Dealing with the legal system!!! HAAAHAAAAHAHA.... OMG, stop the carnival ride!! So, still no ruling on the third Motion for Summary Judgement and it is getting a bit close to pre-trial conference.... which was scheduled for December 19th. However, it was recently vacated and reset... to 2 days earlier!! What?? Not sure why, but okay, we're ready. I had wrapped up this post and was debating whether or not to publish it yesterday afternoon, however, knowing how Collaer likes to disregard courts orders and deadlines, delay information, and just basically ignore the legal process, giving him that unfair advantage.... I decided to wait. Hee hee... so glad I did!!! Initially I addressed that I was not too sure how Collaer was gonna argue or present any information at trial, since he hadn't, as of 10:30 yesterday morning, submitted their Witness and Exhibit Lists. They were due on the 5th, but since there was no ruling on the MSJ, counsels informally requested, and were granted, a small extension for submitting the lists. It was extended to Monday, December 10th. We submitted ours on the 6th. The 10th came and went, and nothing from the defense. Hmmmmmm.... ???? We didn't have any of their info to stipulate to, they didn't have anything to present or argue, and even if they submitted it in 5 minutes, would it be accepted by the court? I know if we were even a day past deadline, Collaer would be coming out of his skin to file a motion to strike everything we filed. After all, it happened before due to their last minute submission of hundreds of thousands of discovery docs. We even filed a formal request for an extension, and Winmill was on the ball when he denied their motion, citing the defense's delay in submitting such a large volume of discovery. Low and behold... Collaer filed the lists yesterday afternoon. So, they were 4 days past the informal extended deadline and, since pre-trial is Monday, they basically submitted the lists 1 business day before pre-trial... as I stated... disregarding deadlines and an unfair advantage. Sort of funny, although most everyone knows I was fired because of the lawsuit and gathering evidence, that the department and Collaer argue I was terminated for violating policy, yet counsel for the defense cannot seem to follow the legal guidelines and court orders. Why has he not been fired?? That is of course rhetorical since they will find some way of justifying. Goes hand in hand with why so many in leadership and other staff who violated policy were not fired. So the question remains... will the court accept the lists since the deadline was missed?? Probably. No disrespect but, Collaer has already missed deadlines, delayed producing docs, delayed trail, failed to redact juvenile info from docs, and there has been a bit of perjury on the side of the defense, yet no sanctions or consequence have been imposed. We will likely leave it up to the court to address the defense missing the deadline. In spite of the lack of accountability, Winmill has been very fair and professional through this whole process, so we trust that he will continue. Moving on... Harrigfeld had her 'retirement' party the other day and this week is the end of her reign. So who will be taking over??? Well, at this point Monty Prow has been named interim director. Oh Damn, a clone of Harrigfeld... looking at the numbers and how they can rearrange them to their benefit. I just wish someone would look at the ACTUAL info, facts, numbers, etc. to draw a true and accurate conclusion. Apparently, Harrigfeld had suggested staff contact the governor's office if they were interested or had someone in mind to consider for IDJC Director. Does anyone think that would be taken into consideration?? Odds are they have already known for sometime who they wanted to appoint. I thought about calling, but... really?! Deaf ears and all. My suggestion would not have been an option for them... Appoint someone from outside the state of Idaho. Someone that has never worked with IDJC or any other Idaho agency... an actual neutral individual that could come in without a self-serving agenda, and with the best interest for the juveniles, staff, and community. However, in political circles.... I don't believe that person exists. So, the end of an 'era' and on to the next chapter with a Harrigfeld clone and a Mini Me Otter... oh Lord... One final note for the day... Court Trial is in 29 days!!!!!! How strange to think that this could be coming to a resolution. I am afraid to place too much hope on that though since a final resolution would mean the end of the track for the gravy train, for the firm of Anderson, Julian, and Hull, on this case anyway.
