II. THE COMMISSION ABUSED ITS DISCRETION.
The proceedings were undermined by bad faith, fabrication by the
COMMISSION, and failure to consider evidence, even denial that
evidence existed when it was actually undisputed evidence that had
been accepted into evidence.
THE COMMISSION DID NOT PROCEED IN THE MANNER REQUIRED BY
LAW. The COMMISSION misconstrued the law, accepted evidence
which should not have been accepted, and took it upon itself to violate
Petitioner’s constitutional rights on behalf of the school district.
Many of the decisions “factual findings” are actually allegations by the
COMMISSION regarding which no evidence was presented.
Of the 16 Legal Conclusions, 1, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 16 are invalid because
they are based on implied findings, and/or on findings which are not
supported by evidence, and/or on misconstruction of the law,
Legal Conclusions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 15 are valid in themselves
but were misconstrued by the COMMISSION in reaching its decision.
The Commission’s decision is so self-contradictory that one wonders if
it didn’t just decide it wanted to dismiss Mrs. Larkins from her
employment because she filed a lawsuit, and then left it up to the judge
to come up with 22 pages of allegations. The findings do not merely
ignore undisputed evidence, they boldly state it doesn’t exist.
III. THE COMMISSION’S FINDINGS ARE NOT
SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE
The District and the COMMISSION have latched on to any excuse they
can lay their hands on to justify District actions which were complete
mistakes. The goal of the District and the COMMISSION seems to be to
smear Mrs. Larkins with unfounded allegations, in order to create the
illusion that the District’s actions were justified.
In some instances the COMMISSION findings are obviously fabricated;
in other instances, the fabrications are less obvious, but equally, or
possibly more, significant.
With 103 Findings of Fact, the COMMISSION managed never once to
mention the fact that this case is about someone whom many teachers
feared would “come to school and kill them all.” Somehow, the
COMMISSION felt it could completely ignore this fact.
Bizarrely, the teacher who was twice ordered to
stay off school property, is being dismissed for
NOT coming to work.
Do these people pay any attention to what comes out
of their mouths?
Clearly not. They just make it up as they go along.
The proceedings were undermined by bad faith, fabrication by the
COMMISSION, and failure to consider evidence, even denial that
evidence existed when it was actually undisputed evidence that had
been accepted into evidence.
THE COMMISSION DID NOT PROCEED IN THE MANNER REQUIRED BY
LAW. The COMMISSION misconstrued the law, accepted evidence
which should not have been accepted, and took it upon itself to violate
Petitioner’s constitutional rights on behalf of the school district.
Many of the decisions “factual findings” are actually allegations by the
COMMISSION regarding which no evidence was presented.
Of the 16 Legal Conclusions, 1, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 16 are invalid because
they are based on implied findings, and/or on findings which are not
supported by evidence, and/or on misconstruction of the law,
Legal Conclusions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 15 are valid in themselves
but were misconstrued by the COMMISSION in reaching its decision.
The Commission’s decision is so self-contradictory that one wonders if
it didn’t just decide it wanted to dismiss Mrs. Larkins from her
employment because she filed a lawsuit, and then left it up to the judge
to come up with 22 pages of allegations. The findings do not merely
ignore undisputed evidence, they boldly state it doesn’t exist.
III. THE COMMISSION’S FINDINGS ARE NOT
SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE
The District and the COMMISSION have latched on to any excuse they
can lay their hands on to justify District actions which were complete
mistakes. The goal of the District and the COMMISSION seems to be to
smear Mrs. Larkins with unfounded allegations, in order to create the
illusion that the District’s actions were justified.
In some instances the COMMISSION findings are obviously fabricated;
in other instances, the fabrications are less obvious, but equally, or
possibly more, significant.
With 103 Findings of Fact, the COMMISSION managed never once to
mention the fact that this case is about someone whom many teachers
feared would “come to school and kill them all.” Somehow, the
COMMISSION felt it could completely ignore this fact.
Bizarrely, the teacher who was twice ordered to
stay off school property, is being dismissed for
NOT coming to work.
Do these people pay any attention to what comes out
of their mouths?
Clearly not. They just make it up as they go along.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| Why does Schwarzenegger appointee Ron Deidrich of the Office of Administrative Hearings protect judges who make illegal decisions? |
| Page 15 |
OAH
Decision
Page 15
Decision
Page 15
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| The findings do not merely ignore undisputed evidence, they boldly state it doesn’t exist. |
The Commission’s decision is so self-contradictory that one wonders
if it didn’t just decide it wanted to (illegally) dismiss Mrs. Larkins
from her employment because she filed a lawsuit, and then left it up
to the judge to come up with 22 pages of (false) allegations.
if it didn’t just decide it wanted to (illegally) dismiss Mrs. Larkins
from her employment because she filed a lawsuit, and then left it up
to the judge to come up with 22 pages of (false) allegations.
 |
| |
 |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |