New law: School districts might be banned from allowing intimidating or humiliating behavior by teachers toward other teachers--and the gratuitous sabotage of work performance

Will teacher culture change due to new laws requiring examination of bullying in the workplace?  I doubt it.  Teacher culture is really just human nature adapted to a particular setting, and it is perhaps most intensely practiced by those teachers who have become administrators. Here's an article about new laws in California, including the requirement to train employees about bullying.  It may be a first step toward making bullying illegal in the workplace.

CALIFORNIA: 5 new laws that will affect employers, workers

BY RICHARD K. De ATLEY 
Press Enterprise 

Updated: Jan. 4, 2015

It’s 2015 and with the new year comes new state laws that affect California employers and employees.

Among them is legislation that affects sick leave use and accrual, employer responsibilities regarding independent contractors, and the inclusion of “abusive conduct” training for supervisors. Unpaid interns and foreign workers also have new protections...

'ABUSIVE CONDUCT' TRAINING

Law: AB 2053. Expands existing sexual-harassment training requirements to include prevention of abusive conduct.

What it says: Employers already required to provide sexual harrassment training to supervisors must now also provide training on “abusive conduct.”
That conduct is defined as something that “a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive, and unrelated to an employer’s legitimate business interests.” Acts can include “repeated infliction of verbal abuse...verbal or physical conduct that a reasonable person would find threatening, intimidating, or humiliating, or the gratuitous sabotage or undermining of a person’s work performance.”

The law also states that no single act can be counted as abusive conduct “unless especially severe and egregious.”

What it means: The National Review article notes that AB 2053 does not say what should be included in the training component for abusive conduct, and suggests employers consult with approved trainers to see how it can be incorporated into sexual harrassment training programs.
Attorneys Messigian and Ratinoff comment that the law “does not create a cause of action for abusive conduct in the workplace, but it does appear to be the first step toward protecting workers against bullying in the workplace that is not linked to any form of illegal discrimination.”...

Dad calls cops to teach son a lesson; cops shoot son dead

Don't call the cops to teach a kid a lesson. Find a better way. This kid took the family vehicle--is that a capital offense? Dad used power to control the kid, and pretty much guaranteed a criminal record for the young man at the very least. The kid tried to escape that fate. This is not a good way to teach kids how to deal with problems.

Dad calls cops to teach son a lesson; cops shoot son dead
Natasha Lennard
Salon
2013-11-08

Police car dashboard footage of the truck stolen by Iowa man's son: VIDEO

Take this tragedy as a cautionary tale: Do not call the police on your kids, or anyone's kids, or anyone, ever, in order to teach them a lesson.

Cops in Ames, Iowa, shot dead 19-year-old Tyler Comstock after his father, James, reported his van stolen. The teen had driven off with the van following a family dispute.

As Raw Story reported:

Police chased Tyler Comstock onto the Iowa State University campus and set up a blockade that resulted in Comstock ramming Officer McPherson’s vehicle. McPherson ordered Comstock to shut off his truck, and when he refused to comply, McPherson shot at him six times.

The Iowa medical examiner’s office says he was killed by two gunshot wounds to the chest.

Comstock's father reacted in horror to the tragic turn of events; yet another addition to the pantheon of trigger-happy cop killings. "He took off with my truck. I call the police, and they kill him,” he said.

The footage below was recorded from the car dashboard of the officer who shot Tyler Comstock:

Backbiting, hypocrisy, dishonesty at the Vatican; where are the grownups on this planet?

I used to think that teachers lounges were particularly good examples of backbiting, hypocrisy and dishonesty. But as I learned more about the world, I found that almost every organization I came across exhibited this very same behavior. I used to think 90% of people were honest--but that might be because I spent 27 years of my life teaching elementary school.

But in 2001 I was introduced to the real world, and I've gotten to know the layers of society that have some power. Now I think that 90% of people are dishonest. I came to this conclusion after doing a series of depositions of elementary school teachers, administrators and lawyers, and examining the actions of administrators and board members.

I now think that 90% of organizations are corrupt. I happen to be personally familiar with corruption in schools. When our schools and our clergy fail our children, it's more shocking than when some faceless corporation violates the law.

The thing that bothers me most about the clique in the Vatican is the hypocrisy and dishonesty. It's become very obvious over the past twenty years that the Church would be a better institution if priests were allowed to marry, and if women were allowed to be priests. After all, this isn't the first time in history that the Catholic Church has behaved in a heinous manner.

The world has changed, and the inability to marry has become a deal breaker for too many of the people who would be wonderful priests. Also, many of the people who would be wonderful priests are female.

I was talking to a female Episcopal priest in San Diego, and she told me how she had felt unworthy to be a priest.

I said, "But then you read about all the priests who abuse children, and you quit feeling unworthy, right?

She smiled and nodded her head.

Scandals and Intrigue Heat Up at Vatican Ahead of Papal Conclave

By RACHEL DONADIO
New York Times
February 23, 2013

VATICAN CITY — As cardinals from around the world begin arriving in Rome for a conclave to elect a successor to Pope Benedict XVI, new shadows have fallen over the delicate transition, which the Vatican fears might influence the vote and with it the direction of the Roman Catholic Church.
v In recent days, often speculative reports in the Italian news media — some even alleging gay sex scandals in the Vatican, others focusing on particular cardinals stung by the child sex abuse crisis — have dominated headlines, suggesting fierce internal struggles as prelates scramble to consolidate power and attack enemies in the dying days of a troubled papacy.

