The Guardian<\/em> have now produced a summary of the first week of the Cambridge Whistleblowing Tribunal here<\/a>. A consequence of the failure to settle the case is that the details are now entering the public domain through witness testimony, which can be freely reported.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the Institute of Astronomy in 2021, colleagues intervened to protect a distressed staff member. They themselves were made subject of a Grievance<\/p>\n\n\n\n He claimed no action was taken to protect Dr Tausch-Pebody, but grievances were instead raised against himself and two other professors by the Institute of Astronomy\u2019s director, Prof Richard McMahon. Evans said: \u201cIt is unprecedented in Cambridge University for a head of department to make a Grievance against three professors simultaneously.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The university dismissed McMahon\u2019s allegations against the professors, saying <\/strong>no evidence had been submitted in support of the claims. Evans told the tribunal that despite the lack of evidence, the complaint \u201ctook almost two years for the university to dismiss\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The barrister Akua Reindorf KC<\/a> is defending the case for the University.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Reindorf said the University of Cambridge is defending Evans\u2019 claim \u201cat very great expense\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Akua Reindorf KC, for the University of Cambridge, suggested Evans\u2019 emotional testimony in court about the suicide of a former colleague amounted to \u201ccrocodile tears\u201d. \u201cNo, and that is an offensive thing to say,\u201d Evans replied. Prof McMahon has still not been withdrawn his allegations, despite never presenting any evidence. His assertions against Prof Evans and Prof Haehnelt were found defamatory and admitted untrue in the defamation case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yesterday in open court, the individual who initiated the investigation into Prof McMahon\u2019s grievance \u2014despite seemingly multiple violations of the University’s ‘Dignity at Work’ policy \u2014 continued his cross-examination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Counsel for Prof Evans, Stuart Brittenden KC<\/a>, asked Prof Nigel Peake whether he accepted any responsibility for what had occurred.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n