U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 15, 2010 01:57 AM UTC

Media focus on plagiarism overshadows big underlying issue of fraud

  • 22 Comments
  • by: Jason Salzman

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

It’s natural that journalists would be focusing on plagiarism in the strange story of Scott McInnis, the Hasan Family Foundation, and the water articles. Writers think about plagiarism all the time. And McInnis’ assignment as a Hasan Fellow was mostly to write a “series of in-depth articles on water.”

But what’s more germane, going forward, is probably fraud, not plagiarism. And this is a story line that journalists should track closely.

That’s because McInnis had apparently entered into a contract with the Hasan Family Foundation to write the water articles. McInnis is correct when he says that the articles were never published, but, still, McInnis probably had a contractual agreement with the foundation to produce original articles, not to copy Judge Gregory Hobbs’ work.

His plagiarized articles appear to constitute a breach of his contract, and breach-of-contract is a common type of fraud.  Even if the work was being done for a foundation, it was a business transaction, and in the business world, unlike the day-to-day world journalists occupy, breach of contract, not plagiarism, rules the day.

And the Hasans look like they are in just the right mood to file the civil fraud lawsuit, given that they’re pissed (“shocked, angry, and disappointed,” according to an Hasan news release), and they’re conducting an internal investigation that could result in their asking for their money back from McInnis.

One might think McInnis would be jumping head over heels to calm the Hasans, given the media frenzy that would emerge from a lawsuit, but not really.

On the Caplis and Silverman show yesterday,  McInnis stopped short of promising to return the money to the Hasans, if necessary, though he did say he’d try to work things out with them.

Silverman: Are you going to give the Hasan family their money back?

McInnis: As I say, I’m going to sit down and talk with them and do what we need to do to make it right.

To win a fraud case against McInnis, according to lawyers I spoke with, the foundation would have to prove four general elements, which hinge on  whether McInnis knew his articles were plagiarized.

Asked by Craig Silverman yesterday whether he had signed a form stating that his work was “original,” McInnis said no.  

But as has been widely reported, 2005 memo submitted to “Seeme Hasan, Chairwoman; Hasan Foundation” under the name of “Scott McInnis, Senior Fellow” states, “All the Articles are original and not reprinted from any other source.”

McInnis is claiming that his researcher made the writing mistakes that resulted in the plagiarism. This would make McInnis’ deceit unintentional. But his researcher, Rolly Fischer, is blaming McInnis for the plagiarism, so there looks to be lots of material for a court fight, with McInnis, Fischer and the Hasans as the star witnesses.

“A civil fraud claim by the Hasan Foundation is one of many things that Scott McInnis needs to be worried about today,” Craig Silverman wrote me via email. “$300,000 is a lot of money to make, and a lot of money to return.  If a lawsuit happens, then there are the costs and attorney fees to be considered. If this is fully played out,there would be brutal lengthy depositions and other forms of discovery before you ever get close to a trial.”

Drew Dougherty, media contact for the Hasan Foundation, told me today that the foundation will not make any decisions about next steps until after its internal investigation is completed. He doesn’t know how long this will take.

Journalists should discuss the fraud case with lawyers and the Hasans themselves, as this story plays out.

Tweet
Share

Comments

22 thoughts on “Media focus on plagiarism overshadows big underlying issue of fraud”

  1. I think the average person following the story is lumping it all together though.

    It’s all lies. He lied about it being original work and he lied about it being his work.

    While those are two very different lies, a lie is a lie as far as voters are concerned.

  4. Jason, to all the others who have thanked you for tracking this issue. I for one have not been surprised. I’ve never found Scooter to be authentic.

  6. He used “the articles were in the public domain” as a defense.

    WTF?! (Where is the Interobang when we need it so much these days?)

    So, Willian Shakespeare is in the public domain so I can use his words without attribution?

    Jesus. Scooter is a lawyer. Did he not learn anything during all his education?

    Watching him all I could think of was “bullshitter”. Some people (not to point to Sarah Palin) think they can just bullshit their way through anything.

  7. .

    I think that they are the only ones with standing to charge him with this alleged fraud, or to charge McInnis with breach of contract.  I don’t think you have such standing, Jason, and I’m pretty sure I don’t.  

    I cannot see how the Hasans can reach the conclusion that filing such a suit is in their best interests, especially if they have competent legal advice.

    Let’s walk through this.

    I am going to use the language and mindset of federal contracts and assistance, since that’s what I know, but which may not be 100% applicable.

    .

    First, this is a “grant,” not a contract.  

    In a contract, the awarding entity (Government agency, in my experience)  promises money in an amount certain in exchange for the delivery of some specified good or performance of some specified service.  This is what you called a “business transaction.”

    In a grant, the money is promised in exchange for a promise to give one’s best effort to try to do something.  Payment is not contingent on delivery of anything specific or completion of any particular action.  In Basic R&D, for example, a Principle Investigator (research grants usually go to a PI) could start out exploring how an atomized spray coating might protect a radome on a spacecraft, and then pivot and decide to examine the effects of fabricating the radome out of different materials.  Research can be serendipitous.  The PI exercises great discretion.  As long as he was pursuing the overall objective, he still “earned” the grant.  It is NOT what you called a “business transaction.”

