University of Wales Lampeter Newsletter

Student Rights & Whistleblowers UK

Bringing Light to Injustice and Maladministration

Student Support Site

The Plagiarism Game

May 24th, 2008 · No Comments

The Plagiarism Game – Its all part of the ‘Lampeter Experience’

Here is how its played:

Your assignment is put through anti plagiarism software and they deliberately leave in the quotes in the assignment to be counted in the scan.
Therefore what they call plagiarism is in fact a list of references which are contained in your assignment!
They then place a brick wall in front of you to hide the means by which they came to make the allegation against you, that is so you have no chance of clearing your name and proving them wrong.
It takes away you basic human right of being innocent until proven guilty.


You get labelled a cheat and there is nothing you can do about it, if you complain they tell you that the marking is of the highest standards in the University sector yet, you could train a monkey to do a better job. If you complain again you are falsely accused of malicious harassment, keep trying to clear your name and then they send in the solicitors to threaten you with legal action to keep you quiet.

This is what they call Plagiarism >>>

Have You Been Threatened for Complaining or Stitched Up and Need Help?

Like most victims of abuse nobody believes these pillars of society would do such a thing, the way to deal with this is to publicly name and shame the perpetrators. contact us >>>

What is relevant to the Plagiarism Game is this quote from the Information Commissioner

“The University has explained that Mr Zorichak did not formally accuse you of plagiarism, the repeated question in Mr Zorichak’s feedback `you appear to have copied verbatim without further acknowledgement?’ does not constitute a formal accusation, but `rather offers an opportunity to the student to clarify the situation and if appropriate correct the perception of the assessor’.”

This means 4 things

It goes against your most basic and fundamental human right that you are innocent until they can prove your guilty. It is not for you to prove your innocence against an unfounded malicious accusation. Incompetence is no excuse for if it is made carelessly or recklessly then it is still considered a deliberate act.

Lecturers must carry out their work with a degree of competence over that of an untrained monkey, it is not the job of student to instruct lecturers on the correct use of anti plagiarism software.

All anti-plagiarism software carries a warning to check the results carefully and for plagiarism under 15% a detailed check must be made. It is for the lecturer and not the student to do this. It is an admission of mind numbing incompetence.

It is an admission by the University that lecturers cannot be trusted with regard to the issue of plagiarism, and that students are required to do their job for them.


Here is an example of accusations being made and withdrawn as and when it suits them, the purpose being to cover their gross misconduct and to destroy my credibility. Not only for complaining but in case I made another complaint about what they are going to do next; which was to intimidate me throughout an entire examination by staring me out less than six feet away. Doing that to a witnessing court is a criminal offence commonly known as harassment.

“To: Conny Matera-Rogers
From: Zed Zorichak
Date: 9 May 2006-05-09
Subject: TM
Dear Conny,

Point 4 – Marked down etc. As per Point 2Professor Austin thoroughly supported my original marking plus the independent blind second marking carried out by a colleague following TM’s initial verbally expressed dissatisfaction with the mark awarded. Additionally between the second marking and Professor Austin’s involvement the then Head of IT, Tony Corner, also thoroughly endorsed my first marking and told TM that there were no reasonable grounds for a complaint on his part.

Prove It! Where is the evidence? They “lost” it.the above is a pack of lies. Tony Corner had the matter taken out of his handstand I never had the chance to speak to him on this issue. Here is an example of the sort of two faced shit you are dealing with, from experience Professor David Austin is as sick and twisted as Zed Zorichak, and as far as trust is concerned there is only one word; don’t! See ‘Mummy’s Boy’ more >>>

No accusations! But what’s this?

Point 5 – Plagiarism etc. During a routine software check of TM’s essay it appeared that a significant percentage – from memory between 10-20% of his essay was a verbatim copy of different sources of information on the www. Correct academic procedures for citation had not bemused ie quotes and or footnotes etc. I remember making a comment in the written feedback along the lines of

“Routine software checking seems to identify about 20% of verbatim www material?””

Yes, its an unfounded accusation of plagiarism!

I was not asked to comment before any allegation was made and no reference to plagiarism should have been made at all. Upon compliant from myself it should have been withdrawn, but my complaint was ignored. I am therefore entitled to say what I like about these shits.

The accusation was retribution for making a complaint against Zed Zorichak and the University fearing damage to its reputation if knowledge what this evil shit had done was made public. They were never going to accept that it got it wrong so they tried to conceal it instead. Once you complain you get marked down for every petty thing. See the ‘ie’ in Point 5 notice that the full stops are missing, I was marked down for doing that.

Be warned Zed Zorichak is an evil bastard beyond most people’s comprehension and has problem with women. This is what happens when you drag a psycho off the street and call them a University Lecturer. You could train a monkey to do better.

Tags: The Plagiarism Game