May 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003

« Gods and Monsters | Main | The Criminal Color »

June 07, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c68d353ef00df3521bfdb8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Local Programming: Don't Send Your Kid to Great Valley Middle School in Malvern, PA:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Absolutely amazing that someone can distort a situation and make themselves the victim. This Booman came onto a middle school campus without permission-the same week an intruder came into another school in this area. He took a sweatshirt from a student-the student was set by Booman's friend's son-not his son as reported.(the boy used a cell phone-not allowed in school -to call Booman)
He drove a car jumped out and ran after an 8th grader-he waited until the principal went into the building. What kind of man does this? Suppose he hurt the boy? Suppose Booman was caught by Dr.Swymer-instead he ran off like a coward.
We had no proof the sweatshirt mentioned belonged to his friends son.
His friend's son has a long discipline history -going back to elementary school.
Yes-Swymer called police-yes Swymer pressed for charges. Yes-Swymer runs one of the finast and safest schools in the country.
People like Booman are not helping -they are part of the problem today. Then they get to post inaccurate information about people.
Wait until Booman and friends find out about their next legal problem.

Dear Dr. Swymer-

He used a pay phone to call me. I didn't jump out of the car. I didn't run at the boy. I didn't wait for the principal (you?) to walk into the building. I immediately walked from the parked car to the boy with the sweatshirt. I gently placed my hand on his shoulder to get his attention because he had his back to me. With the other hand I unzipped his sweatshirt. I said, "Hi, you need to take this off because it does not belong to you." I met no resistance. As I walked away the boy said that he was going to have his father 'kick my ass' and that he was going to have his friends 'kick CBtE's ass'. He then attempted to enlist friends of his to do just that, as I reported to the police.

Also, 'proof' is a high standard, but we supplied you with photos, we could have supplied receipts. Your administration made representations that you had contacted the thief's family and that they confirmed they bought the sweatshirt. Either this is a lie or the boy's parents lied to the police, because they made no such claim to the police.

Did you lie when you said that you contacted the thief's family? Did you lie when you said that they confirmed they had bought the sweatshirt?

I am not saying you are lying in this post, but you made several inaccurate statements. So, I don't have much faith in your (or Mr. Freeman's) prior statements to CBtE's family.

Your administration told the family that you could not resolve the issue but it was obvious that we would have no reason to claim a sweatshirt that didn't belong to us. The response we got was that CBtE is a disciplinary problem but the thief is not.

How could we get our sweatshirt back if that was the attitude your administration was taking? The police don't have time to do forensic analysis of 60 dollar sweatshirts.

As for you other point, I would not have run off like a coward if you had been there. I would have asked you to allow me to take possession of the sweatshirt, which belonged to us. Under no circumstances would I have hurt the boy because I am not an idiot.

Your decision to respond to this by punishing the victim of a crime is telling.

Dear Dr. Swymer,

I actually would like to be a little more specific in what we are talking about here as far as what was done by you administration in this case.

Here is my understanding of what was done.

First CBtE complained to a teacher. The boy was approached and claimed to have (just) bought the sweatshirt at a specific retail outlet. That retail outlet does not and never has carried that sweatshirt.

Question: did you inquire with the retail outlet if they carried the shirt? Did you examine the well-worn sweatshirt to see if it was plausible that it had (just) been purchased?

CBtE could identify the sweatshirt by stains, rips, and wear.

Question: Did you attempt to see if the thief could do the same?

Vice-Principle Freeman told the CBtE and his mother that the parents affirmed that they bought the sweatshirt and that they had the receipt to prove it.

Question: Did Mr. Freeman really call his parents and did they really make this claim. Were they asked to provide the receipt.

(The police told me that the parents were unaware of any issue surrounding this sweatshirt until after I repossessed it. The police also told me that the parents did not make any claim to have bought the sweatshirt and certainly did not have a receipt. Also, the boy made no claim that he owned the sweatshirt to me at any time.)

Question: Did the parents lie to you to cover up their son's theft or did Freeman lie to CBtE and his mother about whether they contacted the boy's parents and what they said.

When CBtE did not get initial satisfaction about his sweatshirt, he brought in photographs of him wearing the sweatshirt. At least one of the photos revealed a stain that matched the sweatshirt. This was not acted on in any way. To the contrary, he was told that he was a disciplinary problem while the other boy was an upstanding citizen.

