| !!!..... |
| . |
1935 Autocross CT
El Cajon, CA 92019
December 10, 2001
Dear Michelle:
Hi! I hope you’ve been having a good school year.
I wanted you to know that Rick Werlin has recently, at my lawyer’s request, produced a report of allegations against
me by staff members at Castle Park. You are one of six people whose accusations are included in his report. I am
well aware of the reasons for the other five people being
El Cajon, CA 92019
December 10, 2001
Dear Michelle:
Hi! I hope you’ve been having a good school year.
I wanted you to know that Rick Werlin has recently, at my lawyer’s request, produced a report of allegations against
me by staff members at Castle Park. You are one of six people whose accusations are included in his report. I am
well aware of the reasons for the other five people being
November 21, 2001
To: Pamela Havird
From: Maura Larkins
Re: Michelle Leon-Scharmach’s complaint
Michelle is the librarian. At the beginning of last year, she did not let me know what time my
class could go to the library each week. I assumed she’d let me know on or before the day I
was supposed to come. On Thursday of the second week of classes, Jan Clark, the library
aide, asked me if I had been given my library time. I said no. She seemed somewhat
disgusted with Michelle.
“Lessons haven’t started have they?” I said.
“Yes,” Jan told me. “They started this week. And your time was yesterday.”
I could see why Jan was disgusted. Michelle had apparently used my class’s library time for
her own prep time without ever letting me know.
But I could see an easy solution to the problem. I knew Michelle had no classes scheduled that
afternoon, so she could make up our lesson that very day. And fortunately, there were still a
few minutes of recess left, so I went right over to the library to talk to her. (Since I was only
working a half-day that day, this was my only opportunity to talk to her that day.) I honestly
believed she would want my kids to get their lesson.
I walked into the library. I did not say anything. I stood waiting to catch Michelle’s eye.
Michelle stopped her lesson and said to me, “You’ll have to come back later. I don’t have time
to talk to you now. You should have come to see me sooner to get your library time.”
“I was just wondering--“ I started to say.
She cut me off. “You’ll have to leave now. I can’t talk to you now.”
Talk about hostility, overreaction, and inappropriate behavior in front of students! Even if she
could make a case for refusing (in front of students) to let me speak, it would be hard for her
to justify telling me to leave. Teachers and students come in and out of the library freely all
day, and stay as long as they want. And normally when a teacher comes in to talk to another
teacher, she is given a respectful ear. Even children who come in with a message are given a
respectful ear. Michelle clearly had a personal agenda.
I said, “I was wondering if you could make up our library time this afternoon.”
She said. “No. That is my prep time. I am not going to give up my prep time.”
[Of course, Michelle knew perfectly well that she had used my library time for her prep time.]
Then the kindergarten teacher, a very young and inexperienced teacher named Lynn Del
Galdo, said, “You need to leave! You’re interrupting my students’ time!”
My emotional state was one of puzzlement. I could not figure out why it was such a problem to
give me a minute of time, since I assumed we all wanted all kids to be treated fairly.
I said, “I only need a minute of your time. My students lost all forty-five minutes of their time!”
Lynn said again, “You need to leave.”
I left, shaking my head. I figured we’d discuss making up the lesson when Michelle and Lynn
had settled down. (I’ve been doing a lot of puzzled head-shaking this past year. I am unable
to follow the logic of several of my coworkers.)
Michelle and Lynn reported this incident to Gretchen three months after it happened, right after
I asked Michelle to make up the missed lesson. Gretchen never told me that a complaint had
been made. Werlin used this in April to justify having taken me out of my classroom in
February. He and Gretchen were desperately searching for justification for their actions. The
real reason I was taken out of my class was the police report.
I know Michelle felt bad about this. Michelle and I had always gotten along well. I think she
was influenced by others. She went to Maria Beers after I was taken out of my classroom and
said, “Wasn’t there a step that was skipped here? Shouldn’t we have discussed this instead of
just taking Maura out of her classroom?”
During the week I was back, Michelle came over and hugged me.
Someday I’ll tell her not to feel so guilty. Her complaint was a symptom, not a cause.
But she should feel somewhat guilty.
She contributed to the frenzy of hostility.
And she’s old enough to know better.
