This is not true. She graduated from college in 2000, at the age
of 24, having spent three years in community college and two years in a four-year
bachelor’s degree program.
66. Again, you are holding Dr. Kolbe responsible for conlent un a Wiki pedia page that
she did not create. Dr. Kolbe never claimed to have been a ‘·front line war
correspondent” in each of these countr1es and Wikipedia does not state this. As a
reporter. she covered many topi~s, most related to chil dren and youth, bnt other
:subjc:ct:s as wt:ll, and a yui<.:k search on LexisNexis, as well as a look through the
archives of the wire service and of Pacifica radio, would document the times and
places s11c traveled and ,;i;,1orked, which includes tl1ese count1·ies and many others.
31
chapter that I was, “Quoting Wikipedia:” And Wikipedia most certainly does portray her as a
War correspondent. Here it is,
By the late 1990s, Duff was a well-established international journalist with postings in
Haiti, Israel, Croatia, several African countries, and Vietnam. After the United States
invaded Afghanistan, she traveled to the front lines as one of the few non-embedded
Western journalists.
As for me being so negligent as not to use Lexis Nexis. Lexis Nexis costs money. Or you have to
be affiliated with an institution. I’m not affiliated with an institution. And I don’t have much
money. I am a lone researcher who lives from one consultant job to another and supports 6
children. My sole access to research documents is through the internet. That’s the best I can do.
If I don’t have access to exclusive journals and research resources, does that mean I can’t write
about what I find for free online?
Kolbe herself posted an extensive account of her conflict with the radio station. Whether
technically she was fired or not, here’s her account of an incident leading to the end of her
employment. I put it in the endnotes. This is Duff/Kolbe account of what her boss said to her.
67. You claim that Dr. Kolbe did not help found Rael yo Timoun. You slate she worked
for Radyo Timoun but was fired. This is not trne. As a teenager, Dr. Kolbe worked
with a radio engineer in Berkeley, CA to build a transmitter which she then brought
to Haiti and set up with the help of an electrician on the roof of Lafanmi Selavi She
then trained a group of street children to me the radio equipment and conduct live
broadcasts. She continued to offer training and raise money by organizing
fundraisers and writing grants for Radyo Timoun and by organizing opportunities
for Radyo Timoun child journalists to visit the United States for training and to
speak at conferences. She continned this volunteer work with Radyo Timoun
through 1999. These activities, individually and collectively, can easily be
describing as helping “found” the radio station.
Dr. Kolbe wrote about this experience at the time in the San Francisco Examiner
and discussed it at several conferences, on radio interviews on KQED and KPFA,
and on the radio program Democracy Now. Other atiicles and media abom Radyo
Timoun also mention Dr. Kolbe’s role as a youth reporter in working with sti-eet
children to sta1i the radio station.
Dr. Kolbe was not an employee of Radyo Timoun nor was she ever fired from
Radyo limoun. In the footnotes here, you say thal Dr. Kolbe was fired or quit from
KPFA but KPFA is not connected to Radyo Timoun in nny way, nor was Dr. Kolbe
ever fired from KPF A
Dr. Kolbe has never been fired from employment.
32
I’m management, don’t you understand that? You’re so stupid you can’t understand
that? …. fuck you…you’re through at KPFA…. get out of the movement… you’re too
stupid and out of it to know what’s going on.”
Kolbe subsequently submitted her letter of resignation. Based on this exchange—that
Kolbe/Duff apparently wrote and posted online—I think it’s fair to conclude she was fired.
I didn’t say it factually did not happen that she started a newspaper. I said I could not
substantiate it. And I can’t. No record of a lawsuit with the ACLU. I contacted the school
newspaper. I can provide the correspondence. They never heard of her. If she’s so famous, why
have they never heard of her. The school Newspaper is today called the Tiger, it’s been around
since 1913. Look it up.
68. This asse11ion is without factual basis. The ACLU’s involvement in this matter is
addressed above. Also, the account related lo Dr. Kolbe’s creation of an
underground school newspaper is in the Colurnbia Journalism Review, as well as
in several books and other forms of media about her life story. See, e.g. Hearst, A.
(1 995). Public issues,privale lives. Columbia Journalism Review, 34(3), 17-1 9.
69. Your statements regarding the Pasadena High School newspaper are false. You
falsely state that Dr. Kolbe has lied about events in her childhood and that she did
not start an underground school newspaper cal led ”The Tiger Club” in 1988. The
evidence you give is that you say you called the Pasadena High School newspaper
and that their name is the Tiger Club and that they were founded in 1913.
This is a lie. The Pasadena High School newspaper is the called the Chronicle and
it has been published since 1915.
The South Pasadena High School newspaper is called the Tiger, not the Tiger Club.
The tig~r is the school mascot. The name of the underground school paper that Dr.
Kolbe started in 8th grade, was, in fact, the Tiger Club.
33
I’m confused. She changed it to Lyn Duff? And what happened to the hyphenated name that you
claim was on the SS card and school enrollment…. And why are there two Wikipedia entries—
one for Lyn Duff and one for Athena Kolbe– that are written as if they are two totally different
people, neither acknowledging the other. I why was she wondering around Haiti for 3 years
telling everyone her name was Lyn Duff and then 9 years later she was wondering around telling
everyone she was Athena Kolbe. And why is everything online about Lyn Duff prior to 2006 and
everything about Athena Kolbe online after 2006. I don’t think I’ve made any unreasonable
conclusions here.. She also told me that she legally changed her name. And there are interviews
and a highly publicized debate around this very issue, journalist Lyn Duff changing her name to
Athena Kolbe. One only need Google all this. If we make it to full disclosure on all this I’ll provide
the reference and articles.
70. In this section. you again falsely claim that Dr. Ko1be, changed her name to Kolbe.
She did not change her name to Athena Kolbe, as this was 1he name given to her at
birth.
34
() RTD student bus pass issued by the Los Angeles Regional Transit District
in 1989. 1990, and 1991
g) I [ol lywood, CA public library card issued in 1990
h) San Francisco public library card issued in I 992
i) Oakland public library card. issued in 1995
j) Driver ‘s learning permit, issued by the Department or Motor Vehicles in
San Francisco in 1994
k) Listed telephone number in the San Francisco white pages, 1994-2002
I) Social security card
m) Press pass for the Republican National Conven1ion, First Union Center
Philadelphia, issued in 2000
n) State medical insurance identification cards issued while Dr. Kolbe was in
foster care in 1989, 1990, l 992, J 993, 1994 and then Dr. Kolbe ‘s Medi Cal
post-foster care benefit cards issued in 1995 and 1996
o) Application to a journalism training program at UC Berkley, 1995
p) Temporary press credentials issued by the Los Angeles Police Department
and press pass for the Democratic National Convention, both issued on
Augusl 11, 2000
q) KPF A identification card and press passes issued in l 994, 1996, 1998,
2000, and 2002
r) Press access card for Vietnam, issued in 1998
s) Temporary press pass for China, issued in 1997
t) Government Press identiiicalion card for Israel from the years 1999-2004
u) Visa application for Brazil in 1998
v) Visa application for travel in India applied for in l 997 and granted in 1998
w) T nternational vaccination card for yellow fever issued in 1998 and again in
2003, which states that Dr. Kolbe is a journalist and her name is “Athena
Duff-Kolbe”
x) School TD for Peralta Community College District, issued in 1995, 1997,
and 1999
y) 13us permit certifying that Dr. Kolbe is a person with a hearing disability,
issued in 2004
z) Dr. Kolbe’s savings account, mutual fund accounl, and IRA
aa) federal and state income taxes filed 1994 thrnugh 2004 (al whid1 point Dr.
Kolbe’s accountant began filing the documents as “Athena Duff-Kolbe”
doing business as “Lyn Duff’; this continued through 2009).
bb) A letter or invitation and letter of sponsorship from a local journalism
s<.:hoo1 for Dr. Kolbe’s application for a visa to Tndia in J 997
cc) Temporary press credentials for the White House, issued in 1999
dd) Press pass for the Republican National Convention held in San Diego.
issued in 1996
35
What I find most notable about all this new information is that Kolbe/Duff was was apparently
prone to use multiple identities from an early age. But once again, there is nothing about all
this accessible online. Nothing I could find. Nor in interviews surrounding the Haitian political
rape and murder controversy was any of this evidence cited. In the chapter I am recounting the
controversy. It pertains to Haiti. No one in Haiti cares what she called herself before she got
there. She got to Haiti as a journalist calling herself Lyn Duff. She became very well-known under
that name. She was closely associated with President Aristide. There is no evidence and I have
met no one in Haiti who knew her in those days by any other name than Lyn Duff, which she
published articles under. Then, in 2006 she published what would become a politically explosive
study under the name of Athena Kolbe. As recounted, many observers—included the then
president of Haiti Gerard Latortue– found it shockingly biases. Hence the controversy. She did it
without acknowledging her other name (Lyn Duff) or profession as an activist-journalist. It’s all
well documented. That’s what’s at issue in the article, not what she called herself when she was
in grade school.
In the context of the Haiti controversy, no, there was never any reference in to her earlier life.
And once again, I could not verify any of it.
Yes, and I’ve gone over this earlier on and in the chapter. Highly questionable to ask perfect
strangers and children about rape experiences, especially when under the threat and authority
of the people that you, as a researcher, are claiming raped them. But once again, this is
academic and hardly an issue of defamation.
72. Your claim that “no one” ever investigated Dr. Kolbe’s early years is a blatant lie.
Dr. Kolbe’s life before the age of 25 .. vas scrutinized by dozens, 111aybe hundreds,
of jomnali sts, researchers, academics, and government administrators. The
legitimacy of her experiences during these years is a lready well established.
73. You state that Dr. Kolbe’s study published in the Lancet was a case of”questionable
journalistic elhi<.:s, if not outright fraud.” Again, this is false. There is no evidence
of fraud because Ors. Ko]be and Hutson did not commit fraud . Additionally, the
ai1icle they wrote was a peer-reviewed academic research at1icle, not a journalistic
piece and thus, there was no “journalistic ethics” issue involved in its publishing.
74. Here you claim that what you are recom1ting is “not really about Kolbe/Duff ‘ but
you are in fact recounting things about Dr. Kolbe.
36
Yes, Duff/Kolbe appears to be a great example of the irresponsible and exploitive behavior of
foreigners in Haiti and it should be exposed and something should be done to bring these people
and institutions to account.
Yes, I believe that poor data, unsubstantiated data, irresponsibly collected data, opens the doors
for criminals, for people who would conduct fake development, fake charity. It’s an argument.
And it’s an important one. And I think I overwhelmingly substantiate it with data, logic and
analysis. And people like Duff/Kolbe do not want it to change. Hence all these accusations from
her. But it should and must change for the benefit of impoverished Haitians, hence my exposing
her apparent patterns of deception.
Once again, she told me this. In view of the controversy described over the data and her use of
two names and double identity as an activist-journalist and supposedly impartial scholar, it’s
eminently reasonable to believe that she had been pushed out of Wayne State. I think there is
even a published reference for this.
This is all documented in the chapter and I think unequivocal. But in the end, it is academic
debate and has nothing to do with defamation.
75. Your entire paragraph is false. Your accusation that Dr. Kolbe opened the door for
criminals is patently false. Fu1ther, she is not a pseudo-scholar. Dr. Kolbe has not
misled or lied to J)eople.
76. You repeatthe falsehood that Dr. Kolbe was pushed out of Wayne State University.
This is not true.
77. You falsely state the basis of the critique of your data. Dr. Kolbe and her co-author
said is tbat it was inconceivable that your data was representative. not becm1se of
who funded it, but because of the methods you employed and tlrnlyuu huin publicly available reports.
37
A “blatant lie”? Interesting choice of words. Kolbe and I were once friends and discussed at
length the death estimates. These were private discussions. I expected and repeatedly sought a
discussion with the entire group of authors. This never happened. I have ample documentation
of me reaching out in writing. But I reached out to Kolbe. I understand now that Kolbe never
passed my messages or written summaries of the issues onto the others. Regarding Matts
Lundahl, yes, later there was correspondence between him and me and I referred him to Kolbe.
But Matts was not part of her team. He’s and independent researcher. Our exchanges with him
came much later and have nothing to do with Kolbe and Muggah publishing an Op Ed in the LA
Time without consulting me nor their refusal to respond in writing to my list of issues with their
study. But in the end, the fact that I requested discussion and debate and it never happened is
enough to substantiate my point. Be glad to provide documentation. Although, I fail to see how
it’s relevant to the main issue. Seems academic
I don’t falsely claim anything. I opin, based on the evidence and logic, as expounded earlier on in
#17, that it may never have been done. Here is what I said,
I did not say they did not conduct it. I said they may never have conducted it. And I give a lot of
very good reasons to believe they may not have. Including the impossibility of conducting a
survey in 2-weeks time, six weeks after the Haiti earthquake, and when some 20% of the
respondent were not even in Haiti. Yes, very suspicious. I also provide references and examples
for how hard it was to find people. And I can provide correspondence from Columbia University
Professor and recognized world authority on disasters who also finds it very suspicious. And the
78. Here you falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues refused to engage in a
disc L1ssion with you about death estimates. This is a blatant lie. Not only did Drs.
Muggah and Kolbe discuss their methodology and findings with you at length in
person, Dr. Kolbe also engaged in a written correspondence with you about this
topic. This written discussion is documented in Mars Lundhal’s 2013 book “The
Pol itical Economy of Disaster: Destitution, Plunder and Earthquake in Haiti” where
he quotes email correspondence and conversations between Dr. Kolbe and you. Dr.
Kolbe provided these emails to Dr. Lundhal wjth your permission and you also
forwarded Dr. Lundhal a number of emails which included correspondence with
Dr. Kolbe about this very issue. Some of that correspondence from you, however,
contradicts statements you make here about Dr. Kolbe and her research.
79. You falsely claim, that the referenced study may never have been done, when in
fact it was done.
38
results were absurd. This is all in the chapter and documented. And elsewhere I say very clearly
that they may simply be accepted data from surveyors who did do their jobs. I say this in several
places. And I point his out in endnotes. And I know Kolbe herself that they had accidently caught
a least one surveyor filling out questionnaires in a tent. They were not even trying to catch him.
And I know from having worked with Kolbe that in at least one major WFP survey they had done
5,000 surveys with an illegible questionnaire (it made no sense in Creole), suggesting they had
never done the survey. And I know from her survey employees that she has never vetted or
checked on data. No follow up. I could go one and on. If we go to full disclosure I can almost
certainly supply statements from surveyors to this effect. But in the end, it should not be
necessary because the findings from the data make no sense (I detail that in the chapter), and, I
did not state factually that she lied or invented those surveys, but that she may have and that
the data and impossibility of the logistics suggest so.