Question: is this an appropriate way to deal with a child that is clearly going the extra mile to prove to you that he has been the victim of a crime on school property?

CBtE also told you that this was not the first time the thief had gained access to his friends locker. He had people that corroborate that.

Question: Why did you not interview those witnesses?

Here's another question. How is it possible for you not to know CBtE used a payphone and not a cell phone. Did you not investigate this matter for yourself? Was this not part of your reason for disciplining him? It was in error. You have now repeated the error. Perhaps you should apologize. You also painted an entirely erroneous picture of my actions (some of which, I understand, were captured on tape). Why did you do that? Have you not been able to interview the over a dozen witnesses that know I did not wait, jump or run?

The issue here is that you did not act in a reasonable and responsible manner when confronted with evidence that there was a thief on your campus. You decided to insult the victim and the victim's mother rather than do a rigorous and fair-minded investigation. Perhaps you should have contacted the police to resolve the matter.

For my part, the police told me that the parents wanted to know why we didn't try contacting them directly. The answer to that is that we were under the impression that they had told you they had a receipt for the sweatshirt (because YOU TOLD US THAT). Under those circumstances, since we knew (or thought) they were lying, it did not seem as though that avenue would be likely to give us any relief.

Faced with a boy's parents that were lying, and a administration that blamed the victim and refused to respond to photo evidence or common sense, there seemed to be only one way of getting the actual, prized, sweatshirt back.

I apologize for any disruption and I have taken responsibility for disorderly conduct and trespassing.

When will you apologize?

And are you going to do something about this thief trying to get someone to assault and batter your former student?

I'm not a registered use and/or poster on "Booman"'s site.

For what it's worth, based on the posts above, I think if the school authorities had stepped in earlier, none of this would have been necessary.

Look into small claims court.

Dear “Booman,”

While I would normally not take the time to respond to people like you, I must in this case make you aware of how out of line your recent comments about Dr. Stephen Swymer have been. For you to make such a huge issue out of a sweatshirt is completely ridiculous and pathetic. And to take this small claims dispute that is so clearly an everyday argument between kids and turn it into an attack on schools in general is preposterous. People like you who like to burden administrators and teachers with these petty issues are the problem—not quality administrators like Dr. Swymer. Do you really think that schools should use their resources pursuing “he said she said” issues about sweatshirts? Personally I think quality instruction and a safe learning environment are more important. Then again, since you don’t reside in Great Valley School District or pay taxes there I guess you don’t care how other people’s money is utilized.

As someone who has gone through the Great Valley School District and is now a teacher, I can say with far more authority than you that Dr. Swymer is not only one of if not the finest educators in the country but that he is also a fine human being. For 28 years he has served the Great Valley School District and has created a school that is nationally renowned for excellence. In fact, under Dr. Swymer’s administration, General Wayne (now Great Valley) has been recognized as a National Blue Ribbon School of excellence THREE times—and that is under both Republican and Democratic Presidents, so it isn’t about his conservative ideology. Bill Clinton even honored him. Dr. Swymer is sought out by people around the country because of his expertise. He has dedicated his life to making the lives of kids better. You simply won’t find another principal like him. Today because of idiots who come after them, administrators have an extremely high turnover rate in this country, particularly in law-suit dominated PA. Dr. Swymer has stuck it out through very trying times and serves as a model for everyone who is lucky enough to know him.

You should also know that you are incorrect in referring to Dr. Swymer’s “obsession’ with your blogging. He had nothing to do with planning the celebration in his honor and had nothing to do with the police contacting you. As you are not a resident in the Great Valley School District, you might not be aware that it is standard for police to be present at large functions. Schools must coordinate with police and make them aware of any potential issues, and I’m sure because you have a history of trespassing on school property that you were brought up. An entire gym was full with people who completely disagree with your opinion of Dr. Swymer—teachers, students, parents, alumni—representatives of the THOUSANDS of people who prove that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Since you are from Philadelphia and in your post you made a point about the number of murders in the city in recent years, I must ask you why that has not made you realize what is really important in life. Perhaps you should stop hiding behind your computer and have the courage to confront Dr. Swymer face to face like a real man. I know it must have taken you a lot of courage to go after a middle school child, let’s see you go after a man. Something tells me that you are far too cowardly to do so. Stop ranting about a good man and take ownership of the fact that you trespassed at a school. Especially considering the tragic events at several schools this year, I think you and your readers should be applauding Dr. Swymer for his quick response and handling the situation so seriously. A sweatshirt does not justify violating the safe atmosphere of a school. Clearly CabinBoytheElder should have been more careful with his belongings and not shared his locker combination with anyone. If he had been more careful, he never would have lost his sweatshirt. Even if it was his sweatshirt, you are under no authority to go after a kid. Vigilante justice is not justifiable, especially when we’re talking about a stained sweatshirt.

