The Knox County Court of Common Pleas lists John Freshwater’s case—in which he was appealing his firing from Mount Vernon City Schools—as being “closed.”
Freshwater’s appeal never went to trial.
The case disposition is described on the court's website as being that of “Transfer to another judge or court.”
AccountabilityInTheMedia.com asked Freshwater whether he was given an opportunity to challenge the attempt to close his case at the county level. His wife, Nancy, wrote back, “We knew nothing about it; we didn't even know the request was made.”
Attorneys for the Mount Vernon Board of Education had filed a “Notice of Removal” with the county court Wednesday morning. In the filing, the attorneys told the court the “case has been removed to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.”
(See here for a copy of the documents. TIFF 339 KB )
The attorneys did not include in their filing a copy of any decision made by a federal judge that shows the transfer of the case was approved.
Although the county court website has an entry that says the case is “finished” and “filed away,” there is no document—such as a decision by county judge Otho Eyster—which corresponds to that entry.
Knox County Clerk of Courts, Mary Jo Hawkins, told AccountabilityInTheMedia.com that “there is no document for the entry” which says the case is finished. She explained that the entry “is just our notation.”
Included in the documents the school board’s attorneys filed is a copy of the request, apparently filed in federal court, for transfer of the case.
In the request, the school board's attorneys argue: “This case is subject to removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) and (b), because the district court has original jurisdiction over this action based on federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1331.”
Freshwater had submitted his appeal to the county court pursuant to Ohio Revised Code 3319.16.: “Any teacher affected by an order of termination of contract may appeal to the court of common pleas of the county in which the school is located.”
The request for removal of the case was reported on by the Mount Vernon News on Wednesday in the article “Board asks to move case to federal court.” Reporter Pamela Schehl wrote, “Attorney Sarah Moore, of the law firm Britton, Smith, Peters & Kalail, said the board filed papers asking to move the Freshwater case to federal court.”
AccountabilityInTheMedia.com asked board members whether the request to move the case to federal court was made directly by the school board or with the prior knowledge and consent of the board. Board president, Dr. Margie Bennett, replied via e-mail: “Prior to the removal of the case to federal court, the Board met in executive session with legal counsel to discuss the case. The details of those discussions are a matter of attorney-client privilege, which no individual board member can waive or disclose.”
UPDATE 3-8-2011:
Federal judge Gregory Frost on Monday signed a memorandum saying that the case should be transferred to his docket.
(See here for a copy of the memorandum. 137 KB PDF)
Previous coverage related to Frost:
April 18, 2010 — “Christian Family Objects to Bible in Classroom”
July 31, 2010 — “Judge to Reconsider Previously Issued Sanctions”
Aug. 4, 2010 — “What’s in the Trash, Stays in the Trash, According to Judge”
Oct. 21, 2010 — “Freshwater Lawsuit Dismissed”
UPDATE 3-13-2011:
Judge Frost on Thursday issued an order questioning whether the federal court has jurisdiction over Freshwater’s case:
“This Court, however, questions whether it has subject matter jurisdiction over this action based upon § 3319.16 of the Ohio Revised Code and, if it does possess jurisdiction, whether it is proper to exercise it in view of the abstention doctrine. Thus, the Court is inclined to sua sponte remand this action. Defendants may have until March 28, 2011, to provide a brief explaining why this action should not be remanded.”
(See here for a copy of the order. 22 KB PDF.)
For additional documents related to this matter, see the website of the National Center for Science Education.
UPDATE 4-5-2011:
Judge Frost on Tuesday issued an order remanding the case back to the county court:
“First, this action was an on-going state judicial proceeding prior to removal to this Court. Plaintiff filed this action in the proper state court as required by § 3319.16 of the Ohio Revised Code. Next, those proceedings certainly implicate important state interests […].Finally, the state court is quite competent to hear Freshwater’s complaints of constitutional violations.”
(See here for a copy of the order. 29 KB PDF.)
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Did MV schools fulfill 2009 settlement terms?
In August 2009 the Mount Vernon Board of Education agreed to a partial settlement with the Dennis family. Eighteen months later, portions of the settlement may have been left unfulfilled.
As part of the agreement the school board promised that there would be two presentations given to employees of the Mount Vernon City Schools on the subject of religion in the public schools. The board also said that after they made their decision regarding John Freshwater’s employment they would issue a statement included in the settlement.
The presentations
The first presentation was given in August of 2009 by two attorneys. The second presentation, according to the settlement, was to be given by Melissa Rogers or a speaker “with similar credentials.”
The first presentation was given in August of 2009 by two attorneys. The second presentation, according to the settlement, was to be given by Melissa Rogers or a speaker “with similar credentials.”
 |
| The 2009 settlement stipulated that there were to be two presentations. |
AccountabilityInTheMedia.com asked the schools’ superintendent, Steve Short, whether the second presentation had been given. Short wrote back, “I have forwarded your request to our attorney for a response.”
If and when the attorney, Sarah Moore, responds this article will be updated with her response.
The settlement gave a deadline for the second presentation: September 2010.
(See here for a copy of e-mails to and from AccountabilityInTheMedia.com regarding the second presentation. PDF 65KB )
The statement
The school board promised to “make a public statement” using wording included in the settlement. The statement was to be issued after the board made its decision regarding Freshwater’s employment.
 |
| The school board in 2009 agreed to make a public statement after the hearing concluded. |
AccountabilityInTheMedia.com asked the school board’s president, Dr. Margie Bennett, about the statement. Bennett wrote back, “I understand Mr. Short sent the Press Release to the local media and the Columbus Dispatch.”
Following Bennett’s response, a copy of the press release was requested from the school via a public records request. When the response is received this article will be updated with the response.
(See here for a copy of e-mails to and from AccountabilityInTheMedia.com regarding the statement. PDF 69KB )UPDATE 3-1-2011:
Moore has not responded to the request for comment.
The school has not replied to the public records request.
UPDATE 3-3-2011:
Rogers replied to a request for comment from AccountabilityInTheMedia.com, saying: “I suggest you contact David Millstone. I'd be happy to talk to you, but Mr. Millstone knows much more about this matter.”
(Millstone is one of the two attorneys that gave the first presentation to school employees on the subject of religion in the public schools. Millstone, however, did not handle the settlement with the Dennis family.)
AccountabilityInTheMedia.com had sent the following questions to Rogers: “Were you contacted by anyone to speak at the school? Did you give a presentation at the school on the subject of religion in the public schools?”
(See here for a copy of e-mails to and from Rogers. PDF 69KB )
UPDATE 3-4-2011:
The second presentation
Short told AccountabilityInTheMedia.com that the second presentation has not yet been given.
“We are in the planning stages for the second speaker,” Short said. “We anticipate that we will have the second speaker in May.”
The speaker will be someone other than Rogers. “Unfortunately,” Rogers explained, “we could not work out the scheduling.”
(See here for a copy of e-mails to and from AccountabilityInTheMedia.com regarding the second presentation—updated on 3-4-2011. PDF 12 KB )
The statement
Short supplied a copy of a press release that contains the statement that was required pursuant to the August 2009 settlement. The press release is undated but would have been issued sometime after the school board made the decision in January 2011 to fire Freshwater.
(See here for a copy of the press release. PDF 48 KB)
(See here for a copy of e-mails to and from AccountabilityInTheMedia.com regarding the statement—updated on 3-4-2011. PDF 10 KB )
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
School board votes 4-1 to fire Freshwater
The president of the Mount Vernon Board of Education had to prompt board members several times before one of the members offered to move to adopt the resolution to terminate John Freshwater’s teaching contract.
Paula Barone moved, seconded by Jody Goetzman, to fire Freshwater.
Steve Thompson was the only board member to vote against the resolution.
(Click here to view a copy of the resolution adopted by the school board during Monday’s meeting. 632.765 KB PDF.)
The referee overseeing Freshwater’s state administrative hearing, R. Lee Shepherd, issued a report on Friday recommending the termination of the teacher’s contract.
In the beginning of the report, however, Shepherd dismisses the allegation that Freshwater burned a cross onto the arm of one of his students:
“Due to the sensational and provocative nature of this specified ground, it and the facts and circumstances surrounding it became the focus of the curious, including those in the video, audio, and print media. Once sworn testimony was presented, it [became] obvious that speculation and imagination had pushed reality aside.”
Shepherd also noted that the matter involving the Tesla coil had already been dealt with by school administration. (See the article, “Tesla Coil Matter Was Officially Resolved January 2008.” )
Although Shepherd said that Freshwater violated the Establishment Clause and that he recommended firing Freshwater, he noted that Freshwater excelled as a teacher:
“Initially, it must be noted that a wealth of evidence was presented to substantiate that John Freshwater was a successful eighth grade science teacher. Many, possibly most of his students seemed to enjoy his class and remember it fondly. On the average, Freshwater students performed at or above the state requirements and expectations for eighth grade science students. The state test score results for his students often exceeded the state test score results of other eighth grade science teachers. On more than one occasion, John Freshwater was recognized by his peers for his outstanding teaching skills.”
(Click here to view a copy of Shepherd’s report and recommendation. 41.084 KB PDF.)
The school board did not permit public participation during the meeting. Board president, Dr. Margie Bennett, said this was “because we have a lot of business to cover.” See correction at end of article.
Video: "Paula Barone withdraws recusal regarding John Freshwater hearing."
(Click here to view a copy of the Paula Barone and Steve Thompson recusal letters. 1.19 MB PDF)
Video: "School board votes 4-1 to fire John Freshwater."
Video: "School board members talk about the firing of John Freshwater."
For Freshwater’s side of the story, see the article, “Freshwater’s Closing Arguments: Allegations Unsubstantiated.” Also see the articles in the archive for additional coverage of the Freshwater controversy.
UPDATE 2-15-2011:
Related Document
As already reported by the media, Freshwater filed an appeal February 8 with the Knox County Common Pleas Court. (Click here to view a copy of the 33 page document. 3MB PDF. )
Correction
During the February 14 school board meeting, Bennett said she wanted to clear up a misunderstanding over why there was no public participation at the last meeting.
“Public participation,” Bennett said, “is always a part of our meetings and we would never do away with it because we are too busy. The reason we didn’t have any was because no one had signed up.”
(Editor’s note: Based on having gone back and looked at the video, it appears that Bennett’s statement at the opening of the prior meeting —“We won’t spend a lot of time on comments this evening because we want to go right into…we have a lot of business to cover”—was intended by her to keep the board members’ comments brief.)
Paula Barone moved, seconded by Jody Goetzman, to fire Freshwater.
Steve Thompson was the only board member to vote against the resolution.
(Click here to view a copy of the resolution adopted by the school board during Monday’s meeting. 632.765 KB PDF.)
The referee overseeing Freshwater’s state administrative hearing, R. Lee Shepherd, issued a report on Friday recommending the termination of the teacher’s contract.
In the beginning of the report, however, Shepherd dismisses the allegation that Freshwater burned a cross onto the arm of one of his students:
“Due to the sensational and provocative nature of this specified ground, it and the facts and circumstances surrounding it became the focus of the curious, including those in the video, audio, and print media. Once sworn testimony was presented, it [became] obvious that speculation and imagination had pushed reality aside.”
Shepherd also noted that the matter involving the Tesla coil had already been dealt with by school administration. (See the article, “Tesla Coil Matter Was Officially Resolved January 2008.” )
Although Shepherd said that Freshwater violated the Establishment Clause and that he recommended firing Freshwater, he noted that Freshwater excelled as a teacher:
“Initially, it must be noted that a wealth of evidence was presented to substantiate that John Freshwater was a successful eighth grade science teacher. Many, possibly most of his students seemed to enjoy his class and remember it fondly. On the average, Freshwater students performed at or above the state requirements and expectations for eighth grade science students. The state test score results for his students often exceeded the state test score results of other eighth grade science teachers. On more than one occasion, John Freshwater was recognized by his peers for his outstanding teaching skills.”
(Click here to view a copy of Shepherd’s report and recommendation. 41.084 KB PDF.)
Video: "Paula Barone withdraws recusal regarding John Freshwater hearing."
(Click here to view a copy of the Paula Barone and Steve Thompson recusal letters. 1.19 MB PDF)
Video: "School board votes 4-1 to fire John Freshwater."
Video: "School board members talk about the firing of John Freshwater."
For Freshwater’s side of the story, see the article, “Freshwater’s Closing Arguments: Allegations Unsubstantiated.” Also see the articles in the archive for additional coverage of the Freshwater controversy.
UPDATE 2-15-2011:
Related Document
As already reported by the media, Freshwater filed an appeal February 8 with the Knox County Common Pleas Court. (Click here to view a copy of the 33 page document. 3MB PDF. )
Correction
During the February 14 school board meeting, Bennett said she wanted to clear up a misunderstanding over why there was no public participation at the last meeting.
“Public participation,” Bennett said, “is always a part of our meetings and we would never do away with it because we are too busy. The reason we didn’t have any was because no one had signed up.”
(Editor’s note: Based on having gone back and looked at the video, it appears that Bennett’s statement at the opening of the prior meeting —“We won’t spend a lot of time on comments this evening because we want to go right into…we have a lot of business to cover”—was intended by her to keep the board members’ comments brief.)