We shall see.... 29 days and counting down!! Well… I really don’t know where in the world to start!! So many things have happened at the Nampa facility recently that it just makes one’s head spin. The Stand-off on September 25th is probably the best place to begin. What a fiasco of leadership! The media already did a pretty good job reporting the incident, but spokesman, Jeff Ray, was apparently blindsided when contacted by reporters. And then he makes statements that are inaccurate…. Intentional?? Maybe, but on whose part? But could that have anything to do with his resigning as IDJC’s Public Information Officer shortly after the incident?? Anyway, I digress. The ‘Robo-tripping’ blog on September 13th connects the stand-off/barricade that occurred less than 2 weeks later. The juveniles involved in the drug incident were moved into a different pod (living unit). This alone was not a brilliant idea. Let’s put a group of individuals who feed criminal mindset together… yeah, brilliant!! There is a reason that individuals convicted of crimes are court ordered to cease contact with others in the criminal justice system, gang members, etc. And what in the world could have triggered such an occurrence?? An inappropriate drawing by a juvenile…?? Seems a bit extreme for something so… juvenile… pun intended. According to many, many sources, Viner escalated the situation, then instructed all juveniles that did not want to get involved to exit the classroom. Then she instructed all staff to leave the classroom….. uhm…. No wonder the 6 remaining juveniles were able to take over the classroom!! You never give up high ground! Why on earth would she have left the 6 defiant juveniles alone in the room?? At 9:06am the juveniles barricaded the door and covered the windows, mirrors, and cameras. Throughout the stand-off the juveniles stated they damaged property, threatened staff, made racial comments and inappropriate demands. An article in the Idaho Stateman quotes Harrigfeld stating “We would have requested assistance from Nampa Police Department if we had not been able to safely control the setting in a nonviolent manner outside the room or if the environment inside the room had become unsafe for the youth” How in the world did anyone know if the juveniles were safe or not?? The stand-off began at 9:06am and, according to the Incident Report, the first wellbeing check was done at 2:39pm… that is 5 hours 33 minutes of no eyes on 6 juveniles! Then there were only 6 other wellbeing checks and 2 medical checks during the remaining 8+ hours, and only twice did the checks comply with IDAPA. In contrast, before resigning as Public Information Officer, Jeff Ray stated that the juveniles agreed to allow staff a visual check every hour That still does not comply with IDAPA. The fact remains that no one could verify the safety of the juveniles for the majority of the 13+ hours. And then the question of discrepancy arises… did they falsify a legal document, or did they lie to the public? That is not to say that staff did not want to try to end the stand-off and ensure the safety of the juveniles, as well as staff. Viner simply refused to call local law enforcement. Apparently, Harrigfeld agreed with Viner’s choice since she later stated that if needed, they would have called. Yet, an incident 14 days later, when some of the same juveniles refused to go to their rooms for the night because they were protesting, Harrigfeld gave approval to contact law enforcement. By that logic… destruction of property, threats to staff, the actual act of making weapons to carry out the threat, and removing visibility does not warrant calling for assistance, however, protesting and requesting to speak with someone in charge warrants calling for assistance. Strange. But most do not believe that is accurate. Ultimately, it is Viner’s refusal to call for assistance during the stand-off that concerned and infuriated so many. Harrigfeld provided an out for that decision… and that out was questionable at best. As I understand it, Viner also spent most of the time antagonizing the juveniles and exacerbating the situation. Exactly how does that help any situation? To add insult to injury… Viner ultimately directed staff to unscrew the door window then she discharged a fire extinguisher through the window opening expelling the extinguishing agent into the juvenile(s) in the face. Now, it has been a while since I took the training, but I don’t believe the training included using a fire extinguisher as part of the Use of Force Continuum, and I know it was not part of the AUF training. But what do I know… I was fired for violating policy… oh, wait…. there’s that logic again. Another issue many have heartburn with is the department ignoring or minimizing injuries. The initial reporting in the news stated there were no injuries, not true. After the door window was removed, one staff was hit in the head when the juveniles attempted to keep staff out by thrusting and throwing makeshift weapons through the opening. Once that lie was reported to the media, Harrigfeld then admitted a Security staff was injured but it ‘…was not serious, just a “bump on the head”. Is that really her call? Hell, when Viner made the comment that no one was injured, Squibb spoke up and said he was injured, to which Viner apparently replied, ‘No you weren’t’. This is not new to most. Leadership has a history of ‘suggesting’ charges not be filed by staff, or juveniles, who are assaulted. According to a source who overheard some conversations, Rohrbach was a master manipulator at convincing juveniles not to press charges. Once the stand-off resolved, Viner directed staff that the juveniles remain in their rooms until she