1 / 150

“Web” Obscured Filtering of Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Key Questions on Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972

Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W is vexed by the very bizarre and persistent frenzy that has targeted him on the internet ever since he made the decision to publish on digital platforms [1] some of his recollections on how he was in the month of January 2010 (as an undergraduate student of Westminster College) informed about the April 05th 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery before being told what constitutes affirmative and effective consent in healthy sexual relationships; [2] his questions about Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972...

michaelayele9890
Download Presentation

“Web” Obscured Filtering of Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Key Questions on Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W is responsible for the publications of the Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL): a non-pro?t organization primarily engaged in the dissemination of public records. https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 1/15

  2. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) About American Post-Secondary Academic Education With Regards to A?rmative and E?ective Consent in Healthy Sexual Relationships – # Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Review of Events Leading Up to the Enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act on (or around) November 08th 1990 "Web" Unwelcome Filtering of Michael Ayele (aka) W Publications on American Post Secondary Education With Regards to Consent Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W 14:05 th When publishing their January 30 2018 report, the National Council on Disability (NCD) had recognized that [1] “affirmative and effective consent” is being taught to (domestic and international) college and university students of the United States of America (U.S.A) during the course of their Freshmen year, [2] college and university students of the U.S.A (whether domestic or international) are informed about “healthy sexual relationships” during the course of their 1 year of post-secondary academic education; [3] 20% of women were sexually assaulted in a college or university setting (of the U.S.A) by the time they reached their Senior Year in Calendar Year 2005; [4] 32% of women with a disability were sexually assaulted during Calendar Years 2014 and 2015 in a college or university setting (of the U.S.A); [5] sexual assault “is a public st https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 2/15

  3. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) health and public safety concern with far reaching implications;” [6] sexual assault is a “deeply personal violation,” which “leaves physical and emotional impacts that change the lives of victims;” [7] sexual assault causes “long term physical, psychological, and emotional effects, including depression, post-traumatic stress, thoughts of suicide, flashbacks, and sleep disorders.” The NCD have also noted that their January 30 2018 report sought to “raise awareness of sexual assault (…) on college campuses by examining college policies and practices.” Furthermore,they write that “Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 is a federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any education program or activity that receives federal funding. Under Title IX, discrimination on the basis of sex can include sexual harassment, rape and sexual assault. A college or university that receives federal funds may be held legally responsible when it knows about and ignores sexual harassment or assault in its programs or activities. As of September 22 2017, colleges can adopt various standards of proof in sexual assault cases, from the lowest standard of proof (preponderance of evidence) to a higher standard of proof (clear and convincing evidence). Title IX, like the Clery Act, also requires college employers that address sexual assault to have proper training and to train the campus community in its policies and procedures regarding sexual assault.” th nd Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W is a Bachelor of Arts (B.A) Degree graduate of Westminster College (located in Fulton, Missouri) who was in January 2010 informed about the April 05 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery before being told what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” in healthy sexual relationships. Via email dated March 07 2022, the Department of Justice (DOJ) Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that (his alma mater) Westminster College had extended an invitation to their then Director William Webster to “deliver the 1987 Commencement Address on Sunday, May 17 1987 at 2:30 P.M.” The invitation extended by Westminster College on August 29 1986 came approximately 5 months after the April 05 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery on the campus of Lehigh University (located in the State of Pennsylvania). In another email dated November 12 2020, the FBI had informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that they had transferred the case of Jeanne Ann Clery rape and murder to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) on (or around) June 11 1992. However, via postal mail correspondence that was addressed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, the CIA have denied ever being “assigned” the case of Jeanne Ann Clery on (or around) June 11 1992. It is the opinion of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that the letters sent to him by the FBI (on or around November 12 2020) and the CIA (on or around May 21 2021) were inconsistent with one another. For your information, William Webster was Director of the FBI from 1978 to 1987. He was also Director of the CIA from 1987 to 1991. His father Thomas Webster is an alumnus of Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri). According to the 2019 – 2020 Student Handbook published by Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri), “the college has comprehensive, intentional, and integrated programming, initiatives, strategies, and campaigns that are intended to end sexual misconduct, dating / domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Programs to prevent sexual misconduct, dating/domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking include both primary prevention and awareness programs directed at incoming students and new employees and ongoing prevention and awareness campaigns directed at students and employees. The ongoing educational programs are overseen by the Title IX Coordinator / Director of Human Resources and Vice-President / Dean of Student Life. All prevention programs are [1] culturally relevant, inclusive of diverse communities and identities, sustainable, responsive to community needs, and empirically based and assessed for value, effectiveness, or outcome; [2] in consideration of environmental risk and protective factors as they occur on the individual relationship, institutional community and societal levels; [3] accessible to students, faculty and staff and accommodated based upon one’s ability status, language, and/or learning style.” th th th th th th th th th st The key questions asked by Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery as well as Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 include but are not limited to the following. 1) What were American colleges and universities obligations pursuant to Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? Were American colleges and universities required by law to condemn violence committed against women irrespective of their racial backgrounds, their sexual orientations, their religious affiliations, their national origins and/or their disability status following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? If yes, were American colleges and universities required to inform their students (beginning Calendar Year 1973) what constitutes appropriate sexual boundaries pursuant to Title IX of the https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 3/15

  4. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) Education Amendments Act of 1972? 2) Did American colleges and universities begin informing their students what constitute “affirmative and effective consent” in the years following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? If not, when did American colleges and universities begin to inform their incoming freshmen and transfer students about the concepts of “affirmative and effective consent?” Did American colleges and universities begin teaching the concepts of “affirmative and effective consent” to their students following the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery (on April 5 1986)? If yes, why have American colleges and universities waited so long following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 to inform their students what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent?” 3) Are American colleges and universities discussions pertaining to what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” consistent with Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 if they are first informing their incoming new students about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery? Are American colleges and universities discussions pertaining to what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” consistent with their academic integrity policy if they are first informing their incoming new students about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery? 4) Were there forces out there in the 1970s and the 1980s looking for a case where a Black or an African American man rapes and murders a Caucasian woman for the purpose of enacting a law similar to the Jeanne Clery Act? Was the enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act the result of racist and sexist individuals coming together for the purpose of [a] preventing racial minorities from climbing the social ladder through academic education; [b] cracking down on interracial relationships particularly between a Caucasian woman and a Black or African American man (in American colleges and universities); [c] not applying the same standards in circumstances where a Caucasian man sexually assaults a woman from a racial minority (as in the case of Brock Turner and Chanel Miller following her rape on January 18 2015 at the campus of Stanford University)? th th As a matter of principle, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W unequivocally condemns violence committed against girls and women irrespective of their racial backgrounds, their sexual orientations, their national origins, their religious affiliations, their disability status or their age groups. Still, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W is vexed by the very bizarre and persistent frenzy that has targeted him on the internet ever since he made the decision to publish on digital platforms [1] some of his recollections on how he was in the month of January 2010 (as an undergraduate student of Westminster College) informed about the April 05 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery before being told what constitutes affirmative and effective consent in healthy sexual relationships; [2] his questions about Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972; [3] his correspondence with agents of the U.S government on the circumstances that led up to the enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act on (or around) November 08 1990; [4] his inquiry on the exact year American colleges and universities began teaching their undergraduate students what constitutes affirmative and effective consent in healthy sexual relationships… th th Be well. Stay well. Take care. Keep yourselves at arms distance. Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Anti-Racist Human Rights Activist Audio-Visual Media Analyst Anti-Propaganda Journalist Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W August 3, 2024 Web Unsolicited and Distorted Filtering of Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Review of Events Leading Up to Enactment of Jeanne Clery Act , Web Unwelcome and Incorrect Filtering of Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Key Questions on Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 4/15

  5. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) # Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL), # Vimeo Leave a comment Edit About the “Web” Unwelcome and Unsolicited Filtering of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Written Publications Contextualizing the Circumstances That Led Up to the Enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act On (Or Around) November 08th 1990 – # Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Key Questions on Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 5/15