To: Pamela Havird
From: Maura Larkins
Re: Michelle Leon-Scharmach’s complaint
Michelle is the librarian. At the beginning of last year, she did not let me know what time my
class could go to the library each week. I assumed she’d let me know on or before the day I
was supposed to come. On Thursday of the second week of classes, Jan Clark, the library
aide, asked me if I had been given my library time. I said no. She seemed somewhat
disgusted with Michelle.
“Lessons haven’t started have they?” I said.
“Yes,” Jan told me. “They started this week. And your time was yesterday.”
I could see why Jan was disgusted. Michelle had apparently used my class’s library time for
her own prep time without ever letting me know.
But I could see an easy solution to the problem. I knew Michelle had no classes scheduled that
afternoon, so she could make up our lesson that very day. And fortunately, there were still a
few minutes of recess left, so I went right over to the library to talk to her. (Since I was only
working a half-day that day, this was my only opportunity to talk to her that day.) I honestly
believed she would want my kids to get their lesson.
I walked into the library. I did not say anything. I stood waiting to catch Michelle’s eye.
Michelle stopped her lesson and said to me, “You’ll have to come back later. I don’t have time
to talk to you now. You should have come to see me sooner to get your library time.”
“I was just wondering--“ I started to say.
She cut me off. “You’ll have to leave now. I can’t talk to you now.”
Talk about hostility, overreaction, and inappropriate behavior in front of students! Even if she
could make a case for refusing (in front of students) to let me speak, it would be hard for her
to justify telling me to leave. Teachers and students come in and out of the library freely all
day, and stay as long as they want. And normally when a teacher comes in to talk to another
teacher, she is given a respectful ear. Even children who come in with a message are given a
respectful ear. Michelle clearly had a personal agenda.
I said, “I was wondering if you could make up our library time this afternoon.”
She said. “No. That is my prep time. I am not going to give up my prep time.”
[Of course, Michelle knew perfectly well that she had used my library time for her prep time.]
Then the kindergarten teacher, a very young and inexperienced teacher named Lynn Del
Galdo, said, “You need to leave! You’re interrupting my students’ time!”
My emotional state was one of puzzlement. I could not figure out why it was such a problem to
give me a minute of time, since I assumed we all wanted all kids to be treated fairly.
I said, “I only need a minute of your time. My students lost all forty-five minutes of their time!”
Lynn said again, “You need to leave.”
I left, shaking my head. I figured we’d discuss making up the lesson when Michelle and Lynn
had settled down. (I’ve been doing a lot of puzzled head-shaking this past year. I am unable
to follow the logic of several of my coworkers.)
Michelle and Lynn reported this incident to Gretchen three months after it happened, right after
I asked Michelle to make up the missed lesson. Gretchen never told me that a complaint had
been made. Werlin used this in April to justify having taken me out of my classroom in
February. He and Gretchen were desperately searching for justification for their actions. The
real reason I was taken out of my class was the police report.
I know Michelle felt bad about this. Michelle and I had always gotten along well. I think she
was influenced by others. She went to Maria Beers after I was taken out of my classroom and
said, “Wasn’t there a step that was skipped here? Shouldn’t we have discussed this instead of
just taking Maura out of her classroom?”
During the week I was back, Michelle came over and hugged me.
Someday I’ll tell her not to feel so guilty. Her complaint was a symptom, not a cause.
But she should feel somewhat guilty.
She contributed to the frenzy of hostility.
And she’s old enough to know better.
There was no litigation,
only a tort claim, but after
October 4, 2001, teachers
were made to believe that
litigation was in progress.
That was when Daniel
Shinoff became involved,
according to his own
statement. Mark Bresee
was still very much
involved.
only a tort claim, but after
October 4, 2001, teachers
were made to believe that
litigation was in progress.
That was when Daniel
Shinoff became involved,
according to his own
statement. Mark Bresee
was still very much
involved.
| Fears were encouraged, to the extent that M.S. wrote the following two letters. Most likely, Werlin suggested to Scharmach that she ask for a restraining order. |
| Maura Larkins sued some of her accusers in March 2002 for defamation of character. |
Maura Larkins, teacher at Castle Park Elementary, voluntarily spent
hundreds of dollars to get a fitness for duty examination by a
psychiatrist after she was falsely accused of "being the type of person
who commits mass murders." The doctor faxed his report to CVESD.
Why did Cheryl Cox and the CVESD board and their attorneys Daniel
Shinoff and Kelly Angell continue to foment hysteria at Castle Park
Elementary even after receiving this doctor's letter in August 2001?