I’m not sure what this is about, but knowing Haiti, having done at least 100 major surveys in the
country over the past 27 years, the claim that they interviewed the exact same respondent
makes me even more incredulous. You won’t find the same respondent in 93% of the cases if you
come back the next day. They came back months after the earlier survey. At that point, even
without the earthquake, I can tell you from experience that 10 to 20% for those original
respondents would be somewhere else. Ether in the Dominican Republic, the Bahamas or the
country side. And in addition Kolbe et al are making the claim that they accomplished this in 2
weeks, 6-weeks after the earthquake. In the book I make even more points about the absurdity
of this. It didn’t happen. But I don’t even say that, I opine. I say it is unlikely…. And I give the
logic.
80. You inaccurately describe the methodology used by Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues.
Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues interviewed the 01i ginal respondent or another person
from their house if that person bad died. Also, respondents provided data on
themsel vcs :md al I other household me:nbers.
81. You have wrongly and clearly misapplied the University of Miami study (about
injuries) to their stucly, wluch included deaths and injuries related to the earthquake,
and also included deaths and injuries unrelated to the earthquake which happened
in the weeks fo llowing the earthquake. Your statement does not accurately reflect
the relationship of the findings i..t1 Dr. Kolbe’s publication lo Lhe University of
Miami’s survey findings. Dr. Kolbe and her co-author did not say that children were
more likely to have been injured than others, they said that children were :nore
likely to have died from their injuries. A.nd this is backed up by the other research
as well. Young children and the elderly are more likely to die from certain types of
injuries common with earthquakes.
39
Well, I beg to differ. I would even say that I’m appalled by Kolbe’s lack of understanding of the
issues that she professes to be an expert in. Indeed, that’s in large part what the chapter is
about. But this is all academic and has nothing to do with defamation. This is scholarly debate. I
don’t think a judge would meddle with these points and I don’t understand what ever possessed
lawyer to allow all for this long winded and almost entirely irrelevant rant. I can only interpret
this as some kind of attempt to overwhelm me with accusations.
I’m qualifying myself and my opinion. What’s false about that? I didn’t do more than 100
surveys in Haiti? I have not been at this since 1990?
Once again, I’m appalled by what I see as your failure to understand the issue or admit a single
point. But also, once again, this is more academic debate that has nothing to do with
defamation.
Once again, appalled by what I see as your failure to understand an issue or admit a single
point. But also, once again, this is more academic debate that has nothing to do with
defamation.
82. You make a definitive statement premised on your having done 100 surveys in
llaiti, that Or. Kolbe and her co-au1hor could not have possibly done what they did.
This is a baseless assenion and plainly false.
83. The Kochar quote, from an aii icle published three years after Dr. Kolbe’s study, is
about comparing differences in recovery rates between children and adults for the
exact same injury. Dr. Kolbe did not do this, as children and adults did not
necessarily have the same kind of injuries. They were not comparing reco very rates
from one uniform type of injury. Yot1r use of this quote is misleading and dishonest.
84. In the ir study, Dr. Kolbe and coJleagues stated that deaths post-quake could not be
easily attri.buted lo the earthquake. You se: up a false dichotomy compa1ing 3 %
from the CDC with Dr. Kolbe and colleagues study which reported 25%, as if 25%
of the people ‘Nho died, died because of the earthquake. This is not true. 25% of
the sample of dead people (those who were alive in !ale 2009 but dead in early
2010), died during or atler Lhe eaithquake. Dr. Kolbe and colleagues did not claim
that those people each died from the earthquake, and in fact, they cited specific
examples of people who died from other things, like diarrhea. The 3% figure from
the CDC is a different kind of study, which estimated excess deaths directly
amibutable to the earthquake. Your comparison is dishonest.
40
I do not see this stated anywhere in the article.
I suggest or opine that it may not have occurred. And I’ve backed it up with abundant logic and
argument.
No, that’s not what I stated. I stated,
Few to no institutions or scholars cited the figures at the time. Nor did the media pounce
on this particular study.
Note ‘at the time’. I then go on to say that nevertheless it became part of the academic record,
implying that yes, others would go on in the future to cite it as good data, evidence of how it
really was. And that’s why what it is so dangerous to permit publication of sloppy data and
illogical conclusions. That’s why it was so important that I publish this book and so important
that we have freedom to debate and to expose apparent academic and/or negligence. It’s the
argument I’m making. I couldn’t care less about what Kolbe does in her personal life. The issue is
that when shoddy, unvetted data collection gets into the academic record and becomes the
official narrative. And as Kolbe and Muggah themselves say—their very point in attacking me
85. You falsely claim that Drs. Kolbe and Hutson did not follow ethical guidelines and
that children were interviewed. However, as clearly stated in the article, no children
under the age of J 8 were interviewed. Ethical gui delines were carefully followed,
as described in the arti cle, to minimize psychological and social risks to the
participants including limiting the time spent interviewing. giving the respondent
the option of a private or alternative place to do the interview, and offering to come
back to interview later when the respondent could speak in private.
86. Again, you falsely make an accusation stating that the survey ·•didn’t occur.” This
is not true and there js no evidence to support lhis assertion.
87. You falsely state that ” few to no scholars” cited this study. This is not accurate. The
study was commissioned by the UN Development Program. A number of
international and national actors contributed to the creation of the survey including
the World Bank, the Haitian government, and the UN 171ission in Haiti. They widely
used the data and it was integrated into (and cited in) the Post-Disaster Needs
Assessment in Hai Li. The analysis was also widely cited in the press and in scholarly
publications. A quick google search illustrates that 77 publications cited just one of
the numerous publications using data from this survey in 20 I 0.
41
and my work in the LA Time– this is dangerous, lives are at stake, accurate data is critically
important in assisting vulnerable people poverty, and we desperately need robust discussion
and critique, all of which I provide abundant evidence Muggah and Kolbe did not pursue, Kolbe
in fact deliberately avoided. And yes, based on that and all that is said here, I think that Kolbe is
extremely dangerous and should be held accountable. She not only avoided and apparently hid
my attempts to pursue discussion over her survey and data on the death count, in this
document, she is apparently trying to use legal means to repress the debate and discussion
provided in the book I wrote.
I am justified in opining that Kolbe and Muggah were not satisfied with press coverage based on
the deduction that, if they were satisfied, they would not have written and submitted their own
articles to several of the most widely circulated newspapers on earth. There were doing that
despite the fact that they were publishing reports and successfully persuading other journalists
to publish articles about their work, not least of all Trenton Daniels of the Associated Press.
Muggah is not a journalist, and Kolbe claims here in this very document that she is not either,
yet in addition to their other work, they made significant efforts write those articles writing and
get them published in major newspapers. So what’s unreasonable about the conclusion that
they they’re not satisified? This is one more absurd defense she’s making about nothing. And is
there being unsatisfied a bad thing? I don’t think I said that was a bad thing. What’s bad is that
the data is apparently shoddy and the conclusions do not jibe with what we know from
elsewhere. And regarding the timing, I see that I did get the timing backwards. But whether the
referenced AP article came before or after the particular referenced article that Kolbe and
Muggah wrote is incidental. It has nothing to do with the main point or with defaming anyone.
In nether article did Kolbe and Muggah say that the data they were citing was their own. If they
had been transparent they would have said in the main text that, “In an earlier study, the
author(s) found…” That’s not what they did. They cited the data as if it belonged to someone
else. For example, in the Sunday edition New York Times article entitled, “Haiti’s Silenced
Victims” they write,
88. You falsely claim that Drs. Kolbe and Muggah were “not satisfied” with the
Associated Press coverage of their research and “sensed opportunity” so they began
publishing their own ai1icles; the example you give is of an op-ed that that was
p11blished in the Guardian. This is a false characterization of how and why Drs.
Kolbe and Muggah \-‘i1rote this op-ed for the Guardian, which was authored before
the Associated Press article was written.
89. You falsely claim that Ors. Kolbe and Muggah “never let on” that they had
conducted the research cited in this quote themselves. This is a lie. Drs. Kolbe and
Hutson cited their other previous studies.
42
Although Haiti routinely suffers from political and natural disasters, rape is an especially
insidious crisis. Haiti’s brutal dictatorships used rape as a political tool to undermine the
opposition. A 2006 study reported that some 35,000 women and girls in Port-au-Prince
were sexually assaulted in a single year. In the aftermath of the 2010 earthquake,
residents of the capital’s tent cities were 20 times more likely to report a sexual assault
than other Haitians.
That’s a reference to Kolbe and Hutsons’s infamous ‘Lancet report,’ the study I described earlier
on and in the book, the one so politically explosive, published while Kolbe was also writing
published politically charged articles under the name of Lyn Duff, and that the president of Haiti
said had been discredited….. Yet there is no acknowledgement in this New York Times article
about any of that, and not even that Kolbe herself conducted the surveys. The article says, “A
2006 study reported…” That’s genius that she did that. But no, it’s not academically honest.
Hmm. So it was removed. I saw no hypertext.
This was somewhat stylistic. It’s also descriptive, not factual. I do not claim to peer into the mind
of Kolbe see her fantasies. I’m writing a book. And it’s perfectly fair having documented all that I
had documented and referenced to make the conclusion that Kolbe was living a type of fantasy
from the past. She became the accomplished journalist that she struggled to become years
before. These are big papers: LA Times, the Guardian, New York Times. As for her actually
90. You false ly claim that Ors. Ko lb e an d Muggah neve r let [sic] on to readers” that
they we r citing their own re earch. This is false. The online versio n of the op-ed
had a lin k to th e study cited so that when readers clicked on the sen tence the y were
taken directly to the Lancet article which clearly identifi es Dr. Kolbe as o ne of the
a uthor s. The in -text citation was incl uded by Drs. Ko lbe and Muggah but was
remo ved by th e New York Tim es ed itor prior to publication , ho wcv r a hypettext
link to th e st ud y was inc luded.
91. In thi s section, you rep eat the li e you made prev iousl y, that Dr. Ko lb e was not an
accomp li shed journal ist a1 a yom1g age . You claim t hat sl1e on ly “fanta sized ‘ about
being a ·’jo urn ali st for the world ‘ most imp rtant main str eam media out let .”
Between l 99 4 an d 2000, when Dr. Kolbe was working in pri nt jo urnal ism, she wa
pub I ished in a numb e r of mainstrcm11 medi a outlets incl uding the Washingto n Post ,
th n.n Francisco Exam iner and oth er lar ge dail y papers . This was not her first
article in a major daily paper. And it was not. as you cla im a foray back int o
journalism ; Dr. Kolbe wrote an opinio n piece as a guest writer , someth ing th at is
common fo r academics. Despi te th a t fact tbat it was published i11 the New York
Times she did not write a journali tic article an d she is no Jong r wo rking as a
journalist, s he do es not c laim to be doing so or want to d o so .
43
having been a major journalist as a teenager and young adult, yes, I believe that she thinks so.
But in my internet searches I did not find any evidence of that. The only citation I find for work
by Lyn Duff or Kolbe before 2006 were the Haiti 2004-2006 articles where Lyn Duff was an
activist Journalist—many would say a radical one– for what’s considered a relatively radical
radio station. Google it and see for yourself. On the other hand, if I Google any of the 20 or so
serious journalist friends of mine, I get scores of articles by them in major papers.
Again, based or Kolbe’s account to me and on the logical consequences of the controversy and
her double identity, I think I made no unreasonable assumptions. Highly public debate.
I have no recollection of this whatsoever. I’m amazed that Kolbe would. That was five years ago.
We spoke twice? I doubt I would speak on Skype. If we communicated on Skype it would have
been written. I would like to see the minutes to that conversation. Perhaps I knew about the
survey, perhaps, but the first time I recall it coming to my attention was after publication of
another New York Times article, that one claiming that in 6 months there would be famine and
so the aid agencies should import food. Indeed, the report I first learned about when CARE
International directors wrote and asked me my opinion. I wrote and told them how wrong and
irresponsible that prediction was. I have the emails for that. I was appalled that they had
written this and it was in fact my last straw of having any association with Kolbe. I discuss the
logic in the chapter. It was a radically irresponsible claim. Peasant subsistence strategies are
adapted to hurricanes and floods. Unless it was a hurricane as destructive as category 5
Hurricane Matthew that struck the south in 2016, someone who understands Haitian peasant
subsistence strategies would never make a prediction like that. One would in fact expect the
opposite. First off, the hurricane hit at harvest season so most crops were not lost. Secondly,
some of the most important peasant crops—such as sweet potatoes– respond positively and
92. Your assertion, ug ni n, that Dr. Kolbe was terminated fr om Wa yne Stale U ni versity
is false.
93. Your cluim that Dr. Kolbe was not in the so uthern parl of Haiti during this week is
false. In c redibly, you know this is the case, becaus e you spoke w ith Dr. Kolbe v ia
Skype tw ice that week. You spoke with the guardian and others at the home you
s hared w ith Dr. Ko lbe at that time and they told you she was unavailable to do a
favor for you because she was in the South doing research. You al so discussed, at
length, t he situation with the woman w ho was sexually a ssaulled, who you argued
(at the Lime) had not bee n raped, but was just regrettin g a vo luntary sexual
encounter. Your s tatements about D r. Kolbc’s medica l condition and her alleged
limitations are reckless and false.
44
rapidly to the flooding, so 6 weeks after the hurricane there likely to be bumper crops. Thirdly,
peasant crop cycles in Haiti are 3 month not 6 month cycles.
These authors claim that there would be a famine is 6 months is part of the basis/logic for me
concluding that Kolbe and her co-authors were not qualified to be making those conclusions.
And it was dangerous. They published it a major report that they circulate to the NGOs. They got
it into the mainstream US press. ‘Impending famine, send aid…’ It alarmed the aid agencies,
encouraged massive waste and contributed to sabotaging the efforts to reinforce local
production, something that I’ve been studying and writing about for 20 years. And, sure enough,
there was no famine. Less than six months later the crops were all coming in bumper yields,
helped by the rains from the hurricane. Anyone knowledgeable and responsible expert in Haitian
peasant subsistence strategies would have predicted that.
As for verifying that Kolbe was not in the South or present for the rape, that comes from her
surveyors. They say that neither she nor Muggah were there nor, according to one of the
supervisors, has she ever been on a survey. And really, no one expects them to be there. I
coordinate surveys constantly, and I personally do not have time to go to the field anymore. And
no client expects me to go. And my physical presence would help very little. The surveyors are
moving fast, they’re all over the place. There is no reason for a designer or analyst to be in the
field, other than spot checking work. But even that can be done using GPS point, telephone and,
if necessary, a follow-up team of surveyors. So if Muggah and Kolbe were there, it would be
unsualy. And it makes even less sense in the case of Kolbe because of her health and Muggah
because he is busy with many tasks and lives in Brasil. So given all the evidence, yes, it’s
eminently reasonable to conclude that Muggah and Kolbe were not there. The only issue that
I’m taking here is that they wrote about the rape experience and seeking help first hand, as if
they were present, they then used that firsthand account to establish credibility with and
sympathy from the reader.