said they could come out. This is very interesting to some of us… sounds a lot like leaderships definition of ‘staff convenience’. One of the issues Collaer cannot seem to let go. Since leadership wanted to do away with room time many years ago, staff, including some of the plaintiffs, were quite frustrated when an issue warranted room time due to an assault, escape, etc., something that threatened juvenile, staff, or community safety, and leadership criticized it was for ‘staff convenience’ and implemented the ‘new’ policy. So, did Viner violate policy or is room time allowed now? After all, due to staff shortages, the juveniles have been in their rooms quite a bit. We would argue that it was a safety/security issue, but everyone knows leadership and counsel would argue ‘staff convenience’. Haaaahaaa…. How funny… it was even argued that staff had a pizza party once when the juveniles where locked down. Back then it was during a team meeting and they had pizza. But a pizza party in the hall just outside of the classroom during the stand-off, and then intentionally aggravating the juveniles by talking about how good it is… again, not a great idea, but apparently acceptable. By the way, locking the juveniles in their rooms during legislative visits, ‘just in case’ the juveniles make good on threats of causing codes, is a perfect example of ‘staff convenience’. This was a decision Viner made back in 2012-13. So, on paper, how is this going to reflect on the department? The stand-off began at 9:06am and did not end until 10:45pm, 13 hours and 39 minutes. However, when reading the I.R. the incident itself appears to have ended much earlier and was much less of a concern since it states the ‘code’ was downgraded to yellow at 9:24am and cleared at 10:59am. There it is… many I.R.’s are written like the National Enquirer! Even though the incident did not end until 10:45pm, they did, in fact ‘clear’ the code at 10:59am. Is it any wonder the PbS results come back the way they do?? By the way... Viner has yet to do an I.R., specifically addressing the fire extinguisher usage. And there’s that subjective ‘interpretation’ of policy. Wow… what a mess… and again, no accountability. Which is why I often wonder why we continue to speak up and hope for accountability… at least someday. I strongly considered not posting anything, then I was contacted by several concerned citizens asking if I was going to comment on the incident. That is the reason I continue. The public has a right to know… after all, it is a great deal of their money that is funding state agencies and the many lawsuits when the agencies violate laws. And the newest development… Harrigfeld is retiring. The odd thing is that the whole process is similar to Grimm’s process of retiring. Rumor had it that Harrigfeld was considering retiring next year sometime around February. However, she officially announced her retirement date as December 17th of this year. In August 2012, Grimm sent an email to Harrigfeld requesting her last day be January 18th, as she turned 65 at the beginning of January and the 18th worked best, financially, for PERSI and, I would assume, social security (although she wrote monthly budget). The question of why she ended up retiring two months earlier, which would have affected her income, left a bit of speculation. Sort of the same thing here… is Harrigfeld retiring two months earlier than she originally considered? Does it have anything to do with Otter leaving office? Odd that it is two days before our status conference hearing, and ironic that it is 2 days shy of five years since she (and the Attorney General’s office) fired me. And, have any of the ‘early’ retirements, including Rohrbach, been strongly suggested by someone above the retiree? If so, does it have anything to do with all the issues within the department? What’s really sad is the veteran Nampa staff that have left, or are leaving, because of the lack of department’s ethics, integrity, and concern, i.e. staff do not feel safe. I believe this round of staff leaving, veteran or not, is approximately six. There is something else that has me questioning leadership ethics… How many times can leadership be aware of an issue before they actually step in and fix the issue? And how many times can Harrigfeld look, straight faced, at whoever is in front of her and say she wasn’t aware?? Those are a small portion, that does not include more recent years of PbS results, the recent reporting that went to the media, governor's office, etc. And don't forget feedback from staff that have left the department due to the issues. The case against McCormick shows just how long it took before anything was done. By then, she had had sex with her victim 3 times. Could it have been prevented?? Feb. 2012 - This was first known report of McCormick having a male juvenile alone with her in her office. It was reported to Grimm and confirmed by two other staff, during an AUF Instructor Meeting. Grimm responded by saying that this was going to stop. And then, over the next 6 months... April 25, 2012 June 13, 2012 June 21 & June 27, 2012 June 28, 2012 July 20, 2012 July 23, 2012 July 24, 2012 Aug. 1, 2012 After all of that, then they failed to notify probation. Things that make you go Hmm.
On the up side... at least other agencies are starting to question the departments ethics. But that is for another time. Oh, I almost forgot to mention... the MSJ Hearing is this Thursday. Since Collaer has filed it three times you would think it wouldn't be possible, but here we are again. We shall know more Thursday!!! Then the court trial is right around the corner!!!! Many new and exciting things have taken place at the Nampa facility recently.
