I really feel for him and his family but I think some of this is sadly down to bad timing, as harsh as that sounds. In answer to your points this is my understanding of the situation.
1.Cambridge appointed him too early, "he was set up to fail.” I sort of agree with this in the spirit but not in the detail. Cambridge wanted to diversify their senior staff and that's not to say he didn't deserve it but it was unusual to appoint someone to a full professorship so early in their career, that in itself is a weight for him to bear and real pressure at a young age and I wonder if this was acknowledged in the support they gave him transitioning.
The real issue is that Cambridge did not verify his CV thoroughly, which later became a problem so I think the one of the issues was that the appointment was unusually fast, and Cambridge should have done deeper due diligence. For instance Arday claimed he held visiting professorships at Ohio State University and the University of Glasgow, and honorary roles at Durham. Both Ohio State and Glasgow publicly denied he held the visiting professorships listed. The visiting professorships issue was the most concrete and most damaging, because two universities publicly contradicted his CV Not sure about Durham, but that is a great Uni and if he did hold one there, that in itself is impressive.
2. “Academics are under pressure to publish - questionable papers happen.” Partially true, but not a justification. Yes, publish‑or‑perish culture is brutal and rushed papers are common but the allegations against Arday weren’t about “sloppy work”, they were about identical passages, impossible data, and misrepresented roles. This is not typical academic sloppiness. It’s more serious than the post suggests.
3.“Academia is racist and sexist, others get away with worse.” True in general, but irrelevant to the specific case. Academia absolutely has racism, sexism, and hypocrisy. Many academics behave appallingly without consequences. But this doesn’t mean every investigation into a Black academic is racist. Cambridge’s investigation was triggered by verifiable CV discrepancies, external institutions contradicting his listed roles, concerns raised by multiple academics, the memoir draft containing disputed claims. This wasn’t a random attack, it was a response to specific evidence.
4. “I don’t think it’s in doubt he had autism.” I can see it seems to be accepted he was autistic with global development delay and diagnosed as such at 3. Arday said he was non‑verbal until 11 and illiterate until 18 and some childhood acquaintances strongly disputed this but a few others supported it from their experience of him from infant school but from what I have read, there is no independent clinical confirmation in the public domain. So it’s not “in no doubt” it’s contested.
5. “He was cleared of plagiarism.” I think you are mixing up two separate issues here. According to the Guardian, Liverpool John Moores University did not uphold plagiarism charges regarding his PhD, calling issues “honest and reasonable error.” So my interpretation is that in some minor manner he did, but in all innocence. And when I did my dissertation, I had read so many books and theories that inevitably when I wrote my finding up I inadvertently reproduced some phrases, which luckily were caught before submission so I see this is very feasible. BUT Cambridge however, launched a new investigation into his qualifications and academic record, which was ongoing at the time of his resignation when they stated they had received new information which required review and this happened just before his untimely death. The Times claim they found “identical or near‑identical” passages in his thesis and “impossible” evidence in later papers. I don't know about you but I am not in a position to judge so must await the finding of the review. I think that was a terrible pressure for him, not helped by the press highlighting the issues.
6.In his book, he apparently claims running 600 miles in six days, 30 marathons in 35 days, and raising £5.5m for charity. Running 600 miles in six days is possible, but only at the absolute pinnacle of human endurance, I believe only one person in history has ever exceeded 600 miles, Kouros. Fewer than five people have ever exceeded 550 miles. The vast majority of elite ultrarunners fall between 350 to 450 miles in six‑day events. So the claim is not impossible, but it is extraordinary, and would place someone in the top 0.0001% of endurance athletes ever recorded. 30 marathons in 35 days is extreme but achievable for seasoned ultra‑endurance athletes. When challenged for evidence on the above Arday later said the money was raised “with others over 20 years” and that NDAs prevented him naming collaborators. Surely the point of fundraising for charities is that you advertise it to get sponsorship etc - so whilst I have no doubt he did charitable works, I think there maybe some exaggeration about his ability to undertake extraordinary physical feats. But even one marathon for charity is a darn sight more than the mass majority of us have ever done and on the basis that there is some truth in his charity works - kudos to him for that.
7.Racism - I have suspicions that there are elements of racism here, for instance the claims of plagiarism about his academic work (not his PhD) is a highly controversial academic whose work on race and intelligence has been widely criticised as racist by commentators, though he is not formally designated as such by any institution.
I don't think the timing of his draft review of his book helped and it stoked the fire, that got him in the press which happened to be just at the time, Cambridge Uni started its investigation. The draft was available in Jan 26 to press etc and the published early Aug memoir was toned down compared with the January 2026 draft galley. Several claims were withdrawn or scaled back before publication in Aug. The memoir didn’t create the accusations but I think it amplified them, because it restated claims already under scrutiny.
So given his claims for a man that was none verbal until 11, could not read or write until age 18 this means that he then went to college and got BTECS, BA in Education Studies, University of Surrey (approx. 2006–2009), MA (St Mary’s University) and PGCE (UCL), approx. 2009–2012, PhD in Education, Liverpool John Moores University (2012–2015). Due to his exceptional ability (which the evidence seems to support) he had Lecturer roles at Leeds Beckett & Roehampton (2015–2018) and rose his way through the ranks to become a Professor at Cambridge at the age of 37 in 2023. So he has gone from being unable to read and write at age 18 to being a Uni professor at 37 - that is one hell of a stunning achievement. Then add in that he was married with kids and at some point had the endurance to be a seasoned ultra‑endurance athlete, that professional athletes usually have to work full time at. I have my concerns.
However the end result is that the man took his own life and I would not wish that on anyone and my heart goes out to his family. He needed mental health support which ever way you look at it, it was a lot for one man to cope with. The situation was tragic, but not a simple “witch hunt.”