As for me claiming that the woman had not been raped, I never said she had not been raped.
How would I know?
As for me saying that she was “regretting a voluntary sexual encounter” there’s another
defamatory statement and a very cheap and tasteless shot at my character.
As for Kolbe’s medical condition. That might seem somewhat insensitive and perhaps I should
not have brought it up. But I’m not saying that being obese or having this medical conditions is
bad or that it’s her fault. Only that it is limiting, and prevents her from any kind of field
participation. It’s factual. She was at the time and long has been obese. She also suffers quite a
number of ailments that I do not think I specified–she is on several medications, including
psychotropic medicines, and has hearing aid and visions problems. So my statement is factual–
considerably worse than I describe in the book—and it’s only meant to bolster the evidence and
allow the reader to judge if what I’m saying justifies the conclusions I make at the end of the
chapter.
45
Wait a minute. You’re saying that The New York Times editor went to Haiti and verified that
Kolbe and Muggah had been in the South of Haiti? Are you serious? And what is the relevance
of the medical report? I never said the rape did not occur. My point was that evidence suggests
that Kolbe and Muggah were not present yet they recounted the story first hand. And then they
disingenuously referenced Kolbe’s likely flawed data form the past as if to prove the rape
epidemic and political rapes of 2004-2006 were indisputable facts, referencing it without noting
it was Kolbe and Hutson who had overseen the research. The writer thinks that’s ok? This was
classic duplicity and exploitation of the media. Fake news. And I would very much like to see a
signed statement from Muggah that he was present. I have this strong suspicion that Muggah
would not sign off on many of the claims that Kolbe makes.
I’ve dealt with this. Kolbe might, just might be able to sing Frere Jacques. But no, she is
functionally illiterate in Creole and French. My experience is that Her linguistics competence in
Creole is about that of a 2 or 3-year old. If this is defamatory I can have former colleagues of her
attest to what I’m saying and sign statements to the effect. Just one hint to that in this very
document, she writes about the “Ministry of Education (MOE).” That’s an English acronym that
she must have invented. It’s MENFP, Ministère de l’Education Nationale et de la Formation
Professionnelle. And if you want to say it in English its’ Ministry of National Education and
Professional/vocational Training.
This is a reference to the above NYT article. It’s substantiated. See above explanation.
94. Again, you falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe, and/or Ors. Kolbe and Muggah made up
an event that never occurred. However, it did occur. The New York Timr:,s editor
verified the facts before they published the op-ed. including obtaining a copy of the
medical report.
95. You assert that Dr. Kolbe speaks no French and very little Creole, which is false.
See above.
96. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe and her co-author lied, falsified data, and
·’projected” themselves to be a place where they were not. This is not true.
97. Your statement that Dr. Kolbe lied and duped people, The New York Times, and
academic journals is false.
46
I do not say that I factually caught her making anything up. I say ‘she might have’ and that ‘the
evidence suggests….’ And as evidence we have this repetitive and overwhelming pattern of
deceit.
Based on all the evidence that is indeed the implication.
The point is being missed. This point is not really about Kolbe. Yes, nobody checks Kolbe’s data.
Not for the surveys I discuss in the book. This I know. I know this from participating in her
surveys (I in fact worked for her on a survey), I know this from talking to surveyors and
supervisors who worked with her, I know this from the absurdity of many of the survey findings.
All this is documented in the book.
Moreover, talking to enumerators about whether or they conducted a survey is not sufficient in
itself to verify data. GPS points only help determine where surveyors were; it does not mean
they actually interviewed anyone, or that that they did it correctly. It only means they went to a
location. And on all the surveys I reference, Kolbe did not use tablets. On the survey I worked
with her on, there were no GPS devices. If anyone on her surveys was ever collecting GPS points
for her—as she claims regarding other surveys—they were relying on GPS devices. That’s not
good. My experience is that many Haitians surveyors make a mess of recording the points. But I
don’t even contest that. What I’m saying—and what should be clear from the discussion of
identities of respondents being a secret—is that verifying surveys means calling or re-visiting
respondents to verify they were in fact interviewed. All the evidence I have from her, from
98. Here again, you accuse Dr. Kolbe of ·’making up” her research. This is a lie. Dr.
Kolbe has never ·’made up” research data, analysis, or findings.
99. Your t itle falsely implies that Dr. Kolbe is a liar and that she chose to work in
lm;ation where she could not be called a liar.
100. You falsely state that no one did, could, or would check Dr. Kolbe’s datn. This is
not true. Your own book states tl1at, at least one of Dr. Kolbe’s studies was heavily
checked. You offer zero evidence that no one ]1as or could check her data.
Some ufthe data Dr. Kolbe has collected is publicly available and is 11sed by others.
For a number of studies, the funders have required checks of the data inclmling
processes by which they accompany the enumerators, interviewing the enumerators
when Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues are not present about their data collection
methods, tracking the OPS coordinates and locations of the interviewers while they
are in Lhe field, and a number of other methods 10 assw-e that data collection happens
as planned and that data is ,H.:vurnlt:. These methods have been described in previous
studies as well. You have zero firsthand experience or knowledge to say that Dr.
Kolbe’s data was not been checked by others.
47
surveyors and supervisors working for her and from the absurd results from the data indicate
that she never did that. BUT the big point here is not about her and her surveys. The big point is
that “no one would or could check the data.” She could and should have checked—and
apparently did not—but no one else can because they can’t. And the reason they can’t is
because its unethical to reveal the identities of respondents. So what I’m saying is that, IF she
has falsified data or IF her surveyors have done it, no one can verify that. And the reason is
because of the ethics. And that’s one of the things that makes surveys an inviting endeavor for
liars and cheaters, whether Kolbe or her surveyors and supervisors or someone else.
And in the end, by the way, the acid test regarding the data is if the findings are logical. Her’s
were not. That’s the point of the long discussion about those findings. They consistently, in
survey after survey over a period of 12 years, made no sense in context of other data and other
surveys.
I did not say she fabricated data. I don’t know what Kolbe really does. I said she may have
fabricated it or her surveyors may have fabricated it or she may have simply accepted shoddy
data.
See above
101 . Dr. Kolbe has never fabricated data. This is a lie.
I 02. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe collected data which was either not verifiable or
that she did not verify the data. The steps used to verify data were clearly outlined
in a number of Dr. Kolbe’s publications, as were the steps that were used dming
fielding to assure accurate data collection while protecting tht: rights uf human
rights victims. To state that “no one checks the survey” is false.
l 04. You have falsely stated that human rights priorities dictate that researchers cannot
divulge informant’s names. This is a clear and intentional misrepresentation, as is
your assertion that every survey begins with a promise that the person’s name will
be kept secret is not true. Some surveys begin this way, but not all surveys are
anonymous and confidential. In fact, for some of the surveys Dr. Kolbe performed,
she t·equircd contact information including names and phone numbers in addilion
to addresses or the CiPS coordinates ofthe individual’s home. In fact, the one study
you worked on for the World Food Program for which Dr. Kolbe was the primary
investigator included collection of the respondents’ names and national identity
numbers. You are intentionall y misrepresenting Dr. Kolbe’s work. Researchers
may or may not divulge names depencljng on the circumstm1ces and what has been
48
This is splicing hairs. But the point stands. In the vast majority of surveys the respondents names
and identities must be kept confidential. It’s a type of cardinal rule among academic researchers
and aid agencies. All my clients are adamant about this. And it’s especially important when
conducting doing surveys about the government, violent crime victimization, and evaluating
whether or not respondents benefitted from an aid program. And it’s logical. Making available
the identities of respondents who are critiquing the source of aid could mean that do not get
any more aid, get cut from programs or singled out for retribution by corrupt NGO workers or
local powerbrokers who are brokering access to the aid. Making available the identities of
respondent who have been victims of criminals, gang, members corrupt police or other
repressive authorities can put those people in danger of retribution. Does the writer not
understand this? I hope that Kolbe is not revealing the identities of people interviewed.
See earlier comments. And I’m not sure what’s the contention. During this time she wrote at
least four articles for major newspapers. They’re referenced in the chapter.
Its based on the abundant evidence provided before opining that “the data could only have been
bogus, shoddy or at least extremely shoddy and manipulated”. Here is the full quote.
Kolbe/Duff’s use of social media, her transformation back to being a journalist and her
publication of stellar articles based on what could only have been bogus or at least
extremely shoddy and manipulated survey data was only part of her brilliance.
I do believe that Kolbe is manipulating data. And the last part of the chapter, where we discover
“someone” inventing people and facebook pages and pressuring students who challenge her
with fictitious US consulate officials confirms for me and many of her students that she may
indeed be a criminal. But I’m not directly saying that at this point. Here, I’m only saying that,
based on the evidence, her survey data is bad. That may be her fault, it may be her surveyors, it
may just be sloppy data collection methods and lack of checking. It may be all the above. Its’
what comes next that helps us pass judgement and make inferences about Kolbe’s disposition to
be dishonest.
dictated by the TRB. Dr. Kolbe conforms to the standards required by the ftmders
and the university employing her.
1 05. You fa lsely c I aim that Dr. Kolbe has “transformed” back to being a journalist. She
is not a journal isl any more, nor has she cJaimed such.
106. Dr. Kolbe· s data is not bogus, shoddy, and manipulated.
49
I wrote about this above. I was indeed privy to the formation of the University at the beginning
and so I know for a fact and can demonstrate with correspondence that it was the creation of
Athena Kolbe. I never “resigned” from anything as I never had an official position. Nor did I
really want it. My interest was to create a type of anthropological institute inside the school.
That was when I believe, as she claimed, that it was being launched under the auspices of the
University of Michigan. So with that promise in the future, I helped Kolbe start the school,
helped her find a house, staff, and I temporarily taught there until, as with virtually everyone I
know who worked with her (excepting her partner Puccio), I began to discern the patterns of
deceit that I outline in the book. I could supply a very long list of people complete with
signatures who have had the same experience. Also, to everyone I know who had anything to do
with the school, Kolbe is the managing authority and owner. I can supply a long list of people
who will attest to that as well.
I wrote that!? If I ever said or wrote such a thing it was at her behest and direction and when I
too had been led to believe that Kolbe was starting a legitimate University under the auspices of
the University of Michigan. This was her story at the beginning. But I really doubt I ever wrote
anything about the school or anything that had do with administration. I was there for some
planning stages. But I was in Africa when Kolbe started the school. I was not even there when it
began but rather came back to find it in full swing. And I quickly distanced myself when I
realized that Kolbe was misrepresenting the school. Eventually I cut ties altogether.
107. Your sta1eme11t that Dr. Kolbe is the “sole owner” and “chancel lor” ofETS is false
As you know, you and Dr. Kolbe co-directed ETS when it was first fo unded.
Following your resignation in 2013, Marie Puccio became a co-director. Dr. Kolbe
has never heen the sole owner or sole chancellor of ETS, nor has she ever been a
chancellor. Iler title is the Director of Social Work Education.
108. You c]ajrn that Dr. Kolbe “cleverly crnfted” the description of the ETS as a
” internationally supported degree granting institut ion”. However, this wording was
written by you, not by Dr. Kolbe, in a proposal f01 the creation of ETS that you
submitted to a potential collaborator.
50
As mentioned above, yes, I too was misled into believing that the school was under the auspices
of the University of Michigan. But as stated, I was in Africa the entire time that Kolbe got the
school started. Within months of returning I realized that the school was a scam and began to
distance myself, including sending a long and detailed email to the Dean of Social Work at the
University of Michigan outlying my concerns.
This is all well documented. The quote in fact comes from ETS website. If it’s been changed we
can provide the earlier pages and claims.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
109. Here you claim that Dr. Kolbe ‘·associated” ETS with the University of Michigan
(‘·U oC l\.f ‘), and that dt1ring the first year most students believed that they were
aLtending U of M. During t his time, you were the co-director of ETS and thus
equally responsible for communicating to students. In any event, Dr. Kolbe never
misrepresented the relationsh ip of ETS to U of Mand cenainly never told students
they were attending U ofM or earning a degree from U of M. She is not responsible
for any 1nisrepresenLation by you. Dr. Kolbe is grateful for the support that ( J of
M’s School of Social Work dean and faculty gave in the creation of ETS but she
has never misrepresented a relationsb.ip that did not exist. Jn fact, some students
have stated that yo11 were the one who told them that the program was part of C of
Mand one provided an email where you made thjs statement. Tl1ere is no evidence
that Dr. Kolbe ever stated this and there are many years of emails, statements, and
letters to students and others in which Dr. Kolbe continually corrected your
misrepresentations about her, ETS, and U of M.
11 0. You falsely state Dr. Kolbe wrote/said that the course of study at ETS is a
prerequisite lo ” hecoming ‘ licensed sociiil workers.”’ You put ‘licensed social
workers· in quotes as if you were quming Dr. Kolbe, however, 1his is not a quote.
There is not Ii censure of social wurkern in Hai~i, lhus, the program of srncly at ETS
does not result in a social work license in Hait1. The C:TS program of study does,
however. prepare students for some aspects of social work licensure 111 Lhe United
States, shnirlrl they choose to obtain a social work license abrnad.
111. Your statement in ttis portion of the text is also false. There are o:1ly a handful of
students wbo have work/study scholarships. As you know, your statements about
the tuition costs, scholarships, and who scholarships were offeted to, are also false.
51
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
112. Your statement that people were “fooled” is groundless. You have no evidence lo
support this statement.
113. You falsely state that ”U.S. researchers came to the school and paid Kolbe/Duff for
room, board [sic] and Kreyol lessons given ay the unpaid student teachers.” No one
has ever paid Dr. Kolbe for room/board in Haiti or Creole lessons. The Creole
Language Program is operated by ETS and has never been directed by Dr. Kolbe.
Furthermore, you falsely claim that Creole classes are taught by ”1:npaid student
teachers.” Creole instructors are paid and receive a salary which is substantial ly
higl1er than the average salary for teachers. Creole language instructors also receive
housing, pa11ial board, paid training, paid vacations, health insurance, and/or a
tui tion waiver, in addition to their salary
114. You falsely state the credentials of the faculty at £TS. All ac,aclemic classes at ETS
are taught by a professor who has a graduate degr ee in his/her field of academic
sn1dy. Social work practice classes are taught by people who have an MSW plus two
years of posl-MSW practice expeJience. The Ollly classes which might be taught by
someone who does not have a Masters’ degree are basic computer and typing
classes, or beginning level English language classes, though such classes do not
fulfill degree requirements a.t ETS and are offered for professional development
purposes only. Many ETS professors have PhDs and all academic classes which
count towards the degree programs are taught by people with a Master’s Degree or
higher. ETS does not discriminate against Haitian faculty; qualified Haitian faculty
are also welcomed to teach at ETS.
