Injustice

The Hanging Court

Again, you have four witnesses. 

All testify to one thing.

The bus was speeding.

The bus was on the wrong side of the road. 

The bus hit the dog.

The bus kept on going.

It was a yellow school bus.

It was a Wake County School bus.

Dad of the two kids, grandma, and the dog owner sue WCPSS.

The driver was white.

The driver was allowed to keep driving, without penalty from the school.

The driver had children on the bus. 

The children included minor elementary school kids.

The children were witnesses. 

This was grandma, and two minor children, walking the dog early in the morning before school.

They were almost killed.

The dog is a family dog, given to grandma, but ownership still is retained by her son, the uncle of the two minor children. 

The bus is never impounded for forensic evidence.

The matter was reported instantly to law enforcement.

Law enforcement does nothing but advises to get the severely injured dog to the vet.

After years of medical treatment, the bill is about $10,000.00.

Second scenario. 

AAAD transportation driver, drives handicapped children to school.

One child is very large in a wheelchair, and, it is known his wheelchair tips when turning.

A previous driver complained of the circumstances.

A previous driver was hurt trying to right the wheelchair.

The wheelchair tips, minutes from school

The wheelchair cannot be righted.

The driver is Hispanic

The driver seeks help at the school to right the chair.

The driver is a mile and a half from the school.

The student is uninjured and continues the rest of the day at school.

The driver gets fired, under advice of WCPSS.

Do you think this is equitable?

Continuing,

The first case goes before a court. 

The judge says, you can help get compensation for your kids.

You can help argue the case as next friend. 

Since you have no money, and, the kids have no money, and grandma has no money (after inquiry in the courtroom, if I remember correctly), you can move the case forward for free.

The dog owner has some financial resources.

The judge considers the case as one, although technically they should be three. 

The subject matter is the same in all three cases. 

Following some discovery, it was found that the driver knew he hit the dog.

The driver reported the incident to school officials, WCPSS.

WCPSS did not recommend he stop the rest of his route. 

WCPSS did not recommend he return to the scene of the hit and run.

WCPSS did not impound the bus. 

WCPSS did not have the driver return to render assistance. 

The driver was on the phone with WCPSS around the corner within minutes reporting the incident.

The Cock Fight

The court room is transformed into a cock fight with the assignment of a new judge. 

New definition of the term adversarial court system is injected.

Justice is not a principal to be cultivated by the new judge.

Justice is not a principal to be cultivated by the attorneys assigned to the case.

All the attorneys are government employees or officers of the court.

All the attorneys made oaths to uphold the North Carolina Constitution and the US Constitution. 

The judge/Commission is bound by the same type of oath. 

Would you think the judge would recommend charges against the bus driver?

Would you think the judge would recommend charges against the WCPSS whom covered the accident?

Would you think the attorneys would recognize the criminality of the defendant bus driver and WCPSS and agree to just compensate the victims?

No, it is a cock fight. Justice is left outside of the courtroom.  Justice is only whom can win the court battle.  The court battle is not about justice, but, whom can debate the best. 

It is a fixed poker game where the dealer knows a player is cheating and is okay with him winning the game.

The attorneys argue and use technical jargon.  They just want to win.  They want to defend the driver and WCPSS at all cost. 

It is a hanging court.

The new judge/commissioner says, you cannot defend the interest of your children.

The new judge says the cases are not one and have to be tried as separate cases. 

The new judge withholds a ruling on whom has to pay. 

The new judge intentionally withholds rulings on plaintiff motions. 

Discovery is part of all cases.

As part of the game and technicalities, the government attorneys and employees withhold essential information for the case.

They intentionally delay the case.

You move that they be sanctioned. 

Delays in the case cause the cause to be weakened.

That is a tactic by the government attorneys.

The witnesses moves one, the kids in the school.

The driver moves on. 

All things change with time making the case harder to try.

The dog dies.

What would you do?

What do you consider to be justice?

Is it okay for a citizen to commit a hit and run?

Is it okay for a citizen to drive recklessly with children in the vehicle?

Is it okay for a citizen to destroy evidence?

Is it okay for a citizen to withhold evidence?

Is it okay for a citizen to delay and obstruct a case?

Then, ask, can the government do all of the preceding, and, is that okay?

Can the courtroom be reduced to just “Whom can argue the best and use technicalities?”

Is the courtroom a cock fight arena?

