Editor, the News:
Once again, the Mount Vernon News editorial writers have focused on what they perceive as the time-wasting thoroughness of John Freshwater’s attorney. The July 28 “Our opinion” described Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, as using “trivial entries” in Ohio law to buy more time while he appeals to the Ohio Supreme Court regarding the subpoenas of school board members.
Why is the News more concerned about finding fault with Hamilton’s methods of representing his client than with the ways the school board and administration failed to protect Freshwater’s rights? Does the News consider the due process portion of the U.S. Constitution to be trivial?
A better use of the editorial writers’ time would be looking into the process the school used to investigate Freshwater. Was the decision of the school board to suspend Freshwater without pay valid if they didn’t follow the investigative process in the Master Contract?
The contract states that all witnesses identified by the teacher will be interviewed, written statements will be obtained from the witnesses if possible and the teacher will be given the opportunity to give a comprehensive written response to the complaint being made against him.
David Millstone, attorney for the school board, made the recommendation to the school that they use H.R. On Call to do the investigation. Considering that Millstone had worked with HROC on prior occasions, he would have been familiar with their investigative methods. Does any of the fault for the current mess the school is in rest on Millstone?
The News credited Hamilton with pulling a “magic trick” in delaying the hearing while he seeks to have several board members testify. It would seem that Millstone has pulled a magic trick of his own—in the eyes of the News’ editorial team he can do no wrong.
(Click here to read previous letter to the editor.)