52
That’s interesting statement. You’re claiming that anyone can just open a University in Haiti
within approval from the government? We will provide a written letter from authorities at the
MENFP—if not the Minister himself—expressing how outrageous that assumption is
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike. Among the documentation, can provide the application to MENFP.
That’s from 2014, not 2012. And there is not a single Haitian teacher or administer listed on the
application.
I did not claim that. That was written in a paper he was to co-present with Kolbe, as stated in
the chapter. The obvious and most likely person who would have filled out that application is the
lead academic applying to give the paper: Athena Kolbe. Here’s Balistra’s byline,
Sergio Balistra, PhD , Faculty of Social Science/Department of Sociology, State University of Haiti, Detroit, MI
And here is what was written in his University of Michigan Obituary,
A Port-au-Prince native, Balistra received his university training in social science at the
State University of Haiti in Port-au-Prince. He held advanced degrees in Sociology and
Statistics. Balistra was fluent in English, French, and Spanish, in addition to his native
language, Haitian Creole.
Now who do you suppose wrote that? This is who wrote that,
Athena R. Kolbe, MA, MSW
University of Michigan
Joint Doctoral Student
Social Work and Political Science
11.’i. Tl~ere is mi licens11re of universities in Haiti Nor is there a body in the United
Stales which liccnscu. unjversities located in IIaiti.
116. You falsely stale that Dr. Kolbe has no association with I laitian academics. This is
not true and you lack evide11ce to support this assertion.
117. Your assertion that Sergio Balistra obtained his PhD from the State University or
llaiti is not true. He was a research assistant on a project a( lht State University of
Haiti. However, he obtained h is PhD elsewhere. Neither he nor Dr. Kolbe bas not
ever claimed otherwise.
53
Furthermore, the writer is claiming that Balistra was a “research assistant on a project…”, but
no self-respecting Haitian PhD is going to be anything less than a director. He certainly is not
going to work as an assistant under the direction of US graduate student working in Haiti. And
the claim that he got his PhD elsewhere—meaning apparently in the US or Europe—makes the
prospect all the more dubious. A Haitian with a PhD from a developed country comes back to
Haiti to research as an assistant for a US undergraduate? Hmmm. Could you share the name of
the University where he got his degree?
Interesting that the writer would factually claim that I do not know people who knew or worked
with her at that time? Were they all fake?
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from surveyors and
Kolbe’s survey supervisors at that time that they did not work with any Haitian PhD by the name
of Sergio Balistra.
Based on the evidence. Amply documented. And it is in contrast to her claims that the school
was founded in association with some dozen Haitian professionals. Indeed, Kolbe belabors this
point in touting her University online, claiming that she consulted with the state University, that
only a handful of foreigners were and are involved, as if this was a Haitian institution with Kolbe
acting as a mere guide. As of 2012, there were 0 Haitian professionals on the application for
recognition from the MENFP, the Ministry of National Education and Vocational Training. I can
share that application at disclosure. Absolutely none were involved in founding the school. As
Kolbe attests elsewhere, I know, I was a witness to her founding the school.
11 8. You lack any foundation to claim that Dr. Kolbe ‘s colleagues did not ever m(;t
Sergio 13alistra. As you know, you did not know Dr. Kolbe during the relevant time
period. Not did you know the people Dr. Kol he worked wit h_ durin:; this time Nor
have you spoken to “everyone” about Mr. Balistrn.
119. You falsely claim that “since transforming herself into a scholar” Dr. Kolbe had no
connections with Haitian academics except for one person who you claim does not
exist. However, th is is false. You have no evidence or information ~n what
connections Dr. Kolbe did or did not have tJ1en or what connections she has now.
As an at.:Live member of the Haitian Stud.ies Association she has long standing
relationships with a number of Haitian academics. Your statement is simply false.
54
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
And “voluntary”? So getting a license to open a university in Haiti is just a voluntary thing?
Anyone can open a university, but some volunteer to seek approval from the authorities. Are
you serious?
Not only did ETS students report writing to University, but so did US students. We can provide
documentation if necessary. As for the reference to 1994 (2014?), yes, a great many students
and a great amount of information about the school came our way. The students were trying to
get us to help them make a legal case against Kolbe. I did not do that. I believe what Kolbe did is
terribly wrong, but is was not my fight. It was the students fight. I offer to give them advice and
help if I could. But it was their fight. And also I’m not a lawyer and Haitian courts are ineffective
fiasco, hence people can start schools, misrepresent the schools, invent administrator, threaten
lie and cajole and con all they want and get away with it. I will share the information with you if
we ever get to court.
120. You claim that in 2011, students at EIS “began to realize” that the school had “no
accredi tatio11 inside or outside of Haili.” This is a false statement on several levels.
First, there is no accreditation process for universities in Haiti, there is only a
voluntary process of recognition by the Ministry of Education. There is no body
which accredits schools of social work in Haiti. Therefore, it won lei be impossible
for ETS, or any other school of social work (including the Haitian State
Univcrsi1y·s school of social work) to have obtained accreditation.
Secondly. your statemen: is false becat:se you claim that students “began to realize”
– there was no process of realization which took place because students were
always fo lly informed with regular communication from. the ETS faculty about th~
process of government recognition in Haiti and where ETS was in that process.
121. You false ly claim that in January 2014, ETS students wrote to a Cniversity of
Michigan dean, Laura Lein to complain. This is entirely false. No letter or email
was writ1cn or received by Dr. Lein as you have described.
Jn October or 1994, a woman who had dropped out of ETS after failing her first
semester of classes, who was at the time employed by yo u, wrote (purpmtedly at
your behest) an unsigned email from a newly created anonymous email address sent
from an [P address that was also used by some of your employet:s. H:..iwever, this
person was 1101 a student at ETS and had not been for some time.
55
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
122. Your assertion that Dr. Kothe retroactively increased tuition is false. None of the
ETS faculty, jncluding Dr. Kolbe, or auyuue else, evt:r retrual:Livdy increased
tuition for ETS students. The tuition for ETS has never changed since the clay ll1aL
the degree program was opened by you and Dr. Kolbe.
123. This is a blatant lie. No one was expelled from ETS for not beiug abk (u pay their
bill. Students were given payment plans startin6 their first term and some students
took time off and then returned when they could pay their hill. Nn one ”los:” their
credits. If a sn.:dent earned the credits then they have credit for the classes they took.
124. This is yel another example of a lie that you told at the time and which you have
now put in print. At that point, the degree program al ETS had only been open for
two years, not three, so this is not accurate. Also, since you claim that Dr. Kolbe
retroactively increased the annual tu;tion by $100 USD, Lhis would only be $200
that students who stmied in 2012 wudu have to pc1y, not $900. However, even with
your math errors, the statement lS still false. No student was told retroactively to
pay more tuition.
125. Again, this is a false accusation. No student has ever lost credits fo:- courses that
they took and passec at ETS. The only way a student can ” lose credits” is by fai ling
a course.
56
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
So the writer admits there is a letter and that it came from the wife/partner of Kolbe, Maria
Puccio. But the writer says it was altered. That could probably be determined through forensic
digital techniques, but once again, I’m not saying that I know factually that so and so happened.
I’m reporting what the Haitian students and US students told me and the evidence they
provided. Given all the other evidence from before, claims on the websites, and the
overwhelming pattern of apparent deception stretching back more than 1 decade, as well as my
personally experiences, it’s abundantly clear that I am being as truthful as I possibly can.
126. You claim Lhat 29 students “challenged” Dr. Kolbe by refusing to pay their tuition
and writjng a letter to the US embassy to complain ctboul Dr. Kolbe. This is false.
No such events ever took place.
127. Herc you falsely state that the US Embassy did not respond to the “challenge” of
29 students, but that Dr. Kolbe did. This is false. Dr. Kolbe did not respond to any
such events because these events did not occur.
128. The cmai I that you quote appears to have been altered by you or someone dse after
it was received by Professor Puccio. This is not the email that was received by
Professor Puccio.
Additionally. you falsely state that the letter was “inadve1tently ci rculated to the
entire SlLtdent body.” This is again, false. It was a private email sent to Pro fessor
Puccio which was stolen by an employee of your colleague, Erika Childs. Ms.
Child’s employee ha<.;kt::u Professor Puccio ‘s email account, forwarded this and
otl1er emails to ETS students, to Ms. Childs, and to your employee, Keely Brnokes,
who both then disseminated them widely despite being told by Professor Puccio of
this theft from her email account. This was a private email obtained th.rough illegal
hacking, not one that wns sent publicly as you fa lsely imply. It was not shared with
ETS students by Professor Puccio or Dr. Kolbe, nor was lhe content something that
they 1hcmsclves endorsed.
57
And in this case, we can address the clear the whole thing up if Kolbe would simply produce
Jennifer Balistra. The writer admits the letter existed, and that it was origainally from the
Jennifer Bilastra. Bilastra claims in the letter that her husband worked in the US consulate and
then threatened that ETS students who did not retract all their claims about ETS and write a
detailed letter of apology regarding ETS and send that letter to the consulate would have a hard
time getting visas…. If anyone reads the letter, just about any part of that letter that I can think
of seems to qualfied as extortion, fraud, intimidation…. These are the things that lead me to
suggest in the book that Kolbe’s behaviour “may” indeed be “criminal”. But let’s get Jennifer
Balistra to tell us what parts of the letter were redacted.
As for Erika Childs and Keely Brookes, they were Kolbe’s employees. I did not know any about
them until they came to us, as so many have, appalled at what was going on with Kolbe and ETS
and seeking advice. One of the reasons they decided to come to us is because Kolbe had been
apparently been telling them malicious gossip about me. And now, having experienced Kolbe’s
inclination for lying and manipulation, they realized that perhaps what she said about me
wasn’t true. I don’t get into that in the book. It’s irrelavant and Kolbe’s slander of me has had no
impact on my personal or professional life, not that I know of anyway. But what I learned from
the US graduate students and the Haitian student was that Kolbe’s duplicity and her apparent
willingness to cajole, intimidate and lie was all far worse than I had ever fathomed. And far
more harmful as, at this point, some students had been attending university for 3 years and
could expect to get nothing from the experience. We can discuss all that and what evidence
they have against the school at disclosue. As for the letter, no, it was a group of students who
brought it to us. As I just said, they felt deeply betrayed. These students are mostly poor. They
were handing to Kolbe what for them were enormous sums from their parent’s and family who
all thought that the student was earning an international degree to become licensed social
workers. They feel like she deceived them and robbed them of money and years of their lives.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students, foreign
and Haitian.
We can and gladly will provide ample documentation and attestation from students and staff,
foreign and Haitian alike.
129. Your statement that ”students” recanted allegations is false because no student
made allegations and thus, no student recanted the said allegations. The allegations
to which you refeJ were made by yuw· employee, whu was nul an ETS student.
58
It’s not my claim. It’s the students. I’m recounting their story.
It’s not my claim. It’s the students. I’m recounting their story.
So the writer knows a lot about Jennifer Balistra’s facebook page. And the writer is claiming
Jennifer Balistra is real. Let’s meet her! Get Jennifer Balistra to send me a letter how the
students lied to me and she really exists.
As for the facebook page having all those pics, Kolbe know that’s not true. And I know it’s not
true because I reviewed it right before “someone” took it down. We can share what digital
evidence we have. And these things I’m saying are retrievable through forensic digital methods.
1 ‘.JO. You l~ilsely daim that students asked Dr. Kolbe for a meeting with Jennifer. No
student ever asked Dr. Kolbe or anyone else in the ETS administration for a
meeting, face-to-face or otberwis~, with Jennifer Balistra. The only person who
requested a meeting was your employee, Keely Brookes, who then did not show up
fur the meeling. You also falsely state that Dr. Kolbe told students that Jennifer
Balistra was sick and therefme unable to meet. This is a lie. Dr. Kolbe never made
these slatemenL; and students who wanted a meeting with her could have asked her
directly.
131. Your statement that Dr. Kolbe has claimed that Jennifer was paraplegic or
introverted ts false.
132. Your statement here is false . .Tenrifer’s Facehook page lrnd n lot of photos of her
baby, vacation photos, and pbotograp:–is of events. Her page i nctuded photos of ETS
students in a group photo of her Creole class, ‘?v-hich included some RTS students
in it becat:sc they were Creole instructors.
59
Ok. Let me see if I understand where you’re going with this. You’re claiming that Almathe—who
has been defined as my daughter but who is not my daughter, but rather a Haitian women who
I helped helped as an orphan and sent after her parents died when she was 10 years old–
created Jennifer Balistra? But it was Puccio—Kolbe’s partner/wife, who told her to do it? And
then, if I’m getting the logic, the password was not changed after Almathe left the school, so
maybe someone– perhaps me–substituted a different photo for the original, ostensibly to frame
Kolbe. Why would someone do that? So that three years later they could include it in a book?
Hmm. A seed of doubt? Well, first off, just so the writer understands my personal feelings, no
one I have ever met, least of all Athena Kolbe, is so important to me that I would sacrifice my
integrity and jeopardize my reputation. Yes, I find the students story important and I hope that
they will find justice or, as one of the leaders of the group that originally came to me said, ‘at
least in see that she stops victimizing other young Haitians.’ But for me, ultimately, the reason I
bothered to write about Kolbe, her history and the school, is because it’s an excellent example of
a wide spread problem in Haiti: deception and radical misrepresentation of what is going in the
country executed by institutions and individuals, such as Kolbe, to collect money in the name of
the poor, but not in the interest of the poor, and much of which never makes it to the poor.
That’s what the book is all about. And getting back to Jennifer Balistra, what about all these
other emails from Balistra and the presence of Balistra on the list of administrators and on the
school website? Did someone hack the site and put her there.
133. Herc again, you 1epo1i events and details that did not occur and which art: nut lrnt:.
Jennifer Balistra’s accounts for gmail1 google for classroom, and the Schoology
learning management system were created by your daughter. Almathe Jean, who
set up tht: account at the request of Professor Puccio, a standard practice for new
students and faculty members at ETS. Ms. Jean, who left ETS several weeks before
the events you are recounting occurred, created a password for this gmail account
(the password was not changed until late 2014). lf an incorrect photo was used, or
if Jennifer’s actual photo was replaced, it was by your daughter Almathe, a
disgruntled former employee of ETS or by someone with whom your daughter
shared tl1e login infonuation
Furthermore, you cla:im that “tech-savvy students povped the picture into Tineye”
and discovered it was a cropped stock photo. However, this is also not true. IL was
d011e by you, not a student, and then you told others, including some ETS faculty
members and your daughter about it, and they then 8hared the what you had done
vVith others.