However, first and foremost, there was some very sad and devastating news. We lost one of our own a little over a month ago and I would like to pay tribute to this wonderful and gentle man who had been with the department pretty much since its inception. James Corthen, a veteran Safety and Security Officer passed away at his home on September 24, 2018. James was a gentle giant who had a generous smile and contagious laugh. While I did not know him outside of work, as a coworker, he was a warm and caring person that always found the good in everything. He was supportive of his coworkers, dedicated to his values, and always took the time to talk to anyone who needed an ear to bend or a shoulder to lean on. James suffered from epilepsy and openly offered a wealth of information for me when my daughter began having seizures as a young adult. It was a frightening time for our family, and James shared his own personal experience to help ease a bit of our fear. I will forever be grateful. He will be missed by everyone whose life he touched, and his smile will be forever ingrained in my mind. Rest in Peace Corthen. So what exactly is Robo-tripping?? It is getting high via ingesting large doses of dextromethorphan, which is an active ingredient in OTC cough medication such as Robituson, aka 'Robo'. It can also be extremely dangerous with side effects ranging from dizzynesss, to confusion, to numb hands and feet, and death. Sadly, it has become quite popular with teenagers and young adults. Parents need to be very aware of what is in their medicine chest and how their children are behaving. But what if the child is a juvenile committed to the state? Who is responsible for them when the parents/guardians are not the full time responsible party or the juvenile has absentee parents? Well fear not!!! The Drug and Alcohol program at IDJC is... well.... different. The onset of the Solutions unit back in 2008 began with a Drug and Alcohol program that didn't worry about having an actual certified Drug and Alcohol counselor until 2009. Direct care staff, including me, facilitated D/A groups using a facilitator guide and workbooks for the juveniles.... and non of us were certified D&A counselors... but that must just be frivolous. Apparently Choices caught wind of this and opted to allow their D&A counselor's certification to lapse... for three and a half years. From December 2009-May 2013. The department even issued a check for her to pay for the re-certification in 2012, which is something other staff that are required to maintain certification/licensing were quit irritated with. Now, apparently, it is a BYOD program!! At least is was a few weeks ago. One juvenile brought in 150+ Triple C pills in a shoe and another juvenile brought in an undisclosed amount of Meth. These are juveniles that have 'successfully' reached a level to earn home passes. Sharing is apparently something they do very well. Several of the juveniles behavior caused staff concern enough to conduct UA's... and not surprisingly, several juveniles tested positive. Now, I am not certain how this fits with Harrigfeld's continuous statements of '...focus on the safety and protection of the juveniles in our custody...' but why split hairs, as she once told me. To make things even better... a choices staff discarded the positive UA's, thereby eliminating any evidence. Although, it really doesn't matter... the odds are that no charges will be filed anyway. That's definitely a different method of accountability.
I wonder if the Drug and Alcohol program is next in line for an award. Okay, so I haven't been on the ball with the docs... ugh!! I have been working on one set off and on and promise to post it asap. It's just that.... I am honestly so sick and tired of this whole process. We have documents upon documents showing numerous legal, policy, and ethical violations by the department, yet none of that seems to matter. The system is more about who can make the best moves based on case law as opposed to who broke the law. So, here we are, over 6 years later, still waiting to go to trial. Ridiculous!!! And Collaer again filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. Geez, will wonders never cease?! Just another attempt to delay our right to a trial... oh, and let's not forget... and ongoing paycheck for the firm. The longer they can delay an end to this case, the longer the firm gets a guaranteed pay from the State of Idaho, or all you taxpayers. The plaintiffs have been thought of as disgruntled employees looking for money... really?! The initial amount on this suit was an unrealistic $35 million, we did not ask for... that was likely a strategic amount put in place by legal counsel for other reasons. To be real, a few of us would like to have been compensated for what we lost... for example, in 2011 during my claim with the Human Rights Commission, I asked for around $4800.00 in monetary compensation for lost wages. However, in either case, that was never the deciding factor. Accountability has always been our end goal... the department agreed to other terms, but would not agree to the $4800.00. This is no different... without accountability we would have been no better than the department. We recently requested the monetary claim against Sharon and Betty in their individual capacity be dismissed, waiving our right to a jury trial as well as any past monetary damages. And we are not the ones that have flat out refused to mediate for settlement. So for anyone still thinking it's about money.... It is about money... but not for us. That falls on the law firm of Anderson, Julian, and Hull, specifically Attorney Collaer, and the Idaho Department of Administration Risk Management. The 6 years worth of motions, appeals, and deliberate delays, driving up the legal fees, is thanks to opposing counsel (Collaer) and Risk Management's failure to step in and say 'Enough is enough'. We simply want to go to trial and let Winmill make the decision based on the facts. If, as Collaer continues to alleged, we don't have a leg to stand on, then let Judge Winmill make that decision... but holy Christ Collaer... let us go to trial. Regardless of how long they drag this out... I will see it through. There are some days I just want to call it quits... be done and just move on... but I know that is what they want. I have stuck by this for so damn long already that walking away is not an option. So far the trial is still set for January... fingers crossed that doesn't change. Our next hearing for the MSJ is November 1st. Here's to believing in our success to hold the department accountable. I would have loved to have made more changes to protect the juveniles, staff, and community, but sadly those were the responsibility of other agencies.
