While Harvard maintains its uncomfortable silence, the Chronicle of Higher Education breaks some new ground on Marc Hauser’s monkey business.

An internal document…, sheds light on what was going on in Mr. Hauser’s lab. It tells the story of how research assistants became convinced that the professor was reporting bogus data and how he aggressively pushed back against those who questioned his findings or asked for verification.

The document was provided to the Chronicle by a former Hauser research assistant who testified before the Harvard team of investigators and was concerned that Harvard’s undignified silence was hurting the careers of students and researchers who did nothing wrong.

Which, of course, it is.

The former research assistant also hoped that the document would help scientists in the field understand the severity and breadth of the allegations.

It really is astonishing that a young person who runs a real risk of hurting his career is doing the right thing, while Harvard is…not.

The Chronicle details a particular experiment in which monkeys were tested to see if they could discern differences in tonal patterns. A researcher who wrote up his results found that they absolutely did not. But…

…Mr. Hauser’s coding showed something else entirely: He found that the monkeys did notice the change in pattern—and, according to his numbers, the results were statistically significant. If his coding was right, the experiment was a big success.

Two research assistants told Hauser they were uncomfortable going with his results and that they should conduct another test of the experiment. Hauser would not.

“i am getting a bit pissed here,” Mr. Hauser wrote in an e-mail to one research assistant. “there were no inconsistencies!…

But there were. A research assistant and a graduate student took it upon themselves to review the videotapes of the experiment without Hauser’s permission; one imagines that the circumstances would have to be extreme for a researcher and grad student at vulnerable points in their careers to take that initiative.

(After all, Hauser currently has the world’s most powerful university compromising its principles; on NPR yesterday, Times reporter Nicholas Wade talked of why many scientists feel the university should “come clean.” If he can do that to Harvard, imagine what Hauser could do to a graduate student.)

The research and graduate student found that the monkeys didn’t react to the sonic changes [emphasis added]:

They then reviewed Mr. Hauser’s coding and, according to the research assistant’s statement, discovered that what he had written down bore little relation to what they had actually observed on the videotapes. He would, for instance, mark that a monkey had turned its head when the monkey didn’t so much as flinch. It wasn’t simply a case of differing interpretations, they believed: His data were just completely wrong.

The obvious implication: Hauser fabricated his results.

As word of the disturbing results spread, other researchers in Hauser’s lab came forward with similar stories, and that led to contact with the university ombudsman.

What an opportunity this would be for Harvard to act on its stated principles—”Veritas” and all that—and share the results of its investigation with the world.

The university should call Dershowitz’s bluff—presuming that rumors of Dershowitz representing Hauser are true—disseminate what it knows about what happened and, essentially, dare Dershowitz to sue.

Any subsequent trial would make Dershowitz look terrible—after Harvard is good enough to ignore his alleged plagiarism, Dershowitz bites the hand that feeds him in defense of an apparent con man—and the discovery process would probably destroy Hauser’s career (to the extent that he hasn’t already done so). Yes, there’d be legal fees. But this money would be well spent.

And, of course, Harvard could always counter-sue Hauser for alleged fraud.

Meanwhile, the university would look like it was doing the right thing—because it would be doing the right thing: Putting the principles of research and scholarship and teaching ahead of legalistic concerns.

This situation is not a problem; it’s an opportunity.

Unfortunately, in Mass Hall, the lawyers are running the show….