Ed Barnaby was kicked out of Yale & shipped away to Virginia in 2012

A few months after slandering a legal immigrant, Ed Barnaby was fired, kicked out of Yale and had to relocate to Virginia. 

Yale has a long tradition of corruption and disastrous mismanagement, for instance:    

A female lab researcher raped, strangled and buried upside-down in a wall; an undergrad found with her head smashed in a lathe machine; another undergrad stabbing his male “friend” and then jumping out of the Taft building to his death; an assistant “professor” with a double life as a drug-addicted, HIV-positive prostitute, killing himself in jail with a meth overdose, etc.

So, how do you avoid another scandal?

By putting all the blame on the victim, of course! 

All those deaths, rapes and scandals are public record, but FOR SOME MYSTERIOUS REASON they did not get any bad publicity on (now-defunct) malicious gossip sites like Ivy Gate Blog — which is now dead, rotten and forgotten —  or Gawker, Rest in Peace, Amen!  


Compared to asking a drunkard not to cuss in class, everything else is absolutely fine! 

I wonder where that guy has found employment now…  

Hey Harris, what would happen to one of your colleagues, if he cussed and used sexist swearwords during a job meeting? 

Would he be fired in, like, 5 minutes? 

Hell, yeah! 

Jane Levin and her boobs.  


We are thieves, but don’t tell! 

Hope you enjoyed relocating to Virginia, you stupid cunt! : ) 

Barnaby graduated from White-Trash College with a thesis on administrative corruption and its financial, personal and professional consequences for students/scholars and their families. 

If you ask him, Barnaby will say that he didn’t really HAVE TO leave the Ivy League.

No, no, no.  

He just made a BIG SACRIFICE to raise his kids in a more KKK-friendly environment…


Virginia Gov. Northam between infanticide and the KKK. 

The same attitude towards Life. 

(And by the way, Micheal Jackson never dressed like a bum!)

His career will be “kept comfortable”… for now. 


Following your grievance and/or due to an accounting error and/or a new interpretation of your contract, we have decided to revoke your salary for your 5th and/or 6th year. And that has absolutely nothing to do with the grievance you filed against one of our partners in crime, Pamela Schirmeister. And here’s a confidential non-disclosure, non-disparagement contract for exactly the same amount of money, if you want to sign it…

You’ve got to be fucking kidding me, you jackass! 

Your scam is over, son of a bitch!    

When Barnaby’s daughters go to college, perhaps they will meet a worthless son of a bitch like their father. He’ll steal their fellowships without showing any proof whatsoever that they were actually “disbursed in error” — as if Yale had ever paid any money to anyone, unless they really had to. 


The length of study is 72 months, i.e. 6 years.

Signed by Mr. Gang Wang (actual name), former Associate Director for International Students & Scholars at Yale. 

Barnaby did not correct his error even when the student produced the SEVIS, which is a document from the U.S. Department of Justice, stating the length of the study/work period, namely, 72 months = 6 years. 

The corrupt administration, including Barnaby, acted like the SEVIS meant nothing.   

Hey butt-fuck, does the Department of Justice know that they mean nothing?   

You should be in fucking jail!

Finally, because Barnaby authorized an illegal act and put his signature on it,

the administration held him responsible for the mess, and he got fired and shipped away to Virginia. 

No more ties with the university, right? 🙂 


Hopefully Barnaby didn’t have to take a significant pay cut, sell his house in New Haven, close the mortgage and take out another mortgage for something else in Virginia. Perhaps his interstate move wasn’t too expensive. 

And hopefully his wife didn’t have to quit her job,

perhaps because she didn’t have any to begin with. 




Saussy v. Saussy

Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of New Haven at New Haven

May 29, 2009

2009 Ct. Sup. 8912 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2009)

Memorandum of Decision

Public court documents now also available online in the public domain, e.g. casetext.com 



“The court finds that the husband’s claim that the breakdown of the marriage was due to his wife’s lack of support is not supported by the credible evidence. This court finds the husband to be at greater fault for the breakdown of the marriage, as evidenced by his mental state and by husband’s extramarital relationship with another woman.” ((Memorandum of Decision, Further Findings and Orders, p.20)


“The husband claims the breakdown of the marriage was caused by the wife’s lack of support in his professional life. He also claims that the wife refused to join him at professional events, that she accused him of being selfish and self-indulgent, and that she put herself between him and the children. He further claims that her lack of support for his career moves resulted in his suffering from suicidal thoughts and depression (6).” 

“Note 6. Husband testified that in 2001 he had one year leave from Stanford (to write a book) and that he was so conflicted over whether or not to accept the position at Yale that he spent ‘most of the year lying on the floor of [his] office being obsessed with thoughts of suicide.’ (T 12/15/08, P.119)” 

“Mr. Farmer, a longtime friend of the husband, testified that husband had confided in him [sic] that he was unhappy with the marriage for a long period of time. In 2001, the husband was treated by a psychiatrist and was prescribed medications for depression.”

“The wife claims, for the most part, that the parties had a happy marriage and shared a common interest in Chinese literature and family life and that she always put her husband’s needs first. She testified that she had witnessed emotional instability on the part of her husband throughout the marriage, but she tried to support him in his work and was proud of how successful he had become as a scholar in ancient Chinese literature. (7)”

    “Note 7. The wife described her husband as very insecure and ‘socially kind of weird.’ She stated that while husband enjoys social events, he doesn’t know how to behave and that his ‘mood [is] always up and down very much.’ (T 1/6/09). The wife also described certain troubling conduct by the husband during the course of the marriage, such as banging his head against a wall, and other bizarre behaviors.”   

Her claims regarding husband’s personality were corroborated by husband’s aunt, Eugenia Commack. (8)”

“Note 8. Ms. Commack described the husband as having been a ‘very bright but very troubled child’ who was unable to socially interact. Her testimony described the wife as a supportive and loving spouse.” 

“The wife claims she became aware of the magnitude of the problems in their marriage in the summer of 2007, after the daughter accessed her husband’s computer and discovered emails between her husband and another woman. (9)”

“Note 9. The court accepts as credible the testimony of the wife, that in the summer of 2007, the daughter accessed the husband’s computer for her personal use and found the husband’s personal communications with [Ms. Solovieva], evidencing the extramarital relationship, and that the daughter then shared this information with her mother. (T 1/5/09, p. 136)”

“The testimony of the parties reveal a marriage wherein the husband controlled virtually every aspect of familial life. the husband brought his wife to the United States knowing that she was not fluent in the English language and he determined the family was to speak only Chinese in the home. He further determined that there would be no television in the home. The wife was often uncomfortable in academic and/or social settings because she did not become fluent in English and it is apparent that the husband blames the wife for her discomfort…” (Memorandum of Decision, pp.5-6)