Answer: They wanted to smear Maura Larkins in order to prevent her
from revealing their violations of law. Was this smart? It would have
been smarter to retract the false accusations and apologize. Instead,
they stopped Maura Larkins pay (in violation of the contract) and
refused to grant her the hearing to which she was entitled (also in
violation of the contract).
Robin Donlan (who became famous in 2004 as one of the San Diego
Union-Tribune's "Castle Park Five," then in 2007 for claiming that she
had no idea how her school teacher husband suddenly came to possess
7 million dollars) also worked hard, along with her personal friend,
Chula Vista Educators' President Gina Boyd, and Beverly Tucker of the
California Teachers Association, to smear Larkins.
But it appears that there was another reason for Cheryl Cox's support
of violations of law and the contract: she wanted to get rid of
Superintendent Libia Gil. In May 2002 Cox was willing to violate yet
one more law against Maura Larkins, Labor Code 1102.5, in order to
get rid of Libia Gil.
Cox and Bertha Lopez went along with the BIG THREE, PATRICK JUDD,
PAMELA SMITH, AND LARRY CUNNINGHAM, and voted to dismiss
Maura Larkins less than two months after Larkins filed suit against
the district. Clearly, these people felt so certain that they were above
the law, that they were not afraid to flagrantly violate it.
It appears that Cox and Lopez got something in return: Libia Gil's
resignation. Gil made her resignation official in March 2002, but said
she wouldn't be leaving until October. She announced that she had
accepted a job at New American Schools in Virginia, but she never left
San Diego, and continued, without success, to seek employment around
the country and around the county as a public school superintendent.
Gil claimed to travel for New American Schools, which came in handy
when she wanted to avoid depositions.
hundreds of dollars to get a fitness for duty examination by a
psychiatrist after she was falsely accused of "being the type of person
who commits mass murders." The doctor faxed his report to CVESD.
Why did Cheryl Cox and the CVESD board and their attorneys Daniel
Shinoff and Kelly Angell continue to foment hysteria at Castle Park
Elementary even after receiving this doctor's letter in August 2001?
Answer: They wanted to smear Maura Larkins in order to prevent her
from revealing their violations of law. Was this smart? It would have
been smarter to retract the false accusations and apologize. Instead,
they stopped Maura Larkins pay (in violation of the contract) and
refused to grant her the hearing to which she was entitled (also in
violation of the contract).
Robin Donlan (who became famous in 2004 as one of the San Diego
Union-Tribune's "Castle Park Five," then in 2007 for claiming that she
had no idea how her school teacher husband suddenly came to possess
7 million dollars) also worked hard, along with her personal friend,
Chula Vista Educators' President Gina Boyd, and Beverly Tucker of the
California Teachers Association, to smear Larkins.
But it appears that there was another reason for Cheryl Cox's support
of violations of law and the contract: she wanted to get rid of
Superintendent Libia Gil. In May 2002 Cox was willing to violate yet
one more law against Maura Larkins, Labor Code 1102.5, in order to
get rid of Libia Gil.
Cox and Bertha Lopez went along with the BIG THREE, PATRICK JUDD,
PAMELA SMITH, AND LARRY CUNNINGHAM, and voted to dismiss
Maura Larkins less than two months after Larkins filed suit against
the district. Clearly, these people felt so certain that they were above
the law, that they were not afraid to flagrantly violate it.
It appears that Cox and Lopez got something in return: Libia Gil's
resignation. Gil made her resignation official in March 2002, but said
she wouldn't be leaving until October. She announced that she had
accepted a job at New American Schools in Virginia, but she never left
San Diego, and continued, without success, to seek employment around
the country and around the county as a public school superintendent.
Gil claimed to travel for New American Schools, which came in handy
when she wanted to avoid depositions.
on this list; they put considerable effort into destroying my reputation and career. I am not offering them the
chance to meet with me informally to resolve this problem.
I always thought of you as a nice person. I always thought we got along well. I was shocked to learn that you had
made these secret accusations against me. Rather than sue you for defamation of character, I would prefer to ask
you to help me understand how you came to do this, and how you feel about it now. I believe your actions were
related to other events that were occurring at Castle Park. I have worked long and hard to expose the truth about
what happened last year, and my efforts have finally begun to pay off. I don’t think my other accusers will admit
the truth until they are forced to do so, but I think you have less to hide than they, and therefore have less reason
to be afraid of the truth. I don’t believe you will require a supoena and an oath.