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Freshwater Lawsuit Dismissed
The federal case John Freshwater, et al., v. Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education, et al. was dismissed Thursday:
“Now come all parties, by and through counsel, to stipulate Plaintiffs John and Nancy Freshwater dismiss all claims contained in the First Amended Complaint with prejudice pursuant to Civ.R. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).”
A copy of the stipulated dismissal is posted on the website of the National Center for Science Education.
UPDATE 10-22-10:
Don Matolyak, Freshwater’s pastor, provided AccountabilityInTheMedia.com with a copy of Freshwater’s statement regarding the dismissal of the lawsuit against the school board:
According to Mount Vernon News reporter Pamela Schehl, school board attorney Sarah Moore said: “There was no settlement offer to accept or reject. There was no money on the table for [Freshwater] to leave there. We were baffled when we received the e-mail from him and we can't even begin to speculate why he is saying what he is saying.”
“Now come all parties, by and through counsel, to stipulate Plaintiffs John and Nancy Freshwater dismiss all claims contained in the First Amended Complaint with prejudice pursuant to Civ.R. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).”
A copy of the stipulated dismissal is posted on the website of the National Center for Science Education.
UPDATE 10-22-10:
Don Matolyak, Freshwater’s pastor, provided AccountabilityInTheMedia.com with a copy of Freshwater’s statement regarding the dismissal of the lawsuit against the school board:
“I want to pass along this statement. My wife and I directly sent to the opposing attorneys the following statement by email on Wednesday, October 20, 2010. The truth is there was money offered to me several times to leave the district and stop the state hearing before Referee Shepherd could make his finding. If I took the money and left the district the opportunity for truth would never have come out and the eleven students from my 2007-2008 class would not have been able to testify about the truth. Most importantly if I took the money and left the district the Referee would have been prevented from making a decision. The Referee has heard 38 days of testimony and is the best opportunity for revealing the truth. I will await Referee R. Lee Shepherd’s decision.
“(this is the statement I made to the school board’s attorneys)
“Nancy and I prayerfully considered the settlement terms and have decided to REJECT the terms presented.
“From the beginning, my wife and I have only sought the truth. Revelations in the last few days exposed to us the strategy of those who have harmed me, a strategy designed to obscure the truth rather than seek justice and reconciliation. It has become obvious this federal platform and process will never result in the truth coming forward. Truth is not to be compromised or negotiated or hidden behind money.
“We feel confident that the hearing completed in August 2010, after 38 days of testimony before Referee R. Lee Shepherd is the best opportunity for revealing the truth we sought from the beginning. Therefore, we have decided to withdraw our federal lawsuit against all parties without any personal compensation or monetary gain as proposed, and we have instructed our attorney to file the proper paperwork. We seek no other option than to continue to patiently await the finding of Referee R. Lee Shepherd as he is the ONLY person to hear all of the testimony and most importantly see all of the students from my 2007-2008 class speak about the truth of what went on during my class.
“We have already spent our life savings and have pledged our farm to get to the truth. It is better to leave the money on the table than to take the Bible off of my desk.
“John and Nancy Freshwater”
According to Mount Vernon News reporter Pamela Schehl, school board attorney Sarah Moore said: “There was no settlement offer to accept or reject. There was no money on the table for [Freshwater] to leave there. We were baffled when we received the e-mail from him and we can't even begin to speculate why he is saying what he is saying.”
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
AccountibilityInTheMedia.com Reporter Responds to Subpoena
On Monday evening I submitted a written statement to the Mount Vernon Board of Education regarding the recent subpoena I received from the school board’s attorney Sarah Moore.
In the subpoena, Moore stated that it was for the federal case John Freshwater, et al., v. Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education, et al.
(Click here to view a copy my statement to the school board and a copy of the subpoena. 891 KB PDF.)
Below is a portion of my statement:
“I understand that attorney Moore has a job to do in defending the school district in the federal case. However, there is a difference between being thorough and casting such a wide net, while fishing for information, that one goes overboard. Attorney Moore’s actions appear to be the latter.
“What criteria did attorney Moore use in deciding to whom to send subpoenas? Has she also sent subpoenas to the Mount Vernon News, KnoxPages.com, 13WMVO or the countless television stations and other newspapers who have reported on the story involving Mr. Freshwater? Will she send subpoenas to every person who has ever blogged about the story, written a letter to the editor or spoken at a school board meeting?”
I wasn’t the only one that Moore sent a subpoena to recently. Among those that received a subpoena is Levi Stickle, who maintains the website cfacts.org.
Three people spoke to the school board during the public participation portion of Monday’s school board meeting. Two of the individuals spoke about the recent subpoenas.
(“Levi Stickle to school attorney: Why did you send me a subpoena?”)
(“Community member responds to proposed MVCS levy”)
(“William Pursel: Frivolous subpoenas”)
Moore has been sent a request for comment. If and when she replies this article will be updated with her response.
Also during Monday’s meeting, school board treasurer, Barbara J. Donohue, provided an update to the school board regarding the district’s five-year forecast. She provided information regarding the financial challenges facing the district due to budget cuts at the state level.
UPDATE 10-16-10:
Moore still has not responded to the request for comment.
Mount Vernon News reporter Pamela Schehl did not include any mention of the subpoenas in her coverage of the school board meeting. See her article “McKinley honored by MV school board.”
The managing editor for the News, Samantha Scoles, provided an explanation in an email to AccountabilityInTheMedia.com :
“The reason we have not reported on the public participation portion of the most recent school board meeting is because we were not in attendance. Our education reporter was attending a different school board meeting.
“When we do not attend meetings, we can call on board members, the treasurer or the superintendent for details of the meeting, which we did in this case. I believe we were provided with the statements made in regards to the Behind the Scenes Award.
“Therefore, without being present to hear the public comments, we cannot possibly report on those.”
In an email on Oct 12, Scoles had been provided with links to videos of the public comments and a copy of the written statement given to the school board.
UPDATE 10-20-10:
Dave Daubenmire, through his attorney, has submitted a motion to quash a subpoena sent to him by Moore. Below is a portion of the motion:
“After reviewing the subpoena, it is clear that the only purpose of the subpoena was to harass, embarrass, and incur expenses for a non-party witness, simply because he is a friend of one of the parties. The subpoena should be quashed in its entirety, and attorneys fees awarded to Mr. Daubenmire from the Defendant for the expense of obtaining counsel to respond to this harassing subpoena.”
A copy of the motion is posted on the website of the National Center for Science Education.
Richard Hoppe, who writes for pandasthumb.org, wrote about the recent subpoenas issued by Moore. Below is a portion of Hoppe’s post:
“Essentially the defense is asking for everything Sam [Stickle] has ever written on the web, whether public or in private, about Freshwater, Hamilton, and the Freshwater hearing. That’s a remarkable demand. It has the effect of bringing everything a private citizen has written about this affair into a federal court proceeding for no discernible reason beyond the defense’s hope that something, anything, will turn up. It is a chilling affront to the First Amendment rights of the Stickle brothers and to anyone else (what, who me?) who might have commented somewhere on the web about this specific affair or who might write a blog post or even comment on a discussion board about any legal proceeding.”
In the subpoena, Moore stated that it was for the federal case John Freshwater, et al., v. Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education, et al.
(Click here to view a copy my statement to the school board and a copy of the subpoena. 891 KB PDF.)
Below is a portion of my statement:
“I understand that attorney Moore has a job to do in defending the school district in the federal case. However, there is a difference between being thorough and casting such a wide net, while fishing for information, that one goes overboard. Attorney Moore’s actions appear to be the latter.
“What criteria did attorney Moore use in deciding to whom to send subpoenas? Has she also sent subpoenas to the Mount Vernon News, KnoxPages.com, 13WMVO or the countless television stations and other newspapers who have reported on the story involving Mr. Freshwater? Will she send subpoenas to every person who has ever blogged about the story, written a letter to the editor or spoken at a school board meeting?”
I wasn’t the only one that Moore sent a subpoena to recently. Among those that received a subpoena is Levi Stickle, who maintains the website cfacts.org.
Three people spoke to the school board during the public participation portion of Monday’s school board meeting. Two of the individuals spoke about the recent subpoenas.
(“Levi Stickle to school attorney: Why did you send me a subpoena?”)
(“Community member responds to proposed MVCS levy”)
(“William Pursel: Frivolous subpoenas”)
Moore has been sent a request for comment. If and when she replies this article will be updated with her response.
Also during Monday’s meeting, school board treasurer, Barbara J. Donohue, provided an update to the school board regarding the district’s five-year forecast. She provided information regarding the financial challenges facing the district due to budget cuts at the state level.
UPDATE 10-16-10:
Moore still has not responded to the request for comment.
Mount Vernon News reporter Pamela Schehl did not include any mention of the subpoenas in her coverage of the school board meeting. See her article “McKinley honored by MV school board.”
The managing editor for the News, Samantha Scoles, provided an explanation in an email to AccountabilityInTheMedia.com :
“The reason we have not reported on the public participation portion of the most recent school board meeting is because we were not in attendance. Our education reporter was attending a different school board meeting.
“When we do not attend meetings, we can call on board members, the treasurer or the superintendent for details of the meeting, which we did in this case. I believe we were provided with the statements made in regards to the Behind the Scenes Award.
“Therefore, without being present to hear the public comments, we cannot possibly report on those.”
In an email on Oct 12, Scoles had been provided with links to videos of the public comments and a copy of the written statement given to the school board.
UPDATE 10-20-10:
Dave Daubenmire, through his attorney, has submitted a motion to quash a subpoena sent to him by Moore. Below is a portion of the motion:
“After reviewing the subpoena, it is clear that the only purpose of the subpoena was to harass, embarrass, and incur expenses for a non-party witness, simply because he is a friend of one of the parties. The subpoena should be quashed in its entirety, and attorneys fees awarded to Mr. Daubenmire from the Defendant for the expense of obtaining counsel to respond to this harassing subpoena.”
A copy of the motion is posted on the website of the National Center for Science Education.
Richard Hoppe, who writes for pandasthumb.org, wrote about the recent subpoenas issued by Moore. Below is a portion of Hoppe’s post:
“Essentially the defense is asking for everything Sam [Stickle] has ever written on the web, whether public or in private, about Freshwater, Hamilton, and the Freshwater hearing. That’s a remarkable demand. It has the effect of bringing everything a private citizen has written about this affair into a federal court proceeding for no discernible reason beyond the defense’s hope that something, anything, will turn up. It is a chilling affront to the First Amendment rights of the Stickle brothers and to anyone else (what, who me?) who might have commented somewhere on the web about this specific affair or who might write a blog post or even comment on a discussion board about any legal proceeding.”
Friday, September 17, 2010
Freshwater’s Closing Arguments: Allegations Unsubstantiated
John Freshwater’s “closing statement brief” was released Thursday.
The 180 page document, including diagrams, provides extensive arguments for why the allegations made against Freshwater are unsubstantiated. The brief draws upon the many witnesses who testified during the hearing that began in October of 2008.
(“Freshwater's Closing Statement Brief.” 4MB PDF.)
(The “Middle School FCA Speakers Survey” diagram, like others used in the brief, emphasizes significant details of the testimony.)
The following is from the introduction of the brief:
“Everything in this case is about purpose, context and intent with an ultimate goal of answering the question set forth in the opening statement –
“Shamefully and sadly, had the administration of the employer invested any zeal in investigative fact gathering to determine the basic:
- legitimate answers could have been achieved both by the end of the last day of school in 2008, and before the employer’s resolutions of June 20, 2008, and July 7, 2008.”
AND
“The sum of the decision calculus in this matter will demonstrate John Freshwater prevails in this matter because:
“1. Any and all matters related to John Freshwater’s use of a Tesla Coil were adjudicated by Principal William White’s letter to John Freshwater dated January 22, 2008.
“2. The Academic Content Standards were not applicable in the Mount Vernon City School District until the beginning of the 2004-2005 school year.
“A. John Freshwater taught his 8th grade students exactly as he was required as evidenced by the only known assessment tool authorized in the State of Ohio; the Ohio Achievement Tests. John Freshwater’s students received proper instruction resulting in him being the only 8th grade teacher whose students achieved a proficient rating of seventy-seven (77%) percent on the Ohio Achievement Tests despite his classes containing the most special education students.
“B. Ten (10) eyewitness students, two (2) teachers and one (1) principal testified John Freshwater never instructed on the topics of creationism nor intelligent design.
“3. John Freshwater complied with all of the known parameters as he facilitated, monitored and supervised the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA).
“A. Witness testimony from credible sources clearly demonstrates John Freshwater did not conduct nor lead any prayers during FCA meetings.
“B. Witness testimony from credible sources clearly demonstrates John Freshwater never asked non-familial students to lead prayer in FCA meetings.
“C. Witness testimony from credible sources clearly demonstrates John Freshwater did not exceed his role as facilitator, monitor and supervisor of the FCA.
“4. John Freshwater exercised a constitutional right to have a personal Bible in his classroom on his desk.
“A. John Freshwater removed all items he was lawfully asked to remove.
“B. John Freshwater did not receive any instruction from Principal William White or anybody else to remove the patriotic poster, which was distributed through the Mount Vernon Middle School office, depicting former President George Bush and Colin Powell.
