Speaking Truth to Power - Anita Hill [122]
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN
In Washington, Senators Hatch, Specter, Danforth, and Simpson kept up their attack. Danforth released a statement by John Burke, a partner at the Wald firm, challenging my claim that I had left the firm voluntarily. Burke recalled that I had worked extensively with him and other lawyers in the tax, general business, and real estate sections of the firm. Burke further alleged that he advised me that I should look for other employment. Of course, those statements were completely false. I never worked with him and never received any kind of evaluation from him.
Danforth released the statement despite the fact that Donald Green, the partner “responsible for associate [attorneys] evaluations” as well as the firm records, disagreed with it. Green first submitted an affidavit to the committee, responding immediately to the Burke statement. And he followed up with a letter which provided more complete information based on the firm’s written records, informing Senator Biden: “There was no indication that Professor Hill ever worked on a legal matter with Mr. Burke or under his direct or indirect supervision. Professor Hill did perform a brief assignment for another partner more senior to Mr. Burke in [Burke’s] field of law. Professor Hill’s work was favorably reviewed by that partner. There was another first-year African-American woman associate who did work with Mr. Burke during the time described in his affidavit, who was given an unsatisfactory evaluation and who was asked to seek other employment.”
Nevertheless, when Senator Danforth circulated Burke’s statement, he did not include Donald Green’s response. Again, the truth of the allegations did not matter. At the same time and for months thereafter, Danforth attempted to circulate slanderous allegations made by Oral Roberts students. Allegations were submitted to the press to destroy my personal and professional reputation in order to cast doubt on me. This attack was not about the truth—it was about destroying me.
Before I returned to Oklahoma, some well-wishers had sent flowers to the law school. Some of my colleagues had taken the plants to my home. After the press conference I went home with a bouquet of balloons to a walkway lined with flowers. In contrast to the scene outside, inside, the bomb threats and hate mail began to arrive. My telephone rang constantly, and since I had no way of knowing in advance whether the caller would be friendly, I answered—but always with trepidation. When I grew tired of the threats and condemnation, I let the answering machine take over the job of receiving them. Eventually, an additional telephone line gave me the security of knowing that I would not miss calls from friends and family.
My neighbors Dewey and Katherine Selmon and Wilma and John McFarland brought over casseroles; friends called to offer their assistance and comfort; my mother came to stay with me and help me deal with the stress and turmoil; and on the weekends JoAnn would come with her two younger children to assist and to divert my attention from the fracas. Jonna and Jerry, my niece and nephew, were always a distraction.
One evening, as we were sitting down to dinner, David Swank came by the house. He asked to speak to me alone. “Campus police have received a call—a bomb threat,” he warned. “They are taking it seriously. Just to be on the safe side,” he advised, “you may want to go to a hotel for the night.” I went to my mother and sister and suggested that they spend the night in a local hotel. When I told them why, they insisted, “We’ll stay here with you.” Though I would have felt better had they left, I knew that I could not begin to run from the threats. This was one more test of my will but not one that I would choose for either of them or the children. True to their nature,