The only reason I am responding to your post is not because Dr. Swymer is obsessing with it. In fact, I didn’t even hear him mention it once. I heard about it from one of my students who googled my last name in order to find my teacher website so they could download a handout for class. My last name happens to be Swymer so your post came up in the search. If Dr. Swymer was really upset about the rantings of an admitted criminal, surely he would have mentioned it to his daughters, especially the one who is also an educator. If you want to attack me then that’s fine. I would expect no less from you. But you need to know that my father is not incompetent. He is a great educator and a great person. I’m only sorry that your poor decisions have made it so that CabinBoytheElder has not been able to take advantage of all the wonderful things Great Valley has to offer because of your need to stick your nose where it doesn’t belong. For you to attack my father for doing his job is not only inappropriate (after all, this isn’t even your child—what is a grown man doing hanging out with kids anyways?), but offensive. I may not agree with all of my father’s politics or everything he does, but I can say with absolute certainty that he is a phenomenal educator. Not many people would put their children through their own schools, but he did, which is a testament to the fact that he believes in his school. Great Valley Middle School is an extension of the Swymer family. Get some perspective—a sweatshirt is no reason to start a vendetta against someone. Dr. Swymer has too much to do to spend time worrying about your petty tirades—he has 5 daughters, a wife, a granddaughter, a son in law, and 2 more sons in law on the way, and an extended family made up of every student who has had the pleasure to pass through the halls of his school to occupy him. Perhaps you should try to find people in your life that can make it so you have something better to do than come after someone with an impeccable reputation. If not, I truly pity you because your life must be very empty.


Dear “Booman,”

While I would normally not take the time to respond to people like you, I must in this case make you aware of how out of line your recent comments about Dr. Stephen Swymer have been. For you to make such a huge issue out of a sweatshirt is completely ridiculous and pathetic. And to take this small claims dispute that is so clearly an everyday argument between kids and turn it into an attack on schools in general is preposterous. People like you who like to burden administrators and teachers with these petty issues are the problem—not quality administrators like Dr. Swymer. Do you really think that schools should use their resources pursuing “he said she said” issues about sweatshirts? Personally I think quality instruction and a safe learning environment are more important. Then again, since you don’t reside in Great Valley School District or pay taxes there I guess you don’t care how other people’s money is utilized.

As someone who has gone through the Great Valley School District and is now a teacher, I can say with far more authority than you that Dr. Swymer is not only one of if not the finest educators in the country but that he is also a fine human being. For 28 years he has served the Great Valley School District and has created a school that is nationally renowned for excellence. In fact, under Dr. Swymer’s administration, General Wayne (now Great Valley) has been recognized as a National Blue Ribbon School of excellence THREE times—and that is under both Republican and Democratic Presidents, so it isn’t about his conservative ideology. Bill Clinton even honored him. Dr. Swymer is sought out by people around the country because of his expertise. He has dedicated his life to making the lives of kids better. You simply won’t find another principal like him. Today because of idiots who come after them, administrators have an extremely high turnover rate in this country, particularly in law-suit dominated PA. Dr. Swymer has stuck it out through very trying times and serves as a model for everyone who is lucky enough to know him.