Is justice to be meted out unequally?

Can two judges/commissioners come out with drastically difference rulings and conduct?

Is there a judicial standard?

Is there an attorney standard?

Those are essential questions for the federal court, and North Carolina State Bar Association, and the Judicial Standards Commission to ask.

Do we still live in Jim Crow Era?

Is justice only for a certain group?

Is justice only for a certain skin tone?

Do we have hanging courts?  Just hang them all, I say?

Here is the link to document in this matter, you decide for yourself.

THE DOCUMENTS

  

#metoo #yotambien

#MeToo #yo tambien

Yes, me too.  I have been harassed by somebody.  I do not know who to accuse, so I will accuse everyone.

That is the pack mentality.

Five years, that used to be the statue of limitation. 

1960s is more than 50 years away.

No stigma nowadays. 

It is a Wednesday Night, time to go out and party.  I am a college student, they say.

The weekend is Girls Night Out; we will go downtown, and come back with a man, one for each person.

No stigma, “We are women.”, we go out and get what we want now. 

One lady taking home two to three men, total strangers. 

Can I handle more than two drinks before I lose my self control; no.

The cry, I was harassed.  I am going to report 5 to 6 years or more later. 

The crime was concealed. 

Hum, for years, ladies have a cell phone.

Long gone are the days of the Woman staying home. 

The only role is now gone in terms of just the mother and wife of the home. 

That ERA has been long gone. 

A reasonable person, a touch, a grope, a comment. 

You came and knocked at my hotel room, right after I took a shower.

Of course, I might open in the door in my towel.  Why not wait until the next day and meet me in the Lobby, reasonable person standard. 

Oh, but you got naked for that last movie.  So, nakedness in public is not a problem to you. 

These are some of the questions not being asked. 

The person is guilty because a “pack of persons” came out to declare the crime, years after the alleged act. 

No, I did not turn down the offer for that movie role.  But, the news Media presented as if had “he given her the role” then, “all things would be well”. 

So, attacks are common place.  And, they are now sanctioned by the new media. 

It is the trend now to be a victim. 

So, I am a victim too.  #METOO

Can a person grow?  The college student, the reckless teen.  The 30 to 40 year old man or woman.  They made a mistake in the past, can they grow and change past that era. 

Can the drinking teen become a responsible adult?

No, because they will be accused 20 years later, you were bad. 

Does anyone ever look at the accuser anymore?  Did that accuser ever touch or harass anyone?  Was he or she sexually promiscuous?  

No, you need not bar prior acts, if the accuser can accuse more that 5 years later.  Try that person too. 

No, an element of a crime is concealment.  That concealment takes it beyond the statute of limitations.  Now, it is a free for all.  Who ever heard of a criminal not trying to conceal their acts?

I am a criminal too.  I stole at the age of 8.  I shoplifted.  I broke into cars.  I harassed in school at the kindergarten level.  SOMEBODY TOUCHED ME and I TOUCHED SOMEONE. 

#metoo.  I am a victim and perpetrator like everyone else.  The laws have gone too far.  Now, everyone belongs in prison.  Let us just build more prisons and let everyone be raped and touched therein. 

Sí, yo también. He sido acosado (tocado) por alguien. No sé a quién acusar, así que acusaré a todos.

Esa es la mentalidad de manada.

Cinco años, que solía ser la estatua de la limitación.

La década de 1960 está a más de 50 años de distancia.

No hay estigma hoy en día.

Es un miércoles por la noche, es hora de salir y festejar. Soy un estudiante universitario, dicen.

El fin de semana es Girls Night Out; iremos al centro, y volveremos con un hombre, uno para cada persona.

Sin estigma, "Somos mujeres". Salimos y conseguimos lo que queremos ahora.

Una dama llevándose a casa dos o tres hombres, totalmente extraños.

El llanto, fui acosado. Voy a informar de 5 a 6 años o más después.

El crimen fue ocultado.

Hum, durante años, las mujeres tienen un teléfono celular.

Atrás quedaron los días en que la Mujer se queda en casa.

El único papel ahora se ha ido en términos de solo la madre y la esposa del hogar.

Esa ERA ha desaparecido hace mucho tiempo.

Una persona razonable, un toque, un tientas, un comentario.

Viniste y golpeaste la habitación de mi hotel justo después de tomar una ducha.