    Scott could reasonably claim that reading articles was part of his research.  If he was a better attorney (don’t attorneys all keep close track of how they spend their time, for billing purposes ?) he could claim that nearly every contact with the general public was an occasion of outreach, pursuant to the goals of the Fellowship.  Even when paying the cashier at the grocery store.  So, if he was more competent, he could show on paper that he invested a great deal of effort into this Fellowship, even though he was employed full-time doing something else, and even though he doesn’t have much to show for all that effort.  

    I doubt that the Hasans think that they had a “contract” for Scott to write articles.  

    Their beef is that he didn’t invest he effort that they expected.  Their recourse was to cancel or not renew, which is what they did.

    So what happens in this lawsuit that you are fantasizing about ?

    Hasan Family Foundation charges that Mr. McInnis did not give his best effort.  

    Mr. McInnis responds that, yes, I am nearly incompetent, and what you got was the best that I was capable of.

    Case Closed.

    Ruling in favor of Mr. McInnis.

    .

    Jason:

    you hit a walk-off Grand Slam here.  Take a moment to savor the win.

    Don’t sully the victory with this tangential puffery.

    .

    1. .

      This was a Fellowship,” which is a lot like a “Scholarship.”

      Ever hear of a philanthropic organization that gives out scholarships collaring a particularly poor student and asking for the money back ?  I never have, but maybe you have.  

      If so, please tell me about it.  If not, please admit how preposterous the point of this Diary is.

      .

      1. There was a student at Fairview a couple of years ago who blew off his senior spring semester and got all Fs. He graduated but when the college asked for his final transcript and saw that, they withdrew his full scholarship.

        1. .

          If it wasn’t clear, I meant withdrawing a scholarship AFTER THE MONEY WAS ALREADY SPENT.

          Sorta like the situation with McInnis, where the money was actually handed out, over a period of two years, more than 4 years ago.

          That’s why I included the phrase “asking for the money back” in my post.  That is NOT what happened in your example, where the money was never disbursed.  

          .

          1. There’s a stipulation when you receive a scholarship or grant that you will maintain the terms or the offer can be rescinded, the money may need to be returned, etc.

            Pell grants for example can make it tricky because a lack of eligible credits to be considered full time (12 credits with D or better) in a semester means you get a bill for the financial aid that you’ve already spent

          2. McInnis was paid for work; this wasn’t the sort of “pay someone’s tuition ‘scholarship'” you’re alluding to.  A lot of folks employed at universities, think tanks, or foundations have the title “Fellow” or “Fellowship” — but they’re doing work for hire.

      2. would lose a scholarship in an instant.

        With the Hassan Foundation and McInnis, we don’t have a copy of the agreement between the two parties, if there was one at all.

        If in the original agreement there was a phrase about ‘original’ or other clarifying statements, McInnis didn’t hold his end of the agreement. Can he be sued to return the money? I don’t know without seeing the original agreement.

        If the Hassan Foundation had a verbal agreement with McInnis about his duties as Hassan Fellow and nothing in writing, it will be hard to prove any ‘breach’ on McInnis’ part, I’m guessing.

        It seems the Hassan Foundation didn’t enter into the agreement with both eyes open since in the press release announcing the Fellowship, McInnis is called

        “the most knowledgeable person in the state when it comes to Federal and State laws regarding water and land issues”

        Does that make them negligent? No. Does it give them an opportunity to recoup wasted money? Again, don’t know without the agreement in hand.

          1. It will be interesting to see if it surfaces.

            The Hassan Foundation isn’t blameless in this, if only that they chose to spend so much money on McInnis and not do anything about the apparent disregard McInnis had for fulfilling the terms of the contract, if there was one.

    2. it wouldn’t stop an angry millionaire from filing a lawsuit.

      But you have to guess that they’ll reach a settlement, but with this story, who knows?

      1. .

        Even when I do something I’m proud of, when it hits the paper, I end up lookin’ like a chump.  C.f., 2 June 2007 WaPo, page D-1.  And Fainaru ain’t no slouch, Pulitzer finalist and all.  

        Who wants to be deposed under oath ?

        Who wants to be crossexamined ?  

        who wants a newspaperman poking around in yer trash can ?

        Filing a lawsuit can have the unintended effect of also putting the claimant in the spotlight.  It would make the Foundation a target and an issue, even if they’ve done nothing wrong.  Plus, did I mention the death threats ?

        .

    3. who told me you even need a piece of paper to win a civil fraud case. Just depends on manyh factors, and this case would have a shot.

      And now we know the Hasans want ALL their money back. So who knows where this will go.

  8. NOW McDingus is concnered about MAKING IT RIGHT.

    That’s just A couple of years and several hundred hours of original research and writing too late, isn’t it?

    Why in the hell can’t these guys ever ask a good follow up question?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

88 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!