The Claremont Conservative has decided to honor the anonymity of the alleged victim, who, though a previous blotter mistakenly said she declined to prosecute, has now filed criminal charges against Wilner. Although an initial police blotter claimed she did not seek medical attention, a source close to her notes that she later did when she noticed scratches and bruising around her eye and face. Later that day, the victim returned to the police station where the police took down a report that was sent to the district attorney.
She has also referred the matter to the school's judicial board, or J-Board, where it will be tried after March break. During March break, Wilner is set to go to Kuwait University on a school-sponsored trip with Professors Bassam Frangieh and Lisa Cody. It is not known at this time whether or not he will still be attending given the charges filed against him.
This wasn't the first time that Wilner has had a run in with the law. He was arrested on October 31, 2010 at Harwood Halloween for resisting arrest and drunken disorderly conduct. His bail was set at $10,000 and spent the night in a holding cell. That record is here.
We don't know why Wilner's bail was set at $10,000 which seems shockingly high.
Wilner could not be reached for comment on this story. All three police logs are below, with the most recent to least recent down below.
The comment section of this post is monitored so as to protect the anonymity of the alleged victim.
162 comments:
Can you address the validity of the first arrest record? In your post you say he was arrested at Harwood Halloween, but the scan shows him arrested in New York. Thanks.
That's his home address, idiot.
Is this true? Is my alma mater really paying for this little heathen to go on a trip with Professor Frangieh? The guy apparently has a history of violence and embarrasing drunken antics. I also understand that this little guy got a cushy internship through a Gann connection at CNN. I sure hope he signs an employment contract before his past becomes more widely known, which it will. Facts can be a very pesky thing.
There is a Wilner or two in almost every CMC class. However, this is the first one ive heard about with a publicly documented history of physical violence against females and a sophmorish inability to enjoy some booze now and again...
Can you explain how the second two dispatches pertain to Wilner? His name doesn't appear on them.
The fact that he already has a history of violence at such a young age is alarming enough, however punching a fellow FEMALE student in the face four times during an on-campus event is an absolute red flag.
The first arrest record was taken in Claremont, but they asked for his home address.
Yes, this is true. He is traveling on that trip with Professor Frangieh and Professor Cody. By Wilner's own admission, President Gann did get him a summer internship at CNN.
His name appears on the first and third dispatch. The second one is him. I asked the alleged victim when she went in to report him. As you can imagine, the Claremont PD dosen't get too many assault charges filed.
I wonder what process GANN employed to pick one lucky student for whom to get a highly desirable internship. I assume she used the same precess as she uses when blindly choosing a candidate for lateral tenure. In this case, though, one is a woman-beater and the other an anti-israeli who openly supports terrorist organizations. Presidnet GANN, if you are reading this, please get me an intership this summer as I have a history of clubbing baby seals. Since when does a college's president use their own influence to benefit a singles student? Did Wilner's Gann-Bar have the golden ticket in it or something?
We fired Wilner from the CI for being too close to Pam Gann and not asking her tough enough questions. He then made a career at the Port Side, the Forum, and from the looks of it, CNN.
For some of us who know him, somehow this doesn't come as a surprise.
I wonder how the administration will treat its favorite student in a J-Board action. I don't blame the student for her lack of faith in CMC's process and her desire to press criminal charges.
Never thought I would say this, but damn, CJ, good work.
CJ's exposes a supporter of terrorism, then Gann's pet, all I want to know is: "what's next?"
I just read some of Wilner's "articles" on The Forum. That stuff was maaaad boring. This guy has plenty of interesting topics to probe. For example, he apparently has first hand experience in what is going through a man's mind when he repeatedly strikes a woman in the face. This would make way better human interest reading than Carl's Jr. v. In-n-Out.
Maybe it was a hoax. Maybe she punched herself in the face 4-times Kerri Dunn style just to raise awareness about domestic violence.
Wilner -- I know you are obviously closely monitoring this blog as your world crumbles around you. So, lets hear it. Is it true? Now is the time to dig deep into your journalistic handbag-o-tricks and explain this all away with the written word. The pen is mightier than the, well, closed fist.
As interesting as this whole story is, the more interesting question for me is how somebody ends up with a $10,000 bail for disorderly conduct. That kind of bail means he either really pissed of the cop or has a long history of similar incidents.
I am not a regular reader of CC but this article has been all over Facebook. I fail to understand how someone with a history of violence can still be allowed to represent CMC in Kuwait. In all fairness, CMC does give all its students a wealth of opportunities but this is ridiculous.
Wanna know something crazy? I bet there's a pattern here.
That means that after the girl filed the report with the police Wilner was able to go and "moderate" that discussion with the presidents. We know why he was so big on Scripps drinking policy!
But seriously, WTF?! He's on a school trip to Kuwait and I'm not? If Gann's smart -- and she ain't -- she'll bring his ass home.
Damn this is scandalous. And I thought Frangieh was a big deal.
Just a spelling note, in the "Labels" section of this article the word "nservative" appears. If this is a mistake, you might wish to change it so people can find similar articles in your archives.
has he been found guilty of anything? weren't the first charges dropped? what happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Innocent people don't get bail set at $10,000 and then have the charges dropped. People with good lawyers do.
I applaud Charles Johnson for the way he has written this article. He has presented the facts and left out the personal bias. Hopefully the school steps up and responds in an appropriate way.
Everyone needs to stop being so quick to judge Michael. Maybe this "vistim" deserved to be punched in the face. I mean, she was blocking him from having a good place to stand at the concert. Lets get all the facts before we start jumping to conclusions, people.
First Scott Wilbur...
Then Michael Wilner...