“C. John Freshwater never intended or tried to ‘make a point’ by bringing additional religious articles into his classroom.
“At the conclusion of this brief, John Freshwater will respectfully request the Referee to evaluate and find each of the employer’s allegations against John Freshwater as detailed in the Amended Resolution of Intent to Consider the Termination of the Teaching Contract(s) of John Freshwater to be unsubstantiated.
“John Freshwater prays this Referee, after consideration of the evidence presented, and assessment of the testimony heard, will find the Board of Education (BOE) has failed to prove the charges set forth in the resolution to consider his termination originally dated June 20, 2008, but amended on July 7, 2008.”
For additional coverage of the Freshwater hearing, see the articles in the archive.
UPDATE 9/20/10—related documents:
August 13, 2010 David Millstone’s brief on behalf of the Mount Vernon Board of Education. 239 KB PDF.
August 20, 2010 R. Kelly Hamilton’s rebuttal on behalf of Freshwater. 5.64 MB PDF.
August 20, 2010 Millstone’s rebuttal on behalf of school board. 180 KB PDF.
The above three documents were obtained from the National Center for Science Education.
UPDATE 9/22/10:
The links to the above three documents have been temporarily taken down. (The documents may not have been officially released.)
Freshwater’s “closing statement brief” was released Thursday by attorney Hamilton.
UPDATE 3/17/11:
The links to the above three documents have been reactivated. (The documents are part of the public record pursuant to Ohio Revised Code 3319.16.)
The 180 page document, including diagrams, provides extensive arguments for why the allegations made against Freshwater are unsubstantiated. The brief draws upon the many witnesses who testified during the hearing that began in October of 2008.
(“Freshwater's Closing Statement Brief.” 4MB PDF.)
The following is from the introduction of the brief:
“Everything in this case is about purpose, context and intent with an ultimate goal of answering the question set forth in the opening statement –
‘What makes sense?’ versus ‘What does not make sense?’
“Shamefully and sadly, had the administration of the employer invested any zeal in investigative fact gathering to determine the basic:
‘Who?, What?, Where?, When?, Why? and How?’
- legitimate answers could have been achieved both by the end of the last day of school in 2008, and before the employer’s resolutions of June 20, 2008, and July 7, 2008.”
AND
“The sum of the decision calculus in this matter will demonstrate John Freshwater prevails in this matter because:
“1. Any and all matters related to John Freshwater’s use of a Tesla Coil were adjudicated by Principal William White’s letter to John Freshwater dated January 22, 2008.
“2. The Academic Content Standards were not applicable in the Mount Vernon City School District until the beginning of the 2004-2005 school year.
“A. John Freshwater taught his 8th grade students exactly as he was required as evidenced by the only known assessment tool authorized in the State of Ohio; the Ohio Achievement Tests. John Freshwater’s students received proper instruction resulting in him being the only 8th grade teacher whose students achieved a proficient rating of seventy-seven (77%) percent on the Ohio Achievement Tests despite his classes containing the most special education students.
“B. Ten (10) eyewitness students, two (2) teachers and one (1) principal testified John Freshwater never instructed on the topics of creationism nor intelligent design.
“3. John Freshwater complied with all of the known parameters as he facilitated, monitored and supervised the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA).
“A. Witness testimony from credible sources clearly demonstrates John Freshwater did not conduct nor lead any prayers during FCA meetings.
“B. Witness testimony from credible sources clearly demonstrates John Freshwater never asked non-familial students to lead prayer in FCA meetings.
“C. Witness testimony from credible sources clearly demonstrates John Freshwater did not exceed his role as facilitator, monitor and supervisor of the FCA.
“4. John Freshwater exercised a constitutional right to have a personal Bible in his classroom on his desk.
“A. John Freshwater removed all items he was lawfully asked to remove.
“B. John Freshwater did not receive any instruction from Principal William White or anybody else to remove the patriotic poster, which was distributed through the Mount Vernon Middle School office, depicting former President George Bush and Colin Powell.
“C. John Freshwater never intended or tried to ‘make a point’ by bringing additional religious articles into his classroom.
“At the conclusion of this brief, John Freshwater will respectfully request the Referee to evaluate and find each of the employer’s allegations against John Freshwater as detailed in the Amended Resolution of Intent to Consider the Termination of the Teaching Contract(s) of John Freshwater to be unsubstantiated.
“John Freshwater prays this Referee, after consideration of the evidence presented, and assessment of the testimony heard, will find the Board of Education (BOE) has failed to prove the charges set forth in the resolution to consider his termination originally dated June 20, 2008, but amended on July 7, 2008.”
For additional coverage of the Freshwater hearing, see the articles in the archive.
UPDATE 9/20/10—related documents:
August 13, 2010 David Millstone’s brief on behalf of the Mount Vernon Board of Education. 239 KB PDF.
August 20, 2010 R. Kelly Hamilton’s rebuttal on behalf of Freshwater. 5.64 MB PDF.
August 20, 2010 Millstone’s rebuttal on behalf of school board. 180 KB PDF.
The above three documents were obtained from the National Center for Science Education.
UPDATE 9/22/10:
The links to the above three documents have been temporarily taken down. (The documents may not have been officially released.)
Freshwater’s “closing statement brief” was released Thursday by attorney Hamilton.
UPDATE 3/17/11:
The links to the above three documents have been reactivated. (The documents are part of the public record pursuant to Ohio Revised Code 3319.16.)
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
What’s in the Trash, Stays in the Trash, According to Judge
Federal judge Gregory Frost on Monday rejected the attempt by John Freshwater and attorney R. Kelly Hamilton to have previously issued sanctions lifted.
Frost sidestepped the various issues raised in the dispute and went to what he believed could resolve the matter—the credibility of the parties involved in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al.
With $28,737.50 at stake, Frost decided against Freshwater and Hamilton because Freshwater testified to having pulled items back out of the trash.
“The Court finds Freshwater’s explanation is untenable and that it taints the credibility of his entire testimony,” Frost wrote.
Freshwater had merely explained in the federal hearing, like he had in the administrative hearing, that he pitched some items into a garbage can in his barn and then retrieved the items when his attorney requested them.
Frost also focused on a similar, though separate, situation. This time, Frost wrote that it couldn’t be true that Freshwater both put the item, a Tesla coil, in a trashcan and also gave the item to his attorney.
In research done by AccountabilityInTheMedia.com, it was found to be physically possible to place something in a trashcan and then remove the item.
Perhaps for a person such as Howie Mandel, with germaphobia, it would be psychologically impossible to remove an item from a trashcan.
(Mandel talks about his fear of germs.)
Mount Vernon City Schools’ superintendent Steve Short and Mount Vernon Board of Education attorney David Millstone both testified on behalf of the plaintiffs. Neither one mentioned anything about having every removed something from a trashcan.
“The Court has no uncertainty whatsoever as to the truthfulness of the testimony of these two witnesses,” Frost wrote.
Frost did not include any details about the testimony of Short or Millstone.
Other than the trashcan issue, the only other issue Frost offered as the basis of his decision involved the dispute over whether Hamilton delivered two affidavits on April 30, 2010 to the plaintiffs’ attorney Douglas Mansfield.
It was a matter of Hamilton’s word against Mansfield’s and his two associates. Even at that, Frost wrote that he didn’t even have to include Hamilton’s side of the story in his deliberation on the matter.
Frost wrote that Hamilton didn’t properly word his affidavit about the affidavits. What Hamilton wrote in his brief about the affidavits Frost did find to be properly worded. However, Frost wrote that statements made in a brief cannot be considered “evidence.”
While Hamilton was in the federal hearing, he said a couple of times that if Frost had particular wording he was looking for on any matter to direct him in what would satisfy the court. Hamilton told the judge that he was not trying to be evasive in how he responded to the various issues.
(The Trial by Franz Kafka, starting at 1:07 in video, provides a sense of the legal proceedings regarding Freshwater.)
Frost went ahead and wrote in his decision:
“And, it appears to the Court that the language utilized in Attorney Hamilton’s affidavit is carefully crafted to appear to state that he attached the affidavits to Exhibit 161 but does not actually state such. Moreover, although the affidavit does not state that Attorney Hamilton attached the affidavits to Exhibit 161, to the extent that the affidavit was meant to state such, the Court finds the testimony unbelievable.”
Credibility of judge Frost
During the federal hearing conducted on July 29, Frost did acknowledged twice, after being pressed, that he had been mistaken on something.
One issue had to do with who Freshwater’s attorney was in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. The other was regarding the wording of the 2008 requests by the plaintiffs for the production of documents.
AccountabilityInTheMedia.com previously reported on Frost’s odd decision in April to grant the plaintiffs, the Dennis family, standing in regard to their claims of Establishment Clause violation. (See the article, “Christian Family Objects to Bible in Classroom.” )
The Dennises state in their lawsuit that they are Christians. The Bibles and Ten Commandments that were in Freshwater’s classroom, if seen as religious articles, were from the Dennis’ own religion. In order to have standing, the Dennis’ legal interests have to have been invaded by the presence of these items.
Frost, nonetheless, granted the Dennis’ standing.
Related document:
August 2, 2010 opinion and order by Frost on motion for reconsideration of sanctions. (Doc# 120) 28.32 KB PDF.
Frost sidestepped the various issues raised in the dispute and went to what he believed could resolve the matter—the credibility of the parties involved in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al.
With $28,737.50 at stake, Frost decided against Freshwater and Hamilton because Freshwater testified to having pulled items back out of the trash.
“The Court finds Freshwater’s explanation is untenable and that it taints the credibility of his entire testimony,” Frost wrote.
Freshwater had merely explained in the federal hearing, like he had in the administrative hearing, that he pitched some items into a garbage can in his barn and then retrieved the items when his attorney requested them.
Frost also focused on a similar, though separate, situation. This time, Frost wrote that it couldn’t be true that Freshwater both put the item, a Tesla coil, in a trashcan and also gave the item to his attorney.
In research done by AccountabilityInTheMedia.com, it was found to be physically possible to place something in a trashcan and then remove the item.
Perhaps for a person such as Howie Mandel, with germaphobia, it would be psychologically impossible to remove an item from a trashcan.
(Mandel talks about his fear of germs.)
Mount Vernon City Schools’ superintendent Steve Short and Mount Vernon Board of Education attorney David Millstone both testified on behalf of the plaintiffs. Neither one mentioned anything about having every removed something from a trashcan.
“The Court has no uncertainty whatsoever as to the truthfulness of the testimony of these two witnesses,” Frost wrote.
Frost did not include any details about the testimony of Short or Millstone.
Other than the trashcan issue, the only other issue Frost offered as the basis of his decision involved the dispute over whether Hamilton delivered two affidavits on April 30, 2010 to the plaintiffs’ attorney Douglas Mansfield.
It was a matter of Hamilton’s word against Mansfield’s and his two associates. Even at that, Frost wrote that he didn’t even have to include Hamilton’s side of the story in his deliberation on the matter.
Frost wrote that Hamilton didn’t properly word his affidavit about the affidavits. What Hamilton wrote in his brief about the affidavits Frost did find to be properly worded. However, Frost wrote that statements made in a brief cannot be considered “evidence.”
While Hamilton was in the federal hearing, he said a couple of times that if Frost had particular wording he was looking for on any matter to direct him in what would satisfy the court. Hamilton told the judge that he was not trying to be evasive in how he responded to the various issues.
(The Trial by Franz Kafka, starting at 1:07 in video, provides a sense of the legal proceedings regarding Freshwater.)
Frost went ahead and wrote in his decision:
“And, it appears to the Court that the language utilized in Attorney Hamilton’s affidavit is carefully crafted to appear to state that he attached the affidavits to Exhibit 161 but does not actually state such. Moreover, although the affidavit does not state that Attorney Hamilton attached the affidavits to Exhibit 161, to the extent that the affidavit was meant to state such, the Court finds the testimony unbelievable.”
Credibility of judge Frost
During the federal hearing conducted on July 29, Frost did acknowledged twice, after being pressed, that he had been mistaken on something.
One issue had to do with who Freshwater’s attorney was in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. The other was regarding the wording of the 2008 requests by the plaintiffs for the production of documents.
AccountabilityInTheMedia.com previously reported on Frost’s odd decision in April to grant the plaintiffs, the Dennis family, standing in regard to their claims of Establishment Clause violation. (See the article, “Christian Family Objects to Bible in Classroom.” )
The Dennises state in their lawsuit that they are Christians. The Bibles and Ten Commandments that were in Freshwater’s classroom, if seen as religious articles, were from the Dennis’ own religion. In order to have standing, the Dennis’ legal interests have to have been invaded by the presence of these items.
Frost, nonetheless, granted the Dennis’ standing.
Related document:
August 2, 2010 opinion and order by Frost on motion for reconsideration of sanctions. (Doc# 120) 28.32 KB PDF.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Judge to Reconsider Previously Issued Sanctions
The dispute over discovery in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. continues.
On Thursday, a hearing was held in the courtroom of federal judge Gregory Frost to reassess the basis of his previously issued sanctions against defendant John Freshwater and attorney R. Kelly Hamilton.
Douglas Mansfield, attorney for the plaintiffs, had argued that Freshwater and Hamilton failed to turn over all items requested for discovery.
Freshwater and Hamilton have maintained that they did turn over all items subject to discovery that they have.
(See documents provided at end of article for the details of this ongoing dispute.)
Collaboration among attorneys
Although Hamilton is representing Freshwater in related legal matters—another federal case, the administrative hearing and formerly for the dismissed counter claims—he is not Freshwater’s attorney in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al.
Freshwater testified in the hearing that he believes the dispute over discovery is about the other side trying to keep Hamilton busy so that he cannot focus on the other case and on writing the “massive brief” that is coming due in the administrative hearing.
Freshwater said that the attorneys are “collaborating” against him and Hamilton.
The attorneys on the opposing side of the legal matters regarding Freshwater have done nothing to hide that they are, to some degree, working together. During the administrative hearing the school board’s attorney, David Millstone, routinely allowed the attorney for the “Doe” family to sit at the table with him.
During the federal hearing, Sarah Moore, an attorney for Mount Vernon City Schools’ superintendent Steve Short, sat at the table with the plaintiffs. Ironically, Short was a defendant in the case until a partial settlement was reached in August of 2009.
The partial settlement removed all defendants from the lawsuit except for Freshwater. The only significant monetary consideration that the plaintiffs received in the settlement was $115,500 for the reimbursement of their legal fees. The money was paid by the school board’s insurance.
Short was brought as a witness for the plaintiffs to testify about a one-sheet handwritten inventory he said he made of items that he returned to Freshwater in August of 2008.
(Short’s testimony on this matter covered the same ground as when he testified about it in the administrative hearing. See the section “Inventory of Freshwater’s personal items” in the article “BIBLE ON THE DESK: Freshwater Hearing Comes Full Circle with Last Witness.” )
Moore stated—as an explanation for why the inventory sheet was not turned over in response to public record requests from Freshwater—that it is protected by the work product doctrine and not a public record.
No explanation was provided of how the plaintiffs ended up with a copy of the inventory sheet by May 14, 2010 when they used it as an exhibit in one of their motions regarding the discovery disputes.
Also brought as a witness for the plaintiffs was Millstone, attorney for the school board. The school board, as shown by the name of the case, was the primary defendant until the partial settlement was reached in August of 2009.
Millstone testified that he had a conversation with Hamilton in which Hamilton indicated that he had recorded an interview with retired science teacher Jeff George. Millstone said that he did not request a copy of the recording. (George was not brought as a witness in the administrative hearing.)
In Mansfield’s closing arguments, he said that any recordings should be turned over to him even if the person recorded was not listed in pre-trial as a witness.
Billing records
One of the documents that Mansfield had requested was the billing records for the production of Freshwater’s May 2008 affidavits.
Freshwater testified that he had created the affidavits in preparation for what was to be the second interview with the H.R. On Call investigators.
Hamilton said in his opening statement that he does not have the billing records from May of 2008 regarding the affidavits. He explained that the records were destroyed when a water pipe burst above his computer. Hamilton provided the court with supporting documentation.
Mansfield said that it doesn’t ring true that the records were destroyed in a “flood.”
In a memorandum, Mansfield had provided his summary of Hamilton’s billing records that he was able to obtain from an attorney for the school board. He said that the records included the May 2008 time period but did not mention the production of any affidavits.
Freshwater testified in the hearing that he had four separate fee agreements with Hamilton. In a written statement, Freshwater said:
“The two bills I got from [Hamilton for May 2008] were for two different processes. One bill was for the investigative interview and the other bill was for the legal works other than the interview preparation. I have never hidden the fact that I had separate legal billings.”
Judge Frost
At the close of testimony and arguments, Frost said that he wants this case and the related case to go away more than anyone else does.
Related documents:
2008 response by Freshwater to plaintiffs’ requests for production of documents. 828.8 KB PDF.
January 20, 2010 memorandum by Hamilton responding to plaintiffs’ motion to compel. (Doc#78) 43.93 KB PDF.
May 7, 2010 motion by Mansfield for sanctions. (Doc# 96) 56.57 KB PDF.
May 10, 2010 response by Hamilton to Mansfield’s motion for sanctions. (Doc# 97) 30.76 KB PDF.
May 14, 2010 Mansfield’s response to Hamilton’s response—main. (Doc#101) 44.59 KB PDF.
May 14, 2010 Mansfield’s response to Hamilton’s response—attachment, inventory. (Doc#101-8) 81.51 KB PDF.
June 1, 2010 opinion and order by Frost on motion for sanctions. (Doc# 106) 51.7 KB PDF.
June 15, 2010 motion by Hamilton for reconsideration of Frost’s opinion and order. (Doc#107.) 23.54 KB PDF.
July 2, 2010 Mansfield’s memorandum in opposition to Hamilton’s motion—main. (Doc# 114) 59.68 KB PDF.
July 2, 2010 Mansfield’s memorandum in opposition to Hamilton’s motion—attachment, inventory and photos. (Doc# 114-3) 7.49 MB PDF.
July 13, 2010 response by Hamilton to Mansfield’s memorandum—main. (Doc# 116) 42.94 KB PDF.
July 13, 2010 response by Hamilton to Mansfield’s memorandum—attachment one, Freshwater’s affidavit concerning billing records. (Doc#116-1) 1.65 MB PDF.
July 13, 2010 response by Hamilton to Mansfield’s memorandum—attachment two. (Doc# 116-2) 27.9 KB PDF.
The National Center for Science Education maintains an archive of many of the court documents for the case Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. and for the related case Freshwater v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al.
On Thursday, a hearing was held in the courtroom of federal judge Gregory Frost to reassess the basis of his previously issued sanctions against defendant John Freshwater and attorney R. Kelly Hamilton.
Douglas Mansfield, attorney for the plaintiffs, had argued that Freshwater and Hamilton failed to turn over all items requested for discovery.
Freshwater and Hamilton have maintained that they did turn over all items subject to discovery that they have.
(See documents provided at end of article for the details of this ongoing dispute.)
Collaboration among attorneys
Although Hamilton is representing Freshwater in related legal matters—another federal case, the administrative hearing and formerly for the dismissed counter claims—he is not Freshwater’s attorney in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al.
Freshwater testified in the hearing that he believes the dispute over discovery is about the other side trying to keep Hamilton busy so that he cannot focus on the other case and on writing the “massive brief” that is coming due in the administrative hearing.
Freshwater said that the attorneys are “collaborating” against him and Hamilton.
The attorneys on the opposing side of the legal matters regarding Freshwater have done nothing to hide that they are, to some degree, working together. During the administrative hearing the school board’s attorney, David Millstone, routinely allowed the attorney for the “Doe” family to sit at the table with him.
During the federal hearing, Sarah Moore, an attorney for Mount Vernon City Schools’ superintendent Steve Short, sat at the table with the plaintiffs. Ironically, Short was a defendant in the case until a partial settlement was reached in August of 2009.
The partial settlement removed all defendants from the lawsuit except for Freshwater. The only significant monetary consideration that the plaintiffs received in the settlement was $115,500 for the reimbursement of their legal fees. The money was paid by the school board’s insurance.
Short was brought as a witness for the plaintiffs to testify about a one-sheet handwritten inventory he said he made of items that he returned to Freshwater in August of 2008.
(Short’s testimony on this matter covered the same ground as when he testified about it in the administrative hearing. See the section “Inventory of Freshwater’s personal items” in the article “BIBLE ON THE DESK: Freshwater Hearing Comes Full Circle with Last Witness.” )
Moore stated—as an explanation for why the inventory sheet was not turned over in response to public record requests from Freshwater—that it is protected by the work product doctrine and not a public record.
No explanation was provided of how the plaintiffs ended up with a copy of the inventory sheet by May 14, 2010 when they used it as an exhibit in one of their motions regarding the discovery disputes.
Also brought as a witness for the plaintiffs was Millstone, attorney for the school board. The school board, as shown by the name of the case, was the primary defendant until the partial settlement was reached in August of 2009.
Millstone testified that he had a conversation with Hamilton in which Hamilton indicated that he had recorded an interview with retired science teacher Jeff George. Millstone said that he did not request a copy of the recording. (George was not brought as a witness in the administrative hearing.)
In Mansfield’s closing arguments, he said that any recordings should be turned over to him even if the person recorded was not listed in pre-trial as a witness.
Billing records
One of the documents that Mansfield had requested was the billing records for the production of Freshwater’s May 2008 affidavits.
Freshwater testified that he had created the affidavits in preparation for what was to be the second interview with the H.R. On Call investigators.
Hamilton said in his opening statement that he does not have the billing records from May of 2008 regarding the affidavits. He explained that the records were destroyed when a water pipe burst above his computer. Hamilton provided the court with supporting documentation.
Mansfield said that it doesn’t ring true that the records were destroyed in a “flood.”
In a memorandum, Mansfield had provided his summary of Hamilton’s billing records that he was able to obtain from an attorney for the school board. He said that the records included the May 2008 time period but did not mention the production of any affidavits.
Freshwater testified in the hearing that he had four separate fee agreements with Hamilton. In a written statement, Freshwater said:
“The two bills I got from [Hamilton for May 2008] were for two different processes. One bill was for the investigative interview and the other bill was for the legal works other than the interview preparation. I have never hidden the fact that I had separate legal billings.”
Judge Frost
At the close of testimony and arguments, Frost said that he wants this case and the related case to go away more than anyone else does.
Related documents:
2008 response by Freshwater to plaintiffs’ requests for production of documents. 828.8 KB PDF.
January 20, 2010 memorandum by Hamilton responding to plaintiffs’ motion to compel. (Doc#78) 43.93 KB PDF.
May 7, 2010 motion by Mansfield for sanctions. (Doc# 96) 56.57 KB PDF.
May 10, 2010 response by Hamilton to Mansfield’s motion for sanctions. (Doc# 97) 30.76 KB PDF.
May 14, 2010 Mansfield’s response to Hamilton’s response—main. (Doc#101) 44.59 KB PDF.
May 14, 2010 Mansfield’s response to Hamilton’s response—attachment, inventory. (Doc#101-8) 81.51 KB PDF.
June 1, 2010 opinion and order by Frost on motion for sanctions. (Doc# 106) 51.7 KB PDF.
June 15, 2010 motion by Hamilton for reconsideration of Frost’s opinion and order. (Doc#107.) 23.54 KB PDF.
July 2, 2010 Mansfield’s memorandum in opposition to Hamilton’s motion—main. (Doc# 114) 59.68 KB PDF.
July 2, 2010 Mansfield’s memorandum in opposition to Hamilton’s motion—attachment, inventory and photos. (Doc# 114-3) 7.49 MB PDF.
July 13, 2010 response by Hamilton to Mansfield’s memorandum—main. (Doc# 116) 42.94 KB PDF.
July 13, 2010 response by Hamilton to Mansfield’s memorandum—attachment one, Freshwater’s affidavit concerning billing records. (Doc#116-1) 1.65 MB PDF.
July 13, 2010 response by Hamilton to Mansfield’s memorandum—attachment two. (Doc# 116-2) 27.9 KB PDF.
The National Center for Science Education maintains an archive of many of the court documents for the case Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. and for the related case Freshwater v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al.
Monday, July 26, 2010
MV News: Agreement reached in civil suit
According to the Mount Vernon News, an agreement has been reached “between the Doe family and John Freshwater” regarding the civil suit that was scheduled to go to trial today.
The News stated that it was unable to obtain the details of the agreement.
The attorney representing Freshwater in the federal case, Sandra McIntosh, did not respond to a previous request for comment from AccountabilityInTheMedia.com.
On July 16, 2010, AccountabilityInTheMedia.com sent the following email to McIntosh:
According to the News, the "Doe" family's attorney Douglas Mansfield said that the trial was delayed due to settlement discussions. The News was unable to obtain details.
SECOND UPDATE:
For details from the settlement, see the Oct. 27, 2010 News article by Pamela Schehl, “Settlement signed by both parties in civil lawsuit.”
The News stated that it was unable to obtain the details of the agreement.
The attorney representing Freshwater in the federal case, Sandra McIntosh, did not respond to a previous request for comment from AccountabilityInTheMedia.com.
On July 16, 2010, AccountabilityInTheMedia.com sent the following email to McIntosh:
Will the jury trial for Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. scheduled to begin July 26, 2010 continue as planned?UPDATE 7-27-10:
(In document number 116, attorney R. Kelly Hamilton states that “On Tuesday, July 6, 2010, the undersigned learned from communications with Attorney Sandra McIntosh that a resolution in this matter occurred on Friday, July 2, 2010, which will include resolving any concerns against John Freshwater alleged in Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Opposition [Doc. 114].”)
What was the “resolution in this matter” that occurred on July 2, 2010?
According to the News, the "Doe" family's attorney Douglas Mansfield said that the trial was delayed due to settlement discussions. The News was unable to obtain details.
SECOND UPDATE:
For details from the settlement, see the Oct. 27, 2010 News article by Pamela Schehl, “Settlement signed by both parties in civil lawsuit.”
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Attorney Violates Federal Gag Order
The attorney was attempting to argue that the opposing attorney should receive sanctions—in the process, the attorney may have opened up the door for sanctions against himself. His mistake? In trying to prove his point, attorney Douglas Mansfield released information covered by a federal gag order.