I am very enthusiastic about the legal process, which has slowly but surely worked to bring about truth and justice
in my case. My faith in our system is being restored. I think my father, who was an attorney, would be proud of
me if he were alive. I feel that by refusing to bow to injustice, I am helping to restore Chula Vista School District’s
administration to a level of integrity to which it has not risen for quite some time.
You might want to discuss with a lawyer whether it is in your best interest to remain aligned with Jo Ellen and
Linda and Gretchen as the wheels of justice continue their inexorable turn. I’m not saying you need a lawyer. But
if having one would make you feel more confident and secure, I think hiring a lawyer would be a worthwhile
expenditure. A good lawyer can be an emotional as well as a legal support. If you don’t already have a lawyer, you
can get a referral from CVE or the San Diego County Bar Association.
If you are interested in talking to me informally, with or without a lawyer at your side, please call me at 619 660
6955 before December 17. I am willing to meet with you without my lawyer being present.
I assure you, I never felt hostility toward you. On the day I came into the library to ask if my children’s library
time could be made up during your prep time (which was coming up in a couple of hours), I was not expecting the
level of hostility I encountered. I thought you would be perfectly happy and willing to make up the lesson, and that
you would be pleased that a time slot was still available. I had not yet realized that you had intentionally deprived
my kids of a library lesson the previous day when you used their forty-five-minute library time as prep time for
yourself without sparing a minute to call my room or write me a note to inform me of my library time. You were
petty, but common pettiness does not explain all the events at Castle Park last year. More was involved. Malice
was part of it.
Much investigation remains to be done to expose how and why the frenzy of hostility developed. Perhaps you
intentionally joined those who were instigating this frenzy. If you ate lunch with, and/or spent a significant
amount of time with those who delighted in frequent harsh, contemptuous criticisms of various children, parents,
teachers, and administrators, you certainly had a golden opportunity to become involved. I know you were
dismayed to see the attack on me get so out of hand. But you are old enough to know that those who consider
themselves superior to others and who feel a great deal of contempt for others often end up also considering
themselves above the law. That’s when things get out of hand.
It’s interesting that Lynn Del Galdo isn’t listed by Werlin as one of my accusers. Didn’t she make the same
accusations you did, and at the very same time?
The names that have been omitted from Werlin’s list are in some cases more interesting than the names that are
on it.
Did you hear the story that spread like wild fire last spring about me throwing pens at Werlin when he took me out
in front of the school where there were no witnesses? That story was totally, absolutely, completely false. It was
fabricated out of whole cloth. But here’s the really interesting thing: Werlin didn’t include that story in his report!
Werlin appears quite willing to point the finger at you, putting you in a position where you’ll have to answer for
slander, but he doesn’t seem to relish the prospect of having to answer for slander himself.
The whole truth is going to come out, one way or another. You will be involved in the investigation, one way or
another. I hope you will be standing on the side of justice when the gavel is struck for the final time.
Sincerely,
Maura Larkins
chance to meet with me informally to resolve this problem.
I always thought of you as a nice person. I always thought we got along well. I was shocked to learn that you had
made these secret accusations against me. Rather than sue you for defamation of character, I would prefer to ask
you to help me understand how you came to do this, and how you feel about it now. I believe your actions were
related to other events that were occurring at Castle Park. I have worked long and hard to expose the truth about
what happened last year, and my efforts have finally begun to pay off. I don’t think my other accusers will admit
the truth until they are forced to do so, but I think you have less to hide than they, and therefore have less reason
to be afraid of the truth. I don’t believe you will require a supoena and an oath.
I am very enthusiastic about the legal process, which has slowly but surely worked to bring about truth and justice
in my case. My faith in our system is being restored. I think my father, who was an attorney, would be proud of
me if he were alive. I feel that by refusing to bow to injustice, I am helping to restore Chula Vista School District’s
administration to a level of integrity to which it has not risen for quite some time.
You might want to discuss with a lawyer whether it is in your best interest to remain aligned with Jo Ellen and
Linda and Gretchen as the wheels of justice continue their inexorable turn. I’m not saying you need a lawyer. But
if having one would make you feel more confident and secure, I think hiring a lawyer would be a worthwhile
expenditure. A good lawyer can be an emotional as well as a legal support. If you don’t already have a lawyer, you
can get a referral from CVE or the San Diego County Bar Association.
If you are interested in talking to me informally, with or without a lawyer at your side, please call me at 619 660
6955 before December 17. I am willing to meet with you without my lawyer being present.