I see a trend here
After reading this article, I went to the Forum to see whether it had issued any statements in the eight days since the alleged incident. So far it hasn't. Mr. Wilner is now listed as Editor Emeritus but it isn't clear whether he resigned as a result of this accusation or whether it is just time (since he is a senior). The Forum's lack of attention to this incident is quite disturbing.
Here is an anonbymous comment from the Forum on the 5C Presidents' event: "Ha. Wow, this event is so much different now that we know that Wilner was drunkenly punching girls before it went down." At the moment, these are but accusations. However, even the accusation of attacking another student at the Claremont Colleges is a big deal (at least it should be). If they turn out to be true, the fact that Mr. Wilner chose to moderate the Claremont Presidents will be a spectacular embarrassment for the entire Consortium. In fact, if the accusations are true, it also shows incredibly poor judgment on his own part - to be representing the Forum and therefore CMC's student body the an entire day after an incident.
It is possible that these accusations are simply not true. If Mr. Wilner is misunderstood or misrepresented, the fact that the Forum is still silent - eight days after the incident - is just plain confusing. In fact I am really confused that this issue - the accusation, at least - wasn't reported at all. Either way, I am disappointed by the way in which things have been handled.
Nice work, CJ. I'm an alum of CMC and a supporter of your work.
If true, should CMC consider not issuing a diploma to Wilner come graduation time?
He should be asked to reimburse CMC for the money it wasted sending him on a free trip to the mid-east.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
CJ is the gossip girl of the Claremont Colleges.
Gossip? Really? You think this is gossip? While that's not nearly as disturbing as Michael Wilner and his actions, it's nonetheless disgusting and shameful. Michael Wilner represents everything that is wrong with CMC. He didn't strike that poor girl because he was drunk or she provoked him. He struck her because of his sense of entitlement. He's used to getting things for nothing. Any kind of refusal or disappointment probably enrages him. I will loose all respect for CMC and President Gann if Michael is not seriously punished. At the very least, he must be suspended and sent home. He should not be allowed to graduate.
I call on the Class of 2011, and the alumni at large, to withhold all donations to CMC until Michael is punished. Gann's pet should not get special treatment.
If only Michael Wilner didn't dislike girls so much...
I think everyone would be better served by remembering that all of these charges are still completely alleged, and to refrain from condemnation until both you and J-board/the courts have actually learned what happened.
Pretty sure we're still an innocent until proven guilty society, and while these are serious charges, they are also currently unsubstantiated.
According to CJ, the charges have been substantiated by the victim as evidenced by her continuing to have him prosecuted criminally. All this "innocent until proven guilty" bologne is pissing me off. He has been arrested 3-4 times for the same types of things. Innocent until proven guilty? Maybe. Subject to public scrutiny until proven innocent? Absolutely.
"Anonymous said...
If only Michael Wilner didn't dislike girls so much..."
What does this post mean? Does he have a history of anti-female behavior or something?
He has thrust himself into the eye of public scrutiny by volunteering for consortium events, being a publsihed journalist, and loudly comemnting on local/political affairs. This comes with the territory. My money says CJ would never report on the issues he reports on if he had any skeletons. I bet CJ is as clean as they come, otherwsie no way he'd have the balls to call other people out this way.
Actually, no. Michael has been arrested once before, and not for a violent crime. All it takes for a criminal trial to continue in cases like these is for a person to press charges, regardless of their veracity. So yes, innocent until proven guilty. If Charles has any witnesses who want to testify to the truthfulness of the alleged victim's claims, aside from her herself, they would sure be interesting to read.
And once again, Charles has issued another challenge to the CMC PR office. As Gann's pet and CMC's representative on the Kuwait trip, I'm looking forward to seeing how Rodner and his team can spin this one in under a week. Good luck.
No doubt Michael has a perfectly reasonable explanation for all of this and is more than prepared to defend himself. I'm just excited to see how he does it. With well paid lawyers, anything is possible, but I'm not sure how you explain and vindicate yourself after repeatedly hitting a girl.
CJ - the poster before this post (who is clearly a defender of Wilmers) has challenged you to find witnesses. What a foolish challenge, anonymous, knowing what truths CJ is capable of unearthing (See Frangieh pro-terrorist petitions). CJ - get started.
Look everyone, calm down. Sometimes you go to a concert and it gets a little crowded and you need to punch a woman in the face repeatedly. This happens to the best of us. I mean, Wilmer has carte blanche at CMC I thought. No? Free trips to the mid-east, fancy intersnhips secured by president Gann herself, moderator gig for the president's discussion, etc. COme on guys, give him a break. Based on everything handed to this privileged young man, how else would you expect him to react when someone gets in his way?
Maybe the faculty will band together for their errand boy here and have an all hands,double secret meeting for everyone to sign a resolution in support of punching women!
I like to imagine the incident went down like in Way of the Gun with Ryan Phillippe:
Boyfriend: Hey, hey. Yeah you, get up. What are you retarded? Get out of our concert seats!
Victim: Hey dickless, get out of our spots! Hey fucksuck, get your slippery fucking ass out of our seats! Listen to me, get your fucking ass out!
Wilner: Shut that cunts mouth or I'll come over there and fuck start her head!
Victim: You're gonna wish you never fucking got up this fucking morning asshole, because my boyfriend's gonna fuck you up! And then after that while he's fucking up your fucking gay uncle over there I'm gonna fucking cut off your cock and mail it to your mother, you fucking faggot bitch! You gaylord fucking bitch! How do you like that? You like that a lot you fucking faggot? You like to ass fuck? Fontanella fucking babyheads!
Boyfriend: Go ahead.
