Editorial: Nirschel scandal still smolders

For freshmen settling into the new rhythm of campus life, the lurid tale of the former universi­ty president twice-removed who left the campus in a cloud of scandal and mystery is mostly likely a story that goes untold. Roy J. Nirschel is probably not a name floating around Cedar's halls or in Stonewall's common rooms. Nirschel is old news: the lore of graduated classes past.

The fact that the newest mem­bers of campus see the univer­sity with vision uncolored by the legend of the President who cheated his way straight to an ungainly eviction is probably a relief to administrators and Board of Trustee members.

Ever since they notified the university community in June 2009 of Nirschel's abrupt res­ignation, the university higher-ups have worked tirelessly – and with impressive success – to keep the full details and exact reasons for Nirschel's apparent firing a secret. To the chagrin of curious administrators and college journalists, the racy ru­mors of extramarital affairs, the embezzling of university funds, and the filming of secret sex tapes have remained noth­ing more than unsubstantiated conjecture.

That is until recently, when the Chronicle of Higher Educa­tion printed a story shedding some light on the events lead­ing up to Nirschel's resignation.

The article re­ported that a "secret whistle-blower com­plaint," which was filed three months before Nirschel's res­ignation, alleged that the then-university president had sexu­ally harassed some female coworkers, gave favors to oth­ers, spent university funds for personal expenditures, and was brazen in his behavior to the point that potential univer­sity donors were deterred from giving to RWU.

Following the complaint, uni­versity officials later hired an independent law firm to con­duct an internal investigation, attempting to corroborate the claims made in the complaint, the article reported. The results of the probe have not been made public.

It is understandable why the university is tight-lipped about the gory details of Nirschel's personal affairs. Roger Williams University has a new president and is generating new strategies for fiscal and physical growth; getting mired in the past will not bring the goals of the future any closer any faster.

Yet, however unpleasant re­vealing the truth behind the Nirschel allegations might be, it is something the university should do. It owes honesty to its students and their families – the people generating the majority of the funds on which RWU re­lies. Students and their families invest in this university. We are shareholders in this institution of higher education. We have a right to know that our money was not being misused and that earnest and appropriate efforts are being made by the uni­versity to ensure that future fiscal impropri­ety is deterred.

The juicy details about Nirschel's extra­marital romantic en­deavors unfortunately cloud the moral issue at hand. The campus community's superficial appetite for soap opera storylines about the ex-president's sex life give the administration justification for silence. The people who de­serve to know the truth only seem to express desire for the facts based on a fixation with passing around judgmental gos­sip.

Even the writer of the Chron­icle of Higher Education column focused more on the racy details than on the finan­cial implications of Nirschel's actions. Over two-fifths of the paragraphs in the article direct­ly discussed Nirschel's personal life. Only two paragraphs dis­cussed how Nirschel may have inappropriately spent or have lost the university money.

As time passes and the univer­sity maintains its silence on the details behind Nirschel's depar­ture, more and more incoming classes of students will talk less and less of the president who fell from grace. Gossip is an ephemeral pleasure. Eventu­ally, we will forget about Roy Nirschel and his misdeeds. Al­lowing complacency to stifle the call for transparency would be shameful.