Nick Brown
|
|
Nick Brown's primary function is to preserve the artificial pleasant appearance of Linacre College. Anyone who has seen him speak can see through this facade, and it's easy to see that his job is to smile and pretend everything is OK. However, under the surface there is a much darker side to this. Brown controls much of the communication in and out of Linacre College, and indeed many of the other staff ask him to check over and even write responses to queries, when an issue arises.
Nick Brown and Catherine Walter form the core backbone of Linacre's corruption, and as such they closely cover each other's backs. In particular, when one of them is under investigation for harassment, the other give a heads-up and warning, even revealing who is performing the investigation. This behaviour demonstrates a clear "them vs. us" attitude.
Recently Brown sent an email that is pure gold. It was addressed to the lovely people who are hosting this website, in a desperate attempt to get the website taken down. The email is hilarious in its sheer arrogance, and ironically it resonates with the heart and soul of this website so much that we decided to publish it. I want to thank Brown for taking the time to demonstrate beautifully, in so many ways, the absurd and irrational attitude that pervades Linacre College.
Please note that Brown makes the highly unprofessional decision to make an unprovoked attack against a former student in the email, even though Brown admits he does not actually know for certain whether or not the named student was involved in any way with this website. We have blocked out the student's name out of respect.
This simple email does so much to show exactly the sort of delusional mindset that Linacre staff exhibit.
First of all, there is the sheer arrogance of trying to remove a website that criticises the school. It follows very closely the precedent that they set by removing reviews of the college, as described on the page about Censorship.
However, let's break it down properly:
Logs or Evidence of Abuse: The person who (we have good reason to believe) owns the domain and who has established a website at that domain is a former student of Linacre College, Oxford, Mr ______.
The very first thing Brown does is establish that he is guessing the owner of the domain. He then proceeds to slander this individual, despite Brown admittedly not knowing whether or not he was involved in building the website.
At the same time, he is setting the tone for the appeal; indicating that it is going to be an ad hominem attack on an individual, rather than any sort of refutal of claims or a legitimate argument of any sort. Indeed, he does not disappoint.
Mr _____ has recorded on the website false, grossly offensive and threatening material in furtherance of a campaign of harassment which began in 2016.
He proceeds to paint himself as a victim, without mentioning which content is false or offensive. The accusation of threatening is simply absurd; this website is information only -- where is the threat? Perhaps Brown means it is a threat to his own interests.
Mr ______ resigned his place at Linacre College following the initiation of disciplinary proceedings for harassment, malicious communications, and use of violence directed towards members of the College, both students and staff.
Again, pure slander and ad hominem. Furthermore, he admits again that none of these accusations were established to be true; he simply says that proceedings were initiated but not completed. In any case, what does any of this have to do with the website? If you are a student or prospective student of Linacre, perhaps you should question whether or not you want to be treated this way; where the principal uses you as a scapegoat to further his own interests.
The information recorded on the website, in combination with Mr ______'S recent demonstration outside the College (which involved prominent displays of the website address, inviting members of the College, the University of Oxford of which it is part, as well as members of the public to visit the site), constitutes malicious communications (communications which are grossly offensive, false and threatening) contrary to section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1980 and harassment and / or stalking of three members of staff at the College contrary to section 2 and 2A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
No content on this website is offensive, unless you consider the truth to be offensive. We welcome Nick Brown to tell us which content is false or threatening.
Incidents of harassment by means of (similar) electronic communication resulted in Mr ______ being issued with a Police Information Notice by Officers of Thames Valley Police (Oxford, United Kingdom) in January of this year.
Brown is trying to use a PIN as a shaming device, which is morally wrong as a PIN is not proof of guilt in any way. For those who may not be familiar with the way things work in the UK, it may be worth mentioning that a police PIN can be issued to anyone who gets accused of a crime. It is neither a formal charge nor an admission of guilt by the accused, and has absolutely no judicial value -- it simply means that the police received a trivial complaint not worth investigating and decided to simply inform the accused that they received such a complaint, without taking it further or investigating the truth of the claims. In other words, anyone can get a PIN.
The fact of Mr ______'s recent misconduct which utilises the website was reported to Thames Valley Police on Saturday 13th May 2017.
The ironic backfiring of this email is that as Brown admits, on Saturday, May 13th, the college tried to send police officers stop a small group of people who were staging a peaceful protest outside the college. (This was after they sent university security services.) Both university security and the police advised the group to simply carry on, it's a free country and you are just exercising free speech. Sadly the college simply does not comprehend this.(Interestingly, Oxford University is already under fire for being one of the most heavily censored universities in the world. Linacre's strong censorship culture further pushes this agenda.)
We would urge you to take all steps necessary to remove the site.
Finally, there is the irrational demand by Brown to a company in a foreign country to abide by his interpretation of a UK law, based on zero evidence. This demonstrates the delusional "God syndrome" that unfortunately plagues many of the Oxford elitists. People think Oxford is paradise and therefore the gatekeepers must be angels working for God. Linacre senior staff are accustomed to pushing people around because they are an Oxford college. You can see this in the way that they treat the police; they seem to think that the local police force are their personal strong-arm service and try to send them around to bully people who the college views as a threat.
If you read the letter carefully, you will notice that while Brown tries his very hardest to slander this former student and paint him as a criminal, there is actually not a single shred of evidence of criminal or illegal activity, other than accusations from the college itself. In summary, Brown is trying to "prove" via circular logic, that the student in question is a criminal, by saying "well we reported him multiple times". Even if any of this slanderous spewing were true, it is at best an ad hominem attack, and does not demonstrate that the content is inaccurate, nor does it provide a reason for silencing the website. The suggestion that someone whom the college does not approve of, should not be able to speak about the college, is absurd. Coming from a so-called academic, this is quite pathetic.
If you're a student or prospective student of Linacre, perhaps you should ask yourself whether you want to be subjected to this sort of treatment.
Oh, and in case you're wondering, the webhost's response was that the site stays up, unless the courts order otherwise. God bless Russia.
Nick Brown spends a portion his free time stalking students; see the incident where he followed a student's car.