Por supuesto, podría abrir en la puerta con mi toalla. Por qué no esperar hasta el día siguiente y encontrarme en el Lobby, estándar de persona razonable.

Ah, pero te desnudaste para la última película. Entonces, la desnudez en público no es un problema para ti.

Estas son algunas de las preguntas que no se hacen.

La persona es culpable porque un "paquete de personas" salió para declarar el crimen, años después del supuesto acto.

No, no rechacé la oferta para ese papel de la película. Pero, las noticias presentadas por los medios como si "él le hubiera dado el papel" entonces, "todo estuviera bien".

Entonces, los ataques son un lugar común. Y ahora están sancionados por los nuevos medios.

Es la tendencia ahora ser una víctima.

Entonces, soy una víctima también.

¿Puede una persona crecer? El estudiante universitario, el adolescente imprudente. El hombre o la mujer de 30 a 40 años. Cometieron un error en el pasado, pueden crecer y cambiar más allá de esa era.

¿Puede el adolescente bebedor convertirse en un adulto responsable?

No, porque serán acusados ​​20 años después, eras malo.

¿Alguien alguna vez mira al acusador? ¿Ese acusador alguna vez tocó o acosó a alguien? ¿Era él o ella sexualmente promiscuo?

No, no es necesario que bloquee los actos anteriores, si el acusador puede acusar a más de 5 años después. Prueba con esa persona también.

No, un elemento de un crimen es la ocultación. Esa ocultación va más allá del estatuto de limitaciones. Ahora, es gratis para todos. ¿Quién oyó hablar de un criminal que no intenta ocultar sus actos?

Yo también soy un criminal. Me robé a los 8 años. Fui de compras. Me metí en los autos. Acosé en la escuela en el nivel de jardín de infantes. ALGUIEN ME TOCÓ Y TOCÉ A ALGUIEN.

#yo también. Soy una víctima y un perpetrador como todos los demás. Las leyes han ido demasiado lejos. Ahora, todos pertenecen a la prisión. Solo construyamos más prisiones y dejemos que todos sean violados y tocados allí.

By the current standards, we are all victims, and we are all perpetrators.  Really.  

The Wheels of WCPSS bus Go Round Round Round

The wheels of the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round.
The wheels of the bus are red red red, red red red, red red red.
The wheels of the bus are filled with blood blood blood, blood blood blood, blood blood blood.
The bus driver sped sped sped, sped sped sped, sped sped sped.

That is what he did when he saw grandma walking the dog he sped sped sped, sped sped sped, sped sped sped.

Then he fled fled fled, fled fled fled, fled fled fled.

He fled because he knew the government has a good attorney attorney attorney.

That is an attorney for Wake County Public School system; a good attorney attorney attorney.

The dog is now dead dead dead, dead dead dead, dead dead dead. 
Grandma and the children are now depressed depressed depressed, depressed depressed depressed.  And, the commissioner is okay with it, okay with it, okay with it.

Because it wad not his children or grandma that almost died died died, so you cannot be a Next Friend, Next Friend, Next Friend.

To protect your children and grandma to that end end end, end end end.
That is prohibited says Commissioner Donovan Donovan Donovan.

Justice is denied again and again, again and again, again and again.

Top Post Interview Questions to Ask Employers

1.   As an employer, do you prefer married employees?

2.   As an employer, do you prefer employees with children?

3.   As an employer, do you prefer employees that never were arrested (different from convicted or tried)?

4.   As an employer, do you prefer employees whom attend a church or synagogue?

5.   As an employer, do you prefer employees whom attend clubs or social organizations?

6.   As an employer, do you prefer employees from certain places or origin?

7.   As an employer, do you prefer employees with a certain credit score or rating?

8.   As an employer, do you hire or consider employees with substance abuse issues?

9.   As an employer, do you hire employees with extensive experience working in this area (regardless of age)?

10.              As an employer, do you prefer male employees?

11.              As an employer, were you ever accused of discriminating against protected classes of employees?

12.              As an employer, do you have a history of discrimination or selective and unusual hiring practices (bias)?

Please fax the answers to these question back to me.  Thanks

Country Cafe of Wendell North Carolina

Please support a local business in Wendell North Carolina that feeds our elderly.

This is a redirect to their Menu Page

Dedicated to Judge Lori Christian and Judge Michael Denning Re A Lost Child Divorce Court Blues

Dedicated to Judge Lori Christian and Judge Michael Denning Re A Lost Child

It was at the age of 12/13 years old, that I went down to the court house to seek a Juvenile Petition against my step-daughter. 