  6. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) th When publishing their January 30 2018 report, the National Council on Disability (NCD) had recognized that [1] “affirmative and effective consent” is being taught to (domestic and international) college and university students of the United States of America (U.S.A) during the course of their Freshmen year, [2] college and university students of the U.S.A (whether domestic or international) are informed about “healthy sexual relationships” during the course of their 1 year of post-secondary academic education; [3] 20% of women were sexually assaulted in a college or university setting (of the U.S.A) by the time they reached their Senior Year in Calendar Year 2005; [4] 32% of women with a disability were sexually assaulted during Calendar Years 2014 and 2015 in a college or university setting (of the U.S.A); [5] sexual assault “is a public health and public safety concern with far reaching implications;” [6] sexual assault is a “deeply personal violation,” which “leaves physical and emotional impacts that change the lives of victims;” [7] sexual assault causes “long term physical, psychological, and emotional effects, including depression, post-traumatic stress, thoughts of suicide, flashbacks, and sleep disorders.” The NCD have also noted that their January 30 2018 report sought to “raise awareness of sexual assault (…) on college campuses by examining college policies and practices.” Furthermore,they write that “Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 is a federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any education program or activity that receives federal funding. Under Title IX, discrimination on the basis of sex can include sexual harassment, rape and sexual assault. A college or university that receives federal funds may be held legally responsible when it knows about and ignores sexual harassment or assault in its programs or activities. As of September 22 2017, colleges can adopt various standards of proof in sexual assault cases, from the lowest standard of proof (preponderance of evidence) to a higher standard of proof (clear and convincing evidence). Title IX, like the Clery Act, also requires college employers that address sexual assault to have proper training and to train the campus community in its policies and procedures regarding sexual assault.” st th nd Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W is a Bachelor of Arts (B.A) Degree graduate of Westminster College (located in Fulton, Missouri) who was in January 2010 informed about the April 05 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery before being told what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” in healthy sexual relationships. Via email dated March 07 2022, the Department of Justice (DOJ) Federal Bureau of th th https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 6/15

  7. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) Investigation (FBI) have informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that (his alma mater) Westminster College had extended an invitation to their then Director William Webster to “deliver the 1987 Commencement Address on Sunday, May 17 1987 at 2:30 P.M.” The invitation extended by Westminster College on August 29 1986 came approximately 5 months after the April 05 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery on the campus of Lehigh University (located in the State of Pennsylvania). In another email dated November 12 2020, the FBI had informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that they had transferred the case of Jeanne Ann Clery rape and murder to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) on (or around) June 11 1992. However, via postal mail correspondence that was addressed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, the CIA have denied ever being “assigned” the case of Jeanne Ann Clery on (or around) June 11 1992. It is the opinion of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that the letters sent to him by the FBI (on or around November 12 2020) and the CIA (on or around May 21 2021) were inconsistent with one another. For your information, William Webster was Director of the FBI from 1978 to 1987. He was also Director of the CIA from 1987 to 1991. His father Thomas Webster is an alumnus of Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri). According to the 2019 – 2020 Student Handbook published by Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri), “the college has comprehensive, intentional, and integrated programming, initiatives, strategies, and campaigns that are intended to end sexual misconduct, dating / domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Programs to prevent sexual misconduct, dating/domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking include both primary prevention and awareness programs directed at incoming students and new employees and ongoing prevention and awareness campaigns directed at students and employees. The ongoing educational programs are overseen by the Title IX Coordinator / Director of Human Resources and Vice-President / Dean of Student Life. All prevention programs are [1] culturally relevant, inclusive of diverse communities and identities, sustainable, responsive to community needs, and empirically based and assessed for value, effectiveness, or outcome; [2] in consideration of environmental risk and protective factors as they occur on the individual relationship, institutional community and societal levels; [3] accessible to students, faculty and staff and accommodated based upon one’s ability status, language, and/or learning style.” th th th th th th th st The key questions asked by Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery as well as Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 include but are not limited to the following. 1) What were American colleges and universities obligations pursuant to Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? Were American colleges and universities required by law to condemn violence committed against women irrespective of their racial backgrounds, their sexual orientations, their religious affiliations, their national origins and/or their disability status following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? If yes, were American colleges and universities required to inform their students (beginning Calendar Year 1973) what constitutes appropriate sexual boundaries pursuant to Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? 2) Did American colleges and universities begin informing their students what constitute “affirmative and effective consent” in the years following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? If not, when did American colleges and universities begin to inform their incoming freshmen and transfer students about the concepts of “affirmative and effective consent?” Did American colleges and universities begin teaching the concepts of “affirmative and effective consent” to their students following the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery (on April 5 1986)? If yes, why have American colleges and universities waited so long following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 to inform their students what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent?” 3) Are American colleges and universities discussions pertaining to what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” consistent with Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 if they are first informing their incoming new students about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery? Are American colleges and universities discussions pertaining to what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” consistent with their academic integrity policy if they are first informing their incoming new students about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery? 4) Were there forces out there in the 1970s and the 1980s looking for a case where a Black or an African American man rapes and murders a Caucasian woman for the purpose of enacting a law similar to the Jeanne Clery Act? Was the enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act the result of racist and sexist individuals coming together for the purpose of [a] preventing racial minorities from climbing the social ladder through academic education; [b] cracking down on interracial relationships particularly between a Caucasian woman and a Black or African American man (in American colleges and universities); [c] not applying the same standards in th https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 7/15

  8. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) circumstances where a Caucasian man sexually assaults a woman from a racial minority (as in the case of Brock Turner and Chanel Miller following her rape on January 18 2015 at the campus of Stanford University)? th As a matter of principle, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W unequivocally condemns violence committed against girls and women irrespective of their racial backgrounds, their sexual orientations, their national origins, their religious affiliations, their disability status or their age groups. Still, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W is vexed by the very bizarre and persistent frenzy that has targeted him on the internet ever since he made the decision to publish on digital platforms [1] some of his recollections on how he was in the month of January 2010 (as an undergraduate student of Westminster College) informed about the April 05 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery before being told what constitutes affirmative and effective consent in healthy sexual relationships; [2] his questions about Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972; [3] his correspondence with agents of the U.S government on the circumstances that led up to the enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act on (or around) November 08 1990; [4] his inquiry on the exact year American colleges and universities began teaching their undergraduate students what constitutes affirmative and effective consent in healthy sexual relationships… th th Be well. Stay well. Take care. Keep yourselves at arms distance. Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Anti-Racist Human Rights Activist Audio-Visual Media Analyst Anti-Propaganda Journalist Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W July 27, 2024 "Web" Unsolicited and Unwelcome Filtering of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Written Publications on American Post-Secondary Academic Education Dealing With Consent # Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL), # Dailymotion, # Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Key Questions on Title IX Leave a comment Edit https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 8/15

  9. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) About the “Web” Unwelcome and Distorted Filtering of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Written Publications on the Circumstances Leading Up to Chanel Miller January 18th 2015 Rape on the Campus of Stanford University – Context and Perspective on Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W June 02nd 2016 Through September 02nd 2016 After Habeas Corpus Filing https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 9/15

  10. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) th When publishing their January 30 2018 report, the National Council on Disability (NCD) had recognized that [1] “affirmative and effective consent” is being taught to (domestic and international) college and university students of the United States of America (U.S.A) during the course of their freshmen year, [2] college and university students of the U.S.A (whether domestic or international) are informed about “healthy sexual relationships” during the course of their first year of post-secondary academic education; [3] 20% of women were sexually assaulted in a college or university setting (of the U.S.A) by the time they reached their Senior Year in Calendar Year 2005; [4] 32% of women with a disability were sexually assaulted during Calendar Years 2014 and 2015 in a college or university setting (of the U.S.A); [5] sexual assault “is a public health and public safety https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 10/15

  11. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) concern with far reaching implications;” [6] sexual assault is a “deeply personal violation,” which “leaves physical and emotional impacts that change the lives of victims;” [7] sexual assault causes “long term physical, psychological, and emotional effects, including depression, post-traumatic stress, thoughts of suicide, flashbacks, and sleep disorders.” The NCD have also noted that their January 30 2018 report sought to “raise awareness of sexual assault (…) on college campuses by examining college policies and practices.” Based on the statements made by the NCD in their January 30 2018 report, it is the judgment of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that Brock Allen Turner was very likely to have been informed about affirmative and effective consent in healthy sexual relationships sometime in the months of August / September 2014 when he was a full-time undergraduate student of Stanford University, thus making his documented sexist behavior of January 10 2015 and January 18 2015 all the more aggravating. It is also the opinion of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that the 90-day incarceration of Brock Allen Turner (between June 02 2016 and August 02 2016) for the January 18 2015 rape of Chanel Miller (on the campus of Stanford University) made a complete mockery of the judicial branch of the United States (U.S) government. th th th th nd nd th At the time Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W began to publish some of his correspondence with agents of the U.S government on the biggest news story of Calendar Year 2016 (i.e: Brock Allen Turner 90 day incarceration at the Santa Clara County Jail for the January 18 2015 rape of Chanel Miller), Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W had not signed any binding agreement that subjected his written content on Calameo to evaluation, examination and unsolicited comments intended to “summarize” what the work is about. In other words, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W has never agreed to take on the role of the “Student” for his published works on Calameo while the so-called “web” took on the role of “Professor.” Likewise, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W has never agreed to take on the role of “Plaintiff” and/or “Defendant” for his published works on Calameo while the so-called “web” took on the role of “Judge, Jury and Executioner.” More importantly, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W had started to publish some of his correspondence with agents of the U.S government on the circumstances that led up to the January 18 2015 rape of Chanel Miller because of a commitment he had made that he would disseminate any and all responsive U.S government records within their possession to members of the general public and representatives of the media at no financial expense to them. To the best of his ability, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W has fulfilled this commitment by disseminating (at no financial expense to representatives of the media and members of the general public) the most pertinent records on the circumstances leading up [1] to the January 18 2015 rape of Chanel Miller on the th th th https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 11/15