You should also know that you are incorrect in referring to Dr. Swymer’s “obsession’ with your blogging. He had nothing to do with planning the celebration in his honor and had nothing to do with the police contacting you. As you are not a resident in the Great Valley School District, you might not be aware that it is standard for police to be present at large functions. Schools must coordinate with police and make them aware of any potential issues, and I’m sure because you have a history of trespassing on school property that you were brought up. An entire gym was full with people who completely disagree with your opinion of Dr. Swymer—teachers, students, parents, alumni—representatives of the THOUSANDS of people who prove that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Since you are from Philadelphia and in your post you made a point about the number of murders in the city in recent years, I must ask you why that has not made you realize what is really important in life. Perhaps you should stop hiding behind your computer and have the courage to confront Dr. Swymer face to face like a real man. I know it must have taken you a lot of courage to go after a middle school child, let’s see you go after a man. Something tells me that you are far too cowardly to do so. Stop ranting about a good man and take ownership of the fact that you trespassed at a school. Especially considering the tragic events at several schools this year, I think you and your readers should be applauding Dr. Swymer for his quick response and handling the situation so seriously. A sweatshirt does not justify violating the safe atmosphere of a school. Clearly CabinBoytheElder should have been more careful with his belongings and not shared his locker combination with anyone. If he had been more careful, he never would have lost his sweatshirt. Even if it was his sweatshirt, you are under no authority to go after a kid. Vigilante justice is not justifiable, especially when we’re talking about a stained sweatshirt.

The only reason I am responding to your post is not because Dr. Swymer is obsessing with it. In fact, I didn’t even hear him mention it once. I heard about it from one of my students who googled my last name in order to find my teacher website so they could download a handout for class. My last name happens to be Swymer so your post came up in the search. If Dr. Swymer was really upset about the rantings of an admitted criminal, surely he would have mentioned it to his daughters, especially the one who is also an educator. If you want to attack me then that’s fine. I would expect no less from you. But you need to know that my father is not incompetent. He is a great educator and a great person. I’m only sorry that your poor decisions have made it so that CabinBoytheElder has not been able to take advantage of all the wonderful things Great Valley has to offer because of your need to stick your nose where it doesn’t belong. For you to attack my father for doing his job is not only inappropriate (after all, this isn’t even your child—what is a grown man doing hanging out with kids anyways?), but offensive. I may not agree with all of my father’s politics or everything he does, but I can say with absolute certainty that he is a phenomenal educator. Not many people would put their children through their own schools, but he did, which is a testament to the fact that he believes in his school. Great Valley Middle School is an extension of the Swymer family. Get some perspective—a sweatshirt is no reason to start a vendetta against someone. Dr. Swymer has too much to do to spend time worrying about your petty tirades—he has 5 daughters, a wife, a granddaughter, a son in law, and 2 more sons in law on the way, and an extended family made up of every student who has had the pleasure to pass through the halls of his school to occupy him. Perhaps you should try to find people in your life that can make it so you have something better to do than come after someone with an impeccable reputation. If not, I truly pity you because your life must be very empty.


What a perfect example of blaming the victim by Dr. Swymer's daughter. It really is too bad that the boy "lost" his sweatshirt...he should have been more careful knowing that the school has a policy of allowing thieves to get away with victimizing other kids as long as the victim has a "history".

What Dr. Swymer was trying so thoughtfully to teach CBtE is that if you have gotten in trouble in the past you have forfeited your basic human right to be treated fairly and respectfully.

Blaming the victim appears to be a Swymer family trait.

Perhaps Dr. Swymer should take ownership of his mishandling of the matter when it was first brought to his attention, as was suggested above.

Dear Rachael Swymer-

I am not going to criticize you for standing up for your father. I think that is an admirable trait. But your argument is startling.

First of all, CBtE did not give anyone his locker combination. The sweatshirt was stolen from a friend's locker, as should have been clear to you if you read the article I wrote or the questions I posed to your father above. In fact, the thief had broken into this locker before and stole an iPod. He admitted that and returned the iPod to the locker owner. That happened last fall and should have formed an important clue in this dispute. But Dr. Swymer did not interview the owner of the locker or seem to care at all about resolving the issue.

You say, "For you to make such a huge issue out of a sweatshirt is completely ridiculous and pathetic. And to take this small claims dispute that is so clearly an everyday argument between kids and turn it into an attack..."

I know that the people that reside in the Great Valley Middle School are more affluent than the people that live in Philadelphia, but $60 is a lot of money for an article of clothing. It may be that people steal expensive clothes from each other 'every day' in GVMS, but I don't believe it. If they do, it is a major indictment of the cultural environment fostered by your father's administration. What are you saying?

Are you saying that we should do nothing about a boy that is breaking into lockers and stealing our property and the property of others?