Why?  It was after being told I want to go to the kitchen, get a knife and stab you in your sleep.

It was after taking steps like make false allegations against me.

It was after refusing to be in mental health therapy. 

It was for her best interest.

For years, I saw directly her mom turn her against her step-mom, on the paternal side. 

He mom’s directed her to do certain things, and, my step-daughter did them, but, she also always went one step further than what her mother instructed her to do.  Those additional steps often got her, my step-daughter, into further trouble. 

It all worked, she was banned from her own dad’s home.  The visitations there dwindled.  Also, her father just stepped back not willing to fight for his daughter.  Too many other things were his priority.  So, I raised and cared for his daughter.  She was my daughter, and, I was determined to get help for my daughter. 

So, when my Ex-wife took steps to “set me up” and destroy my relationship with my step-daughter, I sought to legally step in by involving the courts as a third person to get the help that was needed.  The end result was my ex-wife used that action as a catalyst to leave the home.  She said, “You see, he does not care for you, he just wants you to go to jail”.  Not so, the purpose was to help my daughter get the help she needed.  Forced/involuntary therapy and services. 

My ex-wife refused mental health services for herself.  She refused to get help continuously from the church.  She was set in her ways.  But it was scary.  The mental health problems came with attempts at self injury, and, in retro-spec, I should have sought involuntary commitment during certain incidents.  So, I was at peace when she said she wanted to leave.  I did not want blood on my hands, although the leaving was under false pretenses because she was having sex with the church drummer/star praise and worship leader.

What I sought through the courts was orders to stop my daughter from being placed in injurious environments.  Something my mom had done.  She basically had divorced her brothers and sisters and aunts and uncles because of substance abuse and lengthy illegal activities and records.  That was my heritage.  It was a protectionist purpose, although it was a feeble attempt, it basically worked; that was what my mom did and I wanted to follow.  It basically worked because it instilled within us a an opportunity to choose a better path.  And we did.  That is why my mom has children with educational degrees and careers versus criminal records. 

I did not want her, My step-daughter, to be at “their houses” because of the drug activity there. 

Do not use my cars and drive my children without a license.

The response from my ex-wife was they are my family. 

You are not fun, she said.

You do not drink, she said.

You do not dance, she said.

You do not go to clubs, she said.

You do not smoke weed or use drugs, she said.

All you do is go to church.

You do not want to be a swinging couple, she said. 

I wanted to protect and nurture. 

I was all those things before we got married, and, I guess with marriage her purpose was to change me.

Well, and then came divorce and court action. 

She moved in with her boyfriend, “from one bedroom to another”.

And the court ordered that she not reside there, or anywhere where those activities I discussed happened [drugs, driving without a license, etc, all types of injurious environments]. 

So, she did not move out of the Boyfriend’s residence, so, I filed show causes.

Show causes that were subsequently removed from the files without rulings.

Contempt motions and other motions were filed and scheduled, and, under Judge Lori Christian, they were not responded to. Under Judge Michael Dennings, they disappeared altogether from the file.  Multiple inquiries were made with the custodians of court.  The ending file was closed out with outstanding matters, an administrative close out, while knowing all matters were not resolved. 

When a new judge is assigned to a case, and the old one was removed for cause, and that being due process denials and civil rights violations,  Then, the new judge is charged with reviewing the case a new and making sure he hears the matters at the bar.  Not so, the new judge just continued the previous orders and findings of fact.  A clear violation of the judicial charge, and due process and civil rights.  The Welcome sign is “Welcome to the North Carolina 10 District Court, Family Court Division.” 

The purpose and hopes were the court would protect my children and step-daughter.  Instead, the courts allowed or caused to be allowed for the children to stay in an injurious environment.  Perjury is an ancient relic.  Due Process is something left at the doors of the court house. 

So, with knowledge, the courts knew the children were in an injurious environment and knew that my ex-wife was not taking proper care for the children.  But, was primary custody changed to the protector.  No. 

In those injurious environments, my step-daughter continued to learn the ways of criminals.  The very thing I sought to avoid, the very thing she advocated for [my ex-wife], was that my step-daughter got charged with a felony last year.  Now I can say, Thank you Judge Lori Christian and Judge Michael Dennings for contributing to making a criminal.  I wanted the best for my children, and that was for them not to be in those environments.  But, after bringing the matter to your attention, your responses were not to protect, but, to condone children staying in that environment.  A Blind Eye of the Law?  The Inappropriate Use of “Judicial Discretion”.   A license to injure you all did issue and use. 