  12. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) campus of Stanford University; [2] to Brock Allen Turner incarceration at the Santa Clara County Jail between June 02 2016 and August 02 2016 for the January 18 2015 rape of Chanel Miller… nd nd th Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W is a Bachelor of Arts (B.A) Degree graduate of Westminster College (located in Fulton, Missouri) who was in January 2010 informed about the April 05 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery before being told what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” in healthy sexual relationships. Via email dated March 07 2022, the Department of Justice (DOJ) Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that (his alma mater) Westminster College had extended an invitation to their then Director William Webster to “deliver the 1987 Commencement Address on Sunday, May 17 1987 at 2:30 P.M.” The invitation extended by Westminster College on August 29 1986 came approximately 5 months after the April 05 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery on the campus of Lehigh University (located in the State of Pennsylvania). In another email dated November 12 2020, the FBI had informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that they had transferred the case of Jeanne Ann Clery rape and murder to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) on (or around) June 11 1992. However, via postal mail correspondence that was addressed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, the CIA have denied ever being “assigned” the case of Jeanne Ann Clery on (or around) June 11 1992, which coincidentally happens to be (according to public records) Chanel Miller’s date of birth (DOB). It is the opinion of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that the letters sent to him by the FBI (on or around November 12 2020) and the CIA (on or around May 21 2021) were inconsistent with one another. For your information, William Webster was Director of the FBI from 1978 to 1987. He was also Director of the CIA from 1987 to 1991. His father Thomas Webster is an alumnus of Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri). th th th th th th th th th st As a matter of principle, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W unequivocally condemns violence committed against girls and women irrespective of their racial backgrounds, their sexual orientations, their national origins, their religious affiliations, their disability status and/or their age groups. Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W regrets the very bizarre frenzy that has surrounded his written publications pertaining to [1] statements made by the National Council on Disability (NCD) (in their January 30 2018 report) recognizing that (i) “affirmative and effective consent” is being taught to college/university students of the United States of America (U.S.A) during the course of their freshmen year, (ii) college/university students are informed about “healthy sexual relationships” during the course of their 1 (first) year of post-secondary academic education; [2] the strong th st https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 12/15

  13. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) likelihood that Brock Allen Turner was informed what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” when he was an undergraduate student of student of Stanford University (located in the State of California) during Calendar Years 2014 – 2015 (particularly given the statements made by the NCD in their January 30 2018 report); [3] Brock Allen Turner (i) January 10 2015 sexual harassment of a female student who was also attending Stanford University even though he had likely been informed what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” sometime in the months of August/September 2014; (ii) January 18 2015 arrest for the sexual assault he perpetrated on Chanel Miller behind a dumpster on the campus of Stanford University while she was unconscious even though he has likely been informed what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” in the month of September 2014; (iii) being on (or around) March 30 2016 found guilty of sexually assaulting and sexually penetrating Chanel Miller while she was unconscious; (iv) being on (or around) June 02 2016 sentenced to 6 (six) months of county jail for the sexual assault he perpetrated on Chanel Miller; (v) being released from the Santa Clara County Jail on (or around) September 02 2016 after serving 90 (ninety) days of the 6 months sentence imposed upon him on (or around) June 02 2016 for the sexual assault of Chanel Miller on the campus of Stanford University; [4] the institutional support provided by the San Francisco Public Library (SFPL) to Chanel Miller’s memoir entitled: “Know My Name;” [5] that he had become a member of the San Francisco Public Library (SFPL) sometime in the months of November/December 2014. th th th th nd nd nd Be well. Stay well. Take care. Keep yourselves at arms distance. Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Anti-Racist Human Rights Activist Audio-Visual Media Analyst Anti-Propaganda Journalist https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 13/15

  14. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) 1 65% web-unw… / 212 Web Unwelcome Filtering of Events Leading Up to Chanel Miller January 18th 2015 Sexual Assault Download https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 14/15

  15. 8/23/24, 2:11 PM Written Publications – Page 2 – Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W July 21, 2024 Context and Perspective on Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W June 02nd 2016 Through September 02nd 2016 After Habeas Corpus Filing , Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Review of Circumstances Leading Up to Chanel Miller January 18th 2015 Rape on the Campus of Stanford University (California) # “Web” Unwelcome and Distorted Filtering of Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Written Publications Contextualizing Chanel Miller Memoir Entitled: “Know My Name” , # “Web” Unwelcome and Distorted Filtering of Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Written Publications Contextualizing His Decision to File a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in Calendar Year 2016 , # “Web” Unwelcome and Distorted Filtering of Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Written Publications Contextualizing the Months He Had Spent in June and July 2016 , # “Web” Unwelcome and Distorted Filtering of Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Written Publications on the Circumstances Leading Up to Chanel Miller January 18th 2015 Sexual Assault and Ensuing Aftermath , # Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W Review of Events Leading Up to Chanel Miller January 18th 2015 Rape on the Campus of Stanford University Leave a comment Edit Newer posts1234…42Older posts Written Publications Association for the Advancement of Civil Liberties (AACL) , Website Built with WordPress.com. About: Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W https://michaelayeleaacl.wordpress.com/publications/page/2/ 15/15

  16. EXHIBIT 1.

  17. U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C. 20535 March 7, 2022 MR. MICHAEL A. AYELE ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF CIVIL LIBERTIES POST OFFICE BOX 20438 ADDIS ABABA 10013 ETHIOPIA FOIPA Request No.: 1511415-000 Subject: Westminster College (Communications and Opinions) Dear Mr. Ayele: The enclosed documents were reviewed under the Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA), Title 5, United States Code, Section 552/552a. Below you will find check boxes under the appropriate statute headings which indicate the types of exemptions asserted to protect information which is exempt from disclosure. The appropriate exemptions are noted on the enclosed pages next to redacted information. In addition, a deleted page information sheet was inserted to indicate where pages were withheld entirely and identify which exemptions were applied. The checked exemption boxes used to withhold information are further explained in the enclosed Explanation of Exemptions. Section 552 (b)(1) (b)(2) (b)(3) (b)(7)(E) (b)(8) Section 552a (d)(5) (b)(7)(A) (b)(7)(B) (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(D) (j)(2) (k)(1) (k)(2) (k)(3) (b)(7)(F) (k)(4) (k)(5) (b)(4) (b)(5) (b)(9) (k)(6) (b)(6) (k)(7) 2 pages were reviewed and 2 pages are being released. Please see the paragraphs below for relevant information specific to your request as well as the enclosed FBI FOIPA Addendum for standard responses applicable to all requests. Document(s) were located which originated with, or contained information concerning, other Government Agency (ies) [OGA]. This information has been referred to the OGA(s) for review and direct response to you. We are consulting with another agency. The FBI will correspond with you regarding this information when the consultation is completed.

  18. Please refer to the enclosed FBI FOIPA Addendum for additional standard responses applicable to your request. “Part 1” of the Addendum includes standard responses that apply to all requests. “Part 2” includes additional standard responses that apply to all requests for records about yourself or any third party individuals. “Part 3” includes general information about FBI records that you may find useful. Also enclosed is our Explanation of Exemptions. For questions regarding our determinations, visit the www.fbi.gov/foia website under “Contact Us.” The FOIPA Request Number listed above has been assigned to your request. Please use this number in all correspondence concerning your request. If you are not satisfied with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s determination in response to this request, you may administratively appeal by writing to the Director, Office of Information Policy (OIP), United States Department of Justice, 441 G Street, NW, 6th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20530, or you may submit an appeal through OIP's FOIA STAR portal by creating an account following the instructions on OIP’s website: https://www.justice.gov/oip/submit-and-track-request-or-appeal. Your appeal must be postmarked or electronically transmitted within ninety (90) days of the date of my response to your request. If you submit your appeal by mail, both the letter and the envelope should be clearly marked "Freedom of Information Act Appeal." Please cite the FOIPA Request Number assigned to your request so it may be easily identified. You may seek dispute resolution services by contacting the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). The contact information for OGIS is as follows: Office of Government Information Services, National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS, College Park, Maryland 20740-6001, e-mail at ogis@nara.gov; telephone at 202-741-5770; toll free at 1-877-684-6448; or facsimile at 202-741-5769. Alternatively, you may contact the FBI’s FOIA Public Liaison by emailing foipaquestions@fbi.gov. If you submit your dispute resolution correspondence by email, the subject heading should clearly state “DisputeResolution Services.” Please also cite the FOIPA Request Number assigned to your request so it may be easily identified. See additional information which follows. Sincerely, Michael G. Seidel Section Chief Record/Information Dissemination Section Information Management Division Enclosure(s) This is the final release of information responsive to your FOIPA request. This material is being provided to you at no charge. It is unnecessary to adjudicate your request for a fee waiver at this time, as no applicable fees were assessed. Records that may have been responsive to your request were destroyed. Since this material could not be reviewed, it is not known if it was responsive to your request. Record retention and disposal is carried out under supervision of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), Title 44, United States Code, Section 3301 as implemented by Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1228; Title 44, United States Code, Section 3310 as implemented by Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1229.10. Additionally, records that may be responsive to your Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA)request has been transferred to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). If you wish to review these records, submit a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to NARA, Special Access and FOIA, 8601 Adelphi Road, Room 5500, College Park, MD 20740-6001. Please reference the file numbers 100-KC-13743 and 100-KC- 14235.