Victim: You like to fuck babyheads? You like to fuck boys? He's gonna fuck you in the ass, how do you like that? He's not even gay but he'll do it just to fuck...
Boyfriend: Honey honey. She's got a big mouth but she's not kidding. I'm gonna whip you silly and I'm gonna fuck you stupid. You wanna do the man dance? First dance is yours.
Wilner proceeds to punch the victim in the face 4 times...
From all accounts, there are a police report, several witnesses, and photos of the victim's bruises. The victim has told her side of the story. A person like Michael who has made himself a public figure should now defend himself by giving his side of the story.
Of course, he is technically innocent until proven guilty. With high-priced lawyers, indeed, I'm sure he'll be innocent for a long time until he's finally proven guilty. In the meantime, unless there's some reason to think the victim and witnesses all lied, Michael should be a man and own up to what he did, or give us his side.
First Chris Brown and Rihanna, and now this?!?!
To anonymous at 5:22: that post ahead of your was sarcasm. When I wrote that, I was commenting on how there's no excuse for hitting a woman, but Wilner and his expensive lawyers will try hard to find a way. No way in hell I'm on his side on this one.
Yes, yes, I know. I meant it to the poster who posted at 5:17 but two new posts (including yours) came in while I was typing. Dont worry, your sarcasm did not fall on deaf ears...
Well, Charles is being all responsible, so someone had to say it. Wilner always wanted to be Anderson Cooper. But alas, turns it he's more of a Charlie Sheen.
No Way! Charlie Sheen is the man! Do not compare that tiger-blooded demigod to Wilner. Still funny,though...
“Right now I'm focused on writing a really strong senior thesis in the coming year, which will be on heroism in the modern world. Afterwards, I hope to apply my skills as a writer, researcher and journalist.”
That is Charles in his own words, per http://www.claremontmckenna.edu/news/pressreleases/article.asp?article_id=1604.
"Heroism in the Modern World". Pretentious title aside, talk about irony!!!
oops, I meant "Wilner in his own words". Sorry Charles...
Yeah I agree, the comparison to Charlie Sheen is extremely uncalled for and unfair... to Charlie Sheen.
Isn't bail set at the judges discretion? Would being astoundingly white, privileged, rich, and entitled call for a higher bail simply based on how disgusting behavior such as this is more often rewarded amongst the elite?
To quote Jello Biafra from hilarious but oh so true 'Jock o' Rama':
"Another Trans-Am
Wrapped itself around a telephone pole
"I ain't drunk, officer
I just fell gettin' out of my car"
Don't worry about it, son
We were that way when we were young
You've got all the skills
To make a damn good businessman"
To Anonymous above who wrote:
Here is an anonymous comment from the Forum on the 5C Presidents' event: "Ha. Wow, this event is so much different now that we know that Wilner was drunkenly punching girls before it went down."
Unless I'm missing something, you'll be perhaps unsurprised to hear that this comment no longer exists on the Forum's website. I wonder if the erstwhile editor has control over the comment section.
So Wilner...you gonna sack up at any point and respond to this? We're all waiting to hear something. You gonna deny all of this? Give us a plausible explanation? Or just keep hiding behind your lawyers pretending you don't have to be accountable for anything?
Charles, I don't always agree with you--but I also respect a lot of your work. In my experiences with Wilner, he is arrogant, violent, (if this is true which I have a lot of reason to believe it is), beyond despicable. I little note to Wilner, when you treat people you don't perceive to be as important as you think you are, they all are glad to see you fall. Humility goes a long way, I praise the girl who spoke up!
I never thought I'd say this but this is a new low for this blog. Did I mention that it's a blog, not a legitimate news source?
Reasons why:
1. Charles Johnson and Michael Wilner are not friendly. In fact, they do not like each other one bit.
2. Charles Johnson most likely wrote half of the comments on this post.
3. Wilner did not "punch" the female in the face on four separate occasions. The female attests that there was only one punch and three slaps.
4. Once your fist touches another person's nose, there will be repercussions. Calling someone a loser is not illegal.
5. Wilner did not go to jail. Hence, no $10,000 fine. The police simply told the female what her options were and charges were not pressed until the next morning.
6. Campus Security is not a legitimate source for accounts of "assault and battery."
Should I go on? Please people, don't read into this as fact. This blog is a gossip site (at best).
In the vast majority of incidents like this, the women choose not to report it for a wide variety of reasons. Thus, I have to admire the victim for reporting this because it would not surprise me at all if there were plenty of other women out there who've suffered similar experiences. She is performing a courageous favor for the silent other women out there who Wilner may have mistreated because as long as people like him get away with this sort of behavior, they remain convinced that they're above the law.
Wilner is clearly an entitled person who has gotten whatever he wants and has never been told "no". Now he's going to learn the hard and embarrassing way that certain things are unacceptable no matter who you are.
Witness said..."The female attests that there was only one punch and three slaps."....
hahahahahahahahahahahahHahha
the fact that Wilmer is one of those people who go around calling others "loser" is more annoying to me than the three or so bitch slaps + a punch.
Here I must interject, something I have been reluctant to do as I've been just marveling at how this is all turning out.
Most likely, this person is not a "Witness." And at no point does s/he deny what went down, only quibbling the most semantic of detail -- something that is not born out in the police report. If s/he were, s/he would know that the alleged victim had cuts and bruises on her face and that there exists photographic evidence. The police report indicates the punching, as do several eye witnesses who have gone on record. Calling someone a "loser" isn't illegal, but it sure isn't nice.
When it comes to the evidence here and elsewhere assembled, I think a lot of people have a lot of reasons to plead guilty for disliking Michael Wilner and I proudly join their company.