I wonder if any agency will ever step in to make things right in Nampa... Lord knows things really have not improved since Harrigfeld's statement several years ago... the latest example is Robo-tripping. Stay tuned... When Mike Savoie, Division of Human Resources at the time, asked me '...what is your end game...', the answer was for the department and leadership to be held accountable. That has never changed for me. So, for all those who thought it was about the money... DISCLAIMER: THIS POST CONTAINS SEXUALLY EXPLICIT LANGUAGE THAT MAY BE OFFENSIVE TO SOME READERS. Here are several docs containing sexually explicit communication between IDJC staff, while at work, and other persons. Mobile users can download the files here.
I have decided to change things up a bit for sharing information. Since I don't seem to be getting much positive feedback here, it typically comes in different venues such as in person, FB, over the phone, etc., and I get negative feedback here for posting facts in the blog.... I am going to let the documents speak for themselves. I already have some documents on this site in different tabs, however, the blog seems to be the most popular page. Due to that, as well as people such as, whoever 'Erin' is, assuming I either pull this information from my backside or spin it with my own opinion, I am going to post the documents in the blog and let everyone make their own determination. If there is a supporting document that can clarify something I will simply state what is on the supporting document or post both of them. There may be some voice recordings that verify docs so I may quote those or put sections of them on here. Is there evidence of juvenile abuse, hostile work environment, falsification of documents, misspending, cover up, fraud, cronyism, corruption, retaliation, etc... ??? You decide. Rohrbach's historical outline of juvenile sexual abuse at IDJC in St. Anthony, and brief communication of working with DHR on the Nampa unit manager exam. I received a couple comments on the last post. One from a supporter of ours, which I wish we could get more of, and one from a supporter of the department. To our supporters... Thank you!! Here is my response to 'Erin', the departments supporter... 'I see the Ghost Writer is back as well. Okay ‘Erin’… first things first, who are you really? It is easy to stand strong when hiding behind a pen name. Feel free to continue your criticism as ‘Erin’, and if I am wrong about you not being Erin, although I do not believe I am, then I stand corrected. If you are as supportive of the department as you claim, you have nothing to fear from their retaliation, and should be more than willing to speak as yourself. I don’t believe it is conducive to engage in a debate without first knowing who I am debating with… that said, I would like to clarify a few points. Working in corrections and law enforcement for 25 years, I was well-aware, as I am sure others were, there was a potential for injury by an offender. But your criticism of staff filing a restraining order is misdirected. I did not file the order, nor did I tell the staff they had to file. This was a choice made by the staff that was assaulted. Neither you or I suffered the injury and have no right to tell them whether it makes sense or not. I also did not issue the restraining/no contact order… that was the judge. I suppose you could question the Judge about where the juvenile should go… but, IDJC is not the only education and program facility. I assume the Judge understands how detention, corrections, treatment, etc. works, and also assume they issued the order for good reason. Contrary to your opinion, I do respect the staff and judge’s decisions and simply stated that Viner violated a court order. There is no debate in this… it really doesn’t matter what all the circumstances surrounding the order are where I think the juvenile should go, the fact remains that she violated the order. The department violating law is one of the purposes for our claim. Pretty simple, if you read what is actually written.