  19. FBI FOIPA Addendum As referenced in our letter responding to your Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA) request, the FBI FOIPA Addendum provides information applicable to your request. Part 1 of the Addendum includes standard responses that apply to all requests. Part 2 includes standard responses that apply to requests for records about individuals to the extent your request seeks the listed information. Part 3 includes general information about FBI records, searches, and programs. Part 1: The standard responses below apply to all requests: (i) 5 U.S.C. § 552(c). Congress excluded three categories of law enforcement and national security records from the requirements of the FOIPA [5 U.S.C. § 552(c)]. FBI responses are limited to those records subject to the requirements of the FOIPA. Additional information about the FBI and the FOIPA can be found on the www.fbi.gov/foia website. (ii) Intelligence Records. To the extent your request seeks records of intelligence sources, methods, or activities, the FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of records pursuant to FOIA exemptions (b)(1), (b)(3), and as applicable to requests for records about individuals, PA exemption (j)(2) [5 U.S.C. §§ 552/552a (b)(1), (b)(3), and (j)(2)]. The mere acknowledgment of the existence or nonexistence of such records is itself a classified fact protected by FOIA exemption (b)(1) and/or would reveal intelligence sources, methods, or activities protected by exemption (b)(3) [50 USC § 3024(i)(1)]. This is a standard response and should not be read to indicate that any such records do or do not exist. Part 2: The standard responses below apply to all requests for records on individuals: (i) Requests for Records about any Individual—Watch Lists. The FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any individual’s name on a watch list pursuant to FOIA exemption (b)(7)(E) and PA exemption (j)(2) [5 U.S.C. §§ 552/552a (b)(7)(E), (j)(2)]. This is a standard response and should not be read to indicate that watch list records do or do not exist. (ii) Requests for Records about any Individual—Witness Security Program Records. The FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of records which could identify any participant in the Witness Security Program pursuant to FOIA exemption (b)(3) and PA exemption (j)(2) [5 U.S.C. §§ 552/552a (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. 3521, and (j)(2)]. This is a standard response and should not be read to indicate that such records do or do not exist. (iii) Requests for Records for Incarcerated Individuals. The FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of records which could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any incarcerated individual pursuant to FOIA exemptions (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F), and PA exemption (j)(2) [5 U.S.C. §§ 552/552a (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F), and (j)(2)]. This is a standard response and should not be read to indicate that such records do or do not exist. Part 3: General Information: (i) Record Searches. The Record/Information Dissemination Section (RIDS) searches for reasonably described records by searching systems or locations where responsive records would reasonably be found. A standard search normally consists of a search for main files in the Central Records System (CRS), an extensive system of records consisting of applicant, investigative, intelligence, personnel, administrative, and general files compiled by the FBI per its law enforcement, intelligence, and administrative functions. The CRS spans the entire FBI organization, comprising records of FBI Headquarters, FBI Field Offices, and FBI Legal Attaché Offices (Legats) worldwide; Electronic Surveillance (ELSUR) records are included in the CRS. Unless specifically requested, a standard search does not include references, administrative records of previous FOIPA requests, or civil litigation files. For additional information about our record searches, visit www.fbi.gov/services/information-management/foipa/requesting-fbi-records. (ii) FBI Records. Founded in 1908, the FBI carries out a dual law enforcement and national security mission. As part of this dual mission, the FBI creates and maintains records on various subjects; however, the FBI does not maintain records on every person, subject, or entity. (iii) Requests for Criminal History Records or Rap Sheets. The Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division provides Identity History Summary Checks – often referred to as a criminal history record or rap sheet. These criminal history records are not the same as material in an investigative “FBI file.” An Identity History Summary Check is a listing of information taken from fingerprint cards and documents submitted to the FBI in connection with arrests, federal employment, naturalization, or military service. For a fee, individuals can request a copy of their Identity History Summary Check. Forms and directions can be accessed at www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/identity-history-summary-checks. Additionally, requests can be submitted electronically at www.edo.cjis.gov. For additional information, please contact CJIS directly at (304) 625-5590. (iv) National Name Check Program (NNCP). The mission of NNCP is to analyze and report information in response to name check requests received from federal agencies, for the purpose of protecting the United States from foreign and domestic threats to national security. Please be advised that this is a service provided to other federal agencies. Private Citizens cannot request a name check.

  20. EXPLANATION OF EXEMPTIONS SUBSECTIONS OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 552 (b)(1) (A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified to such Executive order; (b)(2) (b)(3) related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency; specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than section 552b of this title), provided that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on issue, or (B) establishes particular criteria for withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be withheld; (b)(4) (b)(5) trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential; inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency; (b)(6) (b)(7) personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information ( A ) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, ( B ) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, ( C ) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, ( D ) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation, or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, ( E ) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or ( F ) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual; (b)(8) contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions; or (b)(9) geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells. SUBSECTIONS OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 552a (d)(5) (j)(2) information compiled in reasonable anticipation of a civil action proceeding; material reporting investigative efforts pertaining to the enforcement of criminal law including efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or apprehend criminals; (k)(1) information which is currently and properly classified pursuant to an Executive order in the interest of the national defense or foreign policy, for example, information involving intelligence sources or methods; (k)(2) investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes, other than criminal, which did not result in loss of a right, benefit or privilege under Federal programs, or which would identify a source who furnished information pursuant to a promise that his/her identity would be held in confidence; (k)(3) material maintained in connection with providing protective services to the President of the United States or any other individual pursuant to the authority of Title 18, United States Code, Section 3056; (k)(4) (k)(5) required by statute to be maintained and used solely as statistical records; investigatory material compiled solely for the purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for Federal civilian employment or for access to classified information, the disclosure of which would reveal the identity of the person who furnished information pursuant to a promise that his/her identity would be held in confidence; (k)(6) testing or examination material used to determine individual qualifications for appointment or promotion in Federal Government service the release of which would compromise the testing or examination process; (k)(7) material used to determine potential for promotion in the armed services, the disclosure of which would reveal the identity of the person who furnished the material pursuant to a promise that his/her identity would be held in confidence. FBI/DOJ

  21. U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C. 20535 November 12, 2020 MR. MICHAEL A. AYELE ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF CIVIL LIBERTIES POST OFFICE BOX 20438 ADDIS ABABA ETHIOPIA FOIPA Request No.: 1480829-000 Subject: CLERY, JEANNE ANN Dear Mr. Ayele: This acknowledges receipt of your Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA) request to the FBI. Below you will find check boxes and informational paragraphs about your request, as well as specific determinations required by these statutes. Please read each one carefully. Your request has been received at FBI Headquarters for processing. You submitted your request via the FBI’s eFOIPA system. We have reviewed your request and determined it is consistent with the FBI eFOIPA terms of service. Future correspondence about your FOIPA request will be provided in an email link unless the record’s file type is not supported by the eFOIPA system. We have reviewed your request and determined it is not consistent with the FBI eFOIPA terms of service. Future correspondence about your FOIPA request will be sent through standard mail. The subject of your request is currently being processed and documents will be released to you upon completion. Release of responsive records will be posted to the FBI’s electronic FOIA Library (The Vault), http:/vault.fbi.gov, and you will be contacted when the release is posted. Your request for a public interest fee waiver is under consideration and you will be advised of the decision if fees are applicable. If your fee waiver is not granted, you will be responsible for applicable fees per your designated requester fee category below. For the purpose of assessing any fees, we have determined: As a commercial use requester, you will be charged applicable search, review, and duplication fees in accordance with 5 USC § 552 (a)(4)(A)(ii)(I). As an educational institution, noncommercial scientific institution or representative of the news media requester, you will be charged applicable duplication fees in accordance with 5 USC § 552 (a)(4)(A)(ii)(II). As a general (all others) requester, you will be charged applicable search and duplication fees in accordance with 5 USC § 552 (a)(4)(A)(ii)(III).