...The volley of news reports since appeared to underscore the backbiting in the Vatican that Benedict was unable to control, and provided a hint of why he might have decided that someone younger and stronger should lead the church...

Elementary teacher was abusive, parents say

Three comments on the story below:

Ken Platt · Works at Dept of The Navy

If there was really anything to this case then charges would have been filed and the teacher would have been name by now. Especially since this has been supposedly going on for 5 years.

Aaron Burgin [reporter]· Vista, California

Not necessarily, Ken. One of the points of the article is that the administrators haven't filed charges in cases of emotional abuse. So, no, charges might not have been filed even if there was anything to the case.

Maura Larkins

Here we have yet another reason why schools should conduct meaningful evaluations of teachers. The current system is a joke. Evaluations by principals are virtually useless because they are compromised by school politics. Many abusive teachers are protected by administrators and the teachers union. Outsiders should be coming in to schools and observing teachers, and the observations should be stepped up when the question of abuse arises, to protect both students and teachers.

Elementary teacher was abusive, parents say
Humiliation of kids should be reported beyond administrators, they contend
Aaron Burgin
Nov. 21, 2012

SAN DIEGO — For five years, a group of parents complained that one Hardy Elementary teacher’s behavior toward students went beyond discipline — they said it was abuse.

According to their children, the teacher would hurl books across the class or publicly humiliate kids who had body odor by spraying them with aerosol. The teacher would instruct classmates to “think bad thoughts” about students who misbehaved, forgot homework or did poorly on an assignment.

The parents complained to the College Area school principal and followed up with a written complaint to the district. Eventually they were told their complaints lacked merit.

Now, the parents are pressing for the San Diego Unified School District to take a stronger stance against emotional abuse — with steps including reporting accused teachers to law enforcement for investigation.

Although that might sound excessive for a teacher who never laid a hand on a student — and in fact, nonphysical abuse is a crime that’s rarely, if ever, prosecuted — state law and district policy call for just that response.

“The district administrators have turned their backs on our kids,” said Susan Hopps-Tatum, who has emerged as parent advocate for the district to better address cases of reported abuse by its employees. “Emotional abuse has as much of an effect on our children as physical abuse, and the district fails to recognize this.”

The state penal code includes emotional abuse in its definition of child abuse and requires teachers and administrators to report even suspected abuse to child welfare or the police.

According to the school district’s administrative code, “Examples of emotional abuse include such things as belittling, screaming, threats, blaming and sarcasm.”

School district and law enforcement officials would not comment on the specific complaints by the Hardy parents.

They did say the requirement for reporting emotional child abuse is not nearly as clear cut as the parents are reading it.

Area Superintendent David Lorden, who reviewed the Hardy complaints, told The Watchdog he believes the district has the right to conduct its own inquiry to determine if a case “rises to the level of abuse.”

“Until we prove otherwise, they are just allegations,” Lorden said. “It can’t be like, ‘I don’t like the way my teacher talked to my child.’”

That process — letting district officials conduct their own review and decide whether to involve other authorities— seems to be the prevailing practice.

Officials with the San Diego City Attorney’s Office, which would prosecute local emotional abuse cases, said it has never handled a straight emotional abuse case.

“When we do handle those cases, they are usually the underlying count of a sexual, spousal or physical abuse case,” said Gina Coburn, spokeswoman for Jan Goldsmith’s office. “There hasn’t been one tried by itself.”

Judith Neufeld-Hernandez, a substitute teacher who pulled her son out of San Diego schools in response to his complaints about the Hardy teacher, said her son would beg his parents on Sunday nights not to make him go to school on Mondays.

“He told me that being in her class was like being a gladiator: You don’t know whether you are going to the lion’s den or if it will be your classmate,” Neufeld-Hernandez said.

Hardy Principal Kathy Wolfe declined to comment. A reporter was not allowed to speak to the teacher involved in the complaint. The U-T is withholding the teacher’s name because the district deemed the complaint unsubstantiated.

School district officials said they do not track complaints against teachers. They said the language of the law gives the district latitude in responding.

“To some parents, if their kid gets screamed at by their teacher, they consider that abuse,” district spokeswoman Linda Zintz said. “If we were to report each of these complaints, law enforcement would be inundated.”v Rod Pacheco, the state assemblyman who sponsored the bill updating the state’s child abuse and mandated reporter laws, said school officials have a duty to report teacher behavior such as what was alleged at Hardy to authorities.

“You’re not entitled to do things like that; it’s not 1910 anymore,” Pacheco said. “It’s 2012. You just don’t get to treat kids that way.”

Pacheco, who handled several high-profile sexual abuse cases during his tenure as Riverside County’s district attorney, disagreed with school officials’ interpretation of the law.

“Clearly, they are not supposed to be evaluating the complaint,” Pacheco said. “If some child says, ‘Teacher X has abused me,’ it is not incumbent on them to decide if that is true. That is not the foundation of whether they report it.

“When they get a complaint they have a duty to report it, period. If it is false, the authorities will determine it is false.”...

Prosecutors want unaired footage in which Jerry Sandusky seems to admit abusing some boys, while saying he didn't abuse others

Prosecutors want unaired footage
NewsCore
FOX News
JUN 18, 2012

Accused Penn State pedophile Jerry Sandusky came off a lot creepier in an exclusive sit-down with NBC last November than anyone knew, but the Peacock Network oddly chose not to air what sounds a lot like an admission of guilt — and now prosecutors want the whole transcript.

