University of North Texas Former Professor – James Jarrett Glass – Sentenced to Federal Prison!

Theft, in its purist form, is accomplished in many ways. Sentenced to 18 months in federal prison and ordered to pay $109,057 in restitution, 63 year old James Jarrett Glass – former professor at the University of North Texas – found out the hard way that every choice has a consequence.


According to information presented in court, Glass was a tenured professor with the University of North Texas and served as Director of the University of North Texas’ Survey Research Center (SRC) between 1993 and 2006, during which time he used the SRC’s resources, specifically its computer-assisted telephone system, professional staff, and student employees, to perform research for his own private consulting companies. Glass charged third parties over $328,000 for the work his private companies were performing using SRC resources, work that cost the University over $175,000.

You look at all these numbers; trying to compute the actual loss is hard to do,” UNT Police Chief Richard Dieter said. “From the police perspective, we believe that the sentence is appropriate and the restitution addresses the potential losses that the university was able to determine. It addresses the conflict of interest and his use of the university’s resources inappropriately.”

Every choice has a consequence. As a white collar crime and business ethics speaker, I speak from first hand experience about the truth about consequences. Reality is – no one escapes the consequences of their choices. While Glass avoided the consequences for a time – he did not avoid the consequences all together. Prison is no fun and will prove to be a dramatic change from his prior activities. You do reap what you sow.

If anyone reading has any background on Glass or worked for him as a researcher and may know his motivation for his acts – feel free to comment as I study the behaviors and backgrounds of those convicted of white collar crime.

White Collar Crime Speaker – Chuck Gallagher – signing off…

9 Responses to University of North Texas Former Professor – James Jarrett Glass – Sentenced to Federal Prison!

  1. Dirk Jensen says:

    Mr. Gallagher,

    I have known Dr. James Glass for about a decade. He is one of the most ethical, honest, integral individuals I know. How does that square with his recent conviction and sentencing? My speculation (and it’s only that) is that what he was doing had received explicit or implicit approval at some point in the past.

    While I don’t know the details of the assertion that it “cost the University $175,000”, I would ask, “was this out-of-pocket costs?” Or, perhaps this was services such as the use of University computing facilities, but valued at fully loaded commercial rates.

    I personally know of several Universities where faculty routinely conduct consulting assignments, for personal fees, and where they are fully authorized to use the University’s resources. As a graduate business student, I helped with research on a professor’s personal consulting projects to gain practical experience; I don’t think that practice is uncommon. And we were fully authorized to use the extensive computing and communications resources of the University to carry out the research.

    While the “fully allocated cost” of such resources could be significant, the true marginal cost is generally close to or at zero.

    In reading earlier reports of this incident, my understanding is that Dr. Glass cooperated fully with the authorities, which suggests that his understanding was that he did nothing unethical or wrong. Rather, he admitted, honestly, that he used the resources as claimed, and because of his factual statement, he was therefore found guilty.

    However, I would ask, did the circumstances or policies change? Was there clear communication of these?

    I guess, Mr. Gallagher, that I would like to understand a few more of the details before I rush to judgment.


  2. That’s a fair response. I, like you, did work as a graduate student knowing that the prof was working for a client outside of the scope of his University work. I would suspect that if it were known by all in advance he would not have been convicted. It appears that someone believed (obviously the govt.) that Glass violated the law and hence business ethics in the actions he took.

    Perhaps there are others that worked as a graduate student with Glass who have comments.

    Thank you for yours.

    • Just passing by... says:

      It appears that the actual conflict of interest stemmed from the fact that Professor Glass was the Director of the Survey Research Center, a position in which he was responsible for providing oversight, and possibly approval, of contracts with private enterprise for services that were similar to those he obtained through his own consulting company. Had he been a math professor charged with teaching and concurrently consulted with companies on projects specific to his field of expertise, or if he were a psychology professor who maintained a private mental health counseling business on the side, I doubt there would have been a problem. That his consulting business so closely correlated with the work he was responsible for conducting on behalf of the university certainly brings into question what criteria he used to select clients. If potential clients were diverted from doing business with the university and instead contracted with him privately, then his actions would have been in direct competition with his employer. If those clients were obtained through his position at the university and if any university resources were used to service them, then it is even that much more likely that his actions were illegal. At the very least, someone in his position should have questioned the potential conflict of interest and obtained clear and written approval from the university. Most colleges and universities require that anyone performing services for a fee outside of their primary employer consult with human resources before going forward. And regarding his alleged personal activities, unless he was employed by a religious institution, signed a morals clause, or his actions were illegal, they are completely irrelevent to the case.