  22. Please check the status of your FOIPA request at www.fbi.gov/foiaby clicking on FOIPA Status and entering your FOIPA Request Number. Status updates are adjusted weekly. The status of newly assigned requests may not be available until the next weekly update. If the FOIPA has been closed the notice will indicate that appropriate correspondence has been mailed to the address on file. For questions regarding our determinations, visit the www.fbi.gov/foia website under “Contact Us.” The FOIPA Request number listed above has been assigned to your request. Please use this number in all correspondence concerning your request. If you are not satisfied with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s determination in response to this request, you may administratively appeal by writing to the Director, Office of Information Policy (OIP), United States Department of Justice, 441 G Street, NW, 6th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20530, or you may submit an appeal through OIP's FOIA STAR portal by creating an account following the instructions on OIP’s website: https://www.justice.gov/oip/submit-and-track-request-or-appeal. Your appeal must be postmarked or electronically transmitted within ninety (90) days of the date of my response to your request. If you submit your appeal by mail, both the letter and the envelope should be clearly marked "Freedom of Information Act Appeal." Please cite the FOIPA Request Number assigned to your request so it may be easily identified. You may seek dispute resolution services by contacting the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). The contact information for OGIS is as follows: Office of Government Information Services, National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS, College Park, Maryland 20740-6001, e-mail at ogis@nara.gov; telephone at 202-741-5770; toll free at 1-877-684-6448; or facsimile at 202-741-5769. Alternatively, you may contact the FBI’s FOIA Public Liaison by emailing foipaquestions@fbi.gov. If you submit your dispute resolution correspondence by email, the subject heading should clearly state “DisputeResolution Services.” Please also cite the FOIPA Request Number assigned to your request so it may be easily identified. Sincerely, Michael G. Seidel Section Chief Record/Information Dissemination Section Information Management Division

  23. U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C. 20535 February 25, 2021 MICHAEL A. AYELE ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF CIVIL LIBERTIES POST OFFICE BOX 20438 ADDIS ABABA ETHIOPIA FOIPA Request No.: 1480829-000 Subject: CLERY, JEANNE ANN Dear Michael Ayele: The enclosed documents were reviewed under the Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA), Title 5, United States Code, Section 552/552a. Below you will find check boxes under the appropriate statute headings which indicate the types of exemptions asserted to protect information which is exempt from disclosure. The appropriate exemptions are noted on the enclosed pages next to redacted information. In addition, a deleted page information sheet was inserted to indicate where pages were withheld entirely and identify which exemptions were applied. The checked exemption boxes used to withhold information are further explained in the enclosed Explanation of Exemptions. Section 552 (b)(1) (b)(2) (b)(3) (b)(7)(E) (b)(8) Section 552a (d)(5) (b)(7)(A) (b)(7)(B) (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(D) (j)(2) (k)(1) (k)(2) (k)(3) (b)(7)(F) (k)(4) (k)(5) (b)(4) (b)(5) (b)(9) (k)(6) (b)(6) (k)(7) 5 page(s) were reviewed and 5 page(s) are being released. Please see the paragraphs below for relevant information specific to your request as well as the enclosed FBI FOIPA Addendum for standard responses applicable to all requests. Document(s) were located which originated with, or contained information concerning, other Government Agency [OGA]. This information has been referred to the OGA(s) for review and direct response to you. We are consulting with another agency. The FBI will correspond with you regarding this information when the consultation is completed. Please refer to the enclosed FBI FOIPA Addendum for additional standard responses applicable to your request. “Part 1” of the Addendum includes standard responses that apply to all requests. “Part 2” includes additional standard responses that apply to all requests for records about yourself or any third party individuals. “Part3” includes general information about FBI records that you may find useful. Also enclosed is our Explanation of Exemptions.

  24. The FOIPA Request Number listed above has been assigned to your request. Please use this number in all correspondence concerning your request. If you are not satisfied with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s determination in response to this request, you may administratively appeal by writing to the Director, Office of Information Policy (OIP), United States Department of Justice, 441 G Street, NW, 6th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20530, or you may submit an appeal through OIP's FOIA STAR portal by creating an account following the instructions on OIP’s website: https://www.justice.gov/oip/submit-and-track-request-or-appeal. Your appeal must be postmarked or electronically transmitted within ninety (90) days of the date of my response to your request. If you submit your appeal by mail, both the letter and the envelope should be clearly marked "Freedom of Information Act Appeal." Please cite the FOIPA Request Number assigned to your request so it may be easily identified. You may seek dispute resolution services by contacting the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). The contact information for OGIS is as follows: Office of Government Information Services, National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS, College Park, Maryland 20740-6001, e-mail at ogis@nara.gov; telephone at 202-741-5770; toll free at 1-877-684-6448; or facsimile at 202-741-5769. Alternatively, you may contact the FBI’s FOIA Public Liaison by emailing foipaquestions@fbi.gov. If you submit your dispute resolution correspondence by email, the subject heading should clearly state “DisputeResolution Services.” Please also cite the FOIPA Request Number assigned to your request so it may be easily identified. For questions regarding our determinations, visit the www.fbi.gov/foia website under “Contact Us.” See additional information which follows. The enclosed documents represent the final release of information responsive to your Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA) request. It is unnecessary to adjudicate your request for a public interest fee waiver because there are not assessable fees. Sincerely, Michael G. Seidel Section Chief Record/Information Dissemination Section Information Management Division Enclosure(s)

  25. FBI FOIPA Addendum As referenced in our letter responding to your Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA) request, the FBI FOIPA Addendum provides information applicable to your request. Part 1 of the Addendum includes standard responses that apply to all requests. Part 2 includes standard responses that apply to requests for records about individuals to the extent your request seeks the listed information. Part 3 includes general information about FBI records, searches, and programs. Part 1: The standard responses below apply to all requests: (i) 5 U.S.C. § 552(c). Congress excluded three categories of law enforcement and national security records from the requirements of the FOIPA [5 U.S.C. § 552(c)]. FBI responses are limited to those records subject to the requirements of the FOIPA. Additional information about the FBI and the FOIPA can be found on the www.fbi.gov/foia website. (ii) Intelligence Records. To the extent your request seeks records of intelligence sources, methods, or activities, the FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of records pursuant to FOIA exemptions (b)(1), (b)(3), and as applicable to requests for records about individuals, PA exemption (j)(2) [5 U.S.C. §§ 552/552a (b)(1), (b)(3), and (j)(2)]. The mere acknowledgment of the existence or nonexistence of such records is itself a classified fact protected by FOIA exemption (b)(1) and/or would reveal intelligence sources, methods, or activities protected by exemption (b)(3) [50 USC § 3024(i)(1)]. This is a standard response and should not be read to indicate that any such records do or do not exist. Part 2: The standard responses below apply to all requests for records on individuals: (i) Requests for Records about any Individual—Watch Lists. The FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any individual’s name on a watch list pursuant to FOIA exemption (b)(7)(E) and PA exemption (j)(2) [5 U.S.C. §§ 552/552a (b)(7)(E), (j)(2)]. This is a standard response and should not be read to indicate that watch list records do or do not exist. (ii) Requests for Records about any Individual—Witness Security Program Records. The FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of records which could identify any participant in the Witness Security Program pursuant to FOIA exemption (b)(3) and PA exemption (j)(2) [5 U.S.C. §§ 552/552a (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. 3521, and (j)(2)]. This is a standard response and should not be read to indicate that such records do or do not exist. (iii) Requests for Records for Incarcerated Individuals. The FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of records which could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any incarcerated individual pursuant to FOIA exemptions (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F), and PA exemption (j)(2) [5 U.S.C. §§ 552/552a (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F), and (j)(2)]. This is a standard response and should not be read to indicate that such records do or do not exist. Part 3: General Information: (i) Record Searches. The Record/Information Dissemination Section (RIDS) searches for reasonably described records by searching systems or locations where responsive records would reasonably be found. A standard search normally consists of a search for main files in the Central Records System (CRS), an extensive system of records consisting of applicant, investigative, intelligence, personnel, administrative, and general files compiled by the FBI per its law enforcement, intelligence, and administrative functions. The CRS spans the entire FBI organization, comprising records of FBI Headquarters, FBI Field Offices, and FBI Legal Attaché Offices (Legats) worldwide; Electronic Surveillance (ELSUR) records are included in the CRS. Unless specifically requested, a standard search does not include references, administrative records of previous FOIPA requests, or civil litigation files. For additional information about our record searches, visit www.fbi.gov/services/information-management/foipa/requesting-fbi-records. (ii) FBI Records. Founded in 1908, the FBI carries out a dual law enforcement and national security mission. As part of this dual mission, the FBI creates and maintains records on various subjects; however, the FBI does not maintain records on every person, subject, or entity. (iii) Requests for Criminal History Records or Rap Sheets. The Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division provides Identity History Summary Checks – often referred to as a criminal history record or rap sheet. These criminal history records are not the same as material in an investigative “FBI file.” An Identity History Summary Check is a listing of information taken from fingerprint cards and documents submitted to the FBI in connection with arrests, federal employment, naturalization, or military service. For a fee, individuals can request a copy of their Identity History Summary Check. Forms and directions can be accessed at www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/identity-history-summary-checks. Additionally, requests can be submitted electronically at www.edo.cjis.gov. For additional information, please contact CJIS directly at (304) 625-5590. (iv) National Name Check Program (NNCP). The mission of NNCP is to analyze and report information in response to name check requests received from federal agencies, for the purpose of protecting the United States from foreign and domestic threats to national security. Please be advised that this is a service provided to other federal agencies. Private Citizens cannot request a name check.