Mansfield was fully aware of the nature of the information he released. The judge had issued an order stating that the documents Mansfield wanted to submit were to be “filed under seal.”
On Friday he did file the documents under seal but then went ahead and included his summary of their contents in a publicly available memorandum.
The reason that there was even a gag order in the first place was because Mansfield’s clients, the Dennis family, had complained about John Freshwater releasing information from settlement negotiations.
When Freshwater spoke to the Mount Vernon Board of Education in May, he briefly summarized a settlement offer made to him by the Dennis family.
Although the documents that Mansfield summarized are not of a settlement offer, they do come from settlement discussions that Freshwater had regarding the related lawsuit against the school board.
The documents in question are billing records from Freshwater’s attorney R. Kelly Hamilton.
Both Mansfield and judge Gregory Frost described the documents as being “subject to a gag order.”
In the gag order, Frost wrote, “Any violation will meet serious consequences, including monetary sanctions and other sanctions up to and including the most severe this Court can impose.”
Related documents
The National Center for Science Education maintains an archive of many of the court documents for the case Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. and for the related case Freshwater v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al.
Mansfield was fully aware of the nature of the information he released. The judge had issued an order stating that the documents Mansfield wanted to submit were to be “filed under seal.”
On Friday he did file the documents under seal but then went ahead and included his summary of their contents in a publicly available memorandum.
The reason that there was even a gag order in the first place was because Mansfield’s clients, the Dennis family, had complained about John Freshwater releasing information from settlement negotiations.
When Freshwater spoke to the Mount Vernon Board of Education in May, he briefly summarized a settlement offer made to him by the Dennis family.
Although the documents that Mansfield summarized are not of a settlement offer, they do come from settlement discussions that Freshwater had regarding the related lawsuit against the school board.
The documents in question are billing records from Freshwater’s attorney R. Kelly Hamilton.
Both Mansfield and judge Gregory Frost described the documents as being “subject to a gag order.”
In the gag order, Frost wrote, “Any violation will meet serious consequences, including monetary sanctions and other sanctions up to and including the most severe this Court can impose.”
Related documents
The National Center for Science Education maintains an archive of many of the court documents for the case Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. and for the related case Freshwater v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
BIBLE ON THE DESK: Freshwater Hearing Comes Full Circle with Last Witness
The following testimony took place 9:17 a.m.—2:48 p.m. on 6/22/10.
The last day of testimony brought the John Freshwater hearing, which has spanned 21 months, back to where it started: Steve Short testifying about the order for Freshwater to remove his personal Bible from off his desk.
Bible on the desk
When Short—who is the superintendent of the Mount Vernon City Schools—testified at the opening of the hearing, in October of 2008, he said that one of the reasons that he had recommend firing Freshwater was because of Freshwater’s refusal to remove the Bible.
During that previous testimony, Short explained that there were many items within Freshwater’s classroom that could be considered religious. Because of this, Short said that it created a religious display. “It was difficult to determine what was and wasn’t on display,” Short said. “So everything should have been put away.”
Also during the 2008 testimony, Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, asked Short how he handled the similar situation in which teacher Lori Miller had both a Bible on her desk and potentially religious items in the classroom.
“We told [Miller] to remove all the other items that she had,” Short replied.
The Bible remained on Miller’s desk.
When Short testified during Tuesday’s hearing, he changed the focus of his argument.
Short said that the difference between Miller and Freshwater is that the Dennis family complained that Freshwater referenced his Bible during class.
Short acknowledged that the Dennis family was the only family that made such a complaint to him.
In fact, the other students in the class with Zachary Dennis have stated that Freshwater did not talk about religion in his class. (For more information, see the article, “Student Testimony—John Freshwater Addresses School Board.” )
Short also acknowledged that while he did ask Miller if her Bible was part of the “display” in her classroom, he did not ask Freshwater a similar clarifying question.
During Short’s meeting with Miller, Short advised Miller that if she disagreed with the directive to remove the items from her classroom, she could use the union process to grieve the order. Short said that he did not tell Freshwater, who is not a member of the union, of his right to use the union’s grievance process.
Short’s religious display
Hamilton asked Short if he previously had a religious item hanging on the wall in his own office.
Short replied that he hadn't
Hamilton then asked Short if he had in his office a poster created by his son with “World’s Greatest Dad” written across it and at the bottom Romans 12:6.
Short replied that he used to have that poster in his office and that it was a “religious display” but that it was never “hanging” on the wall.
It was following a meeting with Hamilton in July of 2008 that Short removed the poster. Short said that he noticed Hamilton walking around the office and looking at the items in the room. He said that fifteen minutes after the meeting he removed the poster.
Short acknowledged that at the meeting Hamilton did not make any complaint about the poster being a religious display.
Chain of evidence issues
Short addressed issues raised by Freshwater regarding how the items from his classroom were stored and why some of the items in storage were already labeled as board exhibits.
The materials from Freshwater’s classroom were moved into storage in August of 2008, Short said. He said the first storage site used was the director of business office—after about 20 to 30 days, the items were again moved, this time to a room on an upper floor of the central offices that used to be a women’s bathroom.
Short said the only time that anyone had access to the stored items, other than himself, was when the items were stored in the director of business office. The janitor had a key but was instructed to not enter the room, Short said.
The boxes were not numbered until there was a “plethora of attorneys” sorting through the materials and requesting copies, Short said. He explained that the numbers were added so that the items could get back in the right boxes.
Two of the boxes ended up falling apart and so were replaced with new boxes, Short said. These were the two boxes that had handwritten dates that preceded the packing label dates.
Regarding school board exhibit number 22, Short said a printout of the email was found among Freshwater’s items. Short explained that after school board attorney David Millstone three-hole punched the document they realized a copy should be included with the stored items.
Regarding school board exhibit number 91, Short said the situation was the same as for number 22 except that he was able to stop Millstone before he three-hole punched the document.
Regarding OAT grade sheets that were found in storage, Short said that a custodian probably included some of Freshwater’s mail in with the stuff that was moved to storage.
Inventory of Freshwater’s personal items
Short said that in August of 2008 Freshwater called him and requested the return of his belongings. Following the call, Short said he talked with council and that the instructions he was given was to make a list of all the items that he was giving back to Freshwater.
The one-sheet handwritten inventory Short said he made was entered as school board exhibit number 115. The list included items such as “clock radio,” “parachute,” “volcanoes book,” “t-shirts” and four Bibles.
Short then compared the inventory to photos supplied, apparently, by Freshwater of the personal items that Freshwater says were returned. Short said that some items included in the inventory are not in the photos and that there are some items in the photos that are not in the inventory.
Hamilton asked Short why this handwritten inventory was not provided in response to his public records requests.
Short replied that he does not believe that it is a public records document. He said his understanding is that it is protected under the work product doctrine.
Upon further questioning from Hamilton, Short agreed that he is no longer trying to protect the document from discloser.
Although Short considered the document to be protected under the work product doctrine, the Dennis family already had a copy of it by May 14, 2010 when they used it as an exhibit for one of their motions in their federal lawsuit against Freshwater. (Click here to view copy of the inventory. 81.51 KB PDF).
Short said that he has no knowledge of when the inventory sheet was given to the Dennis’ attorney Douglas Mansfield.
Additional statements by Short:
• Items not placed in a teachers personnel file can still be used later in evaluating the teacher. (Editor’s note: The master contract in effect at the time Freshwater was suspended stated the following: “The official personnel files of all teachers shall contain, if available, the following items: […] Appropriate letters of commendation or reprimand issued to the teacher by supervisors.”)
• Believes that Freshwater told him that he both handed out Bibles to students and talked about the meaning of Easter in class. (Editor’s note: When Short testified in 2008 he stated the following: “[Freshwater] said that maybe he’d given them [the Bibles] to some of the FCA kids if they forgot theirs when they came.” “[W]hat he talked about was Easter in relationship to the stars and astronomy where the different religious states were and fit in with the stars. […] Freshwater couldn’t remember if he brought it up or the students brought it up, but he said I may have spent one or two minutes talking about Easter and […] what it means to Christians.” Emphasis added.)
• Miller was at the meeting in which Freshwater addressed the issue of the Bibles and Easter. Does not know what would be in Miller’s notes of the meeting.
• Did search through the school buildings looking for the items identified in the first anonymous letter. Was not trying to hide materials.
• Does not have knowledge of the Dennis’ attorney taking items belonging to Freshwater. Considers it hard for it to be possible that the Dennises obtained information from Freshwater’s classroom that has not appeared at the hearing.
• A display becomes a religious display if someone perceives it as such.
• There is no definition of “religious display” in the school’s written policy.
• On August 7, 2009 individual school board members made the following comments related to evaluating his performance: Gives few updates regarding the Freshwater case. Does not always have good record keeping. Needs to have better control over the attorney. The school is in deficit spending mode.
• The school board gave him a rating of “1.7.” This rating falls between the categories of “needs improvement” and “satisfactory.”
• Believes that he did a good job related to his investigation of Freshwater.
The conclusion of testimony
Of the over 90 witnesses that testified during the course of the hearing, Short was both the first and the last witness.
The referee, R. Lee Shepherd, said that there has been a vast amount of information presented during the hearing. He said that the attorneys wisely agreed to do their closing arguments in writing.
Both sides have until July 26 to submit their briefs and until August 2 to submit a reply to their opponent’s brief.
Both sides agreed to have all exhibits entered as evidence and allow Shepherd, as the trier of fact, to decide what weight to give each exhibit.
Shepherd said that within ten days of reaching a decision, on what his recommendation will be, he will provide a written report to the Mount Vernon Board of Education.
The school board will make the final decision.
Shepherd concluded the day by thanking those that have been involved, most importantly, he said, Joan C. O'Donnell, the court reporter.
Shepherd thanked the attorneys for their professional conduct during the hearing. He said that he has not seen anything like it before from “both sides of the hall.”
His final comment was to the gallery. He thanked the people for wanting to stay the course and for having patience during all of the stops and starts of the hearing.
For additional coverage of the Freshwater hearing, see the articles in the archive.
The last day of testimony brought the John Freshwater hearing, which has spanned 21 months, back to where it started: Steve Short testifying about the order for Freshwater to remove his personal Bible from off his desk.
Bible on the desk
When Short—who is the superintendent of the Mount Vernon City Schools—testified at the opening of the hearing, in October of 2008, he said that one of the reasons that he had recommend firing Freshwater was because of Freshwater’s refusal to remove the Bible.
During that previous testimony, Short explained that there were many items within Freshwater’s classroom that could be considered religious. Because of this, Short said that it created a religious display. “It was difficult to determine what was and wasn’t on display,” Short said. “So everything should have been put away.”
Also during the 2008 testimony, Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, asked Short how he handled the similar situation in which teacher Lori Miller had both a Bible on her desk and potentially religious items in the classroom.
“We told [Miller] to remove all the other items that she had,” Short replied.
The Bible remained on Miller’s desk.
When Short testified during Tuesday’s hearing, he changed the focus of his argument.
Short said that the difference between Miller and Freshwater is that the Dennis family complained that Freshwater referenced his Bible during class.
Short acknowledged that the Dennis family was the only family that made such a complaint to him.
In fact, the other students in the class with Zachary Dennis have stated that Freshwater did not talk about religion in his class. (For more information, see the article, “Student Testimony—John Freshwater Addresses School Board.” )
Short also acknowledged that while he did ask Miller if her Bible was part of the “display” in her classroom, he did not ask Freshwater a similar clarifying question.
During Short’s meeting with Miller, Short advised Miller that if she disagreed with the directive to remove the items from her classroom, she could use the union process to grieve the order. Short said that he did not tell Freshwater, who is not a member of the union, of his right to use the union’s grievance process.
Short’s religious display
Hamilton asked Short if he previously had a religious item hanging on the wall in his own office.
Short replied that he hadn't
Hamilton then asked Short if he had in his office a poster created by his son with “World’s Greatest Dad” written across it and at the bottom Romans 12:6.
Short replied that he used to have that poster in his office and that it was a “religious display” but that it was never “hanging” on the wall.
It was following a meeting with Hamilton in July of 2008 that Short removed the poster. Short said that he noticed Hamilton walking around the office and looking at the items in the room. He said that fifteen minutes after the meeting he removed the poster.
Short acknowledged that at the meeting Hamilton did not make any complaint about the poster being a religious display.
Chain of evidence issues
Short addressed issues raised by Freshwater regarding how the items from his classroom were stored and why some of the items in storage were already labeled as board exhibits.
The materials from Freshwater’s classroom were moved into storage in August of 2008, Short said. He said the first storage site used was the director of business office—after about 20 to 30 days, the items were again moved, this time to a room on an upper floor of the central offices that used to be a women’s bathroom.
Short said the only time that anyone had access to the stored items, other than himself, was when the items were stored in the director of business office. The janitor had a key but was instructed to not enter the room, Short said.
The boxes were not numbered until there was a “plethora of attorneys” sorting through the materials and requesting copies, Short said. He explained that the numbers were added so that the items could get back in the right boxes.
Two of the boxes ended up falling apart and so were replaced with new boxes, Short said. These were the two boxes that had handwritten dates that preceded the packing label dates.