As for writing on this comment section, I have been working on my thesis, behind the Shakespeare conference, and napping all day, so it's obvious that I did not comment. I wish I were clever enough to generate half of the comments on here. I mean, seriously, what do you people think I do all day? Sit around and write on my own blog? Are you crazy?
The police report says he punched her; I'm going with the cops. It wasn't Campus Safety; it was the Claremont Police Department, which reported it as a 242 -- assault and battery in progress. The $10,000 bail and the night in jail refer to Harwood Halloween, not this incident. Unfortunately, it seems to be that Michael has a problem with liquor and women and so I thought I would warn the women and make it clear that these very serious charges are facing him.
As Wilner is a darling and stenographer of President Gann -- he was picked for a trip to Kuwait despite never having studied Arabic or, as best I can tell, the Middle East -- I worried that this alleged crime would be swept under the rug, where it might collect dust long after commencement.
I guess next we will hear that the girl had it coming. I mean, damn, she was like, dancing and having too much fun. Can't have that.
I wonder, though, when is it OK to ever punch, slap, or push a woman? Let's say the cops were wrong, though and he only punched her once and slapped her three times, I guess that makes it OK, right?
Only a pussy punches women. If you had any balls, you would've at least taken on her boyfriend. This is all assuming you didn't have a shred of decency or chivalry in your immature, entitled little heart. If you did, you would've stepped back, realized how infantile it is to hit a woman over something so meaningless, and stepped back before finding another spot to stand.
This speaks volumes to your character. Equally shameful is the fact that you refuse to apologize or say anything at all. If this is all a misunderstanding, you would've cleared it up by now. If you were at fault and had some integrity, you would've apologized and moved on without things getting so embarrassing. But whether it's true or not, you make it appear that you're so entitled and arrogant that you don't have to be accountable for any of your actions.
Which explains why you were so comfortable representing the Forum two nights later and why you feel no shame in representing our school on a free trip to the Middle East that you were more than happy to accept.
I'm disturbed that in a school filled with so many exceptional, kind, and intelligent people, a spineless prick was chosen to represent us to the outside world. I just hope the rest of the world figures out that you're not representative of the rest of us.
nice work CJ! -'09 alum
CJ, please follow this story, help us ensure justice is served... aka not just a j-board slap on the wrist
To the person or people posting anonymously to ask Wilner to comment on CJ's claims:
Why in the world would Wilner do that? He has been charged with a crime and anything he says can be used against him. Why should he risk a conviction to satisfy CJ?
Good Point. When you're guilty of a crime, it's generally best to keep your mouth shut in order to avoid further incrimination.
I think Frangieh owes Wilner a steak dinner.
What is wrong with hitting a girl?
In the matter of giving both sides of the rumor: While purely word of mouth, I have heard the alleged victim refused to press charges or go to the hospital the night of because she was under the influence of ecstacy. She neither wanted to be tested and found on the drug nor felt the wounds until the next day because of the drug's influence
And obviously it's ok to hit a girl is she is inebriated.
Jee...Well I hope he beat the e out of her....?
Well, anonymous, when I spread "rumors" -- something I never do, of course -- I put my name to them. That way, I can be held liable for libel. It is beyond disgusting to suggest what you have without any evidence whatsoever. It impugns an alleged victim's character, not her substantive, well-documented, photographic evidence.
You are also just plain wrong. She did get medical attention and she did file a police report and notify the dean of students office.
Even if she were on a controlled substance -- which again you have provided zero evidence of -- I submit to you that it would still have been a crime to assault her. Think about it. Example: If you kick a hippy, it's still a crime, even if the hippy thinks he's on the astro plane.
Unless you have the toxicology reports, which you don't because again, there's no evidence that what you are saying is true.
Saying that someone deserves to be punched because they may have ingested something they shouldn't have is like blaming a rape victim's short skirt for enticing her attacker. I suspect you are one of Wilner's ever diminishing cohort. Strange, isn't it, that he doesn't feel the need to defend himself.
Yeah, shame on the victim for not maybe thinking straight or feeling up to talking to the cops after being assaulted. I'm sure after being punched in the face she was at least high on adrenaline, and I don't blame her for wanting to wait half a day to get herself sorted out before talking to the freaking police.
Addendum: the timing on the police blotter says otherwise vis a vis the e whopper. She went to the cops at 3ish; and then filed another report eight hours after that, so no, she didn't wait until the next day.
If she reported him right away, something tells me that the same people would say she rushed to judgment. It's sad that some people are feeling the need to lie for someone who is so obviously in the wrong here. You should feel ashamed, but shame, like remorse, doesn't seem to be fashionable among Wilner or his defenders.
To 5th Amendment:
Funny how invoking the 5th Amendment usually means you've done something incriminating. If Michael did not do anything wrong, he could say so right here, and the 5th Amendment would not be a problem.
It's entirely different, however, to be silent as you await the advice of your counsel. Any reasonable, high-priced attorney, however, would probably tell Michael he can't buy his way out of this one, and he should come forward and own up to it.
to anonymous at 10:17pm:
I am siding with Mr. Johnson's comment here in that it does not matter if she were on a substance or not, the fact is that Michael hit her, and that is not ok.
But, by thinking that Ecstasy removes all pain, or that an assault and battery case would require the VICTIM to have a blood sample taken, you clearly play into the government funded reports that MDMA puts holes in your brain and gives you Alzheimers, and that people on drugs can't control themselves. Do some research before you speculate what kind of effects a drug would have on someone's ability to realize that they are hurt; either by reading legitimate studies, or doing some field research of your own.
