Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos diarist/teacher removed from classroom by police (186 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well presumably (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, erush1345, Sparhawk

    and if you read Sparhawk's comment above, quite likely, the charged "immoral conduct" is precisely not "writing a book," but something about the process of appearing to assign a book you wrote, with admittedly explicitly sexual content, to a class.  

    Seems a stretch to me that this would be "immoral conduct" either unless that is a hell of a steamy book, or there is some other angle to this story not in evidence, which is why it is so important to continually note that we are dealing with one side of the story here, from a fellow kossack who seems like a solid dude and has been perfectly civil and responsive for the most part in answering questions in this thread.

    But this kind of drama always has more than one side.  And the other side might not just be a venal administrator or a corrupt school system.  It might be an aggrieved parent or group of parents, for example.  (And the administrator may not have any basis for revealing that, so it might not be in evidence yet even if it were.)   Doesn't make it de facto any more valid as a criticism, but it might compel the school district to act in a particular way.

    I guess I come across as doubting the diarist's account.  And on some level I guess I do -- not in its sincerity, but in its partiality.  It's human nature to rationalize misconduct when we are caught, and the more so when we are unaware that it is misconduct until we are caught. The gesture of putting this account into the public mediasphere when legal steps are still unfolding suggests the need for a framing of the story that will be different from the one that might emerge from any subsequent litigation or administrative proceeding.  The diarist says he has counsel, yet no employment law attorney I know (and I know several, including one who specializes in defending educators) would be likely to encourage a presentation of the case such as this diary represents.  In fact, almost certainly any attorney worth the paper their degree is photocopied on (kidding, sorry lawyers) would strongly advise not doing something like this diary.  (We see it in online communities a lot -- upset people do often need to vent their side; there have been  a couple of drama diaries like that at dKos, as I recall!  Ha ha, a couple.)

    There is no way this this very diary doesn't hurt rturner's practical, real world odds of keeping his job if the situation actually is as he describes and nothing more or less than that.   So that in turn suggests the situation (from its other perspectives) might be seen a good deal differently than it is presented here, making this a sort of pre-emptive defense that, simply, "doth protest too much" given the way it minimizes the scope of the admitted infractions (which do sound rather minor, again).

    Or it's just an emotionally driven scream of frustration, which never helps one win an argument, or a lawsuit, as much as many may sympathize with that frustration.

    Dudes and dudettes, it's not about "courage."  It's about common sense.  Being brave won't help if you're not smart. Don't waste your bravery on false bravado.  Get a lawyer, coldly plan a defense, and sue the bastards if they fire you. Your odds of winning that go up if you don't ever contradict yourself in print.  Unfortunately, you already have in this diary, if perhaps in trivial ways that some of us have pointed out.  Those statements can be used to impeach your later positions.  It has nothing to do with being fearless, and everything to do with being clever.

    It is why they say a lawyer who defends her/himself in court has a fool for a client.

    So to the extent the whole situation, while gripping in its ambiguity and opportunity for venting spleen about the way teachers are treated or how bad the public school systems of the USA have become, remains utterly unresolvable, it's an inkblot test and a Rashomon remake. See in it whatever you want to see.

    “I wore black because ... it's still my symbol of rebellion -- against a stagnant status quo, against our hypocritical houses of God, against people whose minds are closed to others' ideas.” -- Johnny Cash

    by RocketJSquirrel on Wed May 01, 2013 at 11:18:26 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site