RE: Waiver of Attendance

May 19, 2010

Dear Professor Ritter:

Pursuant to Section 6(d)(iv), I am waiving my attendance at the hearing on June 6 at

9:30 a.m. in the Marshall Dennehy Room on the third floor of the law library because of
the recent death of my daughter and the fact that I must leave town to attend to my
critically ill brother. I therefore rely upon the following written evidence already
submitted into the record before you:

(1) My first affidavit dated (Widener_FirstAffidavit_LawrenceConnell.pdf);

(2) My second affidavit dated (Widener_SecondAffidavit_LawrenceConnell.pdf);

(3) The expert affidavit of Professor Orin Kerr

(Widener_TabA_Affidavit_ProfOrinKerr.pdf);

(4) The expert declaration of Professor Michael Salmanson

(Widener_TabB_ExpertDeclaration_ProfSalmanson.pdf);

(5) The first affidavit of student Samuel Elbardissi

(Widener_TabC_StudentAffidavit_SamuelElbardissi.pdf);

(6) The affidavit of student Nigel Scott

(Widener_TabD_StudentAffidavit_NigelScott.pdf);

(7) The affidavit of student Marissa Ramsay

(Widener_TabE_StudentAffidavit_MarissaRamsay.pdf);

(8) The affidavit of student Daniel Shehata

(Widener_TabF_StudentAffidavit_DanielShehata.pdf);

(9) The emails sent to me by 29 other students (Widener_TabG_StudentEmails.pdf);

(10) The affidavit of student Dianna Hall

(Widener_TabH_StudentAffidavit_DiannaHall.pdf);

(11) The affidavit of student Danielle Oppenheim

(Widener_TabI_StudentAffidavit_DanielleOppenheim.pdf);

(12) The second affidavit of student Samuel Elbardissi

(Widener_TabJ_StudentAffidavit2d_SamuelElbardissi.pdf).
 I do not waive any other rights regarding the hearing and I expect the hearing to be
recorded stenographically. I ask that the hearing be open to the student body and the
general public, and that all statements against me be taken under oath. Because I am
gathering further written material to submit prior to June 6th, I also ask that the record be
kept open through that date for further submissions in my defense.

I am hereby submitting the following blog entries by the complainant

and I ask that it be

made part of the record. Her three entries covering the spring semester 2010 include:

1.
2.
3.

A review of these entries reveals that never contemporaneously mentioned

her complaints in this public forum. This lack of contemporaneous corroboration of her
allegations is evidence that her accusations are not credible. In her original letter to the
Dean, complained that she was shocked and offended by my behavior from the
start of the semester in January 2010, including such traumatizing events as my
threatening and cursing at her (“Die, bitch!”). Yet she wrote

In short, the
complainant’s own record of her spring semester 2010 experience is at odds with her
subsequent claim of discrimination and harassment against me. Her letter to the Dean of
November 18th is simply a post hoc effort, more than a half year after the class ended, to
bolster her unfounded accusations.

Sincerely,
Lawrence J. Connell
Associate Professor of Law
Widener University School of Law
Wilmington, DE 19803