I also never implied always restraining and handcuffing, or continued isolation of the juveniles… not sure how you assumed that other than your own ‘spinning’ of what was stated. Are you related to Collaer?? Staff should have the discretion to intervene, within reason, in order to protect the juveniles, staff, and community. Appropriate Use of Force is designed to stop the offender and protect the victim, property, and juveniles from self-harm. Nowhere have I or the other plaintiffs said the department should allow staff to hogtie, sit on, handcuff indefinitely, or lock up and throw away the key, regarding a juvenile acting out or assaulting anyone. Letting the proverbial pendulum swing to extremes is not our style. Letting staff use the tools, ALL of the tools at their disposal, is all we have ever said. That is where my my ‘rage’, as you so eloquently put it, about PbS comes into play. PbS could be a good tool… if used properly. However, leadership has directed staff not to restrain or put the juveniles on room time, we believe because of reporting for PbS. Just because you say don’t do this, doesn’t mean the issue that could lead to this doesn’t exist. I firmly believe in gaining compliance via verbal de-escalation… to a degree. If there is a potential for serious bodily injury, it is within reason to physically step in to prevent injury… regardless of how it looks on paper. Once the threat is minimized then, by all means, stop the physical intervention. And please understand, the staff not stepping in was never intended as a criticism of the staff… it was of leadership removing staffs option in a potentially dangerous situation. And PbS… it IS all about numbers. The number of restraints, suicide attempts, etc. is the basis for where each department falls nationally… numbers, which ultimately can result in receiving an award. By the way, thank you for clarifying that leadership rarely works with the juveniles. Which begs the question… ‘How can they justifiably direct staff to stop using a tool that could protect juveniles, as well as staff who provide direct care on a day-to-day basis? They need to talk to staff and listen to what they are saying… not simply say if they don’t like it they can get another job. (This was from Viner on a few occasions) Why is moderation so difficult to understand?? Why is it all or nothing for so many?? Many of the staff do a great job with the juveniles, which I have said before. We even have a ‘Kudos’ email I sent to nursing when I worked there… to which Betty’s reaction when forwarding it to Sharon was, ‘I may barf’. But, by all means, let’s discuss me being ‘juvenile and amateurish’ and ‘disgruntled’. Acting out behavior, in and of itself, should never automatically result in a restraint or room time… the consequence should fit the behavior. A juvenile walking out of a room during school shouldn’t warrant a control to the ground and mechanical restraints, but a juvenile causing serious bodily harm, to anyone, should warrant physical intervention such as a control hold, possibly to the ground. Each of these, and other scenarios, should be the determining factor if there is any room time. Each and every situation is different. I cannot say that every assault should end in a physical restraint, just as you cannot say all acting out behavior should never result in a physical restraint. I can say that you may not be too far off on one thing… I must be insane to have ever thought speaking up was a good idea. And the fact that I appear to be, and often feel, alone in this endeavor, exacerbates that feeling daily. I have no desire to ‘mud sling’, name call, or waste time arguing a difference of opinion. My desire in this whole big thing was to simply protect people; the juveniles, staff, and community. Grimm called me her worst nightmare and stated I was not held in high regard, ‘Erin’, you have called me disgruntled and insane, and apparently the Attorney General’s office is the one that drafted my termination letter…. Seems quite extreme when dealing with one little peon like myself. If you honestly believe I am the only person with these concerns, you really should revisit that belief. I am the one plaintiff that speaks up because apparently, I believe it will make a difference. Of the 5 other plaintiffs… 3 are still employed and I would like to keep them that way. They already have a big enough target on their back and I would never ask them to become a bigger target. There are over 300 employees with the department, not including the previous employees, and I am sure some provide information to leadership… is it really that big of a stretch to think some may provide information to the plaintiffs?? I only wish that those who support us would comment here… but I suppose we will just have to wait for them to take the stand. Hate me if it makes you feel better. For me, the comments, as hateful and hurtful as they are, only serve to confirm the character of those making the comments. I did not injure or have a sexual relationship with a juvenile, alter my time card, work without the proper certification, or falsify legal documents… I reported these issues for the sake of protecting others. Yet I was Betty’s ‘worst nightmare’, Cloud kept pushing for termination, Rohrbach considers me a member of the ‘demonic hoard’, and you, as well as others, refer to me as ‘disgruntled’. You are entitled to your opinion. Yes, I am a martyr… because I have sacrificed a great deal for principle. I do not consider myself all-important… just outspoken. Highlighting the increased number of former juveniles who have reoffended is simply a way of showing that coddling the juveniles is not successful. That is not what happens in the adult world. If they assault someone when they are adults, the odds are that they will serve some sort of time and may have a no-contact order. And just to clarify… I am not saying lock ‘em up and throw away the key’. I am saying that they will not be given a reward in exchange for compliance. Not being held accountable sets them up for failure as an adult. Following law and common sense should not be this much of a challenge. |
AuthorJust trying to make a difference for the 'little guy'.
Archives
December 2018
Categories |