  26. EXPLANATION OF EXEMPTIONS SUBSECTIONS OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 552 (b)(1) (A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified to such Executive order; (b)(2) (b)(3) related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency; specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than section 552b of this title), provided that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on issue, or (B) establishes particular criteria for withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be withheld; (b)(4) (b)(5) trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential; inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency; (b)(6) (b)(7) personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information ( A ) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, ( B ) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, ( C ) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, ( D ) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation, or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, ( E ) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or ( F ) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual; (b)(8) contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions; or (b)(9) geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells. SUBSECTIONS OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 552a (d)(5) (j)(2) information compiled in reasonable anticipation of a civil action proceeding; material reporting investigative efforts pertaining to the enforcement of criminal law including efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or apprehend criminals; (k)(1) information which is currently and properly classified pursuant to an Executive order in the interest of the national defense or foreign policy, for example, information involving intelligence sources or methods; (k)(2) investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes, other than criminal, which did not result in loss of a right, benefit or privilege under Federal programs, or which would identify a source who furnished information pursuant to a promise that his/her identity would be held in confidence; (k)(3) material maintained in connection with providing protective services to the President of the United States or any other individual pursuant to the authority of Title 18, United States Code, Section 3056; (k)(4) (k)(5) required by statute to be maintained and used solely as statistical records; investigatory material compiled solely for the purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for Federal civilian employment or for access to classified information, the disclosure of which would reveal the identity of the person who furnished information pursuant to a promise that his/her identity would be held in confidence; (k)(6) testing or examination material used to determine individual qualifications for appointment or promotion in Federal Government service the release of which would compromise the testing or examination process; (k)(7) material used to determine potential for promotion in the armed services, the disclosure of which would reveal the identity of the person who furnished the material pursuant to a promise that his/her identity would be held in confidence. FBI/DOJ

  27. NARA-NGC-2022-000921 has been processed with the following final disposition: No Records. March 31, 2022 Michael Ayele (aka) W P.O. Box 20438 Addis Ababa Ethiopia RE: Freedom of Information Act Request NGC22-392 Dear Mr. W: This is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), dated March 18, 2022, which we received in our office on the same date via FOIAonline. We assigned your request the above internal tracking number, NGC22-392 and FOIAonline number NARA-NGC-2022-000921. In your request, you stated: What I am requesting for prompt disclosure are all records within your possession detailing: [1] the formal and/or informal ties that exist between your office, the CIA, the DOJ (FBI), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the National Archives Records Administration (NARA) and Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri); [2] your communications about Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, as a Black man who came to the United States of America (U.S.A) in December 2009 for the purpose of pursuing his undergraduate degree; [3] your communications about Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, as a Black man who has on and off lived in the States of California, Missouri, Maryland and the District of Columbia between December 2009 and July 2016; [4] your communications about Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, as a Black man who has previously been to the States of New York, Virginia, Tennessee, Illinois and Ohio between December 2009 and July 2016; [5] your communications about Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, as a Black man who’s achieved the primary goal he had set out when deciding to move to the U.S for the purpose of obtaining a Bachelor of Arts (B.A) Degree; [6] your communications about Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, as a Black man who has earned a B.A Degree from Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri) on December 31st 2016; [7] your communications about Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, as a Black man who had successfully completed the Economics and Political Science major he had declared with Westminster College in the month of May 2013; [8] your communications about Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, as a Black man who has on and off been in contact with the Department of Justice (DOJ) Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for the purpose of obtaining documents pertaining to Jeanne Ann Clery; [9] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which has previously confirmed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that they’ve been in contact with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) following the death of Jeanne Ann Clery; [10] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which has previously confirmed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that they had assigned the case of Jeanne Ann Clery to the Central Intelligence Agency (C.I.A) on June 11th 1992;v [11] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which has confirmed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that Westminster College had extended an invitation to their former-Director William Webster on August 29th 1986; [12] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which has confirmed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that William Webster had accepted the invitation extended to him by Westminster College on October 31st 1986; [13] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which has confirmed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that Westminster College extended their invitation to William Webster 4 (four) to 5 (five) months following the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery; [14] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which has confirmed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that William Webster accepted the invitation extended to him by Westminster College 6 (six) to 7 (seven) months following the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery; [15] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which have implied to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that his alma mater (Westminster College) held (unofficially perhaps) a non-negligible significant interest in the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery; [16] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which has initiated contact with the NARA following the FOIA request submitted by Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that was assigned Case No.: 1511415 –000;

  28. [17] your communications about the FBI as a federal agency, which has suggested for Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W to contact the NARA by referencing file numbers 100 –KC –13743 and 100 –KC –14235; [18] the communications between the FBI and NARA on the subject of file numbers 100 –KC –13743 and 100 –KC –14235;vi [19] your communications about the CIA as a federal agency, which has assigned the FOIA request submitted by Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W on the subject of Jeanne Clery’s death Case No.: F –2021 –01641; [20] your communications about the CIA as a federal agency, which has to this day failed to acknowledge that the FBI had reassigned the criminal investigation they had opened following the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery to them on or around June 11th 1992; [21] your communications about the CIA as a federal agency, which has to this day failed to disclose the content of the investigation that was assigned to them by the FBI on or around June 11th 1992.vii NARA is the repository for documents and materials created in the course of business conducted by agencies of the Executive branch of the United States Federal government. We estimate that less than 5% of these records are designated as permanent records for legal or historical purposes. Federal agencies usually transfer their permanent records to NARA no earlier than 15 years from the date of creation, but we receive many well after 30 years from the date of creation. After conducting a search, we were unable to locate the records responsive to your request. NARA does not have any communication relating to any part of your request. This completes the processing of your FOIA request. If you are not satisfied with our action on this request, you have the right to file an administrative appeal within ninety (90) calendar days from the date of this letter via regular U.S. mail or email. By filing an appeal, you preserve your rights under FOIA and give the agency a chance to review and reconsider your request and the agency’s decision. If you submit your appeal in writing, please address it to the Deputy Archivist of the United States (ND), National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, Maryland 20740. Both the letter and the envelope should be clearly marked “Freedom of Information Act Appeal.” If you submit your appeal by e-mail please send it to FOIA@nara.gov, also addressed to the Deputy Archivist of the United States. Please be sure to explain why you believe this response does not meet the requirements of the FOIA. All correspondence should reference your case tracking number NGC22-392. If you would like to discuss our response before filing an appeal to attempt to resolve your dispute without going through the appeals process, you may contact our FOIA Public Liaison Gary M. Stern for assistance at: National Archives and Records Administration 8601 Adelphi Road, Room 3110 College Park, MD 20740-6001 301-837-1750 garym.stern@nara.gov If you are unable to resolve your FOIA dispute through our FOIA Public Liaison, the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS), the Federal FOIA Ombudsman’s office, offers mediation services to help resolve disputes between FOIA requesters and Federal agencies. The contact information for OGIS is noted below: Office of Government Information Services National Archives and Records Administration 8601 Adelphi Road–OGIS College Park, MD 20740-6001 ogis@nara.gov ogis.archives.gov 202-741-5770 or toll free 1-877-684-6448 Thank you for contacting the National Archives and Records Administration. Sincerely, The NGC FOIA Team Office of General Counsel National Archives and Records Administration

  29. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL October 29, 2020 Michael A. Ayele P.O. BOX 12596 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia waacl13@gmail.com; waacl1313@gmail.com; waacl42913@gmail.com RE: FOIA Request No. 21-00102-F Dear W: This is in response to your October 13, 2020, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the United States Department of Education (ED) Office of Inspector General (OIG) for: 1)Details of formal and informal ties existing between the ED and Lehigh University; 2)All communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence exchanged between employees and legal representatives of ED with Lehigh University about Jeanne Clery’s time as a student at Lehigh University since April 7, 1986; 3)All communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence between ED and the legislative branch of government in the State of Pennsylvania about Jeanne Clery since April 7, 1986; 4)All concerns and complaints that were filed with ED pertaining to Donald Trump having been invited to speak at the graduation ceremony of Lehigh University Class of 1988 two years after the brutal rape and murder of Jeanne Clery; 5)All concerns and complaints that were filed with ED about Donald Trump having been invited to speak at the graduation ceremony of Lehigh University Class of 1988 fifteen years after the DOJ charged his real estate company of maliciously excluding blacks and African Americans as customers; 6)All concerns and complaints that were filed by people of the United States of America with ED about Donald Trump having advocated for the reinstatement of the death penalty in the state of New York following the much-publicized incident at Central Park in the Spring of 1989; 7)All communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence exchanged between ED and students, faculty, staff, Board of Trustees members at Lehigh University about Donald Trump having endorsed the reinstatement of the death penalty in the State of New York following the much publicized incident at Central Park in the Spring of 1989; 8)All communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence exchanged between ED and students, faculty, staff and Board of Trustees members of Lehigh University about Donald Trump’s failure to be respectful of affirmative and effective consent in his sexual relationships with females; 9)All communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence exchanged between employees and legal representatives of ED and students, faculty, staff and 400 MARYLAND AVENUE, S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-1510 Promoting the efficiency, effectiveness, and integrity of the Department’s programs and operations.