If so, it might be a genetic trait, because that is precisely your father's attitude.

It's amusing to hear you say that I cost CBtE the opportunity to take advantage of your father's great school. This is a school that suspended him for putting a bagel in the hood of his friend's sweatshirt and then refused to discipline or investigate a thief on school property. This is a school where the Vice-Principal did not investigate a crime but instead lied to the parents, probably the police, and blamed the victim for the crime, just as you have done, again, here.

Let me be a little more plainspoken here. Thieves do not fare so well in urban schools. You don't steal people's property in Philadelphia and then wear that stolen property to school if you have any thought for self-preservation. Not unless you're a gang member. Why? Well, if your school feels that investigating theft is a "burden [to] administrators and teachers [and a] petty issue' then that is much more true in our schools.

And when authorities don't have time or take responsibility for policing their own schools then that is when vigilante justice takes precedence. It is only in the vacuum of authority that ordinary citizens (or students) have to settle their own disputes.

This is a basic principle that can be seen on a large scale on the streets of Iraq. Small disputes over people's property will snowball into larger feuds between gangs and families if no authority has the ability to mete out basic justice. This wasn't a hard case. It did not require the wisdom of Soloman. It only required some inclination to fairness to a student that was long ago labeled as a 'discipline problem'. Vice-Principal Freeman said he would suspend CBtE over and over until he was gone from the school system, and he kept his threat. He was just not interested in helping him get his sweatshirt back, which he made clear when confronted with photographs of CBtE in the sweatshirt. His response? He said something like, 'Yeah, well, this kid is an upstanding citizen and you are a discipline problem, so why should I believe you?'

That's when I gave up on the school doing what is right. Because the 'upstanding citizen' had broken into the locker before and stole an iPod and other things, and the school refused to consider that a problem or as a clue as to who really owned the sweatshirt.

But, I forgot, it was petty of me to care about something as stupud as a sweatshirt. Never mind that it had sentimental value to CBtE. Never mind that he was very upset that the thief was wearing it to school and daring him to fight to get it back.

I thought there were rules against bullying.

CBtE is technically listed as 'disabled'. He is technically in a 'special education' program. And this is how you treat him?

And I have to tell you, that I have begun to hear from parents in this school district and I haven't heard one good thing yet about your father.

You said he wasn't responsible for having the police contact me? That's a lie. He called the police and tried to get them to arrest me for blogging. When he was told that wasn't happening he then expressed concern about me coming to the school to disrupt his little party.

Does lying also run in your family or did you just not know that you father doesn't understand the first amendment?

It's a good thing your father is retiring because he has no credibility left in your school district and more and more parents are becoming aware of his poor performance.

Mr. "Booman" should stop caring about other people's children. Doesn't he know the world is cruel enough without people randomly caring about others?

I have watched this blog drama unfold for a while now, both at BooMan Tribune and here. I wasn't going to bother adding my 2 cents, but the more i see BooMan defend his actions, the angrier I get.

Did the school fail to address the case of the stolen shirt? Absolutely!

Does that justify BooMan's behavior? Absolutely Not!

Booman insists he had only three choices. Complain the school (didn't work). Complain to the police (wouldn't have worked so didn't try), or employ vigilante self-help (his only remaining choice).

Wrong! Booman had many choices. He could have complained to the school superintendent, and if that didn't work to the school board. He could have called the child's parents directly and dealt with them directly. He could have gone to the poilce and filed a report. The murder rate in Phili does not justify his unwillingness to follow the rule of law. And finally, if none of those things worked, he could have helped his son take the matter to small claims court.

Instead, he committed several crimes. Although he was not convicted of, or as far as I know charged, with assault, he did commit an assault upon a minor. An assault is any unwanted, unpermitted touching of any kind. Further, he admits he committed the crimes of trespassing on school property and disorderly conduct.

What is the lesson he is teaching his son? That one crime justifies another? That the biggest dog in the fight wins?

We live under the rule of law in this country. We have legal remedies, both civil and criminal, for just these situations. Before resorting to vigilantism, he should have exhausted all legal remedies. He did not.

And he continues instead to hold his criminal behavior up as a shining example of victory, redemption, and good parenting.

He is wrong on all counts. And he has been a poor example to his son, who needs to learn the way to deal with crimes in a society that operates under the rule of law.