This is an open letter to those Esteemed and Honorable Judges, Judge Michael Denning, Judge Lori Christian, and, Family Court Coordinator Pamela Reese, whom contributed to the making of a criminal. 

The purpose in my heart was to protect my children while they reside in North Carolina.  Your purpose is to “get paid” and be a public servant, while doing a disservice to the public. 

I am so saddened and disappointed.  I pray for my children.  A hedge of protection.

Yes, in part it was the choice of the A/B Honor student to engage in criminal activities.  That shows she is knowledgeable. But, it does not negate the contributory aspects of your actions.  That was my ex-wife’s claim to fame; “My daughter is an A/B Honor Student,” and, I kept saying “Stop, she looks at porn and is taking on criminal aspects [by being in those environments]”.  No one heeded my calls for help. 

Justice Denied.

The purpose of this open letter is to cry out and speak up with those  and let it be known what happened.  I just am hoping and praying my Step-daughter makes it out alive and Straightens Up.  I love all my children but do not want to attend funerals for them because of continuing to be in injurious environment like Gang run tattoo parlors and hair salons.  Here to help and pray.  Could you not see where the desires to be a stripper come if they were instilled by high ranking strippers in your family. Hum.  That is why I try to help and pray.  

1DIVINELINE2HEALTH

1DIVINELINE2HEALTH PARTNER

WCPSS Safety Issues at Zebulon GT Magnet Middle School

 D. PROCESS FOR ADDRESSING COMPLAINTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF DISCRIMINATION, HARASSMENT, OR BULLYING           

a.       1. Initiating the Investigation      a. Whoever receives a complaint of discrimination, harassment, or bullying pursuant to subsection C.1. shall immediately notify the appropriate investigator who shall respond to the complaint and investigate. Where the complaint is received by school staff and involves allegations made against a staff member, the principal shall promptly consult with Human Resources to provide notice of the complaint and determine the appropriate investigator. The investigator of a complaint is determined as follows.                      

1)      If the alleged perpetrator is a student, the investigator is the school principal.  

1.       [okay, it does not say the AP, it says principal, and, I guess it is to avoid claims, as in this case, by the principal that she did not know or was a part of the investigation].

2.       If the alleged perpetrator is an employee other than the assistant superintendent of human resources or the Superintendent, the investigator is the assistant superintendent of human resources or designee, who may enlist the assistance of the alleged perpetrator’s supervisor in conducting the review. [not applicable]           

3.       If the alleged perpetrator is the assistant superintendent of human resources, the Superintendent or designee is the investigator.  [not applicable]

4.       If the alleged perpetrator is the Superintendent, the Board attorney is the investigator. (In such cases, whoever receives a complaint of discrimination, harassment, or bullying shall immediately notify the assistant superintendent of human resources who shall immediately notify the Board chair. The Board chair shall direct the Board attorney to respond to the complaint and investigate.) [not applicable]         

5.       If the alleged perpetrator is a member of the Board, the Board attorney is the investigator. (In such cases, whoever receives a complaint of discrimination, harassment, or bullying shall immediately notify the Superintendent who shall direct the Board attorney to respond to the complaint and investigate. Unless the Board chair is the alleged perpetrator, the Superintendent shall also notify the Board chair of the complaint.) [not applicable]

b. As applicable, the investigator shall immediately notify the Title IX, Section 504, ADA, or other relevant coordinator of the complaint, and, as appropriate, may designate the coordinator to conduct the investigation. [This complaint did involve a disability in all respects; AND TO OUR KNOWLEDGE WAS NOT REPORTED TO ANY COORDINATORS.]

c. The investigator shall explain the process of the investigation to the complainant and the alleged perpetrator. [THIS NEVER HAPPENS; BOTH IN THE FEBRUARY COMPLAINT, AND, AGAIN IN THE MARCH COMPLAINT.  REALLY.  A PATTERN HERE FOR SURE.]