"I didn't go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I've helped," Sandusky told Costas in footage that never made the November airing.

The disturbing answer first came to light when NBC's "Today" show aired previously unseen transcripts last Tuesday. That prompted prosecutors from the Pennsylvania attorney general's office to contact NBC lawyers on Friday to request that the network turn over and authenticate the entire transcript from the interview that was used to tape the segment that aired on the news program "Rock Center with Brian Williams."

The unaired segment includes a back-and-forth between Costas and Sandusky about his work with young people through his charity for troubled kids, the Second Mile.

"I'm a very passionate person in terms of trying to make a difference in the lives of some young people," Sandusky said. "I worked very hard to try to connect with them. To make them feel good about themselves. To be something significant in their lives. Maybe this gets misinterpreted, has gotten depending on ... I know a lot of young people where it hasn't. I have worked with many, many young people where there has been no misinterpretation of my actions and I have made a very significant difference in their lives."

Costas then challenged Joe Paterno's one-time defensive coordinator, saying, "But isn't what you're just describing the classic MO of many pedophiles? And that is that they gain the trust of young people, they don't necessarily abuse every young person. There were hundreds, if not thousands, of young boys you came into contact with, but there are allegations that at least eight of them were victimized.

"So it's entirely possible that you could've helped young boy A in some way that was not objectionable while horribly taking advantage of young boy B, C, D and E. Isn't that possible?" Costas asked Sandusky during the interview.

Sandusky gave an unusual reply.

"Well — you might think that. I don't know. In terms of — my relationship with so many, many young people. I would — I would guess that there are many young people who would come forward. Many more young people who would come forward and say that my methods and — and what I had done for them made a very positive impact on their life.

"And I didn't go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I've helped. There are many that I didn't have — I hardly had any contact with who I have helped in many, many ways," he added.

An executive at NBC News, who asked that her identity be withheld, told FOXNews.com, "There were a lot of compelling comments in the original interview, but we did not have time to include them all."

"He goes along, pretends to be a gentleman, pretends to be accommodative, pretends to be seriously committed to the law..."

"He goes along, pretends to be a gentleman, pretends to be accommodative, pretends to be seriously committed to the law, and turns around, sending people, beating up people, using violence to coerce and to literally defend power for the sake of defending power."
MORGAN TSVANGIRAI, prime minister of Zimbabwe, on President Robert Mugabe, who is seeking new elections.

Fears Growing of Mugabe’s Iron Grip Over Zimbabwe
New York Times
By CELIA W. DUGGER
December 25, 2010

HARARE, Zimbabwe — The warning signs are proliferating. Journalists have been harassed and jailed. Threats of violence are swirling in the countryside. The president’s supposed partner in the government has been virulently attacked in the state-controlled media as a quisling for the West. And the president himself has likened his party to a fast-moving train that will crush anything in its way...

Power never concedes anything without a demand

"Hope" Has Been a Bust, It's Time for Hope 2.0
Arianna Huffington
January 18, 2010

On the eve of the first anniversary of President Obama's inauguration, it's become painfully obvious that elected officials are not going to save us. The 2008 election was all about "Hope." But Hope is simply not cutting it.

What we need is Hope 2.0: the realization that our system is too broken to be fixed by politicians, however well intentioned -- that change is going to have to come from outside Washington.

This realization is especially resonant as we celebrate Dr. King, whose life and work demonstrate the vital importance of social movements in bringing about change. Indeed, King showed that no real change can be accomplished without a movement demanding it.

As Frederick Douglass put it: "Power never concedes anything without a demand; it never has and it never will."

The perfect example of this came in March 1965. In an effort to push for voting rights legislation, King met with President Lyndon Johnson. But LBJ was convinced that the votes needed for passage weren't there. King left the meeting certain that the votes would never be found in Washington until he turned up the heat in the rest of the country. And that's what he set out to do: produce the votes in Washington by getting the people to demand it. Two days later, the "Bloody Sunday" confrontation in Selma -- in which marchers were met with tear gas and truncheons -- captured the conscience of the nation. And five months later, on August 6th, LBJ signed the National Voting Rights Act into law, with King and Rosa Parks by his side...

Insiders expand their control to school construction division in LAUSD, causing award-winning facilities department to lose its chief

L.A. schools construction chief resigns
Guy Mehula, 56, who had been with the program since 2002, quit after an apparent power struggle with district leadership. James Sohn is named interim facilities chief.
By Seema Mehta
September 29, 2009

Guy Mehula, the highly regarded head of the Los Angeles Unified School District's massive school construction program, has resigned after an apparent power struggle with district leadership.

In a brief letter to subordinates Monday, Mehula gave no hint of discord, painting his departure as an opportunity to search for new challenges. "The work that we have done together and the investments we have made in our schools, community, and economy are significant," he wrote.

But critics say Mehula's resignation is fallout from a growing rift between his facilities services division and district headquarters, prompted by policy changes made by Supt. Ramon C. Cortines that threaten to dismantle the award-winning division.

"There's an old saying: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it,' " said Thomas A. Rubin, a consultant to the district's bond oversight committee, which is overseeing expenditure of more than $20 billion in voter-approved school construction and modernization funds. "This ain't broke. It's not perfect, but it is almost without any doubt whatsoever the best thing the district has done in decades."