Regarding school board exhibit number 22, Short said a printout of the email was found among Freshwater’s items. Short explained that after school board attorney David Millstone three-hole punched the document they realized a copy should be included with the stored items.
Regarding school board exhibit number 91, Short said the situation was the same as for number 22 except that he was able to stop Millstone before he three-hole punched the document.
Regarding OAT grade sheets that were found in storage, Short said that a custodian probably included some of Freshwater’s mail in with the stuff that was moved to storage.
Inventory of Freshwater’s personal items
Short said that in August of 2008 Freshwater called him and requested the return of his belongings. Following the call, Short said he talked with council and that the instructions he was given was to make a list of all the items that he was giving back to Freshwater.
The one-sheet handwritten inventory Short said he made was entered as school board exhibit number 115. The list included items such as “clock radio,” “parachute,” “volcanoes book,” “t-shirts” and four Bibles.
Short then compared the inventory to photos supplied, apparently, by Freshwater of the personal items that Freshwater says were returned. Short said that some items included in the inventory are not in the photos and that there are some items in the photos that are not in the inventory.
Hamilton asked Short why this handwritten inventory was not provided in response to his public records requests.
Short replied that he does not believe that it is a public records document. He said his understanding is that it is protected under the work product doctrine.
Upon further questioning from Hamilton, Short agreed that he is no longer trying to protect the document from discloser.
Although Short considered the document to be protected under the work product doctrine, the Dennis family already had a copy of it by May 14, 2010 when they used it as an exhibit for one of their motions in their federal lawsuit against Freshwater. (Click here to view copy of the inventory. 81.51 KB PDF).
Short said that he has no knowledge of when the inventory sheet was given to the Dennis’ attorney Douglas Mansfield.
Additional statements by Short:
• Items not placed in a teachers personnel file can still be used later in evaluating the teacher. (Editor’s note: The master contract in effect at the time Freshwater was suspended stated the following: “The official personnel files of all teachers shall contain, if available, the following items: […] Appropriate letters of commendation or reprimand issued to the teacher by supervisors.”)
• Believes that Freshwater told him that he both handed out Bibles to students and talked about the meaning of Easter in class. (Editor’s note: When Short testified in 2008 he stated the following: “[Freshwater] said that maybe he’d given them [the Bibles] to some of the FCA kids if they forgot theirs when they came.” “[W]hat he talked about was Easter in relationship to the stars and astronomy where the different religious states were and fit in with the stars. […] Freshwater couldn’t remember if he brought it up or the students brought it up, but he said I may have spent one or two minutes talking about Easter and […] what it means to Christians.” Emphasis added.)
• Miller was at the meeting in which Freshwater addressed the issue of the Bibles and Easter. Does not know what would be in Miller’s notes of the meeting.
• Did search through the school buildings looking for the items identified in the first anonymous letter. Was not trying to hide materials.
• Does not have knowledge of the Dennis’ attorney taking items belonging to Freshwater. Considers it hard for it to be possible that the Dennises obtained information from Freshwater’s classroom that has not appeared at the hearing.
• A display becomes a religious display if someone perceives it as such.
• There is no definition of “religious display” in the school’s written policy.
• On August 7, 2009 individual school board members made the following comments related to evaluating his performance: Gives few updates regarding the Freshwater case. Does not always have good record keeping. Needs to have better control over the attorney. The school is in deficit spending mode.
• The school board gave him a rating of “1.7.” This rating falls between the categories of “needs improvement” and “satisfactory.”
• Believes that he did a good job related to his investigation of Freshwater.
The conclusion of testimony
Of the over 90 witnesses that testified during the course of the hearing, Short was both the first and the last witness.
The referee, R. Lee Shepherd, said that there has been a vast amount of information presented during the hearing. He said that the attorneys wisely agreed to do their closing arguments in writing.
Both sides have until July 26 to submit their briefs and until August 2 to submit a reply to their opponent’s brief.
Both sides agreed to have all exhibits entered as evidence and allow Shepherd, as the trier of fact, to decide what weight to give each exhibit.
Shepherd said that within ten days of reaching a decision, on what his recommendation will be, he will provide a written report to the Mount Vernon Board of Education.
The school board will make the final decision.
Shepherd concluded the day by thanking those that have been involved, most importantly, he said, Joan C. O'Donnell, the court reporter.
Shepherd thanked the attorneys for their professional conduct during the hearing. He said that he has not seen anything like it before from “both sides of the hall.”
His final comment was to the gallery. He thanked the people for wanting to stay the course and for having patience during all of the stops and starts of the hearing.
For additional coverage of the Freshwater hearing, see the articles in the archive.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
School Board’s Expert Witness: Debating Is for Politics, Not Science
The following testimonies took place 10:09 a.m—11:15 a.m. and 2:25 p.m.—4:52 p.m. on 6/08/10.
Allowing eighth-grade students to debate would give them the wrong impression of how science works, Patricia Princehouse said. Debating, she said, is used in politics but is not used in science.
Mount Vernon Middle School teacher John Freshwater did allow one of his science classes in 2007-2008 to debate creationism and evolution. Freshwater previously testified that debating was something his students wanted to do and that his involvement was only instructing them to research their position, giving them a few rules and supervising the debate to keep it civil.
Princehouse and another expert witness were brought by Mount Vernon Board of Education attorney David Millstone to testify about whether debating is appropriate and to interpret both Freshwater’s 2003 proposal “Objective Origins Science Policy” and his teaching materials.
Patricia Princehouse
Background
Princehouse teaches at Case Western Reserve University. Although she is not included on the list of faculty within the biology department, she is listed as a “Lecturer in Philosophy” in the department of history and philosophy of science.
In addition to her work at the university, Princehouse is active in promoting evolution in the public sector. She serves on the board of Ohio Citizens for Science which she helped found.
(Princehouse is a signatory of the National Center for Science Education’s “Statement of Concern” regarding the Answers in Genesis’s creation museum. Highlighting added.)
Princehouse’s website includes the following description of her activities: “Believing firmly that academics must not isolate themselves from the public square, Princehouse has become a major voice in the struggle to secure the integrity of science education in America's public schools.”
Debating
Princehouse said the debate format is not appropriate for the science classroom. Even at the college level, debate skills would not come naturally to all students and the students would become bogged down trying to learn those particular skills, Princehouse said.
(The NCSE provides helpful advice to aspiring Darwinists—don’t debate creationists. Highlighting added.)
Instead of debating, scientists discuss things and do testing, Princehouse said. She gave the example of scientists looking to see whether particular fossils could be found where they were expected. She said that if the results do not support the hypothesis then the scientists correct their idea and test it again.
Freshwater’s 2003 proposal
Princehouse said Freshwater’s 2003 proposal to the school board was “very cleverly worded.” Although it was clever, she was able to determine that the proposal was to teach creationism.
The clues that Princehouse was able to use to deduce what Freshwater was really up to included his use of terms such as “critically analyze.”
After Princehouse reviewed the Science Curriculum Committee’s written response to the proposal—which said that the proposal was both illegal and addressed by school board policy regarding controversial issues—she said that there are issues in the proposal that are legitimate but that the proposal also brings in things that are not.
The only thing in Freshwater’s proposal that comes close to inclusion of creationism or intelligent design is this statement: “understand the full range of scientific views that exist regarding the origins of life and its diversity, and understand why origins science may generate controversy.”
The language of the proposal contained no statement that creationism was part of “the full range of scientific views.” For Princehouse to come to the conclusion that the proposal was to teach creationism, she first had to accept creationism as science. However, in her testimony she stated that creationism was religion and not science.
(Bertrand Russell helps explain Princehouse.)
The department of philosophy at CWRU has the following quote by Bertrand Russell on its website: “The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as not to seem worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe it.”
Teaching materials
Princehouse said that the terms “specified complexity” and “irreducible complexity,” which were included in one of Freshwater’s lesson plans, are terms used in ID.
Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, asked Princehouse whether she would expect an evaluation of the lesson plan, by two teachers, to include a comment on the inclusion of the terms. Princehouse said that the teachers might not be familiar with “creationist labels.”
The lesson plan was made about four months after the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover decision that dealt with ID.
Princehouse said that it could happen that a student would bring up the topic of the court case in class. She added that a teacher shouldn’t include the topic in the lesson plan even if a student previously asked about it in class. Her reasoning was that the discussion of current events belonged more in a social studies class.
Test scores
Princehouse said that she has issues with the grading standards in Ohio. The state is lowering the bar further and further to the point that a student could do well on the Ohio Achievement Test and yet not know very much, Princehouse said.
The OAT results for Freshwater’s five classes during 2007-2008 came to an average of 415.2. (The state average was 407 and the school average was 413.)
Princehouse said that it is not Freshwater’s fault that the bar was lowered.
Although Princehouse said the test is not the best method to know how well the students perform, she acknowledged that it is the method used. She added that it is very hard to measure what student’s have learned.
Teacher’s ownership of books
Princehouse said that the possession of books on the topic of ID does not mean that the person teaches ID in class. She said that she also has books such as Icons of Evolution by Jonathan Wells.
Steve Rissing
Background
Steve Rissing teaches at Ohio State University. He is a professor in the department of evolution, ecology and organismal biology.
When the Ohio academic content standards were revised, Rissing served on the advisory committee.
Rissing serves on the board of OCS and is a signatory of the NCSE’s “Statement of Concern” regarding the AIG museum.
Rissing said that he does know Richard Hoppe, who has been writing about the Freshwater hearing on Pandasthumb.org, but that he has been avoiding reading Hoppe’s writings. Rissing said that he has worked with Hoppe on several projects.
(Hoppe is also a signatory of the NCSE’s “Statement of Concern.” Although Hoppe is not listed as being on the board of OCS, he is one of three contact people listed at the end of the OCS article “Creationist Pseudo-Museum Displays to Mislead Students.” )
Rissing said that during the last few weeks he did talk with Princehouse three or four times about coming to the Freshwater hearing. (Princehouse stayed after her testimony and joined the gallery to listen to Rissing.)
Hamilton asked Rissing if he was involved in Bryan Leonard’s doctorate evaluation. Rissing said that he knows Leonard but that he was not involved. (For more information on this controversy, see the article by Jerry Bergman, “The Strange Case of Steve Rissing.” 35.20 KB PDF )
Hamilton also asked Rissing if he had in any manner protested in front of the AIG museum. Rissing answered that he had not.
Debating
Using debate in science class is bad “pedagogy,” Rissing said. He went on to explain that “science is not a debate” but instead “science is a discussion.”
Rissing said that debate has a connotation of an athletic event in that there are winners and losers. He said he never does science that way.
Test scores
Rissing said he knows there is an OAT and that while he doesn’t know a lot about the test he imagines that a test called that would be intended to assess whether the students have “achieved” the standards. He said students would achieve proficient on the OAT if they were being taught the standards.
The method of teaching that Rissing said he uses is an “inquiry” approach instead of just directing the students in how to do projects and giving them rote memorization tasks such as fill-in-the-blank worksheets.
Rissing said that the state standards mention not memorizing terms.
Rissing did agree that different students require different methods of instructions.
Teaching materials
One of the standards for the eighth-grade states: “Explain why it is important to examine data objectively and not let bias affect observations.”
Freshwater previously testified that up until 2003 he used some worksheets called the “giraffe and woodpecker,” which were created by a former student, to show examples of improper use of the scientific method. (Click here for copy of the woodpecker worksheet. 137.77 KB PDF.)
Rissing said that using these worksheets to discuss the issue of bias with students would not be a proper way to teach the standard. What the writers of the standard had in mind regarding bias, Rissing said, was the issue of someone dismissing an explanation because of a preconceived notion.
Rissing did some research and found what he believes served as the basis of the two worksheets—The Evolution of a Creationist by Jobe Martin. Rissing said that the sections in the book about the giraffe and woodpecker are “great” and that “we can do that in the U.S.” He has students that believe in a creator but, he said, a teacher should not be asking questions about that.
Inside Rissing’s classroom
As it turns out, Rissing does incorporate discussion of religion into the biology classes he teaches at the college level. He even uses material developed by his students to facilitate that discussion.
Rissing said that he put together, from student research, a chart about diseases that contrasts 14th century beliefs and responses with that of the modern understanding about those diseases.
The column with the 14th century explanations for diseases includes “Devil,” “God,” “Sin,” “Hand of God” and “God’s wrath.”
Rissing explained that one of the learning objectives that he is following with this chart is discussing the history of science.
At the bottom of the chart, Rissing labeled the 14th century beliefs as “non-scientific” and the modern understanding as “scientific.”
When Rissing teaches the class, he said he cuts up the information from the chart and gives it to the students to discuss in groups. The students compare notes and talk about the differences between the columns. He said that it is appropriate for students to compare information that is scientific to that which is non-scientific.
Rissing, who happens to write a column on biology for The Columbus Dispatch, said that it is acceptable for teachers to discuss current events in class.
Allowing eighth-grade students to debate would give them the wrong impression of how science works, Patricia Princehouse said. Debating, she said, is used in politics but is not used in science.
Mount Vernon Middle School teacher John Freshwater did allow one of his science classes in 2007-2008 to debate creationism and evolution. Freshwater previously testified that debating was something his students wanted to do and that his involvement was only instructing them to research their position, giving them a few rules and supervising the debate to keep it civil.