60
But more important here, you’re saying that Jennifer Balistra in fact exists? Where did she go?
Did she die in an earthquake like Sergio Balistra, the other colleague of Kolbe’s who appears to
be invented?
I’m pretty sure that these kind of frantic attempts to blame others can be weeded out through
forensic digital methods. But that’s totally unnecessary. The overwhelming logic and the fact
that no one who has anything to do with the school ever met these people would suggest to any
reasonable human being that they were invented by “someone.” And once again, I don’t think I
made any factual accusations. I never claimed to have seen anyone creating fictitious web
pages. I presented the logic and left it for the reader to decide. I might have made opined
statements based on the evidence and then pulled it together in conclusions, but I invented
nothing. And we can provide overwhelming evidence and testimony what I do say.
And it’s not like a single shred of evidence. We’re talking about years of what appears to
patterns of duplicity published online, in reports, major newspapers, school websites. And then
we have all these student testimonies and emails. We have all the web pages and we have all
the emails where “someone” is having the fictitious Bilastra intimidate students. Not least of all
with the claim that her husband works for the US consulate and that students who publicly
complain about Kolbe and ETS will never get a visa to the US. It’s Kolbe school. I don’t think
anyone who has ever come in contact with the school is under any delusions about that. So why
would anyone else but Kolbe write a letter like that. And again, it’s not simply an argument
about one little fact. It’s a pattern that is well documented, and repeated over a period of at
least 10 years. The school and creation of fictitious people is simply the climax
As for the TinEye issue. I suppose accusing me of discovering the photo was fake supports the
idea that maybe I framed Kolbe, which seems to be where the writer hopes to go with that.
That might, just might, be interesting if there was not just one but two Balistra, a name rare on
the internet and unheard of in Haiti. There was Sergio Balistra, a supposed Haitian who lived
before the earthquake. And then there was Jennifer Balistra, a supposed Peruvian who
appeared in something like 2013. Both were Kolbe’s colleagues. But she’s apparently the only
one who ever met either them. Moreover, this patterned use of Jennifer Balistra and her
frequent intervention in conflicts on Kolbe’s behalf pretty much puts to rest any reasonable
doubt whose interest she served. Indeed, I think you’re going to have a hard time convincing
anyone that I or Almathe invented either of the Bilastra’s or hacked or tampered with emails or
internet sites. Why don’t you blame the Russians? And again, we have documentation and can
provide written and notarized testimony from dozens of former students about the Bilastra(s)
61
At this point in time, when I learner of Jennifer Baliatra, I had nothing to do with the school nor
had I had anything to do with the school for almost 2 years. I know absolutely nothing about
Jennifer Bilastra until the students—US and Haitian alike—came to me with all the cited
information. No reason to doubt them, especially given that Bilastra does not exist. But yes,
once they brought Bilastra to my attention, I investigated to so I could be confident that the she
in fact did not exist.
As for if the students investigated. Oh yes, they did. So did US graduate students. And so did
teachers at the school. And oh yes, those pages were gone. That I did follow, and with
fascination. But more interesting here, the writer is claiming they were not gone? That they
were active in 2015. Could we see some evidence of that? And, the writer is admitting that she
knows Bilastra? That she knew when those accounts were pulled down? And she’s saying
“active”. What exactly is mean by “active”? Were they pulled down and put up again? Has
anyone else ever met her Jennifer Bilastra, before or since. We would all like to meet her. Could
you put us in touch? In fact, if you can produce Jennifer Bilastra, and she can attest to having
worked with Kolbe and ETS, that she’s from Peru, and that her husband was with the US
consulate in Haiti, I will immediately and voluntarily retract the chapter and issue profuse
apologies.
Let’s see her! Lets’ talk her. Produce her! Put us all in touch! You have my email. Have her write
to me!
Look, there is ample evidence and any reasonable observer would conclude that Balistra was
invented. Evidence from the students and US teachers that she did threaten students that if they
did not cooperate with ETS and, by corollary, Athena Kolbe, they would not get visas. All the
134. No ETS students ever told Dr. Kolbe or anyone else al ETS thl they thought
Jenni fer did not exist. This accusation originated with you and is has never been
falsely claim that somehow in response to this accusatim1 being made to Dr. Kolbe,
tho..t Jennifer Bol istra’s Faccbook and Google accou11t.-; w~rt: c’gune Lhe next day.”
This is again false. Her Face hook and Google accounts were still a:::tive as recently
as lale 2015.
135. Agajn, you claim that Jennifer Balistra does not exist. She does and this accusation
is false. There is no evidence to support your accusation other than your lies and a
Grnail account registered in Jennifer Balistra’s name to which you had access
through your daughter.
62
evidence for a reasonable person to make that conclusion comes from students and US grad
students and is in the book.
As for the part about my “daughter” and me having access to Balistra’s account through her.
Almathe is 28 years old, and at that time she was living with and employed by Athena Kolbe.
Well there is some evidence regarding language skills. In 27 years of living and Working in Haiti I
have never seen someone write an English acronym for a Haitian ministry. It’s MENFP, Ministère
de l’Education Nationale et de la Formation Professionnelle. And if you want to say it in English
its’ Ministry of National Education and Professional Training.
But the most interesting part of this comment, to me, is that the writer admits the school has no
accreditation, and that, in effect, Kolbe misled students, sold them worthless educations.
If there is any question all about any of this, particularly about the legality of simply opening a
University in Haiti with no approval, I can get a letter from the Minister of Education explaining
the details. Even the primary schools must be registered.
As for the reference to me, I never applied to the MENFP for anything regarding Kolbe’s school. I
offered to help. But that was when I was misled to believe the school was a serious endeavor,
was legal, was under the auspices of the University of Michigan. That was before I understood
the extent of the deceit, whereupon I withdrew and, in an attempt to be responsible, wrote to
the University of Michigan dean of Social Work and told expressed my concerns. I will provide
that letter on disclosure. Moreover, when I offered to help, I offered in the context of having a
committee of academics managing the school. A board of directors. Kolbe made it quite clear
that she intended for no one to be able to challenge her absolute control over the school. I don’t
discuss that in the book because it seems so unnecessary given all the other evidence and
complaint from students and staff. But I can probably dig up some emails that will verify that. I
can also provide the 2014 application, which has no Haitians listed on it as staff, director,
assistant, advisor or anything else, none at all.
136. Here you falsely claim that in reaction to some events which neveT occurred (a
fictional complaint made to the Ministry of Education) (“MOE”), that Dr. Kolbe
then began to work on getting official recognition for ETS. Again, this is lie. There
was no complaint by ETS students to the MOE so no act ion was taken in resporn.:ie
to events which did not occur. Furthermore, you know that Dr. Kolbe and you both
began the process of official recognition in the beginning of 201 2, when ETS first
began offering a deg1ee program. Lastly, since there was never any compl2.int hy
1:;Ludents to the MOE, the ministry never intervened nor did anyolle foar that they
would do so.
63
Interesting reaction. If there is a “Haitian director” this is new. When I was familiar with the
school, and the time I wrote about, there were no Haitian directors or even Haitian professionals
with University degrees. Nor is there a Haitian director listed on the 2014 application for a
license from MENFP. They’re all foreign. Four of six are grad students. One is a PhD who says
she was put on the application without her consent. The other is an obscure professor who, if I
recall, I tried to contact but did not reply.
Also, be glad to get a letter from the Minster of MENFP regarding their policies.
As for me being a director, yes, Kolbe gave me a nominal title as “director” and offered me
partnership. I think I mentioned this above. But that was something she was pushing on me and
I now interpret her earnest attempts to recruit me as a trying to garner credibility because I am
a writer with a reputation for honesty and critiquing aid. It would have given her credibility.
What I was interested in was creating an Institute of Anthropology inside of this University of
Michigan supported School of Social Science. But I was never involved in any meetings with
anyone besides Kolbe. I do not recall ever being introduced to anyone who was going to be a
director or board member, especially none who were Haitian, albeit I proposed quite a few of
them. I can probably dig up emails attesting to that. Kolbe wanted no one else involved in the
school who might challenge her control. That was clear. And then when I got back from the
work for the US Government in Congo and found the school was in full swing, I was not invited
to any meetings with a board of directors or introduced to anyone. At some point Puccio showed
up, but I never understood what her role was more than her being Kolbe’s partner/wife. I was
told erroneously, that she was a “professor” a University of Michigan. She was not. She was a
grad student. But I never had any meetings with her. And she knew nothing at all about Haiti.
Anyway, when I began to realize something was seriously amiss, that it might well all be sham
and so eventually I pulled out and wrote the University of Michigan. And yes, I had a moral
obligation to tell students that the University was fake. It was not just unaccredited– by any
institution or state authority—the students weren’t being taught useful information. I was
teaching several classes and Kolbe quite literally cut them off mid semester. I can only assume
I 37. Your narrative is full of lies . First, Dr. Kolbe and the ETS leadership team first
submitted a request for recognition to MOE in 2012, the year the degree-granting
programs were created, not in 2014 as you claim. Second, this request was not done
in response to student concerns. Tt was filed during the fi rst term ETS was opened,
while yoll were still a director at ETS and before you sta1ied creating concerns for
the studenL::; by lying to them about Dr. Kolbe and encouraging them to drop out of
school. Third, ETS bas never been run by a board. Fourth, the director of ETS is
Hai tian and Dr. Kolbe and Professor Puccio (who are US citizens) are members of
the leadership team but are under the leadership of a Haitian director. Fifth, the
LeadeTShip team has never included any other “University of Michigan graduate
studenLs.” There has always been a Haitian on 1he leadership team.
64
she gave them credit for what I never finished teaching. And nothing in the school was really
English, as Kolbe claimed. Had I not taught them in Creole, few of the 40 or so students in the
classes would have understood a word I said. Yet, at the same time, there was nothing Haitian
about it, except the students. The students were not qualified to be in an English school. Most
were not qualified to be in college. And they were not being brought up to a level that qualified
them at a university level. The teachers were not qualified as professors… Indeed, when I was
there, the only teachers beside me were Almathe Jean, who has high school diploma. And
another Haitian teacher who has not University education. But no, I didn’t encourage people to
drop out. I probably should have. But I was leery at the time about engaging in a conflict with
Kolbe. We all understand her to be vindictive and seek retribution. There are many of us who
have avoided conflict with her after experiencing lies, some malicious. Example with me, after I
left she told people I stole tablets from the house. Others were threatened by apparently false
administrators and a wife of a US consulate official. It’s all discussed in the book and below.
There is much more that I did not discuss. But getting back to the issue of me encouraging the
students to leave the school, I did not do that, even though I should have. It was not my place. If
some asked I gave my opinion. But I did not go out of my way. I was an am extremely busy with
other work.
Well, that’s not true. You’re supposed to have a license and approval from the Haitian State. I
find it incredible that anyone would try to claim differently. Shows contempt for Haiti.
Moreover, the writer has already admitted knowledge to the contrary.
But unfortunately, you’re right in that Haiti is full of foreigners who do as they please and get
away with it. That’s part of the point I’m making in the book.
I’m getting this from Kolbe’s colleagues and the application …..
138. You write “Kolbe would soon ka.rn that foreigners could not get a license to open
a private University [sic] in Haili .” This is false. Several universities in Haiti have
been opened by foreigners including one which was opened the same year as ETS,
whose director was also an Americun PhD candidate in the United States at the
time. FmtJ1errnore, there is no “license” needed to open a university, there is only a
voluntary process DfrecogniLion hy MOF..
139. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe “learned” that only someone with a PhD could
open a university. This is not trne. Dr. Kolbe did not learn this as this js not true.
65
Yes, this is from one of Kolbe’s former colleagues/staff. It’s a trivial point. Given all the evidence,
no reason not to believe her.
Overwhelming evidence suggests she did just that. Inventing and intimidating students. Jennifer
Bilastra is the icing on the cake.
All substantiated earlier on in this document and the book. All well substantiated… Plus it’s one
more academic issue that has not place in a case of defamation. More evidence that the
complaints are an act of desperation.
140. You falsely write bat a graduate student in the United States came to you with
information about the name of the ETS director. This is a lie. The person who told
you is not a gradv.ate studen1 nor does that person live in the United States.
Secondly. it appears that you deliberately misspelled tbe name the ETS director,
“Sophcnic,” whose name is neither suspicious nor runny.
14 1. ln this section, you falsely state that Dr. Kolbe has produced “shoddy” data and is
··preying on impoveiished Haitians.” Neither of these accusations are true.
142. You fal se ly stated that Dr. Ko ]be “twice claimed and provided evidence for a
Haitian rape epidemic more severe than any known on eaiih at the time.” This is
not true. There were other conflicts with much higher rates of sexual assault than
Lhose in Hai ti.
143. In this section, you accuse Dr. Kolbe of giving a fi rsthand account of helping a rape
victim for which you claim she was not present. This accusation is false. Dr. Kolbe
was present, and you know that she was because she discussed this wilh you at
lenglh at that lime. Your response at the time was to summarily dismiss the report
the enumerator made of rape. In fact, you responded by advising Dr. Kolbe not to
take action because the woman who was raped likely ·’f -eked him and then
regretted it.” You then gave Dr. Kolbe an example or a time you yourself had been
accused or a rape which you claimed you did not commit.
66
The writer made this accusation before and it’s disgusting. I never did and I never would say
such a thing. I’m surmising that this is an attempt to play off of the fact that much of my two
chapters, those the writer is taking issue with, discuss false accusations of rape and rape
epidemics, including Kolbe’s own claims for rape indices in Haiti in excess of the highest indices
on the planet. Yes, if anyone were to read my analyses they would recognize instantly that such
a comment would be completely out character for me.
Nor was I ever in my life accused of rape.
By the way, these statements are good examples of defamation or slander. The writer states
them factually but, as they never happened, cannot possibly provide proof.
It’s also yet one more example of what would appear to any reasonable observer to be patterns
of deceit, the same kind of tendency we see in the Kolbe’s patterns of manipulation of the social
media, news outlets and academic venues. These are patterns that appears over and over in at
least the past 13 years of Kolbe’s career and public life. Possibly of that past 30 years. The 2004 –
2006 shenanigans were all documented in the press. More is now documented and hopefully,
through its exposure, the abuse will be checked. Yes, the fascinating thing is that this document
Kolbe has crafted and the demand for retraction is itself another example of the behavior I
describe in the book. It’s peppered with invented and unverifiable “facts” for which Kolbe has no
one or document to back it up. And we see the same attempts to use social media and threats
to squelch any criticism. Looking at the retraction demands, they read exactly like the demands
the fictitious Jennifer Bilastra—ETS administrator and wife of US consulate official—made of the
students. Is Kolbe going to threaten to have my passport pulled?