Other blogs are picking this up now....
http://jilliannow.blogspot.com/2011/03/michael-wilner-and-domestic-violence.html
I saw the victim sometime after the incident, and she had scratches and swelling in her eye, but nothing that warranted a hospital visit. She was pretty sober and coherent, and mentioned that she had spoken to campus security at the actual event, sometime before 3 am which is the time of the initial police report.
I don't get it. Something must be missing here. He literally punched this chick in her face? And then proceeded to slap her a few times? Really? Who does that? Is this real? CJ- will the CPD make a comment? Has Wilner contacted you or demanded you retract this article? Someone please fill in all the missing info. This story has to have a rational explanation. Was it really a girl he hit? I need details people.
What would Anderson Cooper say?!
What's the big deal???
CJ-- post the police report. It should be public record. If you don't have it, where did you get the "punched four times" and called her bf a "loser" info?
Charles, please use your resources and connections with alumni to ensure that Wilner is brought to justice. Furthermore, Gann must apologize to the CMC community for helping this weasel and allowing him to represent our school. I suggest a facebook group: "Michael Wilner is not representative of CMC"
To those shouting "innocent until proven guilty": This is the weakest possible defense. One usually invokes this when there are no redeemable qualities in the suspect. None have come to the aid of Wilner's character and defended him. None have embraced him as a friend and denied that he would have committed such actions with forethought. None have recounted an alternative set of events that sheds a more sympathetic light on Wilner's actions.
Yes, he is innocent until proven guilty, but this is a legal principe afforded to all so that we don't make Type I errors. Given Wilner's history and reputation on campus, most would agree that a Type II error is what we should be worried about.
Julian,
The police blotter is up there and says punched four times. Witnesses reported that he called her a boyfriend a loser. (He apparently delayed graduation by a year, or something.)
As for the police report, patience, young padawan. This story isn't finished yet. Crack open a brewsky, take a load off, and come back tomorrow morning. We're just getting started.
Why is Wilner going to Kuwait?
Duh. Wilner's bi-winning. He's winning over here; he's winning over there.
Technically, the blotter says he punched her "AT LEAST" 4 times.
Unverified, but I got this information from a very reliable source. Wilner wanted to apologize to the victim the next day through an RA, but instead pulled back saying that if he did that he would be admitting his guilt and that he could not afford to do that as it would prove his guilt. Michael, I've admired some of your work, but I've always known you to lack moral character and to be a very selfish person. It are the few people like you on campus that gives our great college a horrible name.
Alum '10
To the person who noted the disappearance of this comment from the Forum:
“Here is an anonymous comment from the Forum on the 5C Presidents' event: "Ha. Wow, this event is so much different now that we know that Wilner was drunkenly punching girls before it went down."
Unless I'm missing something, you'll be perhaps unsurprised to hear that this comment no longer exists on the Forum's website. I wonder if the erstwhile editor has control over the comment section.”
I assume the comment was erased to prevent people from taking the debate going on these pages to the Forum’s pages. Ultimately, I expect that will happen anyway.
I posted this comment here just because it reflects the embarrassing position one person’s actions have landed the Forum, CMC & the 5Cs in – even if he is innocent.
If W was aware that he was part of an incident that had potential to turn ugly, his decision to represent CMC the following day at the 5-C Presidents event was a poor one. I hope W now realizes that, as the editor-in-chief, what hurts his personal reputation (based on fact or part-fiction) also affects the Forum and the school in general. His possible innocence in the Feb 27 incident does not change this.
If he is innocent it would still have been professionally commendable to find a substitute to moderate the event and resign from the Forum, to keep the integrity of the organization and the school from possible future criticism. I would hate to think that there is no one else capable of moderating a debate at the Claremont Colleges. Nor do I believe that the Forum would melt away without his presence.
If W had exercised that kind of caution a week ago, the Forum, CMC and the 5-Cs would not look as affected by this “controversy” as they do right now.
This particular post by CJ on the Claremont Conservative has gained traction online, especially on Facebook. As a competitor for attention at CMC, it was W's job to anticipate CJ’s next move. Since W did not, from the student’s POV it now seems that an alleged criminal was moderating the Presidents of the colleges – an unfortunate consequence of a poor decision.
I guess it does not make much sense to comment on W’s guilt at this point in time. Yet, guilty or not, W took a big – and unnecessary – risk with the reputation of the organization he was leading and the school he was representing. If good leadership is in part about recognizing failures, then this decision from the editor-in-chief of the Forum can be fairly criticized.
For the record, I can vouch for Wilner having begun behavior of this sort at least three years ago. In my experience, the alcohol and the victim's gender has nothing to do with it. Drunk or sober, female victim or male victim...it doesn't matter; self-entitled, aggressive people with violent internal conflicts are problems.
This whole thing is pretty hilarious if you sit back and think about it.
CJ = hated online, but actually a nice guy and a solid reporter. (Yes, he sensationalizes, but so what? We visit his site.) So, last year, CJ is fired from Forum for making it fun. Takes on a supporter of terrorism on campus.
MW = boring online, uses connections with Gann to get job with CNN, elsewhere. Writes what Gann tells him to. Uses Forum to promote himself less than twenty-four hours after accused of criminal assault on a small CMC girl.
Keep up the good work, CJ. We alumni notice. MW, resign from the Forum and get help.
Sorry. I wanted to be the 90th comment. Dick move, I know. Hey, at least I don't punch out girls.
Where is the ASCMC President? Where is the Campus Organizations Chair? According to the ASCMC Constitution both these people have a right to fire Wilner (suspend him or take over the Forum). Where is the ASCMC Chief Ethics Officer? We had some really bright alums right our constitution in the 70's and now it seems like student government resembles high school again.
Ooops:
*write
This might be the first worthwhile feature ever written on this blog.
This might be the first worthwhile feature ever written on this blog.
There is no need to address his current position at the Forum or at ASCMC. HIs term will be over (like all ASCMC officials) as of spring break.
He just wrote an article on the Forum and deleted a comment criticizing him. I'd say it's time to remove him now.
They just printed a front-page story by Michael on their website??
Yeah. For extra fun, try commenting on it. It seems that comments require moderator approval. Big Surprise.
As an alum who's been watching this closely, I'd like to throw in my two cents. Michael was a poor choice to represent our school in the Middle East and it does appear that he's given repeated favorable treatment. However, it's important to keep the administration out of this, and if anything, they should be commended for offering so many extraordinary opportunities to students. One reason that Gann and Michael are so close is simply that she does not come into contact with a lot of students in her day to day work. Michael made an effort to get to know her, and in return, she helped him in ways that she was able to. She likely was in the dark about much of Wilner's past and since he was someone she knew well, she was willing to help him out.
It's not her fault and she should not be accused of wrongdoing simply because Wilner decided to cover up his checkered past and continue taking what was offered to him. She was trying her best to engage a student and get to know more of the student body. If anything, more students should be getting to know President Gann. As we saw with Wilner, she can really help students out and I'm sure she'd appreciate getting to know more of the people she leads.
Wow Wilner. you've got 99 problems and a bitch is one.
A lot of people are upset about the fact that the school has allowed Wilner to go to Kuwait with Frangieh. I don't see the problem. Isn't Wilner just treating women the way Frangieh thinks the law should treat them? Let's leave them both in the Middle East.
During my four years at CMC, I had to defend my campus against unwarranted, blanket allegations of chauvinism and predatory behavior targeted towards all of our men. I am horrified that someone who claims to represent CMC has now given some validity to these awful stereotypes. I hope that someone such as this is no longer allowed to represent CMC, whether abroad, in speeches, or as an alumni.
You gotta love the irony of CJ's best, most followed story being about what appears to be his journalistic on-campus nemesis. CJ-1, Wilner-0.
It's obvious that CJ posted all 102 comments on here. Just kidding! Hahahahahahahahahahahahhahha.
Happy International Women's Day everybody!
To those who think there is no point in firing Wilner just a few days before the end of his term, In terms of employment, the circumstances in which one leaves a job are a big deal, and most employers ask about them. Even if it's only a day, I want Wilner to have to write "I was fired from my post as Chief Editor of my colleges newspaper in light of criminal allegations against me." on future job applications.
ASCMC should at least suspend him, and make formal sanctions as the criminal proceeding unfold. At the very least, ASCMC should draft a letter of condemnation to send to CNN and other future endeavors of Wilner's.
Our student body needs to be distanced from this kind of behavior.
Michael is a good person, a great writer, and these charges are unfounded and meant to harass a good person with a bright future. This wouldnt be the first false report by an allegedly attacked "victim". This wouldnt be the first time the CPD has inaccurately reported on a blotter. This is just the latest in CJ's attempt to bring hard to those who he has perceived as a threat or that have overshadowed him in his quest for whatever it is that he is trying to do...Shame on you CC.
To "To CJ and his":
To be fair, the victim filed a full report and is also pursuing prosecution -- that seems like a dangerous route if her claims are unfounded.
Further, if they really are "unfounded," why isn't Wilner defending himself? I bet he's lawyered-up already. Seems like he hardly finds her allegations unfounded.
But for good measure, CJ, I hope you get a copy of that police report and put it online. Then maybe these commentators who care more about impugning your reputation than about admonishing their friend for assaulting a girl and lawyering up instead of taking responsibility will finally realize just want kind of friend they have.
To "CJ and his"
"Michael is a good person, a great writer, and these charges are unfounded and meant to harass a good person with a bright future. This wouldnt be the first false report by an allegedly attacked 'victim.'"
You admit your bias, and I will admit mine. My friend, the "victim," would not lie about something like this -- nor would she ever cry wolf just to harass a "good" person. Unlike MW, with his history of unsavory behavior, her character has never been called into question. Yea, maybe CJ has a personal vendetta against Wilner (I really have no idea, nor do I care), but he is doing a favor to my friend, and the CMC community, by shedding light on this horrible incident.
while you're at it you should write about other assaults that happened that night. one kid ended up in the hospital unable to see out of one eye. also you should comment on the general disrespect towards women in general at cmc, particularly the older men at alumni events.
Was the kid who ended up "unable to see out of one eye" a female? Was her injury the result of an attack by a male? Was that male a prominent face of the institution? If no, why the hell would CJ write about it ya dummy?
As to your comment RE CMC men having disrespect for women -- that is such a tired ass argument and ignores the going-ons of all other colleges in the country. "The older men at alumni" events sound hilarious, though. Any good ditties about what they have done? I would love to have a chuckle over some good classic chaveunistic anecdotes from our forefathers.
@To CJ and his...
You and your ilk, underrepresented as you are, seem to be trying to imply that CJ is sensationalizing unfounded attacks against the character of an excellent man. I have a simple thought experiment for you.
Imagine that the accused were not Michael Wilner, but someone with an excellent reputation, with a demonstrably excellent and chivalrous character, such as, say, Chuba. Would there not be just as many comments on this post attacking Charles for accusing someone of doing something that is so against his established character? Would there not be no shortage of his friends willing to post their names behind comments defending their good friend against what would have to be obviously untrue charges?
