The photographs and consent
The Colloquium is clear on an important point that John F. Manderscheid has repeatedly omitted from his public presentation of this matter: our Chairman is depicted in the photographs in question. The Chairman gave the Colloquium permission to use his own image for Colloquium purposes, including promotion of the organization and its activities.
The photographs were used in connection with the promotion, continuity, and public record of the Colloquium’s activities. They recorded an event in which our Chairman and the Colloquium were directly involved.
It is also necessary to record that John had been engaged in providing photographic services connected with Colloquium activity and received gratitude for his services.
The Colloquium does not deny that a photographer may hold rights to photographs they create. However, ownership of copyright does not give any person a license to distort the factual context, impose unreasonable demands without allowing time for review, or turn a manageable issue into a public campaign against an organization and its Chairman.
The ultimatum of 16th of June
On 16 June 2026 at 10:15AM, John contacted our Chairman through WhatsApp and demanded the removal of photographs from the Colloquium’s website and GoFundMe page. He stated that the photographs were his intellectual property and imposed a deadline of 12:00 PM, after which he threatened to bring the matter to the attention of the University.
The Chairman responded. He explained that he was at at that moment. He made clear that the photographs were not being used for fundraising purposes, that he would review the material with the Committee once he had access that evening, and that he would revert after properly examining the situation.
That was a reasonable response. It was not a refusal. It was not an attempt to evade the issue. The Chairman did exactly what a responsible office-holder should do: he offered a short opportunity to access the relevant system, verify the facts, consult the Committee, and respond properly.
John nevertheless persisted with the deadline. When asked why the issue was being treated as so urgent, despite the photographs having previously appeared on Colloquium platforms without objection, he asserted that he had withdrawn permission and did not want the photographs associated with the Colloquium.
The Chairman expressly stated that removal was not a problem. Yet John continued to press the matter aggressively rather than permitting a reasonable review.
Public attacks
On 16 June at 1:36PM, John posted public comments under the Colloquium social media posts demanding that photographs associated with the website launch be removed. He publicly claimed that the Colloquium lacked permission to use the photographs.
He subsequently stated that he had reported the Colloquium account to Meta for “intellectual property theft.”
The Colloquium rejects this characterisation. The record shows that the Chairman did not ignore John’s request and did not refuse to review or remove the material. John chose public escalation while the Chairman was actively attempting to deal with the issue reasonably and in good faith.
This was not a neutral attempt to resolve a rights concern. Its effect was to place the Colloquium under public suspicion, to damage its reputation, and to portray its Chairman as acting dishonestly before he had even been given a reasonable opportunity to access the relevant platform and respond.
Trinity News case
On 17 June at 3:42PM, John tried to escalate the issue further by writing to Trinity News, where our Chairman held before a separate role. He alleged that the Chairman had used or continued to publish photographs without consent and looking for confirmation that none of John’s photographs or intellectual property had been used by Trinity News.
John brought allegations about a dispute involving the Colloquium into the Chairman’s separate professional environment. The correspondence intended to extend the consequences of the dispute beyond the Colloquium itself and placed the Chairman’s position in another organisation under unnecessary pressure.
John asserted that any earlier permission was limited and revocable, and stated that he had notified Instagram and LinkedIn of alleged infringement.
The Colloquium considers this pattern unmistakable in its practical effect: it was not confined to removing photographs. It placed pressure on the Colloquium’s website, its fundraising, its social-media accounts, its public reputation, and our Chairman’s separate role with Trinity News.
Exclusion from the PhD community
The situation escalated again on 20 July 2026 at 9:05 PM, when John F. Manderscheid removed our Chairman from all three official School of Law PhD student groups, without explanation, warning, stated reason, process, or opportunity to respond.
Our Chairman is an active School of Law PhD student. The groups concerned were community spaces for PhD students: they circulated information, events, announcements, and ordinary postgraduate communications. They were not John’s private groups, nor were they his personal property.
Administrative access in such groups exists to facilitate the PhD community, not to allow an administrator to exclude a current PhD student without fair reason or process. The decision to remove the Chairman from every relevant group therefore had a clear and serious effect: it cut him off from core channels of academic-community communication.
The Colloquium regards this as a targeted act of exclusion against our members. It was not an isolated administrative decision. It followed John’s earlier demands, public accusations, third-party complaints, and escalating actions directed at the Colloquium.
Our Chairman was also excluded on 20th of June at 1:54PM without any expalanation from the group for the “PhD Family-Friendly Potluck Picnic 25 July 2026,” administered by Lindiwe Mpofu TCDSU Postgraduate Research Representative. She is one of the "business partner" of John F. Manderscheid. We have a strong understanding that John requested and encouraged her to remove our Chairman from this group and Lindiwe agreed to follow this. It was another step in a targeted campaign.
The wider context
These events occurred while the Colloquium members were already under significant pressure in matters involving Professor Oran Doyle and Professor David Kenny.
The Colloquium has reasonable thoughts to believe that John was instructed. Based on the communication copied to Professor Oran Doyle and Catherine Finnegan on the 16th of June at 5:02PM we have strong understanding that it was planed campain
The chronology raises questions which require proper answers. Why was a previously manageable photography matter transformed into ultimatums, public allegations, reports to social-media platforms, communication with a separate organisation linked to the Chairman, and finally the Chairman’s removal from official PhD groups? Why was a current PhD student excluded without explanation or process?
These are not trivial matters. They concern fairness, proportionality, academic freedom, student participation, and the proper limits of administrative power within a university community.
Our position
The TCD Law Student Colloquium will not accept the normalization of bullying, intimidation, retaliation, or arbitrary exclusion.
We condemn the conduct attributed to John F. Manderscheid and Lindiwe Mpofu in connection with the exclusion of our Chairman from PhD community spaces. In the Colloquium’s view, these actions were improper, unjustified, and carried out in a manner that fostered hostility towards TCD Law Student Colloquium members.
A disagreement concerning photographs cannot justify the isolation of an active PhD student from their academic community, exclusion from community groups and events, or attacks on an independent student organisation. The Colloquium considers this pattern of conduct shameful and fundamentally incompatible with the standards of fairness, respect, and due process that should govern an academic community.
We are deeply disappointed by John F. Manderscheid’s activity. The Colloquium had treated John as a colleague and had no prior conflict with him. Rather than pursuing a fair, proportionate, and constructive resolution, he chose a course of escalation that has seriously damaged trust and caused substantial harm to our community.
We are equally concerned by the conduct of those who enabled, encouraged, or participated in actions that had the effect of excluding our Chairman and generating hostility towards the Colloquium. No person should be used to carry out provocations, intimidation, or retaliatory acts against a student, a Chairman, or an independent student organisation.
The Colloquium is preserving all relevant correspondence, screenshots, public comments, and communications. We are prepared to take all appropriate further action to protect the Colloquium, our Chairman, and every member of our community.
No one should be permitted to use administrative access, public insinuation, institutional pressure, or complaints to third parties as instruments for silencing, isolating, or undermining a student organisation. Such conduct has no place at Trinity College Dublin.
Further updates will be published.
— 19th Emergency Committee, TCD Law Student Colloquium
Add comment
Comments