Of yes, I was forward correspondence on this issue. Be glad to share it at disclosure.
144. You falsely claim that ETS is a “gatekeeper’· for research. ETS lias no say in
whether people conduct research in Haiti, nor has the leadership of ETS, including
Dr. Kolbe, ever attempled to do so.
67
Same as above. Reference to Kolbe intimidating students, foreign and US, with threats from the
fabricated Balistra.
I think it’s fair to say that a “real” University is recognized by a State or licensing board,
accredited by at least one credible national or international institution, that it can give
recognized diplomas for the student’s hard work. Kolbe’s ETS is not recognized by Haiti, not
recognized by the US, not recognized by any State or governing entity on planet earth. Nor,
when I was writing and she was collecting money for useless diplomas, was it recognized by an
accredited institution. Not in the US, not in Haiti, not one in any country in the world. That’s in
addition to many other documented shortcomings. But the bottom line here is that Kolbe
invented ETS and then sold it at bargain price to Haitian students desperate for international
degrees. All this is heavily documented in the book and I can provide websites and abundant
testimonies from students and former staff. It’s fake. It might be real in Kolbe’s mind, but it’s
fake. Its’ fraud, it’s deception, and its exploitation of youth in one of the poorest counties on the
planet. And the writer as much as admit it’s fake in these pages, that it has no license or
accreditation.
145. You state that Dr. Kolbe “positioned” ETS to the ”status of research gatekeeper”
by means of a si ttiug un an elhical review board. Then you falsely claim this board
approved research that Dr. Kolbe did which would not have been approved in the
United States. This is false. First, the ethical research com111ittee at ETS did not
exist in 2006, 2009, or 2010, the three years during which studies were conduded.
Secondly, all three of these studies were approved by the fostitutional review boards
of the rn1iversities with which Dr. Kolbe was affiliated al the lime: Wayne State
University in 2006 and the University of Michigan in 2009 and 2010. Third, there
are several ethical review boards in Haiti that primarily review and act as
gatekeepers for foreign researchers; the Ethical Research Cornmi1tee (ERC) at ETS
is not one of them. 1l1e ERC at RTS primarily reviews research proposals by ETS
students, not foreigners.
l46. ETS is not a “fake” university.
148. You fa lsely claim that four foreign researchers and graduate students wrote letters
of complaint ta the University of Michigan School of Social Work. This is not true.
Two letters were sent, one fr.om you, and one from your employee, Keely Drookes,
co-signed by your daughter’s thee-roommate, Erika Childs.
68
Well, the writer just named three of them. Keely Brooks is not and never was my “employee”.
And why has Erika—who never was my employee– gone from my “employee” to my “daughter”
Almathe’s roommate”?
The only thing relevant here is that Keely Brookes considers herself another of Kolbe’s victims.
She came to the school thinking it was credible, worked for free, paid Kolbe money… As for
responses to letters, I personally wrote an email about Kolbe, sent it to the University of
Michigan, and never got a response. I know of at least four other people who did the same. The
lack of reply suggest that University of Michigan staff want to make no statements that would
imply they know of or support the school. As for me and my knowledge of this, Kolbe claimed
that the Dean personally encouraged her to start the school and promised support. I’m sure I
can dig up some old emails to that effect. As for other people who wrote, I know the students
did as well. At least that’s what they told me. And they tried to get me to translate a letter for
them—none of the students of the ETS English school could write a decent sentence in English.
At disclosure. I can retrieve those for you. But really, I don’t see the relevance. The most
important issues here are whether or not the students believe Kolbe fabricated Bilastra to
intimidate them, the letter about the consulate with fabricated threats…. Those are what are
most important. Did she fabricate them? I think that the overwhelming evidence makes it
reasonable for all of us to conclude that she did.
I think we got that one nailed down.
I think we can nail that one down too.
149. You falsely claim that “none” of the two letters was responded to. This js not true.
A representative of the University of Michigan School of Social Work spoke at
length to your employee, Keely Brookes, about the content of her letter. Not finding
Lhe complaints credible .is not the same as not responding to them.
150. Your assenion that Dr. Kolbe lkd to people or financially exploited them is false.
151. You falsely stated that Dr. Kolbe bas been accused of providing substandard
education. ln fact, Dr. Kolbe has never been accused of substandard teaching. She
has received very high student evalqations of her tealhing, both in Haiti and in the
United States.
69
More irrelevant academic issues
No idea what you’re talking about
Extrapolations…. And besides, these are once again academic issues that don’t concern the
court
Repeated point…. Dealt with elsewhere
152. You clc. im that Ors. Kolbe and Hutson did not say how they defi ned rape. This is
not true. They were very clear ahout how rape and sexual assault were defined in
all published repol’ts. In fact, you criticize this earlier in -your book and also quoted
from the portion of the study which defined rape. Drs. Kolbe and Ilutson used the
HURIDOCS standardized classifications for defi ning sexual assaltlts and
different iated between assaults which included penetration with penis, fin gers, or
other objects, forced oral sex, unwanted sexual touching, and other actions. This
was clearly stated in the article.
153 . Herc you falsely state that two different reports, written at different times and for
differem audLences, were actually the same report.
154. You inaccurately state that Dr. Kolhe and colleagues’ research found something
that they did not find. You are alt.empting to reinterpret their findings but clearly
lack 1l1e stati stical skills to so. Dr. Kolbe and her col leagues never said that rate of
sexual assaul1 would hold or that 7% of all women would be sexually assaulted in
a one-year period. This is somethfog that you claimec, and then falsely attributed
to Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues.
155. llere you fa lsely state that the six other authors on the paper you described are
university professors. This is not true nor has anyone ever claimed thi s was the case.
156. This is false. Drs. Kolbe and colleagues never put the percentage of people who
were sexua lly assaulted at )% of those sampled or 6% of all females. This
typographical error was made by someone else and was corrected before
publication and in all circulated copies of the article.
70
Repeated point…. Dealt with elsewhere
This is a misunderstanding of my point. I said that 20% of the people in the second survey
reported having been raped during the earlier period. It was Kolbe’s report. Is she cognizant of
the content?
This is dealt with elsewhere. I made no factual statements. I have no idea what you really did.
But based on the logistics and findings, there are serious doubts.
Yeah, sure, all journalism especially Kolbe’s is the complete responsibility of someone else.
That’s an absurdity. The editors may change what the journalist says, but it’s the journalist
who’s sifting through quotes and information, picking and choosing what’s relevant. And here’s
what I said,
At a certain point, seemingly fed up with the lack of sympathy from the international community, Duff
issued what sounded like a threat that Aristide’s supporters were now justified in launching violent
reprisals entitling an article, “We Won’t Be Peaceful and Let Them Kill Us Any Longer” (Interview with
Haitian Activist Rosean Baptiste, interviewed by Lyn Duff, 4 November 2005).
So I didn’t say that it was a threat. I said it “sounded” like a threat. And it sure does.
157. Thi s is a false representa tion of Dr. Kolbe and colleagues’ research. Th ey neve r
conducted o st udy whi c h interviewed people on ce and then again fom years later
and fo.md t hat fi ve uf 29 peopl e wliu repurl ed a sexual assault in the first s urvey
rep orted an other sexual assault in t he second surv ey. You again appea r to have
invented information.
158. Here agai n you fa lsel y claim Dr. Ko lb e a nd her collea gues did n.ot conduct the
survey wh ic h they fielded.
: 59. You fa lsely clai m th at Dr . Kolbe issue d a threat of violence. You also attri bute this
to a n emotional res ponse wh1 c h Dr. Kolbe d id n ot ex press or fee .. D r. Ko lbe did
not advocate for or against v io lence in this instance; s he w as assigned a story by
her producer. cuuJut:l1::chose th e title, a nd distributed :t w ithout D r. Ku lbt: be in g involved or even be ing
in formed o f such. Dr. Kolbe’s m otivation in co nduc ting t he inte rview was lo fu lfi ll
he r job as a journa list ; she is n ot responsible for the s tate ments made by t hose whom
she interviewed and she has not publicl y expressed a greement o r disagreement with
Stich statements.
71
This is dealt with elsewhere….
This is dealt with elsewhere….
This is dealt with elsewhere…. But just to remind you. Her is the quote from Kolbe’s resignation
letter. This is Duff/Kolbe account of what her boss said to her.
I’m management, don’t you understand that? You’re so stupid you can’t understand
that? …. fuck you…you’re through at KPFA…. get out of the movement… you’re too
stupid and out of it to know what’s going on.”
.
l 60. You appear to have mad e u p most of the content of this narrative. Dr. Kol he never
claimed tha: such British people were battli ng each other and reaching across the
A tl antic to harass her and Dr. Hutson. Nor is there any m enti on in the aiiicles or
statements made by Dr. Kolbe of Scotland Yar:i or individua ls being “sophisticated
enough” to evade Scotlfmd Yard.
16 1. Here you falsely claim that Dr. Ko lbe told the Institutional R ev iew Board one thing
and then did another. This is not tru e. Everything that was repo rted to the IRB was
done and everything that was done WES reported to the TRB .
162. You use th is footnote as evidence of a false statement you made earl ie1 th at Dr.
Kolbe was “fired” from Radyo T imoun. You then seek to cast doubt on whether
the events described in this section ever too k place. The event s as described by Dr.
Kolbe are accurate. Dr. Kolbe resigned from KPF/\ in 1997 in the mid st of a heated
union-m anagement conflict over contract renewal s. She was asked several times tu
return and later did so.
72
This is dealt with elsewhere…. Why would anyone on earth care enough to post a fake
resignation letter from Lyn Duff. And how is it that this was on line for some 20 years and
Kolbe/Duff never knew about it. Documentation is provided. I’m merely citing chat rooms and
posts that claim to be from Kolbe/Duff
Again, a firsthand and highly sympathetic account of Kolbe’s fight with her employer and a
resignation letter. And you’re saying Kolbe did not post it. So someone impersonated her, wrote
the account, and posted it? I find it incredible and telling that according to Kolbe, I did not get
one single fact right. Nothing on the internet is true except for what I could not find. Nothing she
said or posted was really her. And Almathe Jean invented Balistra.
This is dealt with elsewhere….
163. Th.is footnote follows a section of your book in which you falsdy claim that Dr.
Kolbe’s early life story is not true and that tlrns, her research as an adult in Haiti
should be dismissed. You further try to cast doubt on Dr. Kolbe’s integrity by
saying that she may have been the person to have wrilten these comments or posts
and put ihem online. However, Dr. Kolbe did not write the post~ or c.:omments
which you have referenced.
164. Dr. Kolhe did not post her resignation letter from KPFA online. It was posted by
Lyn Gerry (who is not, as you implied, a person created by Dr. Kolbe). Nor did Dr.
Kolbe make this post from Mark S. Bilk, a person she does not know. He was
apparently aware that Dr. Kolbe was a torture survivor because of the extensive
press coverage of her story and the story of other gay youths forcibly subjected to
aversion therapy at the time.
Furthermore, you put the term “to11ured” in quotes to imply that Dr. Ko lbe was not
t011ured. In fact, she was, and this is well documented despile your baseless
assertions that such events never took place.
165. This fo llows a section in which you claim that Athena Kolbe is not Dr. Kolbe’ s real
name. In fact, this is Dr. Kolbe’s name which ~he was given at birth by her parents.
73
This is dealt with elsewhere….
I’m confused because that’s what she and Muggah said in the LA Opinion piece written about
the survey I conducted…
Once again, the writer is imputing motivations and conclusions I did not make. I did not say
anything about conspiracy. I only presented the evidence. Here’s the statement,
166. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe never used her hyphenated name prior to 2006.
However, this 11arne, Athena Lyn Duff-Kolbe appears ou numerous documents and
is easily loiu1d in a number of sourt:c:s. ll is Lhe full name used in the court records
for her guardianship and associated hearings to prevent her ti·om being subjected to
further anti-gay to1ture in 1992. This form of Dr. Kolbe’s name appears in a number
of places during the 1980s and l 990s as previously mentioned.
167. You accuse Dr. Kolbe and her colleagues of referring to themselves as a “team of
North American researchers” as an “academic slight” of your team. This is fa lse.
And, it is irnpMsihle, ~ince Dr Knlbe and her team completed and J:L\blished their
research, describing it as such, long before you did and therefo re did not know that
in the future you would decide to conduct a similar study.
168. Here you f”al sely claim a conspiracy took place where a womar that Dr. Kolbe has
never met, Amy Wilentz, who had strong opinions about the earthquake death toll
influenced her husband, a man you say is an editor at the Los Angeles Times who
happens to edit the opiniou editorial page, lo solit:iL or accept an editorial by Drs.
Kolbe and Muggah which casts your research in a negative light.
This is a false narrative of what took place. Drs. Kolbe and Muggah do nol k.now
Ms. Wilentz and they did not work with a male editor in the submission and
ctpproval of Lheir edilorial, so it would not be possible that they worked with Ms.
Wilenlz’s husband. Vv11en their editorial was published it was a fema le editor, who
has no relationship to Ms. Wilentz, who accepted and edited their piece.
This op-ed was submitted to several newspapers and tbe authors made the decision
to have it published with the Los Angeles Times.
74
As for why Kolbe had published Opinion pages of the LA Times, of all places, as it turns
out that editor of the LA Opinion pages is none other than the husband of Amy Wilentz,
author of the Rainy Season, the major work defending the rise of Aristide. Wilentz and
Lyn Duff were both advocate-journalists working with Aristide in the mid-1990s. Willentz
was unhappy with the death toll controversy and the negative impact that many thought
it had on Haiti recovery effort.
The only statement someone can call into question here is how I know that Willentz was
unhappy about the death count. The answer is that I spent about an hour on the phone with
Willentz discussing it and she wrote about it in her 2013 book, “Farewell Fred Voodoo.”
