Academic Fraud Clearinghouse

[apl68]

Dipak Panigrahy, Harvard Medical School, submitted 500 pages of plagiarized word salad as expert testimony in a federal class action lawsuit. The judge rejected it.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/4/15/hms-professor-plagiarized-report/ 

More egg on Harvard's face.

[Wahoo Redux]

Dipak Panigrahy, Harvard Medical School, submitted 500 pages of plagiarized word salad as expert testimony in a federal class action lawsuit. The judge rejected it.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/4/15/hms-professor-plagiarized-report/ 

More egg on Harvard's face.

Sounds like it is not plagiarism in the truest sense (he cited his sources), but a hack job in which he cut-n-pasted large sections of other people's real scientific work without proper identification, so it looked like valid original research, and cherry-picking what he found to reach a solution convenient to his client.

I've wondered why out court system allows this version of paid "expert opinion" in the courtroom.

[marshwiggle]

Dipak Panigrahy, Harvard Medical School, submitted 500 pages of plagiarized word salad as expert testimony in a federal class action lawsuit. The judge rejected it.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/4/15/hms-professor-plagiarized-report/ 

More egg on Harvard's face.

Sounds like it is not plagiarism in the truest sense (he cited his sources), but a hack job in which he cut-n-pasted large sections of other people's real scientific work without proper identification, so it looked like valid original research, and cherry-picking what he found to reach a solution convenient to his client.

I've wondered why out court system allows this version of paid "expert opinion" in the courtroom.

By that definition, I could write a paper listing 3 sources, properly cite one quotation from each source, and then cut-and-paste everything else to my heart's content and argue it's "not plagiarism in the truest sense".

Not buying it.

[Wahoo Redux]

Dipak Panigrahy, Harvard Medical School, submitted 500 pages of plagiarized word salad as expert testimony in a federal class action lawsuit. The judge rejected it.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/4/15/hms-professor-plagiarized-report/ 

More egg on Harvard's face.

Sounds like it is not plagiarism in the truest sense (he cited his sources), but a hack job in which he cut-n-pasted large sections of other people's real scientific work without proper identification, so it looked like valid original research, and cherry-picking what he found to reach a solution convenient to his client.

I've wondered why out court system allows this version of paid "expert opinion" in the courtroom.

By that definition, I could write a paper listing 3 sources, properly cite one quotation from each source, and then cut-and-paste everything else to my heart's content and argue it's "not plagiarism in the truest sense".

Not buying it.

Okay, Marshy.  I appreciate your expert opinion.