I assure you, I never felt hostility toward you. On the day I came into the library to ask if my children’s library
time could be made up during your prep time (which was coming up in a couple of hours), I was not expecting the
level of hostility I encountered. I thought you would be perfectly happy and willing to make up the lesson, and that
you would be pleased that a time slot was still available. I had not yet realized that you had intentionally deprived
my kids of a library lesson the previous day when you used their forty-five-minute library time as prep time for
yourself without sparing a minute to call my room or write me a note to inform me of my library time. You were
petty, but common pettiness does not explain all the events at Castle Park last year. More was involved. Malice
was part of it.
Much investigation remains to be done to expose how and why the frenzy of hostility developed. Perhaps you
intentionally joined those who were instigating this frenzy. If you ate lunch with, and/or spent a significant
amount of time with those who delighted in frequent harsh, contemptuous criticisms of various children, parents,
teachers, and administrators, you certainly had a golden opportunity to become involved. I know you were
dismayed to see the attack on me get so out of hand. But you are old enough to know that those who consider
themselves superior to others and who feel a great deal of contempt for others often end up also considering
themselves above the law. That’s when things get out of hand.
It’s interesting that Lynn Del Galdo isn’t listed by Werlin as one of my accusers. Didn’t she make the same
accusations you did, and at the very same time?
The names that have been omitted from Werlin’s list are in some cases more interesting than the names that are
on it.
Did you hear the story that spread like wild fire last spring about me throwing pens at Werlin when he took me out
in front of the school where there were no witnesses? That story was totally, absolutely, completely false. It was
fabricated out of whole cloth. But here’s the really interesting thing: Werlin didn’t include that story in his report!
Werlin appears quite willing to point the finger at you, putting you in a position where you’ll have to answer for
slander, but he doesn’t seem to relish the prospect of having to answer for slander himself.
The whole truth is going to come out, one way or another. You will be involved in the investigation, one way or
another. I hope you will be standing on the side of justice when the gavel is struck for the final time.
Sincerely,
Maura Larkins
| Does the following letter contain an offer that you would accept if you were not involved in covering up wrongdoing? |
| Merry Christmas, Michelle! |
| From Maura Larkins |
December 11, 2001
Safe Surroundings
I am writing this in regards to the safety issue at Castle Park Elementary
School. Before last year I felt safe at school. After the problems that arose
with Maura Larkins I felt that I needed to be more aware of my
surroundings. For the security of students and staff I have made sure that
the library door that is accessible from the parking lot is always locked. We
all need to be a lot more careful and aware of the things going on around
us. No matter where we are we should never have to feel unsafe.
Thank you
Safe Surroundings
I am writing this in regards to the safety issue at Castle Park Elementary
School. Before last year I felt safe at school. After the problems that arose
with Maura Larkins I felt that I needed to be more aware of my
surroundings. For the security of students and staff I have made sure that
the library door that is accessible from the parking lot is always locked. We
all need to be a lot more careful and aware of the things going on around
us. No matter where we are we should never have to feel unsafe.
Thank you
TO: [This name was removed. Most likely, it was addressed to Lowell Billings, or
Sam Snyder, who served as principals of Castle Park Elementary during the fall
of 2001.]
FROM: [Michelle Scharmach]
REGARDING: Restraining order against Maura Larkins
Maura is not reacting to the misunderstanding we had in the library in a rational
manner. She has twisted the circumstances in an unhealthy way, and has stated
that she will never forgive me for the wrongs she feels I committed against her.
Wounds that do not heal fester, and can cause unnatural reactions.
She came to my home and delivered an accusatory and threatening letter. I fear
that as litigation continues on this issue, she may become further angered and
threaten me with physical harm. I fear for my safety at both my school sites as
well. I am hoping that a Restraining Order will be issued against her to
augment my peace of mind now and in the future.
Sam Snyder, who served as principals of Castle Park Elementary during the fall
of 2001.]
FROM: [Michelle Scharmach]
REGARDING: Restraining order against Maura Larkins
Maura is not reacting to the misunderstanding we had in the library in a rational
manner. She has twisted the circumstances in an unhealthy way, and has stated
that she will never forgive me for the wrongs she feels I committed against her.
Wounds that do not heal fester, and can cause unnatural reactions.