I’m surprised I put that in the endnotes. But yes, it’s true. That’s what Smucker– a good friend of
mine and a highly respected consultant who has worked in Haiti for 40 years– had to say about
Kolbe after they met. He couldn’t understand how someone who could barely order something
to eat in Creole could be conducting surveys in Haiti. Here is exactly what I say,
To be exact, Duff/Kolbe, speaks no French, a smattering of Kreyol and she understands
even less than she speaks. I would estimate her Kreyol at the linguistic capacity of a 3-
year-old, an observation corroborated by the many students I know who have worked
with her and by Glen Smucker, another U.S. Ph.D. fluent in Kreyol who was baffled by
how she has accomplished so much in Haiti while so linguistically limited. Indeed, I was
rather stunned to learn this myself when I first met her. This is a person, a scholar no
less, who has been working and intermittently lived in Haiti for 27 years. Yet, she is not
functional in the common language. Nor does she make any pretense otherwise. She
uses translators with her students and she does not participate in teaching Kreyol to
foreigners in the courses she offers. Indeed, to my knowledge Duff/Kolbe has never made
an effort to systematically learn Kreyol or French. (page 453)
169. Here you give a long narrative falsely claiming that Dr. Kolbe does not speak
Creole or French. You further state that Glen Smucker corroborated this. However,
either you have lied or Dr. Smucker lied. Dr. Smucker has never spoken with Dr.
Kol be in Creole; they had lunch and only spoke English during the lunch, as they
are both English speakers. I-le would have had no context for evaltiating whether or
not Dr. Kolbe speaks Creole. You claim she is not fm1ctionally fluent in Creole and
that sl1e has never systematica lly tried to learn Creole or French. However, these
are all lies. You have previously affirmed that Dr. Kolbe is fluent in 1 Iaitian Creole.
75
Splitting hairs. Kolbe is ETS
She’s been in and out of Haiti since 1994 . If I said 27 instead of 23 it’s a slip….
Oh yes, I have it. Kolbe gave it to me. And that data comes from the questionnaire that was,
when I got on the job, incoherent. As for why the death count should have been high in the
sample, I think I explain that. They were cash for work recipients considered the neediest and
hardest hit. But out of 5,000 only some 5 had anyone in the household killed din the
earthquake. That’s a flag.
Well, we’re all entitled to our opinions aren’t we. Aren’t we?
170. Dr. Kolbe dces not offer Creole language courses to foreigners. ‘ll1ese classes art:
olforet.l by ETS. Dr. Kolbe does not direct the Creole language program and has
no role in tl:c program’s leadership or day-to-day functions.
17 1. You state tl1at Dr. Kolbe has been liv ing and working in Haiti for 27 years. This is
not accurate.
172. J\gai11, here you have made false statements about research that Dr. Kolbe
conducted and its Endings. You have never seen the complete \VFP dataset n3 it is
proprietary and it was not given to you. The parl of the dalii you had access to was
the po1tion you collected. However, your data had to be deleted ~i·om the dataset
as you did nut follow Lhe study protocols for sampling. F urther, this was a study of
program participants and beneficiaries, aot the general public. Thus1 the results
cannot 1:c generalized to the population as a whole.
173. Again. here you falsely accuse Dr. Kolbe of 1101 producing cr::cible research.
However, the only evidence you produce for th.is is false or based 0:1. yom own poor
statistical skills and misinterpretation of statistics.
76
Call it what you want. But yes, it’s my narrative. It’s my account. So in this case if you want
testimony that it occurred, you can get it from me. As for the technicality of WFP paying me. No
I have a letter from you and the University of Michigan hiring me. You signed the letter. Be glad
to share it at disclosure. As for this repeated point about not following instructions, the issue
was that some surveyors wrote dollars and some gourdes. I know that this is a confusion on all
surveys. In Haiti we have ‘dola’ and we have ‘goud’. One dola = 5 goud. Some people calculate
in one and some the other. Some calculate sometimes in one and other times the other. I’ve
even done a survey on the issue. A properly designed questionnaire can eliminate the problem.
But regarding you saying the data was therefore not good, an analyst experienced with data
from Haitian respondents could have fixed the problem. Until I figured out how to deal with on
the questionnaire, I used to fix those problems all the time. Apparently, the analyst who dealt
with the WFP survey did not have the insight into low income Haitian economic strategies and
behavior that’s that would have empower her/him to do that. They should have asked us,
meaning me or anyone on my team. We could have explained it to them. They did not ask.
174. This narratjve of your initial contact with Dr. Kolbe is far from the truth. You were
llired and paid by the WFP, not by Dr. Kolbe or her colleagues, or the Universi1y
of Michigd.11 as you have falsely cJaimed on your CV. Dr. Kolbe never offered you
$ 10.000 cash to do a one-w-eek survey. Dr. Kolbe never hired, paid, or employed
you. And your “work” was never used in this study though you may have still been
paid. You refused to fo llow the sLu·vey fielding protocols and the data you collected
had to be rccoJlected by others who actually followed the sampling procedures
correctly.
77
First off, yes, that’s exactly it. Kolbe knows very well what a professional statistical
representative and properly conducted survey is supposed to look like. And so when you first
look at her explanations and descriptions, they seem perfect. She even has the habit of
describing the survey process in the first person plural, as if she was there every step of the way.
But the problem, I would learn and recount in greater detail I the book and in subsequent
responses, I that she never was there. And by all accounts there serious and significant
shortcomings in the way the data is collected, verified (or rather, not verified), and transcribed.
And these shortcomings scream out from the her findings. And in the past her findings have so
fit her political leanings and interests of the humanitarian aid sector, while at the same time
being radically out of whack with what we know from other research, that there is good reason
175. You continue ym1r false narrative with another lie, claiming that after Drs. Muggah
amJ Ko lhe puh]ishecl the op-ed in the Los Angeles Times criticizin;; your research,
11ml Dr. Kolbe Then initiated contact with you. This is, of course, not true. A copy
uf your email to her, sent on June 16, 2011, is below:
From: Tim Schwartz [mailto:schwai1z833@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday,June 16, 201 1 8:33 PM
To: a1henadk@aoJ.com
Cc: kolbe@umich.edu
Subject: haiti, st1rveys
ALhern’-,
I’m not sure where 10 begin.
I’ve been meanit1g to get in touch with you for several weeks now.
As fate woulJ have i l, when the controversy over the death count began I had just
finished looking over yolll’ Lancet article. I had fallen into the same trap tnat so many
people must have fallen into. I had read some reference to you being a rabid Artistidc
pa11isan, implying lhat tbe survey \,Vas i1Jfh1ted Lo suit your politics, and so I didn’t take it
seriously. So–this is the fate pait–as I was realizing what an error I made, I was
unwittingly already in the process of getting the same sort of discrediting response to my
‘vvork ….
Just thought I would shore that.
Whal 1 was hoping to discuss with you is some oftl-1e details of the ‘Lancet survey’–as
everyone now refers to it–arnl sume of your Dlher work..
Just so you know where I am coming from here, the Lancet survey sounds well done. It’s
clear you knew/know what you’re doing . .t\.nd the results make perfect seme to me. lt
certain:y corroborates wbat all of us who are familiar wilb Hahi at that time would have
expected in terms of numbers. l plan on refetTing to it a chapter i am writing for a book
and so that’s why 1 am hoping to get some more clarificarions.
Hope that you will find time to respnm.l.
Tim
Timothy T Schwartz (PhD)
78
to believe its’ flawed, perhaps even tampered with. That’s the whole flipping point. And this
email above was my first contact with Kolbe. And yes, I too was duped.
What’s more, that email above was from June 16, evidence that I had reached out to Kolbe and
she had my contact before she published the July 12th 2011 in the LA Times where she and
Muggah called our research methods flawed and said that before researchers publish, ‘there
should be rigorous debate on methods because data is important, lives are at stake….’
Below, from July 19th, is the email where she admits to writing the op-ed and publishing it
without asking me for clarifications about the methodology, which she also admitted in another
email she knew nothing about.
The most interesting thing about it, in retrospect, is that after publishing this article which
attacks our methods and about which she never asked me, she begins this message with an
appeal to my emotions: her daughter had a brain tumor. It was powerful. But as time goes on
I’ve come to understand it as yet another example of the pattern of deceit and manipulation I
write about in the book. I would learn in coming years that it was not her ‘daughter’, per se, but
a foster child she had recently begun to take responsibility for and who had a pre-existing
condition. If she ever became her legal ‘foster daughter’—if she even exists– that’s still sad. But
it’s not what it seemed. Another appeal to emotion to detract from yet another deceitful act.
Here’s the email,
— On Fri, 7/29/11, Athena Kolbe <kolbe@umich.edu> wrote:
From: Athena Kolbe <kolbe@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: haiti, surveys
To: schwartz833@yahoo.com
Date: Friday, July 29, 2011, 6:38 PM
Hi Tim:
Sorry to have not responded sooner. My daughter has a been in the
hospital – she has a brain tumor – and I’ve been out of comission
dealing with her stuff and the insurance company for most of the past
month.
I don’t know if you saw it yet but one of my co-authors, Rob Muggah,
submitted a op-ed to the LA Times in response to your report. It was
quite critical of your report. I’m sorry for not having given you a
heads up about this when we were first in touch; as far as I knew it
was submitted right when the story first broke and then was rejected.
But a month later I guess they decided to run it. I haven’t read it
closely yet but it looks like it was heavily edited and my criticism
of USAID for leaking the report but not releasing the methods annex
79
was cut from the final version.
In any event, email is the best way to communicate right now. I’m not
sure when I’m going to back on line regularly.
Athena

Athena R. Kolbe, MSW, MA
Social Work & Political Science
Office Location: Haven Hall 6566
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Ok. We all have our opinions. Anyone who wants to verify if Kolbe is correct about me being
dumb or lacking in methodological skills can read my reports and articles. As for this reference
to Matts book and methodological issues, they have nothing to do with defamation. Kolbe could
not refuse to talk Matt’s without incriminating herself. I gave Matt’s all I had, including criticism
of Kolbe et. al. study. What he published was up to him. And influenced by whatever Kolbe was
telling him too. But it changes nothing about what I say in the book, my own analysis and
opinions.
176. This is a biz.arre narrative of events that is clearly false and bears no resemblm1ce
to the facts, which are clearly documented in emails between you and Dr. Kolbe.
You engaged in a lengthy ernai I and in-person discussio11 of the results, during
wh.ich it bcc,m1e very clear to Dr. Kolbe that you lacked the statistical skills to fully
understand or discuss the research process in which she was engaged. However, the
discussion. including the emai ls between you and Dr. Kolbe, is quoted in a book
titled The Polilical Econom.v of Disaster: Destilulion. Plunder and Earthquake in
Haiti.
80
Well, you know very well it’s accurate. At least what I recounted. As for what role Noel played,
he was the lead supervisor. He took off with those incoherent questionnaires to conduct surveys
in O’kay. And he was also your only co-author on the 2010 article reporting on the death count,
implying that he was also the lead supervisor on that survey. What more needs to be said there?
That seems like evidence that it’s all worse that I was even suggesting.
As for the incoherent questionnaire, the writer has already admitted in point number ## that the
instrument was flawed. If more is needed might be able to find that instrument. WFP might
have copies. We can certainly get testimony from Egain—who is living in the US now– that it
was incoherent and that we had to spend an entire evening fixing it.
Well, at the time, and regarding you, I can only conclude that based on the questionnaire. You
guys had done 5,000 surveys with an instrument that made no sense. And yes, I’m qualified to
judge. As for Noel ever finishing University, he came to Kolbe’s “University” as an undergraduate
in 2012 and only stayed a few months. So whatever “University” he had been attending, he
apparently did not last long. I also fact checked with some of his colleagues.
177. This narrative of events is false and you appear to have made up the events you say
took place. These conversations and interactions did not occur. The survey
instrument and translation for this particular study was provided by WFP and Mr.
Noel did not play the role in it that you have described. Nor did Mr. Noel disappear
for months.
I 78. Here again you falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe does not read Creole. You add to that
accusation that Mr. Noel, who was at the time a university student, was illiterate.
These are both false statements.
179. You falsely stated that Dr. Kolbe ”discovered” this case and that it occurred during
the fielding of this study, and you follow that up with saying it somehow impacted
the fielding of this study. However, this is a false repn~sentation of events. Events
did not occur in that order, at that time, and in the way in which you havt: porLrayed
them. Furthermore, you claim that Dr. Kolbe used an appeal to emotion to distract
from the creditability of her research; this is also false since the events did not occur
as yuu have described, lhere was no question about the credibility of Dr. Kolbe’s
research, nor was there a diEtraction from the non-existent question of credibility.
81
Yes, that’s right. From what I was told by Kolber, that’s the way it unfolded. I may have emails
about it. And it was quite an appeal to emotion. Did I include the part where Kolbe laughed
when recounting how Stephen, the WFP director cried because he had a 14 year old daughter of
his own…. As mentioned elsewhere, I’m in touch with Byron and if need be we can contact
Myrta and Stephen.
”Minor event”? Well, at least you’re admitting here that there was an incoherent copy. And you
seem to be admitting that Kolbe was not capable of writing the questionnaire, or editing it, or
even determining whether what WFP gave her was coherent. In other words, I should have
inferred from this experience alone that Kolbe was illiterate in Creole. All that is more than
enough to validate my main point. As for my version being a “false narrative,” you’re saying the
research team returned to the office. May I add we asked them to return because they had
some 1,000 or so of those “minor event” copies. That they were headed to Okay to apply them.
And no, they did not return. Kolbe had left the country and they still had not returned. Roger
hemming and hawing, complaining that he had car trouble. I must have a dozen or more
correspondences about that. Kolbe was frantic to get some equipment from him before she
fired him. Yeah, I’m sure that I have plenty of emails to substantiate that one.
Yeah, that survey melted down. The appeal to emotion came just in time.
180. This is another false narrative of events. The WFP survey instrument for this study
was provided by the WFP and translated by them. The final instrument including
translations and back translations was checked and finalized by the WFP. There
was no radical modification based on you being hired or after you were hired. You
are referring to a minor event when the wrong copy of a survey was photocopied
and the rcsc,u-ch team returned to the office to collect the correct cop)’.
181. You falsely claim that the events you described, which did not occt1r as you
described them, resulted in th is smvey “:nelting dmvn” or beingsccn as not
important, or being pushed aside. This is false. Since the events did not occur as
you have described them there was not subsequent melt d(lwn m clumge in priorities
or importance regmcl ing this survey.
82
Yeah, Hutson did not talk to Byron… And Byron was mad. I’m in touch with Byron. And I can be
in touch with Myrta if necessary. I can ask them if they remember. Yes, there seemed to be big
problems and odd things going on behind the curtain, things that Kolbe seemed to be hiding,
that I didn’t see, nor ever said I saw, but inferred based on what I did see and know. And signs
came from Kolbe’s conversations, like Hutson hanging up on her, a statistics professors finding
bad data…. By the way, I wrote Hutson, and never got a reply. I wonder if he would sign off on
that survey, swear the data showed no evidence of problems. And oh, what about the 800 or so
scantrons that will filed in so poorly that Kolbe had to give them back to Roger to be filled in
again. Am I to believe that with no supervision Roger and the team did anything more than
Christmas tree those scantrons? Did check? What that seems to mean, by the way, is that Kolbe
and the professors were not even reviewing the paper questionnaires. They were having the
surveyors and supervisors ask the questions on paper and then transfer that data to scantrons.