For many years, the facilities division had been at the center of significant turmoil, cost overruns and other problems, most notably the construction of the Belmont Learning Complex atop an oil field. The project ended up taking 15 years and costing more than $400 million. About a decade ago, after the Belmont furor, there was a push to create a quasi-independent facilities division that was insulated from district politics and composed of professional construction managers instead of district insiders...

Do students and parents have to keep silent when teachers or coaches are abusive? California court says NO.

Coach Mike Lee

Written Complaint to School Board Held Protected Under Anti-SLAPP Law
Summer 2006
Lee v. Fick (2005) 35 Cal. App. 4th 89
By Kelly T. Boruszewski
Lorber, Greenfield & Polito, LLP

Michael Lee, a high school baseball coach, sued a parent for, among others, libel, and slander. These causes of action were based upon that parent publishing a letter to the Conejo Valley Unified School District claiming Lee was manipulative to the players, the parents, and the other coaches; verbally abusive to the kids; emotionally abusing the kids with his outbursts of anger and favoritism to certain players; and threw a fit in the dugout and verbally attacked the parent’s
son for not respecting his authority.

The slander case of action was based on the allegation that the parent stated to at least eight people Lee was a bad coach, was unethical, and had severe anger and emotional and anger problems. In both causes of action, Lee alleged the parents acted with malice and caused him to lose his job.

In response to the Complaint, the parent brought a special motion to strike (anti-SLAPP motion) pursuant to Section 425.16 of the Code Civil Procedure. Section 425.16, subdivision (b)(1) provides: “A cause of action against a person arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person’s right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue shall be subject to a special motion to strike, unless the court determines that the plaintiff has established that there is a probability that the
plaintiff will prevail on the claim.” Subdivision (e)(1) provides that an act in furtherance of a person’s right of petition or free speech includes, “any written or oral statement . . . made before a . . . judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law . . . .”

Section 425.16 requires a two-step analysis: First, determination whether defendants had made a threshold showing that the challenged causes of action arise from a protected activity. If so, then, second, whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a probability of prevailing on the claim, i.e., the complaint is sufficient and is supported by facts sufficient to sustain a judgment in plaintiff’s favor.
To that end, the parent filed a declaration stating Lee became angry as her son when the son “shook off” Lee’s baseball signs, to which Lee verbally and physically threatened the son, poking a finger in his chest.

As a result, the parent wrote a letter addressed “To Whom It May Concern,” alleging libelous statements. The libel cause of action arose from the letter the parent sent to the school board.

Privilege

Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b) provides that any publication made in any “judicial proceeding” or “in any other official proceeding authorized by law” is privileged. Thus, communications to an official agency intended to induce the agency to initiate action are part of an “official proceeding,” including complaints to school authorities about a teacher or principal in the performance of his or her official duties.

Lee submitted an affidavit in opposition to the motion. He declared the parent’s son was rude to the coaches and had a bad attitude, and denied that he physically or verbally abused the son.

When Lee read the parent letter submitted to the school district, he could not believe what was alleged. School officials conducted a four-week investigation, and Lee continued as baseball coach for the next season. It was only after the parent then met with the principal of the school that Lee was terminated as head coach.
Lee argued the parents never intended to initiate any legally authorized proceedings because the letter was not addressed to a school official, but “To Whom It May Concern.” The Court held that the address on the letter is not determinative and the parent’s uncontradicted declaration that she wrote the letter to deliver to the school district and did not publish the letter to any other person.

Lee then argued that the letter did not request an investigation or hearing and did not ask for any action. But the Court held that it is obvious from the content of the letter the parents were requesting that Lee be removed as coach.

The Court of Appeal held that complaints to school authorities about a teacher or principal in the performance of his or her official duties are privileged, pursuant to Section 47, subd. (d) of the Civil Code, holding that a letter written by a parent to school officials containing allegedly libelous statements about the coach was written to prompt official action and was privileged, even though the letter did not request an investigation or hearing and did not ask for any action.

Further, the Court held that it was not required that the letter expressly request an investigation or hearing or that school officials take any particular action. Notwithstanding, it concluded that it was obvious from the content of the letter that the parent was requesting that the coach be fired.

Under Lee’s slander cause of action, the Court held that the parent’s alleged comments to school officials and other “interested” parents of baseball players discussing her concerns about Lee’s conduct were privileged and Lee cannot avoid the privilege by characterizing the discussion among parents as gossip.

Lee last attempt was to claim that after school officials initially determined to retain him, the matter was no longer under consideration in any official proceeding. However, the Court held that the parent asked the school officials to reconsider, which is part of the official proceedings and is as privileged as an initial complaint.

The parent, as the prevailing party in the anti-SLAPP motion, was entitled to attorneys’ fees.




IS WINNING MORE IMPORTANT THAN HONORING PLAYERS' RIGHTS?

I think the answer to this question might be, more often than not, YES. Coach Lee seems to be doing fine now (see story below).

But sometimes it is the parent who complains who is crushed by the school authorities. Click here for the story of one San Diego parent who spent a week in jail for complaining about a coach.


Coach Lee’s supporters emerge
Claremont Currier
October 17, 2007
Regarding the topic of Claremont High School’s head varsity baseball coach Mike Lee and his past, the Claremont Unified School District along with the majority of CUSD parents are ready to move on with Coach Lee still intact...

...Newbury Park High School parent Debbie Alia said that she was “appalled” while reading a recent Los Angeles Times article on October 3 that focused on the text message issue...“He taught the kids respect, that baseball is a team sport and also taught them not to argue with the umpire or curse..."