  3. Dirk Jensen says:

    Mr Gallagher,

    Just to clarify a potential misunderstanding, I did extensive research work as a graduate student. However, it wasn’t for Dr. Glass. It was for a different professor at a different school in another part of the country.


  4. Sam Hain says:

    I worked for Dr. Glass in the UNT Survey Research Center as a student assistant for several years in the early 2000s.
    I have a very interesting twist to this story. One day the SRC received a fax about an event called the South Plains Leatherfest. I knew Dr. Glass and his wife (or who I thought was his wife) both had Harely Davidsons, so I assumed it was a biker-type event. I did some research about SPLF and found out it was a S&M bondage event that Dr Glass and a couple other partners owned and operated in Dallas. This really piqued my curiosity, so I dug a little deeper to find that his “wife” was really a submissive “slave” he “owned.” I continued to dig and found out many things about Dr. Jim Glass that I would never have guessed were possible.
    I am a strong believer in civil liberties, so I do not have any problems with any consensual activities the Dr. Glass participated in, but the fact that he was leading a double life should give a glimpse into his true character. I understand that being open about something the general public would be shocked by could have devastating professional and personal consequences, but just hiding them is one thing. Living a double life, intentionally deceiving the public, is another. Or maybe it isn’t.
    After I made this discovery I was able to track where his “business trips” for the SRC just happened to correspond with various S&M festivals, including dates and locations. When I would ask where Dr. Glass was, I would get a response of where he was drumming up business for the SRC. I could then check his “Master Jim” calendar posted online and find out what was really going on in whatever city he happened to be in.
    This is all a true and I would encourage you to verify anything I have said with a simple Google search of:
    South Plains Leatherfest, Master Jim and Slave Marsha.
    He did so much to hide it from everyone while making it all available online. I should warn, the content of the pages is adult in nature. I never came across pornographic images, but the subject matter written about is for adults. It is not explicit sexual descriptions, but it is an adult subject.

  5. LAL says:

    I need to speak on behalf of many on this “double life” issue.

    As an active BDSM/Leather community member, I feel it necessary to explain that yes, prominent figures will be on the internet, it is very difficult to avoid that.

    At a person’s workplace, is it anyone’s business what they do off the clock if it doesn’t directly affect one’s job? I don’t recall being required to reveal what I do or don’t do with my significant other when I applied for my job. I don’t recall anyone asking me if I own any leather clothing. I don’t recall any of this being significant to my on-the-job duties. In fact, it has been very clear on ALL my past jobs that my employers didn’t WANT to know.

    Why should this change with a lifestyle still very much unaccepted by society as a whole?

    Plainly put, stick to the important matters. This is not your business, nor anyone else’s.


  6. LAL…Hum. Well, I agree that what we do in private should be private. However, that is not reality. Kids today are finding that our as they use MySpace and Facebook for their fun, private, outside of work activities and then find that employers can and will use that against them.

    You say employers don’t want to know. That’s not true. They really do but can’t ask as most of the time it is a violation of some protected right. Kinda like the military – “don’t ask don’t tell.” Here’s reality…what we do in the dark will be brought to the light. And, like it or not, employers – especially in Texas have the right to terminate with or without cause.


  7. LAL says:

    This is not about termination with or without cause though. This WAS an issue of white collar crime (objective) and became one of attempted discrimination.

    Regarding kids on the Internet…I did not realize this man was responsible for so many children. The babysitting fees must be unbearable. It is parents’ responsibility to raise their children. By the way, a huge “thank you” to the sociology department at UNT for letting me be on a panel to discuss the BDSM.Leather communities to their students. The class asked very intelligent questions, and class dismissed with a group of beautiful young adults knowing the BDSM community is not their enemy.

    “Dont’ ask don’t tell” really does not pertain to this either. This man didn’t tell, but someone went out of their way to ask.

    I’m not asking that anyone support anyone’s private life, but I do feel one should learn to distinguish between personal preference and an actual problem.

    Thank you for your time.


  8. LAL says:

    Forgot to add there…bored children come up with WAY worse things to do online than this stuf, believe me.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: