Churchill plagiarism investigation the flip side of Poshard story?

Remember when defenders of SIU's Glenn Poshard complained about the manner in which Poshard's plagiarism came to light?
Fast forward to March 2009 and see how Ward Churchill, a politically problematic plagiarist, is treated:

And just because the misconduct investigation [of Churchill] grew out of the firestorm over the essay — which CU later determined to be protected free speech — didn’t mean the university could disregard the information it was getting about Churchill’s scholarship, [Michael] Carrigan testified.

As IPBiz noted in the Poshard matter, plagiarism is plagiarism, and can be evaluated independently of the motives of the exposer of the plagiarism.

Another issue with the Poshard investigation [that the committee investigating his plagiarism may have been biased] also shows up in the Churchill matter:

In a further sign the jury is giving serious consideration to Churchill’s claims, one juror asked Rosse if he ever considered assigning someone other than CU law professor Marianne Wesson — who Churchill accused of bias — to chair the investigative committee. Questions from jurors are reviewed by lawyers in the case and then posed to the witness by the judge.

Rosse said he couldn’t remember.

[Italicized text is from an article by John Aguilar titled Regent: Free speech doesn’t negate Churchill's misconduct.]