Though Mr. Lee resigned from his position as baseball coach at Westlake High School last year and was terminated from his coaching position at Newbury Park High, former principals at Newbury Park and Westlake wrote favorable recommendations on behalf of Mr. Lee when he applied for the coaching position at CHS...

Motion hearing at San Diego Superior Court this Friday in Jade Ray v. Heather Hargett and Grossmont GUHSD

UPDATE: The tentative decision in this matter has been released on the evening of July 9, 2009. Heather Hargett, Ben Smith and Steve Cooper have been ordered to answer on or before July 24, 2009 deposition questions that they refused to answer on May 26, 27 and 28, 2009.


Photo: Mount Miguel student Jade Ray

Here's a photo of Heather Hargett.

Note to the Grossmont Union High School District board and Heather Hargett:
You need to do some thinking about three things: respect for all students, race, and how these two things affect student achievement. Take responsibility. Don't just leave the decision-making up to SDCOE-JPA's lawyers.

If think this case is a distraction to the work of education, they are wrong. The GUHSD boarde should read about how the testing gap between white and black students was all but eliminated when Obama at peak. How students feels about themselves directly affects their performance.


It's uncouth and unprofessional for a teacher to lead the class in ridiculing a fourteen-year-old girl for being "ugly". But this case wasn't just any teacher and any student. If a black woman had said the same words to Jade, it would not have had the same impact. I notice that Heather Hargett is very blond. Here's a photo of Heather Hargett. If her hair color has been chemically enhanced, I have to wonder if Hargett thinks blond is pretty and dark is not so pretty. I have to wonder if she revealed more of herself than she intended. I can understand why Jade never went back to Mount Miguel High School. She felt like Aracely Carvalho who was ejected from a Pennsylvania swim club, which later reversed its decision. She "doesn't want people to look at her" with the same contempt ever again in her life.

I have learned one thing as I have studied court cases in California schools. An award-winning music teacher can get away with just about anything. One such teacher got away with physically assaulting a student for being out of uniform at the Rose Parade. Schools seem to care about appearances more than they care about what students are learning.

A recent San Diego Union Tribune article about a high school girl who is suing a teacher for kicking her and telling her to leave the room because she was too ugly to deliver singing telegrams on Valentine's Day brought on an onslaught of comments from people defending the teacher.

I believe that many teachers need a more positive attitude toward children in general. Just because a teacher has a few teacher's pets isn't good enough. Every child should be treated with respect.

Here are some snippets of the pro-teacher comments that were posted regarding Leonel Sanchez' story about teacher Heather Hargett and student Jade Ray of Grossmont Union High School District. The consensus of these people seems to be that there are no abusive teachers, because if there were the school would have done something about it:

"With 50 witnesses and 5 months passed, I have to suspect this would have come out a long time ago if the story was as outrageous as the student is claiming..."

"The story seems pretty un-believable really. It will be interesting for sure when the facts really come out. With so many eye witnesses, I can hardly believe that the child would dare make something up but who knows in this day and age..."

"...So she was embarrassed, so what- who is high school wasnt?"

"...The girl suing should be counter sued and if she is givin money, it should only go to fix her "ugly" attribute..."

"Freddieboy, if that were my WIFE on the receiving end of a false complaint that could ruin her career, that kid AND her parent(s) would be getting a lot more than a lawsuit."

[Note from Blogger: Don't worry. If schools fired teachers for being hostile and disrespectful, there would be a teacher-shortage of huge proportions. That won't happen.]

On the other hand, two people supported the student:

"I had a high school physics teacher who always singled me out to embarrass me in front of the class... I finally walked out when one time he said, "gosh, your parents must be really ashamed."... I hope the kid wins."


"The teacher should have been Fired and the School Board should've addressed the situation with her parents promptly to ensure she went back to that school. This is a story of just a poor educational system."

[Blogger's note: I think ALL teachers need to be supported more--and challenged more--to help them behave maturely in the classroom. I know there are lots of teachers who are more abusive than this one. This situation sounds familiar to me; a lot of teachers get socialized into girl-clique attitudes. The cliques form on teaching staffs and even in classrooms. This sounds like a typical "mean girls" moment. I'll bet there were sycophant students who laughed with glee when the girl was (literally) kicked out.

Maura's advice to Heather Hargett: We've come a long way in race relations, but there's plenty of sensitivity and actual racism today, so it might be a good idea not to call your black students "ugly". You're in a particularly bad position, being blond and attractive. It's not a big stretch for us to imagine that you really do believe that you're prettier than Jade. Just for the record, you're not.]



Here's the court calendar information for this case:
07/10/09 10:00AM C-63 CV Vargas, Luis R. Motion Hearing 37-2008-00087380-CU-NP-CTL D)Heather Hargett Daniel R. Shinoff

Libia Gil and Lowell Billings need to take the advice given by David Frost to Richard Nixon

I just watched the movie Frost v. Nixon, which suggests that Richard Nixon owed an apology to the American people.

Many Americans were outraged that Nixon was pardoned by President Gerald Ford and was never prosecuted for any crime. But isn't that how our justice system works? Isn't it true that powerful insiders in government, schools, corporations and non-profits can commit illegal acts and it just isn't considered illegal because, as Nixon said, "if the president does it, it's not illegal"?

David Frost told Richard Nixon that the American people needed to hear him say that he did more than make mistakes, that his actions were wrong, perhaps criminal, and that he did abuse power.