This whole situation is ridiculous. "Blaming the victim"? Some people seem to forget that the "victim" in this incident involving Booman is the CHILD he ASSAULTED. And to say things are handled better in Philly schools is insane. Turn on the news any given night and you hear about the violence in public schools in Philly. The kids even attack teachers there. Dr. Swymer runs a tight ship, end of story. There has not been a single fight in the history of Great Valley Middle School. Kids take each others' stuff all the time all over the country, in case you didn't know kids do immature things. What Booman should do is teach his buddy (which I agree is creepy to hang out with middle school kids) some conflict resolution skills. And to be more careful about his locker combination. You can't break into a locker unless you get the combination, so obviously the kid screwed up somewhere. Or here's a thought: let the kids' PARENTS resolve it. And all schools look at a kid's record when dealing with these kinds of disputes, just like police look at people's background and prior record. The assistant principal asked the kid about the sweatshirt, what else could he do, administer a lie detector test? Get a life Booman! And if you want to deal with grownup issues hang out with grownups.

Rachael,

It is pretty pathetic of you to engage in sockpuppetry.

A sockpuppet is a secondary online identity used for purposes of deception within an Internet community. A sock puppet is a false identity through which a member of an Internet community speaks while pretending not to, like a puppeteer manipulating a hand puppet.[1]

Sockpuppets are employed to create the impression that support for a position is stronger than in reality, or to defend or praise an individual or particular side of a debate while hiding the puppeteer's role. The key difference between a sockpuppet and a regular pseudonym is the conveyance that the puppet is a third party and thus not affiliated with the puppeteer.

The term was first employed on Usenet in reference to Earl Curley, who had used various pseudonyms to defend his character and arguments and to denigrate his opponents.[2] The term tentacle was also commonly used with similar meaning in Usenet through the mid 1990s.


Domain Name chesco.net ? (Network)
IP Address 204.108.237.# (Chesconet)
ISP Chesconet
Location
Continent : North America
Country : United States (Facts)
State : Pennsylvania
City : Downingtown
Lat/Long : 40.0326, -75.719 (Map)
Language English (United States)
en-us
Operating System Macintosh MacOSX
Browser Firefox 2.0
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.1) Gecko/20061010 Firefox/2.0
Javascript version 1.5
Monitor
Resolution : 1024 x 768
Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit Jun 14 2007 4:01:27 pm
Last Page View Jun 14 2007 4:01:27 pm
Visit Length 0 seconds
Page Views 1
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page http://mithras.blogs...local_programmi.html
Visit Exit Page http://mithras.blogs...local_programmi.html
Out Click
Time Zone UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time Jun 14 2007 4:01:27 pm
Visit Number 482,259

Booman I'm sorry that you can't see what is so apparent to many other people. I posted a thought out response to your attacks and I returned to see if you had responded. I am no sockpuppet despite your accusations. I made one post, and that's it. You can cut and paste domain names all you want. I am not an expert in that area, but the information seems to indicate that the user is in Downingtown, and I currently live in Bucks County. It is also for the post that happened at 4: 01 pm, and video surveillance will confirm that I was at my school, which blocks blogging sites, until about 4:30. Accuse me of lying all you want--you are incorrect. It may be hard for you to grasp, but you are wrong in this situation. You have no right to interfere with other people's children. Education professionals go through training and must meet stringent requirements in order to work with children. People consent to trusting their children with the schools. Unless you are a certified professional with proper clearances or a parent you have no right to be involved in the school, especially in a district in which you don't even reside. This has nothing to do with a sweatshirt--that became irrelevant a long time ago. You victimized a child, you were wrong. You are the one who is clearly obsessing over this situation since you post your comments at 4 in the morning. I hope that you find something useful to do with your time besides attack people who remind you how sad your life is. Perhaps since you have such strong views on education you should take your passion for helping victims and put your money where your mouth is. Go out and work with kids, try and become a teacher, and be a positive influence. Don't bother responding to me because I will not return to this blog or make any more comments. Clearly nothing anyone says will make you see what is plainly true. I hope that your friend is able to move on from this incident, which you have turned into something much more drawn out and dramatic than needed. I don't know all the details because my father would never reveal confidential information about a child, but if he is a special needs child as you say then he is entitled to due process. I am certain that Great Valley will follow the legal process and I hope for the child's sake that a fair conclusion is reached. You are not the victim, it is not your battle, so just let it go.