Yet that is not what we see here. What we see is a strong dominance of comments both supporting the integrity of the alleged victim and by people who know of the obvious darkness that lurks inside Michael Wilner. If Wilner is an easy target, it is only because his own actions have made himself so. Wilner is finally reaping what he has spent four years sewing.
If the Forum has any sense they will figure out a way to oust him before he "naturally" retires so that they can save face.
CJ is out for blood. But that is his prerogative, on a blog that he maintains and takes responsibility for. The Forum is for all students of CMC. When the Forum publishes articles by writers against whom there are serious accusations and then moderates comments left by students (without explaining the cause for this), it raises all kinds of red flags.
I’m not sure who has the power to remove the editor-in-chief from his position but I am surprised he himself has not yet resigned. Right now his behavior does not appear to be that of a person who cares about the institutions he works for. In fact, with the publishing of his latest article and subsequent comment moderation – he only appears to be unashamedly self-serving. If his reputation is about to tank, why take the Forum down with him?
It’s true that in a couple of days his term will be over. Brushing this issue under the rug will not take away the bitter aftertaste waiting for CMC’s student body after Spring Break. It seems like the Forum is going to absurd heights and our student government isn’t doing anything about it.
the person who ended up "unable to see out of one eye" was actually a male. you have a point there -- but NO ONE deserves to have anything done to them that causes physical harm, especially with no provocation and especially when its dealing with things like eyesight (or actually, anything to do with your face - the things on your face are important).
Being homosexual doesn't mean identifying with being a woman. As a homosexual, I do not identify with being a woman and still would not dare hit a woman. Even if gender is a social construct, it's not defined by your sexual preference. So unless he was beating her out of jealous because he's got a crush on her "loser" boyfriend, then his sexual preference shouldn't even come into play here.
CMC STUD, I bet you're one of those people that holds signs at protest rallies with racial slurs about the president. The reason no one is talking about Wilner's sexuality is that its not relevant you idiot. Just pure character assassination and rumor mongering, the exact kind of which CJ is being falsely accused.
Let's not cloud up this clear case of violence with rumors based on prejudice and homophobia... CJ should delete CMC STUD's post.
Jealousy*
I think CMC should open a grad school for journalism and name it the Charles Johnson School of Journalism. Wilner got pwned!
I would definitely concur. This article is the definition of journalism. He identified a topic which is, based on all the comments, one of public interest. He located primary source documents to corroborate the claims, spoke with the victim, took the responsible step of protecting the victim's anonymity, wrote succinct and unbiased prose, and has allowed his readers to generate discussions. How is that not journalism. Seems to be the textbook definition of journalism. What did you want him to do, recycle the same canned headlines that are fed to Wilner by admin.
Heard about this a few days after The White Party & my first thought was, 'This dude is fucked. Did he not realize there are cameras ALL OVER the garage?'
I immediately checked with a contact in Scripps maintenance & was told the recordings could be checked if charges were pursued.
So to anyone referring to the allegations as "unfounded," my bet is that they won't be for long.
Yay! Video Footage!
I have heard of people being suspended/expelled for way less than male on female assault & battery.
I did ask the Forum in 2008 to remove a comment that attacked my then girlfriend. They did.
I also asked the Forum to delete comments purporting to be me that were not made by me. Its managing editor by and large refused and told me to create my own avatar which I did not do. I then gave it as The Forum was rather boring.
Later I will be removing the comment from CMCSTUD as I do not think bringing up someone's alleged sexual orientation is appropriate. We are upset with him for what he has done, not what he is. --Charles
Charles -- thanks for replying. Fair enough, those are all legitimate reasons to request removal. And yes, I agree that the CMCSTUD post ought to be removed as sexuality is a non-issue here and only detracts from the far more serious criminal issue at hand.
Has GANN and/or WILNER or anyone else tried to contact you and demand removal of this article or anything like that? If I were WILNER id be literally begging you and feeding you any line you wanted to hear. Though I suppose it is out of your hands, now...
Charles,
So would you mind granting me the same courtesy extended to you & delete the anti-Semitic comment posted under my pseudonym a few articles back?
Only seems fair since you know I didn't write it.
-Rachael
Oh come on, that comment was straight up funny, obviously a joke, and noone really thought it was you.
But still, I say through throw her a bone, Charles.
throw* (delete through). weird, oops.
If he's the guy who was getting thrown to the ground by police outside the checkpoint right before the party ended he got housed pretty hard, was struggling pretty hard and even if he tries to mitigate his assault charges by threatening action against the police I gotta admit I laughed for a long time at the sight of him being dragged out after going limp with his pants around his ankles. If it was someone else, congrats, you go hard.
"Throw her a bone"????
Don't condescend to me asshat.
You think people aren't well-aware when Charles is being impersonated on other sites? Personally I can always tell and, usually, I find that it's just "straight up funny."
--But CJ doesn't think so & I can see why.
It's a matter of principle. Chuck blathers on and on about people ~manning up~ & LOVES to call commenters out for being anonymous (cowardly, in his mind). At the same time he's hyper-vigilant about his own namesake & takes his "no personal attacks" policy very seriously.
--So why the fuck should I have to put up with shit he won't tolerate?
**Actually, someone did take the comment seriously, but I'm glad you got some lulz.
listen here ya self-righteous broad, I am Jewish and I found the comment to be hilarious. Anyone hurt by something like that should keep it to themselves-- or stage a hoax hate-crime to raise awareness.
I second the anonymous above me. I'm Jewish and I laughed out loud when I read that comment a couple posts back. And that's really saying something because it's not often I come across something on this site I enjoy reading.
Anyone taking that comment completely seriously probably doesn't have the intellect to be at the Claremont Colleges and doesn't go here anyways. They should stick to reading Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin's blogs.