That in itself is stunning problem. It means that Kolbe and her crew opened relied on the
surveyors for the entire data transfer process. And that they missed an opportunity to check the
data. AND, I’ll point out, that the professional protocol would have mandated that the data be
transferred from the scantrons not once, but twice. More evidence that the data was either not
verified or collected and recorded in a shoddy manor. Important data, by the way, data that
Kolbe and Muggah pointed out in the LA Times has a bearing on life and death for 1,000s of
people.
At this point in time, by the way, I only thought that Athena Kolbe was incredibly naïve, that
people like Roger Noel and another survey supervisor (that later was none other than, according
to Kolbe, the supervisor responsible for the famous Lancet Survey; whom she subsequently
recounted to me had been taking advantage of her and who she caught giving her bogus data).
It was not until later, with the experience of the school that I began to question Kolbe’s integrity.
And it was not until 2012 and 2013 when I began intensely reviewing and writing about the
statistics for the rape issue that I began to realize her data from 2004-2006, and 2009-2010
182. Here you describe a series o.f events that never occurred. You did not wOTk on a
study which also involved Dr. Hutson. Dr. Hutson never flew to Haiti and never
refused to meet with Byron Poncesgura. Since these events did not happen, Mr.
Poncesgura was not “furious” for being “shirked.” Dr. Kolbe was the lead
investigator on the study which you worked on, not Dr. Hutson. You did not get to
meet Dr. Hutson because he was 1101 there, these events that you claim happened
did not occur. Dr. Hutson never hung up on anyone when talking about surveys for
this st1,1dy nor was he upset about surveys in this study since he was not involved in
this study in any way. You were not hired as, nor did you work as, a “field director”
for this study. This study was not “a mess” nor v,ras it “bogus.” There was extensive
fo llow-up by and with WFP regarding this study for more than a year afterwards.
83
might be corrupted. As recounted in the book, a study I carried out in 2013 left little room for
doubt. And so that’s when I went back and started to pull all this together and realized that
something more might be going on.
Look, I don’t ultimately know what’s going on in Kolbe’s mind. She may be criminal, it might be
something psychological. It might have something to do with her getting shock treatments (or
tortured as she says elsewhere in this document). It might just be a case of egregious negligence
and self-righteousness. She might think that she’s a saint that all she does and has done is
ordained by God. But that’s not what’s at issue here. What’s at issue is that there is this pattern
of apparent deceit and publication of important but illogical findings that appear to be based on
bad data. With that data she’s been impacting the lives of 10 million Haitians. The data she
produced has arguably influenced international politics, providing data that could have
precipitated—and may have been intended to—sway the US support against the then Haitian
interim government. I’m not saying I liked that government. I did not. But it doesn’t justify using
questionable data to destabilize it. And since that time, she again appeared to use questionable
data to embarrass yet another government (in 2012) that was opposed to her friend and
mentor—Jean Bertrand Aristide—and her data has undisputedly influenced the way that aid
organizations in Haiti spend money. And I would and do argue that that all that was also done
irresponsibly and with shoddy or bogus data. This is serious stuff. It should be aired. If she can
respond in print and prove this is not true, great, more power to her. But it mustn’t be swept
under the rug, repressed or hidden. This is the very essence of why we support free speech.
Anyway, all this does substantiate points I make elsewhere and adds additional support to the
deduction that Kolbe was coming up with findings based on data that may well have been
bogus or, at the least, shoddy. But none of this is really relevant as I did not make any factual
statements beyond what I did see, which is the questionnaire. And while the writer has denied
the extent of the use of that questionnaire, she has admitted it was flawed. I might even be able
to locate a copy of that questionnaire as well as correspondence regarding having to rewrite it.
And if this were to go farther, I would like to hear directly from the other professors who were
part of that survey. Can you can get some statements about the excellent data that was
collected?
I think the students and ETS staff provided sufficient evidence for any reasonable observer to
conclude that Balistra does not and never did exist. But if she does, let’s get a statement from
her.
183. You claim that Jennifer Balistra was an administrator at ETS. She was not. She was
a volunteer instructor.
84
I don’t know what title Kolbe officially bestowed on Almathe Jean, but she was de facto head of
staff. Before I get into the justification for saying that, let me once again point out that the
writer keeps saying “daughter” with all the intended weight of Almathe Jean being my
biological offspring and brought up under my auspices and me having nurtured her profound
love and loyalty. The fact is I do care very much for Almathe Jean. I lived my first year in Haiti in
the home of her parents. They subsequently died after I left. I returned, took Almathe Jean to
live in a city with another misfortunate child. With the help of a missionary woman who I was
close to and who had a school, we got Almathe an English education as far as highschool. But
she was not living with me for most of that time. For most of that time I was not even in Haiti.
Almathe may have spent more of her life living with Kolbe than with me. As for loyalty, I’m not
sure that Almathe feels the same way about me as I do about her. After I realized Kolbe was
running a sham school and I disassociated myself with her school, Almathe stayed on as Kolbe’s
main assistant, de facto running the school in her frequent absence. And she did so for
something like 18 to 24 months. And so if this is some kind of attempt to imply that she was
more loyal to me than Kolbe, I don’t think that fits. Getting back to the point about her being de
facto head of staff, we can get sworn statements and emails that demonstrate her conspicuous
role. I don’t know what Kolbe title she had. I can ask Almathe. But she was de facto running the
school.
184. There is 110 position at ETS called ”head of staff’ nor has a 27-year-old high-school
educated Hajtian 1,,voman been in a supervisory position at ETS. You are referring
to your daughter, Almathe .Jean, who was an administrative assistant and
receptionist at ETS. She was not a head of staff.
185. You claim that Jennifer BaJistra “ftrst appeared” in February 20 14 in response to
an accusation of w1wanted sexual advances by Kolbe. This is fa lse. Firstly, at this
point Jermifer Balistra, had volunteered off and on at ETS for more than a year and
completed a Creole language program at ETS, to which you had initially referred
her. Secondly, Dr. Kolbe never made sexual advances towards your daughter,
Alrnathe Jean, who you refer to here as a “27-year-old hi gh-school educated Haitian
woman .. nor was she ever accused of having done so.
85
I think that Balistra is a done deal. I see little room to doubt that “someone” invented her. But I
think I see what you’re doing here. You’re shifting responsibility to Almathe Jean—who is
supposedly my daughter—and to Maria Puccio—who you do not mention is Kolbe’s sexual
partner—and you’re hiding Kolbe behind ETS being an institution that she is claiming she does
not own and is not the director of. The only thing that seems odd is blaming Maria Puccio. But
she’s done that before. According to the students and staff at ETS, Kolbe blamed Maria when
the maids took her to court over an accusation she made against them for stealing. It appeared
to be a type of shell game: Kolbe got called into court so she blamed her partner, the other
foreigner, who was out of the country, thereby obscuring and dragging out the process.
As for the letters from Balistra and this email. I think a reasonable person would simply accept
that the email was real and had not been altered. There was no reason for anyone to alter it. I
got it long after the fact. There was no law suit associated with this email, no follow up on the
accusation that you Kolbe sexually harassed Almathe. I didn’t even know about it until staff
from the school shared the email with me, months if not a year after the fact. And the reason
they gave me the email had nothing to do with Almathe. It was to show the lifespan and
activities of the fictitious Bilastra.
But most importantly here, the writer categorically denies this ever happened. No sexual
harassment, no accusation, and no intervention from Balistra. I’m 100% confident that in
addition to the emails, we can provide sworn statements from Kolbe’s former students and US
graduate students who were at the ETS that these accusations and this intervention by the
Ms. Jean did not complain lo a “US Doctoral student” from the University of
Michigan or from any another 1miversity, nor was such as person (a doctoral student
from Michigan) “newly signed on” as an administrator fo r ETS. You then include
the as evidence an email you present as being sent from Jennifer Bal istra to this
“U.S. doctoral student” who supposedly was from the University of Michigan.
1 lowevcr. the text you present has been altered by you or someone else.
Furthermore, the person to whom this email was sent has never been a doctoral
student and nor has this person ever been affi liated with tht: University of Michigan.
The US doctoral student from the University of Michigan who was at ETS at the
time that Iv1s. Jean resigned from her position was another person entirely and this
person did not receive any complaints from Ms. Jean nor was she the recipient of
this email in either its original or in this, its altered form.
86
apparently fabricated Bilastra really occurred. One more example of Kolbe’s inclination to tell
untruths.
That should be more than enough to convince a reasonable person that one may conclude a con
and fake school. If necessary, we can also get digital forensic specialists to help with verification.
Interestingly, by the way, I don’t think I ever come right out and say that Kolbe created Balistra.
Of course I believe that. But I’m pretty sure I simply provide the evidence available to me and
the students and leave it for the reader to decide. If I make any factual statements in the
conclusion of the chapter, they are built on long list of arguments and data the logic of which
and the sources of which have been provided to the reader thereby allowing the reader to
evaluate for him or herself the credibility of the claims.
See above
Again, I think I see what’s going on here: Kolbe is trying to hide behind the school, as an
institution—even though she admits that it’s not licensed or even a state approved institution.
She was just a director of the Social Work Education. It’s really a Haitian Enterprise that she just
works for. The fact that she’s doing that tells me that she must feel guilty of misrepresentation
and exploiting the students, among other things. As for how and why I make the conclusion
that it’s her school: first, I think that any reasonable person who reads the other comments can
conclude that it’s her school. But more relevant here, I know that virtually no one in Haiti—
Haitian or US graduate student—is under any delusion who founded, runs and owns the school.
And I’m confident that we can provide overwhelming evidence that any reasonable observer
would make the conclusion that it’s Kolbe’s school. Moreover, I’m not just any reasonable
186. You have misrepresented the content, context, and the circumstances under which
this email was written, why, and how it was received. Furthermore, the version you
bave published has been altered from the original version that Professor Puccio
received.
87. Dr. Kolbe is not and does not claim to be a ” longstanding eminent scholarly
authority on Haiti.” Nor is she the chancellor of ETS. ETS does not have a
Chancel tor. Dr. Kolbe is the Director of Social Work Education under the
leadership of the university di rector and as a member of the leadership team. Dr.
Kolbe lrns never “cowed” foreign academics.
87
observer. I have intimate knowledge of the school and her role, as discussed above and as
attested to by the Kolbe herself in the commentary earlier on.
As for the claim that Kolbe thinks she’s a “longstanding and eminent scholar on Haiti.” Given
her publications and high profile on the internet, articles in major newspapers, papers given at
academic conferences, it’s fair to claim that she, Kolbe/Duff, considers herself a longstanding
and eminent scholar on Haiti. The fact that this is being used as a point of denial and contention
is one more example of duplicity and suggests that she is simply disagreeing with everything in
an attempt to overwhelm.
As for “Chancellor”, what would Kolbe like to call herself? Since she invented the school and
completely dominates it’s every working, she’s free to call herself whatever she pleases. She
may call herself the janitor if it serves her interest. But we can and will provide overwhelming
documentation and sworn statements that a reasonable person would conclude that she is the
owner and de factor chancellor of this institution she refers to as a “University.”
Oh yes, they complained. And if this makes it to court they’ll be more than happy to complain all
over again.
Dealt with elsewhere.
188. Here yot1 falsely claim that graduate students had complained about ETS and/or Dr.
Kolbe. This is false. No graduate student has complained about ETS or Dr. Kolbe
in her role at ETS to the University of Michigan, lo ETS, or to anyone else
as:mciatecl with ETS. The two individuals you referenced as having been graduate
students (your employee, Ms. Brookes, and her fri end/roommate Ms. Childs, are
not graduaie students and were not gradl!ate students at any time durjng their tenure
with ETS.
189. Here you again, falsely claim that Dr. Kolbe is not fluent in Haitian Creole though
you yourself have cetiified several times that sJ1e is fluent in Creole.
88
I was making the point in the context of what is arguably the massively irresponsible blunder
and meddling in Haitian affairs that a scholar accomplished since Kolbe and Hutson published
the 2006 Lancet report discussed earlier.
As described above, in 2012 these three researchers predicted that there would be famine in six
months after hurricane Sandy. And they circulated that data to all the NGOs and they got it into
the New York Times via the AP.
Kolbe, Muggah and Puccio sounded the alarm right in the midst of a major attempt to
reinvigorate Haitian agriculture through local purchases. The US government and World Food
Program and the European Union were all pushing programs designed to promote local
production. Not least of all, the new Haitian government launched Aba Grangou, a massive
program that linked food relief to promotion of local production. I was actually working for
CARE at the time to develop complementary strategies to promote local production. While I was
working for them, and while the Government was trying to launch Aba Grangou, these three
scholars declared there was going to be a famine in six months. Again, they circulated a report
to all the NGOs and got it into the international press via the AP. There was absolutely no
reason to believe the hurricane would have long lasting impact on production, and it didn’t.
They arguably set back the movement to promote local production by 3 to 4 years.
Jeez, I’ve written a book largely about his issue. The US was arguably responsible for crashing
the Haitian agricultural sector during the 1980-90s and early 2000s. They did it by flooding the
market with food aid. When the Obama administration came in there were a lot of admissions
of guilt and they launched the massive Feed the Future program, whereby instead of swamping
the developing world agricultural countries—such as Haiti—with food and lowering productive
capacity, they would help rebuild that capacity. The aid that came with the earthquake set that
attempt back. Right about 2012 it was getting underway again. There were voucher programs
in the south purchasing local production. Then came the Kolbe, Muggah and Puccio, not one of
whom knows anything about rural Haitian agricultural strategies. They had no training in rural
Haitain agricultural strategies, no training in agronomy, never had written about it before,
never lived in rural Haiti. Nothing! Wow. And she doesn’t want me criticizing this. Are you
kidding? Is this Russia? China? Is what they did a good thing?
190. You claim that Dr. Kolbe is unquali fied to “weigh” in on academic research topics
in Ilaiti, which you clt:scribe as being “far afield from her own supposed expertise
as food security.” Dr. Kolbe has extensive training and experience including with
research. teaching, and social work interventions in the areas you mention. These
experiences, such as a doctoral degree, various master’s degrees, years of work
exper.iem:(.; in social work, and other experiences, both inside and outside of Haiti,
qualify her to weigh in on the various subjects you mention.
191. You falsely claim that Dr. Kolbc’s data has never been vetted. This is not true.
89
Dealt with elsewhere.