District Attorney Asher Rubin and Dr. Crews: A new Columbia Pacific tidbit

There has been for some time some speculation coming from Columbia Pacific circles that California deputy district attorney Asher Rubin (in his role as a district attorney) was seriously out to get Columbia Pacific U (some even suggest it was an obsession). Rubin prosecuted the CPPVE case against CPU on behalf of the state from 1998. Rubin is on record as making some nasty allegations about CPU, particularly in the California local "The Point Reyes Light", seen by some in the same CPU circles as a 'right-wing'leaning publication.

Interestingly, it seems that Rubin and CPU's president were acquainted with each other as early as 1978, when both appeared in different roles and at opposite sides at a California trial. Rubin and fellow state attorneys lost the trial, which, incidently,
starred Dr. Crews as an expert witness in his other career role as a psychiatrist. As John Bear will also recall, CPU was incorporated in 1978, the same year as the trial.

It seems that during the trial Dr. Crews testified on behalf of a trannsexual who had undergone sex-change surgery. The state was trying to get out of paying for the surgery on the basis that the surgery was really a cosmetic enhancement rather than real surgery (well, I guess 'dehancement' if such a word were to exist). To sum up, Rubin and the state lost the case and the state had to pay the bill.

At least we now know that California district attorney Asher Rubin and Dr. Richard Crews were acquainted as litigation adversaries as early as 1978. The CPU/state trials began in 1998, 20 years later. Just a tidbit. Here is the URL with the court story: http://www.gendervoyagers.org/gv_medi-cal02.htm
Ain't distance education a pandora's box of adventure and 'alternative' information?
Cheers,
Earon http://www.altcpualumni.org

 

Further note: I went to one of the CPU trials, in San Rafael, 4 or 5 years ago. This was the continuation of one of the state's attempts to close it. The reason it had been continued was that Asher Rubin appeared for the State, but was so unprepared, the judge, in compassion, gave him more time. But at the trial I was at, Rubin had apparently failed to provide some information the judge had demanded, and was still unprepared, and asked for another delay, and the judge read him the riot act. I've never seen such a sarcastic and bitter judge, even on TV shows. Rubin left with his tail between his legs, as the judge found for CPU in that particular matter. The stuff of academic soapy operas.

 

The "some" being Crews and Kavanaugh, I suppose.

I guess that (inaccurate) insult discredits anything published there. And apparently it also trumps the 'Light's' Pulitzer prize for investigative journalism. (Quite an honor for a small suburban newspaper.)

So what? Chances are that Rubin and whatever attorneys were defending CPU had met in the past too. The legal world in a county superior court is a small place. Most of the more prominent figures have already met.

If you want to weave this into a conspiracy theory, you need something stronger than that.

As well as irrelevancies and red-herrings.

 

Yes,
I remember and have filed (somewhere) John's alt.ed.distance posting on that matter. It was probably the high point of the California/CPU trials soap opera. All the other trials/appeals, with some exceptions, went downhill (for CPU).

But as I understand, from my occasional conversations with former CPU academic dean of faculty Dr. Les Carr, the soap opera is really just beginning. CPU has filed an appeal in USA Federal court. I just hope that Asher Rubin continues to represent the now executed CPPVE (put out of its misery in 1996 by Governor Pete Wilson for abuses of its power shortly after its bad report alleging CPU's shortcomings).
Earon http://www.altcpualumni.org

 

I have never met Dr. Richard Crews nor ever had a conversation with him, Bill. I did write Crews a letter in late 1995 asking what the hell was going on with the CPPVE and CPU (and that was roughly the tone expressed in the letetr). I received a response letter and wrote Crews again (by email) in the winter of 1996 - received another response letter (via email). No more contact except that Crews graded some ethics papers I wrote in 1998. So there really is no "Crews and Kavanaugh", Bill.
Cheers,
Earon