  30. Page 2 – FOIA Request No. 21-00102-F Board of Trustee members at Lehigh University about the Kelly McCoy petition on Change.org calling for Donald Trump’s honorary degree to be rescinded; and 10)All communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence between employees and legal representatives of ED and students, faculty, staff and Board of Trustee members at Lehigh University about the motion put forward by faculty members of Lehigh University calling upon the honorary degree awarded to Donald Trump to be rescinded. In regard to part one of your request, the records requested are not reasonably described as required by 34 C.F.R. § 5.20(b) and 5 U.S.C. § 552(a). Therefore, the OIG is unable to process this aspect of your request. In regard to parts two, three, nine, and ten of your request, the OIG conducted a searched and found no records responsive to your request. In regard to the remaining parts of your request, OIG has carefully considered your request and has decided not to confirm nor deny the existence of the records you requested. Disclosure of the existence of such records could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) and of third-parties protected under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C). If such records existed, they would be exempt from mandatory disclosure for the same reasons. For your information, Congress excluded three discrete categories of law enforcement and national security records from the requirements of the FOIA. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(c) (2006 & Supp. IV 2010). This response is limited to those records that are subject to the requirements of the FOIA. This is a standard notification that is given to all our requesters and should not be taken as an indication that excluded records do, or do not, exist. If you are not satisfied with my action on this request, you may file an administrative appeal by writing within 90 calendar days of the date of this letter to: Inspector General U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W. ATTN: FOIA Appeals Washington, DC 20202-1500 You may also submit your appeal by email to OIGFOIA@ed.gov. As we have limited mail access during this time, email is preferred. A copy of your initial request, a copy of this letter and your statement of circumstances, reasons, and arguments should accompany your appeal letter. You also have the right to seek assistance and/or dispute resolution services from our OIG FOIA Public Liaison or from the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). The OIG FOIA Public Liaison is responsible, among other duties, for assisting in the resolution of FOIA disputes. OGIS, which is outside the Department of Education, offers mediation services to resolve disputes between FOIA requesters and Federal agencies as a non-exclusive alternative to appeals or litigation.

  31. Page 3 – FOIA Request No. 21-00102-F You may contact the OIG FOIA Public Liaison or OGIS as follows: Carla McKenzie OIG FOIA Public Liaison Office of the Inspector General U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Ave., SW Washington, DC 20202-1500 Office of Government Information Services National Archives and Records Administration 8601 Adelphi Road Room 2510 College Park, MD 20740-6001 OGIS@nara.gov Mail carla.mckenzie@ed.gov E-mail 215-656-6027 301-837-1996; toll free at 1-877-684-6448 Phone 202-245-7039 301-837-0348 Fax Seeking assistance from the OIG FOIA Public Liaison or OGIS does not affect your right, or the deadline, to pursue an appeal. Sincerely, Antigone Potamianos Counsel to the Inspector General cc: FOIA Service Center

  32. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY FOIA Service Center February 16, 2021 Mr. Michael Ayele P.O.Box 20438 Addis Ababa, N/A Ethiopia RE: FOIA Request No. 21-00103-F Dear Michael Ayele: This letter is a final response to your request for information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, dated October 14, 2020 and received in this office on October 14, 2020. Your request was forwarded to the appropriate office to search for documents that may be responsive to your request. You requested the following: The basis for this request for records are the requirements of the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act. What I am requesting for prompt disclosure are (1) details of formal and informal ties existing between the DOE and Lehigh University; (2) all communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence exchanged between employees and legal representatives of the DOE with Lehigh University about Jeanne Clery’s time as a student of Lehigh University since April 07th 1986; (3) all communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence between the Department of Education (DOE) and the legislative branch of government in the State of Pennsylvania about Jeanne Clery since April 07th 1986; (4) receipt of all concerns and complaints that were filed with the DOE pertaining to Donald Trump having been invited to speak at the graduation ceremony of Lehigh University Class of 1988 two years after the brutal rape and murder of Jeanne Clery (5) receipt of all concerns and complaints that were filed with the DOE about Donald Trump having been invited to speak at the graduation ceremony of Lehigh University Class of 1988 fifteen years after the DOJ charged his real estate company of maliciously excluding blacks and African Americans as customers; (6) receipt of all concerns and complaints that were filed by people of the United States of America with the Department of Education (DOE) about Donald Trump having advocated for the reinstatement of the death penalty in the state of New York following the much-publicized incident at Central Park in the Spring of 1989; (7) all communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence exchanged between the DOE and students, faculty, staff, Board of Trustees members at Lehigh University about Donald Trump having endorsed the reinstatement of the death penalty in the State of New York following the much publicized incident at Central Park in the Spring of 1989; (8) all communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence exchanged between the DOE and students, faculty, staff and Board of Trustees members of Lehigh University about Donald Trump failure to be respectful of affirmative and effective consent in his sexual relationships with females; (9) all communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence exchanged between employees and legal representatives of the DOE and students, faculty, staff and Board of Trustee members at Lehigh University about Kelly McCoy petition on Change.org calling for Donald Trump honorary degree to be rescinded and (10) all communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence between employees and legal representatives of the DOE and students, faculty, staff and Board of Trustee members at Lehigh

  33. Page 2 – Michael Ayele FOIA Request No. 21-00103-F University about the motion put forward by faculty members of Lehigh University calling upon the honorary degree awarded to Donald Trump to be rescinded. Available for Public Access Link (PAL) download are 1,456 pages of documents responsive to your request. The documents provided are:  Lehigh University You can access your PAL account or register for a PAL account at this link: https://foiaxpress.pal.ed.gov/app/PalLogin.aspx However, certain information has been withheld in its entirety according to FOIA exemptions (b)(7)(A) and (b)(7)(C), specified below:  Records or portions of records relating to law enforcement pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §552 (b)(7)(A) of the FOIA. This exemption protects records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such records or information could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.  Records or portions of records relating to personal information that was compiled for a law enforcement purpose is exempt pursuant 5 U.S.C. §552 (b)(7)(C) of the FOIA. Disclosure of this information would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The above mentioned documents are responsive to item number 2 of your request. The Department was unable to locate any documents in reference to item 1 and 3 thru 10. Provisions of the FOIA allow us to recover the costs pertaining to your request. The Department has concluded that you fall within the category of “an all other use requester.” However, the Department has provided you with this information at no charge. The Department's release of this information at no cost does not constitute the grant of a fee waiver and does not infer or imply that you will be granted a fee waiver for future requests made under FOIA to the Department. You have the right to seek assistance and/or dispute resolution services from the Department’s FOIA Public Liaison or the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). The FOIA Public Liaison is responsible, among other duties, for assisting in the resolution of FOIA disputes. OGIS, which is outside the Department of Education, offers mediation services to resolve disputes between FOIA requesters and Federal agencies as a non-exclusive alternative to appeals or litigation. They can be contacted by: FOIA Public Liaison Office of the Executive Secretariat U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Ave., SW, LBJ 7C132 Washington, DC 20202-4500 Mail Office of Government Information Services National Archives and Records Administration 8601 Adelphi Road Room 2510 College Park, MD 20740-6001 OGIS@nara.gov 301-837-1996; toll free at 1-877-684-6448 301-837-0348 E-mail Phone Fax 202-401-0920 robert.wehausen@ed.gov 202-205-0733

