Another Update on the Derrida Papers/Kujundzic Sexual Harassment Controversy

From The Chron. Previous related posts here (noting comments flurry), here, here and here. Supposedly, the text of the letter Derrida sent to the UCI Chancellor is here, though its authenticity cannot be confirmed. It reads in pertinent part:

… First, as concerns probability, I can testify on the basis of what I have been told by many colleagues (including Dragan, obviously). It would seem that the allegations of the plaintiff are unfair and in bad faith (I will not yet say perverse). When there has been neither any coercion or violence brought to bear on her, nor any attack (moreover very improbable!) on the presumed”innocence”of a 27- or 28-year-old woman, where does she find the grounds, how can she claim to have the right to initiate such a serious procedure and to put in motion such a weighty juridico-academic bureaucracy against a respectable and universally respected professor? I have also heard said that all the legal procedures were not observed in the conduct of the inquiry, notably in the way in which the administration informed (in fact failed to inform) our colleagues of new aspects of the law. I have especially heard said that, without even envisaging all sorts of intermediary stages, the provision of a whole range sanctions or warnings, a recommendation has already been made to apply the worst possible sanction of last resort: the exclusion of our colleague from UCI. Why has such a precipitous action been considered? Why go so quickly and so far? …

Again, it is not clear this letter was actually written by Derrida, though the text seems to comport with the description of the letter in the Chron article.