She came to my home and delivered an accusatory and threatening letter. I fear
that as litigation continues on this issue, she may become further angered and
threaten me with physical harm. I fear for my safety at both my school sites as
well. I am hoping that a Restraining Order will be issued against her to
augment my peace of mind now and in the future.
Maura Larkins had to file
her lawsuit very soon, but
she wanted to give one
teacher on Werlin's list,
whom she had always
thought of as a nicer
person than her other
accusers, the opportunity
to avoid being sued. She
delivered the following
letter in person, to give
Michelle Scharmach more
time to decide how to
respond.
her lawsuit very soon, but
she wanted to give one
teacher on Werlin's list,
whom she had always
thought of as a nicer
person than her other
accusers, the opportunity
to avoid being sued. She
delivered the following
letter in person, to give
Michelle Scharmach more
time to decide how to
respond.
| Despite Michelle's request, which apparently was suggested by Richard Werlin, no restraining order was sought by the district. Why? Because that would have required the district to actually make a written accusation, and Maura Larkins would have an opportunity to respond! |
| Michelle seemed to be projecting her own feelings onto Maura Larkins, who never said she wouldn't forgive her. That seems to be Michelle's own feelings of guilt talking. Why did the district take such drastic action without asking to hear the other side of the story? |
| Was MIchelle Scharmach afraid of physical harm, or was she afraid of being exposed as someone who had aided and abetted a crime? Clearly, Michelle Scharmach knew something she didn't want to tell Maura Larkins. She was helping to cover up crimes and other wrongdoing. |
| But Werlin never followed through on the restraining order idea. He would have had to provide some actual, specific accusation against Larkins, and that he could not do, because Maura Larkins had never threatened anybody. Also, if he put the accusations in writing, they would no longer be secret from Maura Larkins, and she would be able to respond to them. |
| After Maura Larkins sued, Michelle Scharmach wrote a letter which the district used as a major justification for firing Mrs. Larkins. Obviously, a letter written after you've been sued is not reliable. So the district erased the date on the letter, and pretended it had been written over a year earlier. That summer, Werlin removed the date from the letter, and changed his Nov. 21, 2001 report to appear that the letter had arrived BEFORE Nov. 21, 2001. This is a felony. Mark Bresee presented Michelle Scharmach's letter to the Office of Administrative Hearings as if it had been received before Nov. 21, 2001, even though he himself had not included it in his Feb. 22, 2002 PERB filing. He had, however, included the two letters below, which were written by Scharmach in 2001. |
| Larkins first heard the allegations against her NINE MONTHS after she was taken out of her classroom. Why the long delay? |
| Scharmach had the opportunity to avoid being sued for her false allegations against Maura Larkins, so it would appear that she acted against her own best interests when she obeyed instructions of CVESD lawyers. |
Was Scharmach blind in her trust in Richard Werlin? Did she believe that Maura Larkins was a
dangerous person? It appears that Michelle Scharmach was duped by Richard Werlin, Robin Donlan,
Linda Watson, and other teachers, who created false allegations to cover up the crime they committed
when they conspired to use Kathleen Elton's allegations to remove Maura Larkins from her classroom.
Of course, it's also possible Michelle just wanted to be on the winning team, and was convinced that
Werlin would prevail.
dangerous person? It appears that Michelle Scharmach was duped by Richard Werlin, Robin Donlan,
Linda Watson, and other teachers, who created false allegations to cover up the crime they committed
when they conspired to use Kathleen Elton's allegations to remove Maura Larkins from her classroom.
Of course, it's also possible Michelle just wanted to be on the winning team, and was convinced that
Werlin would prevail.