Princehouse and another expert witness were brought by Mount Vernon Board of Education attorney David Millstone to testify about whether debating is appropriate and to interpret both Freshwater’s 2003 proposal “Objective Origins Science Policy” and his teaching materials.
Patricia Princehouse
Background
Princehouse teaches at Case Western Reserve University. Although she is not included on the list of faculty within the biology department, she is listed as a “Lecturer in Philosophy” in the department of history and philosophy of science.
In addition to her work at the university, Princehouse is active in promoting evolution in the public sector. She serves on the board of Ohio Citizens for Science which she helped found.
(Princehouse is a signatory of the National Center for Science Education’s “Statement of Concern” regarding the Answers in Genesis’s creation museum. Highlighting added.)
Princehouse’s website includes the following description of her activities: “Believing firmly that academics must not isolate themselves from the public square, Princehouse has become a major voice in the struggle to secure the integrity of science education in America's public schools.”
Debating
Princehouse said the debate format is not appropriate for the science classroom. Even at the college level, debate skills would not come naturally to all students and the students would become bogged down trying to learn those particular skills, Princehouse said.
(The NCSE provides helpful advice to aspiring Darwinists—don’t debate creationists. Highlighting added.)
Instead of debating, scientists discuss things and do testing, Princehouse said. She gave the example of scientists looking to see whether particular fossils could be found where they were expected. She said that if the results do not support the hypothesis then the scientists correct their idea and test it again.
Freshwater’s 2003 proposal
Princehouse said Freshwater’s 2003 proposal to the school board was “very cleverly worded.” Although it was clever, she was able to determine that the proposal was to teach creationism.
The clues that Princehouse was able to use to deduce what Freshwater was really up to included his use of terms such as “critically analyze.”
After Princehouse reviewed the Science Curriculum Committee’s written response to the proposal—which said that the proposal was both illegal and addressed by school board policy regarding controversial issues—she said that there are issues in the proposal that are legitimate but that the proposal also brings in things that are not.
The only thing in Freshwater’s proposal that comes close to inclusion of creationism or intelligent design is this statement: “understand the full range of scientific views that exist regarding the origins of life and its diversity, and understand why origins science may generate controversy.”
The language of the proposal contained no statement that creationism was part of “the full range of scientific views.” For Princehouse to come to the conclusion that the proposal was to teach creationism, she first had to accept creationism as science. However, in her testimony she stated that creationism was religion and not science.
(Bertrand Russell helps explain Princehouse.)
The department of philosophy at CWRU has the following quote by Bertrand Russell on its website: “The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as not to seem worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe it.”
Teaching materials
Princehouse said that the terms “specified complexity” and “irreducible complexity,” which were included in one of Freshwater’s lesson plans, are terms used in ID.
Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, asked Princehouse whether she would expect an evaluation of the lesson plan, by two teachers, to include a comment on the inclusion of the terms. Princehouse said that the teachers might not be familiar with “creationist labels.”
The lesson plan was made about four months after the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover decision that dealt with ID.
Princehouse said that it could happen that a student would bring up the topic of the court case in class. She added that a teacher shouldn’t include the topic in the lesson plan even if a student previously asked about it in class. Her reasoning was that the discussion of current events belonged more in a social studies class.
Test scores
Princehouse said that she has issues with the grading standards in Ohio. The state is lowering the bar further and further to the point that a student could do well on the Ohio Achievement Test and yet not know very much, Princehouse said.
The OAT results for Freshwater’s five classes during 2007-2008 came to an average of 415.2. (The state average was 407 and the school average was 413.)
Princehouse said that it is not Freshwater’s fault that the bar was lowered.
Although Princehouse said the test is not the best method to know how well the students perform, she acknowledged that it is the method used. She added that it is very hard to measure what student’s have learned.
Teacher’s ownership of books
Princehouse said that the possession of books on the topic of ID does not mean that the person teaches ID in class. She said that she also has books such as Icons of Evolution by Jonathan Wells.
Steve Rissing
Background
Steve Rissing teaches at Ohio State University. He is a professor in the department of evolution, ecology and organismal biology.
When the Ohio academic content standards were revised, Rissing served on the advisory committee.
Rissing serves on the board of OCS and is a signatory of the NCSE’s “Statement of Concern” regarding the AIG museum.
Rissing said that he does know Richard Hoppe, who has been writing about the Freshwater hearing on Pandasthumb.org, but that he has been avoiding reading Hoppe’s writings. Rissing said that he has worked with Hoppe on several projects.
(Hoppe is also a signatory of the NCSE’s “Statement of Concern.” Although Hoppe is not listed as being on the board of OCS, he is one of three contact people listed at the end of the OCS article “Creationist Pseudo-Museum Displays to Mislead Students.” )
Rissing said that during the last few weeks he did talk with Princehouse three or four times about coming to the Freshwater hearing. (Princehouse stayed after her testimony and joined the gallery to listen to Rissing.)
Hamilton asked Rissing if he was involved in Bryan Leonard’s doctorate evaluation. Rissing said that he knows Leonard but that he was not involved. (For more information on this controversy, see the article by Jerry Bergman, “The Strange Case of Steve Rissing.” 35.20 KB PDF )
Hamilton also asked Rissing if he had in any manner protested in front of the AIG museum. Rissing answered that he had not.
Debating
Using debate in science class is bad “pedagogy,” Rissing said. He went on to explain that “science is not a debate” but instead “science is a discussion.”
Rissing said that debate has a connotation of an athletic event in that there are winners and losers. He said he never does science that way.
Test scores
Rissing said he knows there is an OAT and that while he doesn’t know a lot about the test he imagines that a test called that would be intended to assess whether the students have “achieved” the standards. He said students would achieve proficient on the OAT if they were being taught the standards.
The method of teaching that Rissing said he uses is an “inquiry” approach instead of just directing the students in how to do projects and giving them rote memorization tasks such as fill-in-the-blank worksheets.
Rissing said that the state standards mention not memorizing terms.
Rissing did agree that different students require different methods of instructions.
Teaching materials
One of the standards for the eighth-grade states: “Explain why it is important to examine data objectively and not let bias affect observations.”
Freshwater previously testified that up until 2003 he used some worksheets called the “giraffe and woodpecker,” which were created by a former student, to show examples of improper use of the scientific method. (Click here for copy of the woodpecker worksheet. 137.77 KB PDF.)
Rissing said that using these worksheets to discuss the issue of bias with students would not be a proper way to teach the standard. What the writers of the standard had in mind regarding bias, Rissing said, was the issue of someone dismissing an explanation because of a preconceived notion.
Rissing did some research and found what he believes served as the basis of the two worksheets—The Evolution of a Creationist by Jobe Martin. Rissing said that the sections in the book about the giraffe and woodpecker are “great” and that “we can do that in the U.S.” He has students that believe in a creator but, he said, a teacher should not be asking questions about that.
Inside Rissing’s classroom
As it turns out, Rissing does incorporate discussion of religion into the biology classes he teaches at the college level. He even uses material developed by his students to facilitate that discussion.
Rissing said that he put together, from student research, a chart about diseases that contrasts 14th century beliefs and responses with that of the modern understanding about those diseases.
The column with the 14th century explanations for diseases includes “Devil,” “God,” “Sin,” “Hand of God” and “God’s wrath.”
Rissing explained that one of the learning objectives that he is following with this chart is discussing the history of science.
At the bottom of the chart, Rissing labeled the 14th century beliefs as “non-scientific” and the modern understanding as “scientific.”
When Rissing teaches the class, he said he cuts up the information from the chart and gives it to the students to discuss in groups. The students compare notes and talk about the differences between the columns. He said that it is appropriate for students to compare information that is scientific to that which is non-scientific.
Rissing, who happens to write a column on biology for The Columbus Dispatch, said that it is acceptable for teachers to discuss current events in class.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
School Board Witness Says She ‘Heckled’ John Freshwater
The following testimonies took place 9:09 a.m.—9:33 a.m. and 11:33 a.m.—11:50 a.m. on 6/08/10.
The witness, Marcia Orsborn, said that she “heckled” John Freshwater about the need to bring a Catholic priest to speak at the school’s Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
Mount Vernon Board of Education attorney David Millstone brought Orsborn and another witness to the hearing to testify about Freshwater’s involvement in FCA and to testify about an alleged statement made by Freshwater about Catholics.
A previous school board witness, Simon Souhrada, testified that he overheard part of a conversation in which he believed that Freshwater said “Catholics aren't Christians.”
Marcia Orsborn
Orsborn, a teacher at Mount Vernon Middle School for the past 29 years, said that her relationship with Freshwater was one in which they both engaged in “good natured teasing.”
Someone told her that Freshwater did not like Catholics, to which she said her reply was that she had no reason to believe that. The complaint did get her to thinking about who the speakers at FCA had been and that none of them had been from her church, St. Vincent de Paul.
Orsborn said that she went and asked Freshwater, one of the club’s monitors, why he had not brought a Catholic speaker to FCA. Freshwater’s response, according to her, was that he would have to check his Bible. Orsborn then asked him what his Bible would say about that. Freshwater replied that he wasn’t sure that she was a Christian, Orsborn said.
After Freshwater’s reply, Orsborn said that she made the “L” loser sign with her hand and said, “Whatever, John.”
As time went by, she kept, in her words, “heckling” Freshwater about having a Catholic speak at FCA. Eventually, she said, Freshwater told her to go ahead and contact a priest about speaking.
Orsborn said she called the church and spoke with Father Mark Hammond’s secretary Shirley Lower. When Hammond did end up speaking at FCA, she said that she didn’t attend the meeting but that she did go to the room and thank him for coming.
Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, showed Orsborn a speaker request form filled out by a couple of students regarding having Hammond speak at FCA. Orsborn said that she doesn’t know what transpired after her initial call to the church and that she has no reason to dispute that the students sent an invitation to Hammond.
Orsborn said that she did not do any research into how FCA was run but that she assumed Freshwater was responsible for the speakers. (Teachers that monitor FCA are supposed to leave the inviting of speakers to the students.)
Hamilton asked Orsborn several questions about her knowledge of Freshwater and his family’s interaction with Catholics.
Orsborn said that she did not know that Freshwater’s daughter Jordon had dated someone from her church. She did not know that Freshwater transported someone to her church that needed a ride. She also did not know that Freshwater’s son Luke went to a Catholic college.
Freshwater never talked about his church background but Orsborn said that she knew where he attended because she taught Freshwater’s three children.
Orsborn said that Freshwater never made the statement “Catholics aren’t Christens.”
According to Orsborn, the Dennis family—who brought the primary complaints against Freshwater that resulted in the hearing—also attends St. Vincent de Paul.
Father Mark Hammond
Hammond said that to the best of his recollection it was Freshwater who asked him to speak at FCA. He did not recall Orsborn or any students talking with him about coming to FCA.
Hammond admitted that his recall of the events is not good.
Although he schedules his own calendar, Hammond said it was possible that someone contacted one of his secretaries.
Hammond said that Freshwater either called him or approached him at a banquette that was held for Care Net Pregnancy Services. He did not recall whether Freshwater’s pastor, Don Matolyak, introduced him to Freshwater.
No one told him what to say at FCA, Hammond said, but he believed that he was there to share about the Catholic faith. He said that when he spoke he tried to clear up misunderstandings about Catholicism and help the students understand that Catholics believe many of the same things as Protestants.
Hammond said that of the three sessions he held at FCA, Freshwater only attended one. Hammond said that he was the one that prayed and that he does not recall Freshwater praying at the meeting.
The witness, Marcia Orsborn, said that she “heckled” John Freshwater about the need to bring a Catholic priest to speak at the school’s Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
Mount Vernon Board of Education attorney David Millstone brought Orsborn and another witness to the hearing to testify about Freshwater’s involvement in FCA and to testify about an alleged statement made by Freshwater about Catholics.
A previous school board witness, Simon Souhrada, testified that he overheard part of a conversation in which he believed that Freshwater said “Catholics aren't Christians.”
Marcia Orsborn
Orsborn, a teacher at Mount Vernon Middle School for the past 29 years, said that her relationship with Freshwater was one in which they both engaged in “good natured teasing.”
Someone told her that Freshwater did not like Catholics, to which she said her reply was that she had no reason to believe that. The complaint did get her to thinking about who the speakers at FCA had been and that none of them had been from her church, St. Vincent de Paul.
Orsborn said that she went and asked Freshwater, one of the club’s monitors, why he had not brought a Catholic speaker to FCA. Freshwater’s response, according to her, was that he would have to check his Bible. Orsborn then asked him what his Bible would say about that. Freshwater replied that he wasn’t sure that she was a Christian, Orsborn said.
After Freshwater’s reply, Orsborn said that she made the “L” loser sign with her hand and said, “Whatever, John.”
As time went by, she kept, in her words, “heckling” Freshwater about having a Catholic speak at FCA. Eventually, she said, Freshwater told her to go ahead and contact a priest about speaking.
Orsborn said she called the church and spoke with Father Mark Hammond’s secretary Shirley Lower. When Hammond did end up speaking at FCA, she said that she didn’t attend the meeting but that she did go to the room and thank him for coming.
Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, showed Orsborn a speaker request form filled out by a couple of students regarding having Hammond speak at FCA. Orsborn said that she doesn’t know what transpired after her initial call to the church and that she has no reason to dispute that the students sent an invitation to Hammond.
Orsborn said that she did not do any research into how FCA was run but that she assumed Freshwater was responsible for the speakers. (Teachers that monitor FCA are supposed to leave the inviting of speakers to the students.)
Hamilton asked Orsborn several questions about her knowledge of Freshwater and his family’s interaction with Catholics.
Orsborn said that she did not know that Freshwater’s daughter Jordon had dated someone from her church. She did not know that Freshwater transported someone to her church that needed a ride. She also did not know that Freshwater’s son Luke went to a Catholic college.
Freshwater never talked about his church background but Orsborn said that she knew where he attended because she taught Freshwater’s three children.
Orsborn said that Freshwater never made the statement “Catholics aren’t Christens.”
According to Orsborn, the Dennis family—who brought the primary complaints against Freshwater that resulted in the hearing—also attends St. Vincent de Paul.
Father Mark Hammond
Hammond said that to the best of his recollection it was Freshwater who asked him to speak at FCA. He did not recall Orsborn or any students talking with him about coming to FCA.
Hammond admitted that his recall of the events is not good.
Although he schedules his own calendar, Hammond said it was possible that someone contacted one of his secretaries.
Hammond said that Freshwater either called him or approached him at a banquette that was held for Care Net Pregnancy Services. He did not recall whether Freshwater’s pastor, Don Matolyak, introduced him to Freshwater.
No one told him what to say at FCA, Hammond said, but he believed that he was there to share about the Catholic faith. He said that when he spoke he tried to clear up misunderstandings about Catholicism and help the students understand that Catholics believe many of the same things as Protestants.
Hammond said that of the three sessions he held at FCA, Freshwater only attended one. Hammond said that he was the one that prayed and that he does not recall Freshwater praying at the meeting.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Rebuttal Witnesses Testify About Documents in Freshwater Hearing
The following testimonies took place 3:31 p.m.—4:41 p.m. on 6/07/10.
Mount Vernon Board of Education attorney David Millstone brought two experts as rebuttal witnesses to testify about documents in the John Freshwater hearing.
Harold F Rodin
Harold F. Rodin, a certified questioned documents examiner, said that the handwriting at the top of the school board’s exhibit number 91— “Reaching for the Sky”—was made by Freshwater.
Rodin based his conclusion on what he said were similarities between several of the letters in the document questioned and in the sample of Freshwater’s handwriting he was given.
The magazine article “Reaching for the Sky” was published in 1988 in Science World. The writing on the document contained references to the biblical story of the Tower of Babel.
Rodin admitted that he did not examine the original document that had the handwriting. He said that when an original is available it is preferred but is not necessary.
The original of the article was found in storage after an anonymous tipster sent a letter to Freshwater. No writing, however, was on the top of the article.
When Freshwater and his attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, were able to review the storage room full of stuff, earlier this year, they found multiple copies of the article. Those copies—except for a photocopy that was already labeled “Bd 91”—did not contain the writing at the top.
(Multiple copies of the article, minus the handwriting, were found with Freshwater’s classroom stuff.)
For more information, see the section “Reaching for the Sky” in the article “John Freshwater Testifies About ‘Truckload’ of Information.”
Rodin said that he could not tell whether the document was used in the public school classroom.
John Liptak
John Liptak, a computer forensic expert, testified about the authenticity of several emails.
One of the emails—school board exhibit number 22—had been described by a previous witness, Ricky Warren, as looking like it was altered.
The email was a reply by Warren to an email sent through Freshwater’s account. The content of the email is about Warren coming to speak at a Fellowship of Christian Athletes meeting. Freshwater’s daughter, Jordan, previously testified that she was the one who invited Warren to speak at FCA.
Liptak said that he observed a local IT person restore a November 2009 backup of the school’s email system. He said he then took a copy back to his lab and examined the data.
Liptak said that he found a copy of Warren’s email within Freshwater’s account that matched that of the copy used as an exhibit in the hearing.
(A copy of the email was found among Freshwater’s classroom stuff already labeled as “BOARD EXHIBIT – 22.”)
Upon questioning from Hamilton, Liptak said that the electronic copy does not have a three-hole punch along the left margin.
Liptak said that his company probably also obtained a copy of the hard drive on Freshwater’s classroom computer but that he was not involved in that task.
Liptak said that he did not examine who had access to Freshwater’s account.
Mount Vernon Board of Education attorney David Millstone brought two experts as rebuttal witnesses to testify about documents in the John Freshwater hearing.
Harold F Rodin
Harold F. Rodin, a certified questioned documents examiner, said that the handwriting at the top of the school board’s exhibit number 91— “Reaching for the Sky”—was made by Freshwater.
Rodin based his conclusion on what he said were similarities between several of the letters in the document questioned and in the sample of Freshwater’s handwriting he was given.
The magazine article “Reaching for the Sky” was published in 1988 in Science World. The writing on the document contained references to the biblical story of the Tower of Babel.
Rodin admitted that he did not examine the original document that had the handwriting. He said that when an original is available it is preferred but is not necessary.
The original of the article was found in storage after an anonymous tipster sent a letter to Freshwater. No writing, however, was on the top of the article.
When Freshwater and his attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, were able to review the storage room full of stuff, earlier this year, they found multiple copies of the article. Those copies—except for a photocopy that was already labeled “Bd 91”—did not contain the writing at the top.
(Multiple copies of the article, minus the handwriting, were found with Freshwater’s classroom stuff.)
For more information, see the section “Reaching for the Sky” in the article “John Freshwater Testifies About ‘Truckload’ of Information.”
Rodin said that he could not tell whether the document was used in the public school classroom.
John Liptak
John Liptak, a computer forensic expert, testified about the authenticity of several emails.
One of the emails—school board exhibit number 22—had been described by a previous witness, Ricky Warren, as looking like it was altered.
The email was a reply by Warren to an email sent through Freshwater’s account. The content of the email is about Warren coming to speak at a Fellowship of Christian Athletes meeting. Freshwater’s daughter, Jordan, previously testified that she was the one who invited Warren to speak at FCA.
Liptak said that he observed a local IT person restore a November 2009 backup of the school’s email system. He said he then took a copy back to his lab and examined the data.
Liptak said that he found a copy of Warren’s email within Freshwater’s account that matched that of the copy used as an exhibit in the hearing.
(A copy of the email was found among Freshwater’s classroom stuff already labeled as “BOARD EXHIBIT – 22.”)
Upon questioning from Hamilton, Liptak said that the electronic copy does not have a three-hole punch along the left margin.
Liptak said that his company probably also obtained a copy of the hard drive on Freshwater’s classroom computer but that he was not involved in that task.
Liptak said that he did not examine who had access to Freshwater’s account.
Former Assistant Principal Testifies about Photos of Freshwater’s Classroom and Lab
The following testimony took place 2:10 p.m.—2:46 p.m. on 6/07/10.
The pictures taken of John Freshwater’s classroom and lab focused on potentially religious items. “I could have taken more pictures, but I wasn’t asked to document everything in his classroom,” said Brad Ritchey, former Mount Vernon Middle School assistant principal.
Ritchey said areas he did not photograph “were not as concerning.”
Ritchey photographed the Bible on Freshwater’s desk, the poster of George Bush and Colin Powell, the Ten Commandment poster, a Cross Club sign, the “Good Thinking and Ten Commandment” book covers and several small posters in the lab area.
Ritchey was brought to the hearing as a rebuttal witness by school board attorney David Millstone.
An expert witness, Michael Molnar, previously testified that the items in Freshwater’s classroom were not part of a “religious display.”
Posters in lab area
There were 14 lab stations with two doors above each one—on the doors were posters about the size of oversized index cards.
Principal Bill White previously testified that there were verses written below the statements on the posters. “There were papers posted around on the cupboards that had what I would refer to as study skills or those types of things at the top,” White said, “and then at the bottom there was a biblical verse and reference that went with each one of them.”
Pictures were not taken of all of the lab stations.
Ritchey testified that, as best as he can recall, not all of the lab posters had Bible verses.
The only close-up photo that Ritchey took was of a poster that did have a Bible verse but, Ritchey said, he thought there was more than one poster like that.
Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, showed Ritchey a photo sent to Freshwater by the anonymous tipster.
In the photo—according to Freshwater’s previous testimony—is one of the posters Freshwater had in the lab area. In large print is the statement, "You can build a throne with bayonets but you can't sit on it for long." Below that in smaller print is, “‘What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.’ Confucius.”
Ritchey agreed that the poster in the photo might be the type of thing that was on the rest of the posters.
Freshwater previously testified that the original of the lab poster, as well as the other lab posters, has yet to be found. The posters were not located among the items discovered in the storage room at the school district’s central offices.
Ritchey said that he believes the items that were in Freshwater’s classroom were “unlawful.”
Fellowship of Christian Athletes
Ritchey said that he was in a meeting with White and Freshwater regarding the student club Fellowship of Christian Athletes. According to Ritchey, Freshwater raised his hands during the meeting and told them that he might have done the same during FCA.
Ritchey said that Freshwater did not mention anything about having said “amen” so that the FCA students could go on to class.
(For Freshwater’s side of the story, see the section titled “Fellowship of Christian Athletes/Alleged exorcism” in the article “John Freshwater: Investigation Didn’t Follow Contract.” )
Ritchey did attend a few of the FCA meetings but did not see a problem with Freshwater’s handling of his role of monitor. He said that he never spoke with the pastor or the students that were at the meeting in which student Zachary Dennis said Freshwater raised his hands and prayed.
Tesla coil
Ritchey said that he and White did have the authority to write the January 22, 2008 letter to Freshwater regarding the Tesla coil.
During the meeting he was at with Freshwater, White did not direct Freshwater to destroy the Tesla coil, Ritchey said.
Ritchey also said had there been an allegation of a student’s arm being held down during the Tesla coil demonstration he would have remembered such a claim.
Ritchey said that he did not remember taking any notes of the meetings with Freshwater.
The pictures taken of John Freshwater’s classroom and lab focused on potentially religious items. “I could have taken more pictures, but I wasn’t asked to document everything in his classroom,” said Brad Ritchey, former Mount Vernon Middle School assistant principal.
Ritchey said areas he did not photograph “were not as concerning.”
Ritchey photographed the Bible on Freshwater’s desk, the poster of George Bush and Colin Powell, the Ten Commandment poster, a Cross Club sign, the “Good Thinking and Ten Commandment” book covers and several small posters in the lab area.
Ritchey was brought to the hearing as a rebuttal witness by school board attorney David Millstone.
An expert witness, Michael Molnar, previously testified that the items in Freshwater’s classroom were not part of a “religious display.”
Posters in lab area
There were 14 lab stations with two doors above each one—on the doors were posters about the size of oversized index cards.
Principal Bill White previously testified that there were verses written below the statements on the posters. “There were papers posted around on the cupboards that had what I would refer to as study skills or those types of things at the top,” White said, “and then at the bottom there was a biblical verse and reference that went with each one of them.”
Pictures were not taken of all of the lab stations.
Ritchey testified that, as best as he can recall, not all of the lab posters had Bible verses.
The only close-up photo that Ritchey took was of a poster that did have a Bible verse but, Ritchey said, he thought there was more than one poster like that.
Freshwater’s attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, showed Ritchey a photo sent to Freshwater by the anonymous tipster.
In the photo—according to Freshwater’s previous testimony—is one of the posters Freshwater had in the lab area. In large print is the statement, "You can build a throne with bayonets but you can't sit on it for long." Below that in smaller print is, “‘What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.’ Confucius.”
(A photo provided by the anonymous tipster to Freshwater.)
Ritchey agreed that the poster in the photo might be the type of thing that was on the rest of the posters.
Freshwater previously testified that the original of the lab poster, as well as the other lab posters, has yet to be found. The posters were not located among the items discovered in the storage room at the school district’s central offices.
Ritchey said that he believes the items that were in Freshwater’s classroom were “unlawful.”
Fellowship of Christian Athletes
Ritchey said that he was in a meeting with White and Freshwater regarding the student club Fellowship of Christian Athletes. According to Ritchey, Freshwater raised his hands during the meeting and told them that he might have done the same during FCA.
Ritchey said that Freshwater did not mention anything about having said “amen” so that the FCA students could go on to class.
(For Freshwater’s side of the story, see the section titled “Fellowship of Christian Athletes/Alleged exorcism” in the article “John Freshwater: Investigation Didn’t Follow Contract.” )
Ritchey did attend a few of the FCA meetings but did not see a problem with Freshwater’s handling of his role of monitor. He said that he never spoke with the pastor or the students that were at the meeting in which student Zachary Dennis said Freshwater raised his hands and prayed.
Tesla coil
Ritchey said that he and White did have the authority to write the January 22, 2008 letter to Freshwater regarding the Tesla coil.
During the meeting he was at with Freshwater, White did not direct Freshwater to destroy the Tesla coil, Ritchey said.
Ritchey also said had there been an allegation of a student’s arm being held down during the Tesla coil demonstration he would have remembered such a claim.
Ritchey said that he did not remember taking any notes of the meetings with Freshwater.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