  34. Page 3 – Michael Ayele FOIA Request No. 21-00103-F You have the right to appeal this decision by writing to the address below, 90 calendar days from the date of this letter. Using the services described above does not affect your right or the deadline to file an appeal. Your appeal must be in writing and must include detailed statement of all legal and factual bases for the appeal; it should be accompanied by this letter, a copy of your initial letter of request, and any documentation that serves as evidence or supports the argument you wish the Department to consider in making an administrative determination on your appeal. Appeals may be submitted using the on-line form available at www.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/foia/foia-appeal-form.pdf. E-mail: EDFOIAappeals@ed.gov Fax: 202-401-0920 Mail: Appeals Office Office of the Executive Secretariat U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, LBJ 7W106A Washington, DC 20202-4536 Sincerely, Elise Cook Government Information Specialist Office of the Executive Secretariat Enclosure

  35. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS 50 UNITED NATIONS PLAZA MAIL BOX 1200; ROOM 1545 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 REGION IX CALIFORNIA February 16, 2021 SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Michael Ayele waacl13@gmail.com (In reply, please refer to # 09-21-2124.) Dear Mr. Ayele: This is to acknowledge that the U.S. Department of Education, San Francisco Office for Civil Rights (OCR), received your complaint on February 16, 2021. We are evaluating your complaint to determine whether OCR will accept your allegation(s) for investigation. Our target date for completion of this process is 30 days from the date of this letter. We will send you a letter notifying you of our determination. We require a signed Privacy Act Consent Form (consent form) when identification of the complainant is necessary to resolve the complaint. If OCR does not receive the signed consent form within 20 calendar days of the date of this letter, your complaint will be administratively closed. If you are filing on behalf of another person, you are responsible for securing written consent from that individual. If you are filing on behalf of a minor (under the age of 18) or a legally incompetent adult, the consent form must be signed by that person's parent or legal guardian. If you require an additional copy of the Consent Form, you can obtain it at http://ed.gov/ocr/edlite-consentform.html. Due to the Coronavirus outbreak, the majority of OCR staff are working remotely. Therefore, to facilitate the processing of your complaint, please submit your signed consent form and any additional correspondence via email to ocr.sanfrancisco@ed.gov. A scanned PDF file or photo/jpeg file of the consent form are both acceptable. You may also submit a completed consent form and additional correspondence via fax to 415-486-5570 (ATTN: OCR SF, and include the case number at the top of this letter). If the above options are not available to you, completed consent forms and additional correspondence may be mailed to the 50 United Nations Plaza address indicated at the top of this letter. If you must return documents to OCR by postal mail, please notify us of this by contacting ocr.sanfrancisco@ed.gov or calling (415) 486-5555 as soon as possible. In your e-mail message or voice message, please include your case number, the name of the recipient, and the date that you have mailed your completed consent form or other documents to OCR San Francisco. A copy of OCR’s Case Processing Manual is available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/ocrcpm.pdf. If you have any questions concerning this correspondence, please call our office at (415) 486-5555 and refer your case number listed above. Sincerely, James M. Wood Team Leader Enclosure The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. www.ed.gov

  36. United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights 50 United Nations Plaza, Mail Box 1200, Suite 1545 San Francisco, CA 94102 CONSENT FORM - FOR REVEALING NAME AND PERSONAL INFORMATION TO OTHERS (Please print or type except for signature line) Complainant’s Name: MICHAEL A. AYELE (aka) W Institution Against Which Complaint Filed: CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY  This form asks whether the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) may share your name and other personal information when OCR decides that doing so will assist in investigating and resolving your complaint.  For example, to decide whether a school discriminated against a person, OCR often needs to reveal that person’s name and other personal information to employees at that school to verify facts or get additional information. When OCR does that, OCR informs the employees that all forms of retaliation against that person and other individuals associated with the person are prohibited. OCR may also reveal the person’s name and personal information during interviews with witnesses and consultations with experts.  If OCR is not allowed to reveal your name or personal information as described above, OCR may decide to close your complaint if OCR determines it is necessary to disclose your name or personal information in order to resolve whether the school discriminated against you. NOTE: If you file a complaint with OCR, OCR can release certain information about your complaint to the press or general public, including the name of the school or institution; the date your complaint was filed; the type of discrimination included in your complaint; the date your complaint was resolved, dismissed or closed; the basic reasons for OCR’s decision; or other related information. Any information OCR releases to the press or general public will not include your name or the name of the person on whose behalf you filed the complaint. NOTE: OCR requires you to respond to its requests for information. Failure to cooperate with OCR’s investigation and resolution activities could result in the closure of your complaint. Please sign section A or section B (but not both) and return to OCR: If you filed the complaint on behalf of yourself, you should sign this form. If you filed the complaint on behalf of another specific person, that other person should sign this form. EXCEPTION: If the complaint was filed on behalf of a specific person who is younger than 18 years old or a legally incompetent adult, this form must be signed by the parent or legal guardian of that person. If you filed the complaint on behalf of a class of people, rather than any specific person, you should sign the form. A.I give OCR my consent to reveal my identity (and that of my minor child/ward on whose behalf the complaint is filed) to others to further OCR’s investigation and enforcement activities. February 18th 2021 Signature Date OR B.I do not give OCR my consent to reveal my identity (and that of my minor child/ward on whose behalf the complaint is filed) to others. I understand that OCR may have to close my complaint. Signature I declare under penalty of perjury that it is true and correct that I am the person named above; and, if the complaint is filed on behalf of a minor child/ward, that I am that person’s parent or legal guardian. This declaration only applies to the identity of the persons and does not extend to any of the claims filed in the complaint. Date Updated August 2016

  37. 2/16/24, 5:53 AM Gmail - FOIA Appeal Request Case No.: 21-02190-F Michael Ayele <waacl13@gmail.com> FOIA Appeal Request Case No.: 21-02190-F Michael Ayele <waacl13@gmail.com> To: "Middleton, Deshawn" <Deshawn.Middleton@ed.gov>, INFO <info@eeoc.gov>, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT <FOIA@eeoc.gov>, INSPECTOR GENERAL <inspector.general@eeoc.gov>, "Michael Ayele (W)" <waacl13@gmail.com>, ogis@nara.gov Cc: ED FOIA Appeals <EDFOIAAppeals@ed.gov>, ED FOIA Manager <EDFOIAManager@ed.gov>, Michael Ayele <waacl1313@gmail.com>, Michael Ayele <waacl42913@gmail.com> Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 11:22 AM W (AACL) Date.: October 18th 2022 Michael A. Ayele P.O.Box 20438 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia E-mail: waacl13@gmail.com ; waacl1313@gmail.com ; waacl42913@gmail.com Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal Request Case No.: 21 – 02190 – F ---> Dispute Resolution Services Requested Hello, This is Michael A. Ayele sending this message though I now go by W. You may call me W. I am writing this letter in response to your correspondence from September 12th 2022 for the purpose of filing an appeal to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, which you had assigned Case No.: 21 – 02190 – F. Please be advised that I have several concerns with the adequacy of the search you have performed for my FOIA request. For instance, you have failed to acknowledge that the Department of Education (DoED) had sent me a letter on February 16th 2021 stating that the “San Francisco Office for Civil Rights (OCR) received the complaint” I had filed on that same day. Additionally, you have failed to acknowledge that the DoED “was evaluating [my] complaint to determine whether OCR will accept” the issues that formed the basis for my complaint “for investigation” on February 16th 2021. Furthermore, you have also failed to acknowledge that I had provided the DoED a signed Privacy Act Consent Form on (or around) February 18th 2021. As a Black man with a U.S college degree (who was in January 2010 informed what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent”), I was deeply vexed by your correspondence from September 12th 2022 for [1] pretending as if I haven’t filed a complaint on February 16th 2021 with the Department of Education (DoED); [2] engaging in a pattern that looked to me very much like a cover-up; [3] failing to make clear how the DoED “evaluates” complaints filed with them pursuant to the Jeanne Clery Act as well as Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of the 1972; [4] giving me the strong impression that the pain and suffering endured by Chanel Miller is worth less than that of Jeanne Ann Clery because she was not raped by a Black/African American man; [5] giving me the strong impression that the pain and suffering endured by Chanel Miller is worth less than that of Jeanne Ann Clery because she was not murdered after she had been raped on the campus of Stanford University (on or around January 17th 2015). As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I hope you will perform a more thorough search for responsive records detailing [1] whether the DoED initiated contact with the San Francisco Office for Civil Rights (OCR) for the purpose of FOIA Request Case No.: 21 – 02190 – F; [2] the discussions between the DoED and the San Francisco Office for Civil Rights (OCR) about FOIA request Case No.: 21 – 02190 – F; [3] how the DoED “evaluates” complaints filed with them pursuant to the Jeanne https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=be10e4fd3f&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-a:r5962429453392230642&simpl=msg-a:r596242945339223… 1/3

More Related