Your information in this story is incorrect. On November 8, 2007, Steven M. Houran, Presiding Judge, Stafford Superior Court, Dover, NH, granted Dr. Sower's request for a restraining order against Mr. Collins.\n\nThe Final Order states in part "The petitioner(Sower)bears the burden of success on the merits by a preponderance of the evidence. She has met that burden. The court notes that, were it to apply the higher clear and convincing burden of proof in this case, the petitioner would meet that burden."\n\nThe order also states that "The court finds credible the testimony to the effect that Professor Collins was screaming and sounded and appeared to be very angry or furious. The court also finds, as several witnesses credibly testified as to their own reaction, Professor Collins words and tone, including the apparent level of his anger, would make a reasonable person fear for his or her own safety or the safety of the person who was the target of those words. The court further finds that upon learning of the words and tone used by Professor Collins referring to her, the person who was the target of those words would reasonably be fearful, at a minimum, of such a threatening circumstance being repeated."\n\n"The respondent (Collins)offers his evidence in support of his contention that no restraining order is justified in part because Professor Sower's assertion that one is needed is motivated either by ill will toward the respondent or by a concern which, even if genuine, is nonetheless an unwarranted and unreasonable overaction. The court declines to reach this issue or make any findings in this regard because, even if the court were to assume without deciding that all of the assertions about Professor Sower's actions concerning her colleagues and about her character are true, it would not change the outcome of this case. More specifically, even if all of those assertions were true and the court makes no finding in this regard, they would not undercut the conclusions that no person should be the target of a threat of death made by a colleague in a workplace and that, on the circumstances of this case, a reasonable person would be fearful that without intervention such an incident may occur again. HOwever, because the testimony presented by the respondent's witnesses could be seen, absent an understanding that the respondent is making no such assertion, as implying that Professor Sower's conduct and attitude justified Professor Collins' actions, the court makes the explicit finding that none of what the court heard would justify Professor Collins' threat against Professor Sower."\n\n"To the extent that the respondent may be understood as suggesting that such a fear of recurrence is unreasonable because his own character and conduct make it certain that it will not happen again, the court disagrees. That the respondent shows LITTLE INSIGHT INTO WHAT HE DID OR ITS IMPACT ON OTHERS IN THE WORKPLACE, is to the contrary, a PRIMARY REASON THE COURT IS ISSUING A RESTRAINING ORDER."\n\n"The petitioner must show that the potential harm to the petitioner outweighs any harm to the respondent caused by the restraing order. The petitioner's side of this balance is plain: she has a right to be free from threats to her life made in the workplace by a colleague and from the harm associated with such threats."\n\n"The petitioner must show that the public interest would be served by granting the injunction. Because the public has a strong interest in securing the freedom of one colleague from threats to her life made in the workplace by another colleage, the petitioner has met her burden of showing that the order she requests serves the public interest."\n\nProfessor Collins was sanctioned by the internal UNH investigation and Dr. Sower was awarded the restraining order. Is there something that the Durham District Court doesn't get by finding him not guilty? That just doesn't make sense.\n\nDr. Collins is sad he can't take his 2-year old daughter to watch the horses and can't take his 14-year old son to soccer. This case is severely affecting his family. Well guess what - how do you think it affected Dr. Sower? Just because she doesn't have children or a spouse, do you think it affects her and her family any less? Is Collins the type of mentor we want our children to look up to? An extremely angry, outspoken, threat to anyone in the "wrong place at the right time?" Collins' colleagues said he has often had outburts within the department; Laue said "we expected his outburst but not to that level of severity" in a Fosters' Daily Democrat article. \n\nSo Sower's colleagues dislike her - so what? Professional jealousy runs rampant within the scientific fields and especially the Biochemistry Department. Can any other faculty in the department match or excel Dr. Sower's awards, \ngrants, excellent teaching evaluations or professional demeanor? I think not. UNH needs to develop a Code-of-Conduct for its faculty members and then abide by it. Maybe that would stop the inaptitude of self-serving, me, me, me attitudes of professors like John Collins.