I go away for a few days, and look what happens.

Just for the record, Rachael and Disturbed appear to have the same IP address.

And damn, how fucking privileged.

I knew they had the same IP address just from the sitemeter. It's apparent that Swymers follow the philosophy of a 'family that lies together stays together'.

Parents of GVMS, are you watching this crap?

Dr. Swymer, Rachel and sockpuppet Disturbed (how pathetic) represent the culture of corruption that has allowed the Bush-crap to float to the top.

What an absolutely frightening example this family demonstrate to their surroundings. Upstanding citizens. Not!

I've known Steve Swymer for 8 years. Last night, dozens of school officials honored him as an educator and leader. Before that hundreds of parents and kids honored him as an outstanding principal and friend after 35 years of distinguished service to his school district and community. Before that, Dr. Swymer was invited three times to the White House so he could be recognized by Presidents Clinton and Bush for his outstanding service and accomplishements.

You, Booman, take the word of a child, trespass on school property to terrorize and assault another child and steal his jersey. Your other accomplishements appear to be limited to this pathetic blog.

I think we all know who the asshole is.

Thanks for proving my point. Swymer's a privileged asshole who probably thinks he can no wrong because of the accolades he's gotten.

And this isn't Booman's blog, this is.

Fuckwit.

Not surprisingly, an asshole lawyer takes the defense of another asshole. At least you can spell fuckwit. Congratulations.

Thanks!

Hey foudufoot-

I take it that reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. That's okay, some of the greatest people to ever live were functionally illiterate. There's no shame in that.

I do think, however, that you might have more comprehension if I kind of recap the points that have confounded you.

You say that I took the word of a child as though a) that's some kind of failure in judgment and, b) that was the extent of my judgment in this case.

So...

I didn't merely take the word of a child. I was there when he received the sweatshirt. I had photographs of him in the sweatshirt. I had receipts for the sweatshirt. I knew the sweatshirt went missing the day it went missing. The sweatshirt could be identified by wear, rips, and stains (yes, even in the photos).

The parents of the thief do not claim to have bought the sweatshirt. They told the police they don't buy clothes for their son but just give him money to get his own stuff. They said that we should have called them to get it back, not that they owned it. The kid never claimed to me to own it, nor did he make that claim to the police. The issue of whether this sweatshirt was stolen is settled and not in dispute.

However, the administration told us that they contacted the parents (I'm not sure if they did) and that the parents had a receipt (they don't).

That's why we didn't call them. They also have an unlisted number and the school (probably properly) refused to give that to us.

You said I trespassed on school property. That's true. I confessed to that and paid a fine.

You said I assaulted and terrorized a child. I had a charge of harassment dropped because the police understood I neither terrorized or assaulted the child. Whatever the technical definition of assault is, the police did not find justice in accusing me of that.

You say I stole his jersey. Actually, I repossessed stolen property.

Swymer has done nothing about this thief and he will surely steal again.

In Stephen Swymer's school, there are three classes of students:

The normal students - most of the student body.
The privlidged - those the administration has given the green light to harass the under-privlidged.
The under-privlidged - those who the administration singles out (by not punishing their attackers/harassers) for harassment by the privliged students.


It is that simple. I have witnessed it first hand as a student in class #3.

I can't believe an adult walked up to an 8th grader, lay hands on him and removed an article of clothing. I would have had him charged for sexual assault.

[足全体を測定し、真珠とオレンジの花の形で埋め込まれています。それは '高' 唐代の 8 世紀半ばの成熟したスタイルを示しています。それは Sh でもともと保存されていた 3 つの同じような箱の 1 つですか? のか? 奈良の偉大な東寺の化合物で。他の 2 つの 1 つで Sh 残って? のですか? で、他の博物館大和 Bunkakan 奈良にも保持されます。ボックスはその価格を得るか。それは希少性と、作品の美しさのためだろうこの経済も思います。
メンズ時計: http://www.sotokeiya.com/menswatch/
レディース時計: http://www.sotokeiya.com/ladieswatch/
ロレックス時計: http://www.sotokeiya.com/rolex/

The comments to this entry are closed.

Support This Blog


Philadelphia Bloggers