d. Written documentation of all formal reports and complaints, as well as the school system's response, must be maintained in accordance with policy 1710/4021/7230. [FOR THE FIRST TIME, IN MARCH, WAS A WRITEN COMPLAINT REQUESTED, AND, IT WAS OBTAINED AGAINST EXPRESSED PARENTAL WISHES; REQUEST FOR REPORTS WERE MADE FROM THE FEBRUARY INCIDENT AND NOTHING BUT AN INCORRECT SUMMATION OF THE INCIDENT WAS RECEIVED.  AND, THAT SUMMATION WAS WAY OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY ALLOWED PERIORD FOR RESPONSE AND PROCESSING.  ALL FORMAL REPORTS NEED TO BE DOCUMENTED AND RIGHTS EXPLAINED.  DURING A MEETING IN MARCH AFTER THE MARCH INCIDENT, WITH MR. LIGHT, HE SAID NO FORMAL REPORTS ARE MADE OR KEPT “NO INCIDENT REPORTS ARE AVAILABLE AND THAT IS AGAINST SCHOOL POLICY ……… BUT YOU CAN GET A COPY OF ADRIANA’S STATEMENT …….. we just do not do that here”.]

e. Failure to report, investigate, and/or address claims of discrimination, harassment, or bullying may result in disciplinary action.          [TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, NO DISCIPLINARY ACTION WAS TAKEN AGAINST PRINCIPAL SMITH AND AP LIGHT.]

2. Conducting the Investigation                

a. The investigator is responsible for determining whether the alleged act(s) constitutes a violation of policy 1710/4021/7230 or policy 1730/4022/7231. In so doing, the investigator shall impartially, promptly, and thoroughly investigate the complaint. The investigator shall interview (1) the complainant; (2) the alleged perpetrator(s); (3) individuals identified as witnesses by the complainant or alleged perpetrator(s); and (4) any other individuals, including other possible victims, deemed likely to have relevant information. The alleged perpetrator shall be notified of the general nature of the allegations. The investigation will include a review of all evidence presented by the complainant or alleged perpetrator.  [IN MARCH, THIS DID NOT OCCUR.  THE INVESTIGATOR IN BOTH SCENARIOS WAS MR. LIGHT, NOT THE PRINCIPAL; AND, FOR EXAMPLE, IN MARCH, HE DID NOT ASK OR ASCERTAIN ANY INFORMATION ABOUT PRIOR ACTS, AND INQUIRY ABOUT A REOCCURRENCE POSSIBILITY (principal smith took the written statement but light was in and out and a part of everything).  ALSO, IN THE FEBRUARY INCIDENT, IT WAS NOT THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED, AS EVIDENCED BY THE INCORRECT SUMMATION.  TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, NO WITNESSES WERE INTERVIEWED AND/OR OTHER POSSIBLE WITNESSES.  THE MOST CRUCIAL PIECE OF INFORMATION WAS THE FEBRUARY INCIDENT OCCURRED IN THE CAFETERIA, AND, THE KIDS WERE THERE WITHOUT STAFF SUPERVISION.  ADRIANA HAD TO GO FIND AN ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF MEMBER.  DESPITE BEING WARNED OF ACTIVITIES OCCURRING DURING INSTRUCTIONAL TIME, THE SECOND INCIDENT OCCURRED DURING THAT TIME, AND NO STAFF WAS MONITORING HALLWAYS. LASTLY, POST FEBRUARY INCIDENT NO ONE FOLLOWED UP AND ASKED ADRIANA IF HE BEHAVIOR HAD CONTINUED. HUM.  IN MARCH, THE INVESTIGATOR DID NOT ASK ABOUT PAST OR FUTURE HARM.]   

If the investigator, after receipt of the complaint, an interview with the complainant, and consultation with the board attorney, determines that the allegations submitted, even if factual, do not constitute discrimination, harassment, or bullying as defined in policy 1710/4021/7230, the matter will be treated outside the scope of this policy. Information regarding the investigator’s determination and the process for addressing the complaint will be provided to the complainant. [NOT ONLY WAS THIS NOT PROVIDED, AS STATED BEFORE, INFORMATION AND DETAILS WERE FALSIFIED, WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE PRINCIPAL, AND, NOT SUMMATION WITH A SIGNATURE OF AP LIGHT WAS EVER PROVIDED.  WORKING IN TANDUM, BOTH THE PRINCIPAL AND AP FAILED TO THOROUGHLY PROVIDE INFORMATION AND INVESTIGATE THE MATTER, AND WENT STEPS FURTHER IN VIOLATION OF COUNTY POLICIES.]

