According to KRQE link
When the superintendent of the Las Vegas Schools found out that there were credible allegations;
that while under school supervision,
a bunch of bullies held some little kids down and rammed broomsticks up their asses.
Superintendent Rick Romero met the returning thugs' bus in the parking lot.
The police were there.
Superintendent Rick Romero "... conceded that at the time
he told the officers this was an internal investigation and that
they were not needed.
I would hope that Winston Brooks is the kind of superintendent
who would have been the first person through the bus door
and then dragged those malicious assholes by the scruff of the necks, to the nearest police car.
In fact, Winston Brooks would probably meet the bus in the parking lot, an obvious obligation and photo op. He would be accompanied by the Albuquerque Public Schools Police. He would insist that there was no need for APS, BCSO, or the NMSP go get involved; that the APSPD had the whole thing under control.
The APSPD is a publicly funded, private police force.
The only one in the entire state.
It is accredited by no one. It is certificated by no one.
It reports directly to Winston Brooks and Paula Maes'
school board.
Winston Brooks would insist that the investigation be conducted by his own Praetorian Guard.
Imagine for a moment that one of those kids that were held down by a gang of bullies, while a broomstick was jammed up their ass
was your baby.
Would you be comfortable allowing Winston's cops to conduct the investigation?
The only reason why APS is the only school district in the state,
with its own publicly funded, private police force;
is so that investigations can be covered up; to hide the truth.
It was former APS Superintendent Peter Horoscak who said
"You can't just tell the truth,
you never know how someone might want to use it."
When APS Deputy Superintendent Michael Vigil was on his
way to jail for aggravated drunk driving; he insisted upon
being allowed to call Gil Lovato, the Chief of the APS Police Department.
Gil Lovato has since said, if he ever gets to court,
if the truth ever gets out,
there will not be a single senior APS administrator left standing.
All Winston Brooks has to do to absolutely refute all of this;
is to sit down at a town hall meeting and answer legitimate
questions about the public interests in the public schools;
all of them.
All he has to do is offer any commitment at all; that he
intends to hold himself accountable to the same standard
he enforces upon students;
candid, forthright, and honest.
He can't, and these allegations are proved,
beyond any reasonable doubt.
3 comments:
What ever happened to Gil's lawsuit? Does some news have to come out about it sometime?
The lawsuit is in federal court.
If it were in state court, you could go to the internet and see everything going on in the case.
A parallel system exists for federal courts, but it is considerably more cumbersome - I honestly can't make it work. I had to go down to the federal court house to register to be able to log in.
On top of that, someone has decided that looking at internet pages would reasonable cost viewers eight cents a page.
I have not figured out yet, how to pay, even if I were inclined to.
I expect it will be settled in secret and Gil Lovato will be paid well to keep his mouth shut.
Taxpayers will also pay Sam Bregman's bill, and Modrall's.
Everyone wins but stakeholders.
It should be a matter of jurisdiction as to who investigates (where did the crome occur), but I have seen your scenario happen.
If the "conduct" happened off campus, the victim would have every right and expectation to get a response from the police - whether BCSD, APD, Air Force OSI, State Police or Tribal cops. Wherever the hypothetical criminal sexual penetration offense occurred, that is what cop force should investigate.
But how would a "cover-up" work? Administrators and lawyers representing an APS employee accused of crimes can try to settle with the family of the victim - about $200 k or so if a student is molested by a teacher is the going rate. Why? To shuffle the employee off, to avoid media embarasment and liability of negligent hiring, negligent retention, or lack of doing any meaningful background check on the offender, of any meaningful oversight of the classroom by superiors.
What other cover-up dynamics exist? The victim and family may not want the story of their abuse in the news. If the victim is poor and the rapers are rich, that can be an issue. People trying to quash allegations rather than having them investigated - usually an indicator that the person trying to quash with no investigation is guilty and powerful. And knows the poor perso won't be able to afford a lawyer.
I say guilty in the sense that the elements of the crime are all there, but in actuality no one is "guilty" until a court says so. Indicted but not convicted means innocent of the crime by definition, even if the elements of the crime are caught on video tape or some other proof exists.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is the criminal standard for conviction. But in civil court, the standard of proof is not so absolute, so they would rather settle there, instead of having every lack of supervision and negligence of hiring and backgrounding be exposed, rather than show how in a school full of people with degrees that someone did not notice that a pedophile had been hired, or that pervasive bullying to the point of sexual penetration was being allowed.
Post a Comment