| Maura Larkins wanted to give Michelle Scharmach the opportunity to avoid being sued for defamation of character. She didn't feel that Michelle belonged on the list of accusers. Maura Larkins was mistaken on this point. Michelle's attitude had undergone a 180 degree change since April of 2001. |
| Since May 2001, Maura Larkins' lawyer had been asking Rick Werlin for information about the allegations against Larkins. The only information so far was Alan Smith's report. |
| Scharmach was convinced by the District to keep her allegations against Maura Larkins secret from Maura Larkins. Werlin did not reveal that the allegation that Larkins had a gun was made by a mentally ill woman, about whom he received evidence on April 3, 2001, the day before he asked Maura Larkins to return to work in April 2001, mentally ill. He also failed to reassure teachers with the letter f from the psychiatrist who examined Maura Larkins. |
| Larkins' responded to the duo's hostility with puzzlement because Scharmach had never before been hostile to Larkins. Larkins had no idea why the librarian had used Larkins' class library period the previous day as her personal time, while keeping Larkins in the dark about when her class was supposed to come to the library. |
| Larkins thought that this was odd behavior, but believed it would take only a moment to fix the problem. Larkins was wrong. Apparently, the librarian had been affected by Robin Donlan's false allegations, and had suddenly developed a strong hostility not only to Larkins, but to Larkins' students. The librarian refused to make up the missed lesson, and told Larkins to leave the library! |
| Librarian Michelle Scharmach and teacher Lynne Del Galdo were unexpectedly hostile to Maura Larkins in the library in September 2000, but Larkins was not the type of teacher who ran to report to the principal whenever she had a problem. |
| When she learned that Michelle Scharmach was one of her accusers, Larkins wrote the following letter to her lawyer. |
| [There was never any investigation of these allegations by the district. The district never asked Maura Larkins for her side of the story. This was the district's final report on why Maura Larkins was taken out of her classroom in the middle of the year. Here is the section regarding Michelle Leon-Scharmach.] |
| Larkins was puzzled when she saw Michelle Scharmach's name on the list. |
| When attorney Daniel Shinoff got involved in this case on October 4, 2001, he wanted written evidence to use against Larkins. He never appears to have advised the board to obey the law and set things right. Until this time, Rick Werlin had told employees that he didn't want anything in writing. Now Werlin wanted written reports. For six months Maura Larkins' lawyer had been asking Rick Werlin for information about the allegations against Larkins. The only information so far was Alan Smith's report. |
| On November 21, 2001, Richard Werlin gave Maura Larkins a list of six names of her accusers, but he didn't say what the specific accusations were. |
| Richard Werlin changed this document in 2002, and district lawyer Mark Bresee submitted the falsified document to the Office of Administrative Hearings. The original document had already been submitted to PERB. |
| In December 2001, the statute of limitations was fast approaching. |
The CVESD board continued to foment
hysteria about violence at Castle Park
Elementary even after receiving an expensive,
reassuring psychiatrist's report about the
person falsely accused of being potentially
violent. Why?
hysteria about violence at Castle Park
Elementary even after receiving an expensive,
reassuring psychiatrist's report about the
person falsely accused of being potentially
violent. Why?
The CVESD board used an unsigned, undated
letter from Michelle Scharmach as Exhibit A in its
case to dismiss Larkins. Where did this document
come from? Was it yet another entry in a long
string of hoaxes perpetrated by Richard Werlin
and Chula Vista Educators?
letter from Michelle Scharmach as Exhibit A in its
case to dismiss Larkins. Where did this document
come from? Was it yet another entry in a long
string of hoaxes perpetrated by Richard Werlin
and Chula Vista Educators?
| Letter from Dr. Otis to Richard Werlin regarding Maura Larkins |
Even after they were warned that Assistant Superintendent
Richard Werlin was committing misdemeanors and felonies
and encouraging false accusations to cover up those
crimes, the CVESD board (Cheryl Cox, Patrick Judd, Pamela
Smith, Bertha Lopez and Larry Cunningham) pretended to
be unaware of the overwhelming evidence against Richard
Werlin. The board allowed Werlin to take serious actions
again and again without creating a paper trail.
Richard Werlin was committing misdemeanors and felonies
and encouraging false accusations to cover up those
crimes, the CVESD board (Cheryl Cox, Patrick Judd, Pamela
Smith, Bertha Lopez and Larry Cunningham) pretended to
be unaware of the overwhelming evidence against Richard
Werlin. The board allowed Werlin to take serious actions
again and again without creating a paper trail.
| Hoax documents were produced through the collaboration of Michelle Leon-Scharmach, Richard Werlin and Mark Bresee after Maura Larkins sued Michelle Scharmach for defamation. |
| A Fraud on the Court |
| A fraudulent, altered document was presented by the district as Exhibit 44 and represented as being the "November 21, 2001" letter that Richard Werlin had hand-delivered to Maura Larkins. Exhibit 44 contained an unsigned, undated letter which was not contained in the true document (because in November 2001, it had not yet been written). This new mystery letter was also offered by the district as Exhibit 7, the first exhibit offered by CVESD to justify the dismissal of Maura Larkins. |
Changes were made to the second page.
NO changes were made to the first page of
the Nov. 21, 2001 letter.
the Nov. 21, 2001 letter.