b. The complaint and investigation will be kept confidential to the extent possible. Information may be shared only with individuals who need the information in order to investigate and address the complaint appropriately and those with a legal right to access the information. Any requests by the complainant for further confidentiality will be evaluated within the context of the legal responsibilities of the school system. [NOT SO AS EVIDENCED BY THE BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY THAT OCCURRED.]                               

c. The investigator shall review the factual information gathered through the investigation to determine whether, based on a preponderance of the evidence, the alleged conduct constitutes discrimination, harassment, or bullying, giving consideration to all factual information, the context in which the alleged incidents occurred, the age, and maturity of the complainant and alleged perpetrator(s), and any other relevant circumstances.            [AS DISCUSSED SUPRA, THIS DID NOT OCCUR.  FACTS WERE MISREPRESENTED.  I AM NOT SURE AS TO HOW THE COUNTY CAN SANCTION LIES BY HIGH LEVEL ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF.  THE HIGHEST LEVEL AT THE SCHOOL IS THE PRINCIPAL.]       

3. Notice to Complainant and Alleged Perpetrator

a. The investigator shall provide written notification to the complainant of the results of the investigation within 15 days of receiving the complaint, unless additional time is necessary to conduct an impartial, thorough investigation. The investigator shall specify whether the complaint was substantiated and, if so, shall also specify: [THESE ELEMENTS AND ACTS NEVER OCCURRED.  AN UNDATED RESPONSE WAS SENT WEEKS LATER, AND, IT WAS NOT THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED. AND, THE PERPETRATOR FROM THE FEBRUARY CONTINUES TO BE DISRUPTIVE AT SCHOOL.  THE RESPONSE WAS SENT BY PRINCIPAL SMITH ALONG WITH THREATS AND HARRASSMENT. HUM.]

1) reasonable, timely, age-appropriate, corrective action intended to end the discrimination, harassment, or bullying, and prevent it from recurring; [NOT SO, THE ACTS CONTINUED.]

2) as needed, reasonable steps to address the effects of the discrimination, harassment, or bullying on the complainant; and               [NOT SO, MYSELF WAS LABELED A HARRASSER, AND MY DAUGHTER WAS LABELED AN ATTENTION SEEKER.]

3) as needed, reasonable steps to protect the complainant from retaliation as a result of communicating the complaint.   [NOT SO, WITH THE MARCH INCIDENT SHE WAS FURTHER VICTIMIZED BY ADMINSTRATIVE STAFF, DR. SMITH IN PARTICULAR WHOM TOOK THE STATEMENT/REPORT WAS IMMEDIATELY INVOLVED.]    

b. Information regarding specific disciplinary action imposed on the alleged perpetrator(s) will not be given to the complainant unless the information relates directly to the complainant (e.g., an order requiring the perpetrator not to have contact with the complainant). [TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, IN BOTH INCIDENTS, NOTHING HAPPENED AND/OR WILL HAPPEN; AND, IT DIRECTLY RELATED TO COMPLAINANT.]               

c. If the investigator determines that the complaint was substantiated, the perpetrator(s) shall be subject to discipline or other corrective steps, as described in policy 1710/4021/7230. If the corrective steps involve actions outside the scope of the investigator's authority, the Superintendent or designee will be notified so that responsibility for taking the corrective steps may be delegated to the appropriate individual. [TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, NOTHING HAPPENED PROPERLY.  IMPROPER RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED. AND A COMPLAINT WAS MADE AGAINST THE PRINCIPAL.]

d. Each alleged perpetrator will be provided with a written summary of the results of the investigation in regard to whether the complaint was substantiated, whether the alleged perpetrator violated relevant law or Board policies by his or her actions, and what, if any, disciplinary actions or consequences may be imposed upon the perpetrator in accordance with Board policy. The perpetrator may appeal any disciplinary action or consequence in accordance with Board policy and law. However, an appeal by the perpetrator of disciplinary action does not preclude school officials from taking appropriate action to address the discrimination, harassment, or bullying.                [AGAIN, IN BOTH INCIDENTS, NOTHING HAPPENED, SO FAR, TO OUR KNOWLEDGE.]  

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLo9dC7C77xgAzvdAHU_ePOc7OU8LFNlwX

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bz80D2kcoar5QWZPYzgyUFp6RDQ

https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=r909Kg_27K8