I believe that many other people in power ought to admit the same thing. Chula Vista Elementary School District administrators Libia Gil, Lowell Billings and Richard Werlin as well as CTA leaders Beverly Tucker, Tim O'Neill, Gina Boyd, Jim Groth and Peg Myers ought to say, "We put Castle Park Elementary through needless agony, a spiral of self destructive obstruction of justice that harmed hundreds of students, and forced the taxpayers to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover up our mistakes."

Also, these individuals should make amends by helping to change the attitude of teachers toward the law. Our children learn from many of their teachers that the rule of law is something that is to be applied by the strong to the weak, but it is grossly inappropriate for the weak to demand that the law be applied to their superiors.

Randolph "Randy" Ward and Diane Crosier are using public funds to advance Dan Shinoff's private lawsuit against this blogger

When San Diego County Office of Education-Joint Powers Authority executive director Diane Crosier recently got subpoenaed by me (Maura Larkins) to testify in the defamation lawsuit against me by Stutz, Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, Crosier was determined not to testify. She is the individual who has assigned millions of dollars worth of SDCOE-JPA cases to her friend Stutz lawyer Daniel Shinoff, and she's as loyal as they come.

Crosier wasn't in her office on our first attempt to serve the subpoena, but the secretary in the office assured us that Crosier would be in the next day after 1:30 p.m.

But lo and behold, Ms. Crosier was nowhere to be seen at 1:45 p.m. the next day. "She has a right to change her schedule," the secretary said. (I guess she felt defensive; she must have known that evading a subpoena is against the law.)

Another woman in the office aggressively demanded my name and the name of the server. The woman told me I couldn't serve the subpoena since I was a party in the case. I pointed out to her that I had brought someone else to serve. We left quickly.

Next I got a message from Stutz law firm that Shinoff was representing his benefactor Diane Crosier in the matter, and his office would accept service. My server went to Shinoff's office for a final, successful attempt at service.

Yesterday I got a letter from Stutz attorney Jeffrey Wade saying Crosier would not testify.

Apparently Crosier and her boss, Randolph Ward, are so anxious to help Shinoff shut down my website that they are not only devoting the public resources of SDCOE to Shinoff to prevent Crosier's deposition, but are devoting public resources to harrassing and intimidating me.

They have filed a lawsuit against me for harrassment.

Apparently they think I shouldn't be allowed to serve subpoenas on them. I haven't seen the lawsuit, but it is clearly related to the deposition subpoena served on Diane Crosier. It would seem that one of the labels for this post should be abuse of power, and another should be misuse of taxpayer dollars for private purposes.

It's legally prohibited for public entities to sue for defamation, but Diane Crosier and Randall Ward have found a way to use public resources to advance Stutz law firm's defamation suit against me.

Diane Crosier and Randolph Ward are being sued by SDCOE-JPA insider Rodger Hartnett.

Is Sarah Palin striving to become a high-latitude Victoria Richart?

2008 Republican Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska

Alaska's current "Troopergate" sounds a lot like the "MiraCosta Mess" to me. I wonder who the Daniel Shinoff alter ego is in this story. I'm not saying that Palin's ex-brother-in-law, state trooper Wooten, is an angel, but I doubt that it was part of Palin's job description to make personnel decisions regarding individual troopers. Just because you have power doesn't mean your personal agenda must be fulfilled by your subordinates.

CBS News
by Laura Strickler and Kim Lengle
WASILLA, Alaska, Sept. 3, 2008

Alaskans refer to it as “troopergate” but the McCain campaign is convinced the investigation into Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s attempts to fire her ex-brother-in-law, state Trooper Mike Wooten, will show no wrongdoing. Palin allegedly demanded that Wooten be fired from his job while Wooten was in the midst of a bitter divorce with her sister. The results of the investigation will be released a few days before the November election.

The focus of the investigation will surround whether Palin abused her power as governor by pressuring Public Safety Commissioner, Walt Monegan, to fire Wooten. After Monegan declined to fire Wooten, Palin asked him to step down. Investigators will try and figure out if the two incidents are related, Palin says they are not...



PALIN DID A POOR JOB OF VETTING THE PERSON WHO REPLACED MONEGAN


Anchorage Daily News
Story by LISA DEMER
August 30th, 2008

Alaska's former commissioner of public safety says Gov. Sarah Palin, John McCain's pick to be vice president, personally talked with him on two occasions about a state trooper who was locked in a bitter custody battle with the governor's sister...

No one from the McCain campaign ever contacted him to vet Palin as a candidate, Monegan said.

Who did they contact? "We don't talk about the vetting process," said Maria Comella, Palin's vice president campaign press secretary...

Palin's replacement for Monegan, Chuck Kopp, was forced to resign just two weeks after he was appointed because of a sexual harassment complaint that had been filed against him when he was the chief of police in Kenai.

Palin, in a news conference announcing Kopp's resignation July 24, said she was unaware that the Kenai city council had reprimanded Kopp as a result of the complaint and would not discuss how her staff had vetted Kopp before naming him to replace Monegan three days after Monegan was fired...

NOTE: Anchorage attorney Thomas V. Van Flein seems to be the Daniel Shinoff alter ego in this case.

There is hope for all of us: dictator Mugabe bows to opposition leader

Zimbabwe Opposition Wins Parliament Speaker Post
Voice of America
August 25, 2008

Zimbabwe's main opposition party has won the vote for speaker of parliament, scoring a major victory over President Robert Mugabe...

UPDATE: OR MAYBE NOT

Zimbabwe: Jeers as Mugabe opens parliament in breach of deal
David Beresford in Johannesburg
The Guardian
August 27 2008

President Robert Mugabe was greeted with boos, jeers and waving fists as he rode to the opening of parliament in an open-top Rolls-Royce yesterday, accompanied by troops with colonial-style pith helmets and lances.

Opposition MPs - who have protested that the Zimbabwe president was in breach of an agreement that parliament would not sit until a power-sharing deal had been brokered - refused to stand on his arrival.

Having to raise his voice to be heard over the jeering in his 30-minute speech, Mugabe once again tried to recover his position by vilifying Britain and the US - accusing them of using food as a "weapon" through sanctions...

What makes ordinary people become abusive? Power.

Stanford Professor Philip Zimbardo Found Out What Power Does to Many Ordinary People
Stanford Report,
August 22, 2001
BY MEREDITH ALEXANDER

"Thirty years ago, a group of young men were rounded up by Palo Alto police and dropped off at a new jail -- in the Stanford Psychology Department. Strip searched, sprayed for lice and locked up with chains around their ankles, the "prisoners" were part of an experiment to test people's reactions to power dynamics in social situations.

" Other college student volunteers -- the "guards" -- were given authority to dictate 24-hour-a-day rules. They were soon humiliating the "prisoners" in an effort to break their will.

"Psychology Professor Philip Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment of August 1971quickly became a classic. Using realistic methods, Zimbardo and others were able to create a prison atmosphere that transformed its participants. The young men who played prisoners and guards revealed how much circumstances can distort individual personalities -- and how anyone, when given complete control over others, can act like a monster.

"In a few days, the role dominated the person," Zimbardo -- now president-elect of the American Psychological Association -- recalled. "They became guards and prisoners." So disturbing was the transformation that Zimbardo ordered the experiment abruptly ended..."

Karen Horwitz, author of White Chalk Crime, notes Zimbardo's understanding that "passivity is the natural state for most people, which is why dissent rarely takes place."

This explains why the CVESD board and the CVE board helped cover up crimes against Maura Larkins, instead of demanding Richard Werlin's and Gina Boyd's
resignations.

It was easier to go along to get along, especially since CTA Executive Director Carolyn Doggett and CTA Head Counsel Beverly Tucker sent a lawyer down to Chula Vista to keep the board in line.

At the same time, CVESD sent Daniel Shinoff, Jeffery Morris, and Kelly Angell aka Minnehan to keep teachers in line.

Bonnie Dumanis and the Axis of Virtue

Apparently Bonnie Dumanis has changed her mind. Last July, she was aiming for an appearance of integrity. Now she's quit pretending that her "Public Integrity Unit" is anything but the cynical use of power for political purposes.


From a SDUT article by Gerry Braun
"Axis of Virtue"
July 2007

"Early in our lunch, we learned that Dumanis does not want anyone to think political considerations influence the Public Integrity Unit. For that reason, she has sworn off endorsing fellow politicians, or seeking their endorsements."


Scott Lewis of Voice of San Diego
10-19-07
Scott Lewis reminds us that Bonnie Dumanis made these remarks about endorsing candidates:

"To underscore the unbiased and transparent mission of this office, I am announcing today that I will no longer personally endorse political candidates except in unusual circumstances. In the past, I have endorsed political candidates where I felt it was in the public's best interest. However, public integrity work is difficult enough without the possibility of having our motives questioned or impaired by politics. So let me be clear: I will not allow this office to be used as a pawn during political campaigns or allow the incorrect perception that we are anything other than completely objective."

CTA goes to California Supreme Court in effort to keep child molesters in classrooms

Here's a post from Jane Swanson's California Teachers Blog:

Those pesky school districts!

Once again they are trying to get child molesters out of the classroom. In the Albert G. Truitt, Jr. case, the California Teachers Association proved once again that its executive director Carolyn Doggett, its chief counsel Beverly Tucker, and their stable of lawyers are a buch of geniuses.

Usually, teachers cannot be dismissed or have their credentials taken away for any act occurring more than four years before charges are brought against them. But for CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE, exceptions have been made to this 4-year statute of limitations IN EVERY VENUE IN CALIFORNIA EXCEPT WHEN A DISTRICT TRIES TO DISMISS A TEACHER.

Atwater School District wanted to dismiss Mr. Truitt in 2002 for molestations that occurred from 1992 to 1998.

CTA said no way!

QUESTION:

Why do Beverly Tucker and Carolyn Doggett want to keep the following anomaly in California law?

"A teacher could be prosecuted criminally, the CTC could institute credential revocation proceedings, and a school district could be sued for negligent hiring, retention, and supervision all based on the same set of facts that exist here. Yet, the Court of Appeal’s literal interpretation of section 44944(a) would deprive a school district of the ability to dismiss an employee on the same set of facts."

ANSWER:

Beverly Tucker and Carolyn Doggett care about political power and loyalty to friends who commit crimes more than they care about the abuse of children.

Sadly, our friends at CTA lost the Albert Truitt case. In June 2007, the California Supreme Court ruled that equity requires that school districts get the same extension on the statute of limitations that the Teacher Credentialling Commission gets.

CTA must have thought it had a good chance to win, since in 1993 it apparently was able to kill a California bill that would have specifically extended the child sexual abuse statute of limitations for school districts. Can you believe that legislators would fail to vote for a bill that would get child molesters out of classrooms? This goes to show the enormous power that CTA has in California. No Democrat can get elected without CTA's support. CTA holds the purse strings to a huge amount of campaign funds, and every local affiliate in California is rigidly controlled by Beverly Tucker and Carolyn Doggett.

Isn't it sad to see Beverly Tucker and her pal Michael Hersh lose a case? Let's hope they don't get depressed. They would be so much more successful if they didn't defend criminals. I for one am crossing my fingers and hoping that in the next case they fight, Bev and Mike won't be using teacher union dues to protect criminals. Maybe they got over confident when they got my case thrown out of court. They succeeded in protecting union leaders who had started with
misdemeanors,but went on to commit felonies to cover up their misdemeanors.

Why Ronald Reagan didn't pardon Oliver North, Robert MacFarlane, & John Poindexter

Scooter Libby

In light of the President Bush II pardon of Scooter Libby, the number two man in VP Dick Cheney's office, for perjury, the following article about Ronald Reagan's refusal to pardon Oliver North and his co-conspirataors is interesting. Bush suffers in comparison to Reagan.

Walter Pincus wrote in the Washington Post on July 16, 2007:

"In his diary entry for Dec. 6, 1988, President Ronald Reagan wrote, "I lean very much toward a pardon" for Robert "Bud" McFarlane, his former national security adviser who had pleaded guilty to four misdemeanor counts for misleading Congress about the Iran-contra affair.

""He awaits sentence. . . . I don't think he deliberately lied," Reagan recorded, adding that McFarlane's wife had written him "on her own asking for a pardon for Bud."

"The issue had come up that morning, according to the diary, when Reagan's White House counsel, A.B. Culvahouse, began a 10 a.m. meeting talking about pardons -- not only for McFarlane but also for Oliver North and John Poindexter, the two main actors in the arms-for-hostages dealings.

"The matter reemerged on Dec. 22, less than a month before Reagan would leave office. The president wrote that he had sent Culvahouse "letters from Ollie North's lawyers asking me to pardon Ollie." Next, he wrote that at 10:30 a.m. on the same day, Attorney General Richard Thornburgh "came in with a well reasoned argument against pardons for North & Poindexter," who at that point were awaiting trial.



"On Jan. 10, 1989, Reagan noted, "The matter of a pardon for North is now being looked at as -- the judge should drop the charges." Part of Reagan's interest in the North trial is reflected in the next day's entry: "[T]he Justice Dept. will file a motion today to quash the subpoenas for Geo. [Secretary of State George P.Shultz] & me in the North case."

"On Jan. 16, Reagan recorded that he had "a 20 min. session on things hanging fire -- like pardons for several people." The only name Reagan mentioned was that of Michael K. Deaver, his former deputy chief of staff who had been convicted of not telling the truth to a congressional committee. Reagan noted that a Deaver relative had called a Justice Department official "about a pardon for Mike," but "Mike has passed the word he wouldn't accept a pardon."

"On Reagan's last full day in office, Jan. 19, he wrote that Thornburgh came "to see me about pardons." Reagan went on: "He doesn't believe I should pardon . . . North, Poindexter or McFarlane. I'm afraid he's right."

"In his autobiography, "An American Life," Reagan disclosed that "despite appeals from their supporters and despite my own sympathies," he had decided against pardoning the three. "I still felt the law had to be allowed to take its course," he wrote. It was Reagan's successor, George H.W. Bush, who would pardon McFarlane on Dec. 24, 1992. North's and Poindexter's convictions had been previously reversed.

"Now, after President George W. Bush has commuted the sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, it would be interesting to know what roles Bush's attorney general and White House counsel played in the decision...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/15/AR2007071501164.html?referrer=email&referrer=email

Today's Corruption Quiz

From "California Teachers" blog:

"His apparent lack of guilt about his actions speaks, I think, to his extraordinary capacity for self-delusion."
(Statement was made by SETH HETTENA, July 16, 2007 in Voice of San Diego)

Who is being discussed in the above statement?

A. Donald Rumsfeld
B. Richard Cheney
C. Randall Cunningham
D. George Bush

Answer: Hettena wrote a book about Randy "Duke" Cunningham, but he wanted readers to understand how the Cunningham case was a result of politics today, where defense contractors and others can buy access to, and a large amount of control over, those who make decisions about America's defense capabilities and way of life. How did these "deciders" gain power? By constantly repeating a set of messages about "values" and "terror," without ever bothering to pay attention to more immediate dangers to our country.

Getting a President to Apologize for Misleading the American Public

No, I'm not talking about George Bush. I don't think the current president has enough self-awareness or empathy to apologize to the American people.

But Richard Nixon did. Not at first, of course. In 1976 disgraced ex-President Nixon was interviewed for 20 hours by British journalist David Frost.

Frost relied on James Reston, Jr., a former soldier who abhorred Nixon's Vietnam War policy. In 1977 Reston wrote a book about the experience of working with Frost on this project, but for some reason, publishers decided that 2007 was the year to publish it. 30 years ago many of us baby boomers thought Nixon was as bad as a president could get. Now we know better.

Matthew Dallek of the Associated Press writes that Nixon was "vindictive and bewildered, angered and bemused...angst-ridden..." "Frost tossed his clipboard onto the coffee table and asked whether Nixon was ready to...acknowledge that the power of the presidency had been abused and apologize to the American people for having dragged them through two years of agony."