Although the incident obviously has some true parts it still seems a little sketchy. How could MW hit her four times without her defending herself. The boyfriend does sound like a loser if he allows his girlfriend to get punched four times and stands there like a moron. Although the previous comment about being a homosexual has no merit, it is worth noting that the victims bf is also notoriously closeted. Maybe MW was picking a fight with the girl over him...
Interesting, a love triangle theory? The plot thickens...
Anyone seen wilner around lately? When is the mid east trip wit Frangieh?
To Anonymous @ 11:38
I don't know how a serious two year relationship comes off to you as "notoriously closeted", maybe you're thinking of the wrong victim.
Great, now rumors are spreading about the boyfriend. 1)The boyfriend's not gay/in the closet, get it out of your head Claremont. 2)Regardless, like when it came to Wilner's sexuality, what does it matter? Again, pulling away from what's supposed to be the focus of all this. AKA ASSAULT AND BATTERY!
--close GAY friend of the bf
To anonymous at 12.55 who said the bf is not gay and you know because you are a "--close GAY friend of the bf"
Riiiiiiiiight.....
Jerry Springer: A man in a two year relationship who hooks up with dudes on the DL is the definition of closeted. And I am well aware of who the victim and her bf are.
Evidence anyone? And just because the guy has close gay friends it doesn't mean he's gay. What century are we in again?
Some of you may be confusing who the victim and her bf are. As a close friend of both of them, I am certain that he is not closeted. As in, it has never crossed my mind.
On an entirely different note...
WTF, Wilner!? Why did you have to do this right before midterms? If you're gonna make major school news, don't do it during one of the busiest parts of the semester. Tonight was supposed to be a study night, and thanks to you, all I've done for the last hour is refresh this page repeatedly and write anonymous comments. Asshole. If you had to express your anger physically, you should've done it at 6:01 or the Wedding Party or a less busy part of the year.
At anonymous 1:20:
I know right? He should be more considerate about being inconsiderate. SO hard to focus.
Hi Charles. Good job on uncovering the Wilner story. I'm not sure about yourself, but I would rather someone with these serious allegations of assault not represent CMC or Anderson Cooper. As such, I've emailed Anderson Cooper's blog staff in hopes of getting Mr. Wilner's future position terminated.
I'd appreciate it if you could add the following link to one of your posts, so as a community, we can make sure Mr. Wilner won't be rewarded for his behavior.
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?10
Her boyfriend is closeted? Oh stop it.
debates on the subject have ignited across the country! this blog is such a microcosm of the nation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/09/rachel-maddow-goes-after-megyn-kelly_n_833357.html
HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS
@ Anonymous
lol and both assailants were New Yorkers, no less. I guess the Big Apple doesn't far too fall from the tree.
CMC Forum is now not being moderated.
Let them have it!
My opinion is that both this Willner character and the author of this blog are giant D-Bags. Thank you- AK '09
Does anyone else find it convenient that CJ cropped his favorite politician, Mitt Romney, out of this photo of Wilner?
There are three people in that picture, and I'm pretty sure that, since Charles mentions Romney in this article, that he is more concerned with protecting the girl in question, as she is a student. Plus, why should Charles post a picture of them anyway? They didn't hit anyone, and at least one of them had no good reason to suspect anything about Wilner's character.
For what it's worth, the last comment answered this pretty decisively. I wanted to protect the girl in question. For what it is also worth, I don't care for Governor Romney anymore.
I'm sure Laura Sucheski knew about Wilner, she's been one of his "goddesses" for quite some time now. Would not be surprised if she was one of the many commenters defending him here...
It's true. You'd think his friends would have reigned him in, but then, you'd be assuming he had friends, rather than marriages of convenience.
Look -- SUCHESKI even reserched how Michael Wilner (after he becomes a convicted felon) will become part of a protected class. She is really looking out for him:
http://watchdog.org/4080/bill-makes-ex-cons-a-protected-class/
As a CMC alum and a law school student I do agree with, and must believe in, what has been said: "Innocent until proven guilty." That being said, whoever is defending Mr. Wilner's actions in saying that the victim probably deserved to be punched for blocking a better position at the concert ought to be in therapy and given help before that person also beats a woman and believes that the woman deserved it. As a man there is NEVER a reason to strike a woman. Mr. Wilner's past arrests speaks strongly about his character and personality as well as a solid indicator of his propensity for legal disregard. Although he has not been convicted, CMC and President Gann ought to have exercised better judgment by witholding Mr. Wilner from taking part in an overseas trip to represent CMC. I vow to withhold any and all funding as a CMC alum until President Gann comes clean about why a student alleged of beating a fellow student was allowed to represent Claremont McKenna College and until the judicial board and criminal courts have completed their duties in determining Mr. Wilner's innocence or guilt. I urge all current and former CMCers to join me in supporting the student body, tradition, reputation and image of CMC by withholding contributions to my alma mater until the President has explained herself.
When are you dumb lefties going to get that Charles is simply smarter than you (and perhaps most of you put together)?
You embarrass yourself by even trying to defend Wilner and give us alums a good chuckle. You are chumps, simple as that.
Wilner is a gross human being.
He certainly is bi. Kid has so many identity issues. I went to high school with him. That is his home address on the first report, and none of this really surprises me.
Anything short of a suspension for the remainder of this year would be very disappointing. They should not permit him to take place in graduation ceremonies, and not let him graduate until the fall semester of next academic year
Anyone else grateful that Wilner was sent to a country where it is illegal to drink on spring break? That's got to be a sort of divine punishment.
He should be ashamed of himself.
Post a Comment