Did mental illness afflict the
accusers or the accused at
CVESD?
accusers or the accused at
CVESD?
Assistant Superintendent Richard Werlin kept secret the evidence
that Maura Larkins was a non-violent person, and also kept secret the
evidence that accuser Kathleen Elton was mentally ill. The District
had used Kathleen Elton's false allegations as a justification for
removing Maura Larkins from her classroom on February 12, 2001.
Three months after receiving the above letter that Maura Larkins was
fit and healthy, Richard Werlin asked teachers to write letters
requesting a restraining order against Maura Larkins.
The alternative would have been to apologize to Larkins. Apparently
not one single individual was willing to consider that option. Larkins'
accusers felt safe because they had the school board, with its
unlimited taxpayer-funded legal resources, on their side.
that Maura Larkins was a non-violent person, and also kept secret the
evidence that accuser Kathleen Elton was mentally ill. The District
had used Kathleen Elton's false allegations as a justification for
removing Maura Larkins from her classroom on February 12, 2001.
Three months after receiving the above letter that Maura Larkins was
fit and healthy, Richard Werlin asked teachers to write letters
requesting a restraining order against Maura Larkins.
The alternative would have been to apologize to Larkins. Apparently
not one single individual was willing to consider that option. Larkins'
accusers felt safe because they had the school board, with its
unlimited taxpayer-funded legal resources, on their side.
| Here are principal Gretchen Donndelinger's notes of Michelle Scharmach's visit to her THREE MONTHS AFTER THE ALLEGED INCIDENT OCCURRED. Why the long delay, Ms. Scharmach? |
| (to be scanned) |
| In an effort to protect Michelle Scharmach from being sued, and to find out the truth, Maura Larkins wrote the letter below to Michelle Scharmach. Larkins had no idea that Scharmach was so deeply involved with Robin Donlan, Lynne Sallans and other accusers. |
| Dr. Otis Letter (Psychiatrist said the accused was mentally healthy, but the evidence indicates that the accusers were not.) |
| Michelle Scharmach Hoax (Letter feloniously added at a later date to Werlin's November 21, 2001 report) |
What was Michelle's motivation for
writing the letter? To try to cover up
her own and Lynn Del Galdo Sallans'
aggressive and hostile behavior in front
of children. Maura Larkins was not
hostile, merely surprised at the
unprovoked and unprofessional attack in
front of children. But Maura Larkins did
not have the habit of complaining about
other teachers. Apparently feeling
guilty, Scharmach stated in paragraph
four: "[We]...wanted to voice our side of
the story in case she made a complaint
against us."
writing the letter? To try to cover up
her own and Lynn Del Galdo Sallans'
aggressive and hostile behavior in front
of children. Maura Larkins was not
hostile, merely surprised at the
unprovoked and unprofessional attack in
front of children. But Maura Larkins did
not have the habit of complaining about
other teachers. Apparently feeling
guilty, Scharmach stated in paragraph
four: "[We]...wanted to voice our side of
the story in case she made a complaint
against us."
Many documents clearly answer
the question.
the question.
"Michelle Leon-Scharmach: Please find
attached a written statement from this
employee indicating that she felt Ms. Larkins
was hostile toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in front of
students."
attached a written statement from this
employee indicating that she felt Ms. Larkins
was hostile toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in front of
students."
| Michelle Leon-Scharmach: Employee has indicated that she felt that Ms. Larkins was hostile toward her, over reacted, and demonstrated hostile behavior in front of students. Ms. Leon-Scharmach stated that one incident took place in front of Ms. Del Galdo's Kindergarten students in the beginning of the 2000-01 school year. |
| Richard Werlin's Nov. 21, 2001 "INTERIM SUMMARY OF CONCERNS/ALLEGATIONS" |
Michelle Leon-Scharmach: Please
find attached a written statement
from this employee indicating that
she felt Ms. Larkins was hostile
toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in
front of students.
find attached a written statement
from this employee indicating that
she felt Ms. Larkins was hostile
toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in
front of students.
Michelle Leon-Scharmach:
Employee has indicated that she
felt that Ms. Larkins was hostile
toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior
in front of students. Ms.
Leon-Scharmach stated that one
incident took place in front of
Ms. Del Galdo's Kindergarten
students in the beginning of the
2000-01 school year.
Employee has indicated that she
felt that Ms. Larkins was hostile
toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior
in front of students. Ms.
Leon-Scharmach stated that one
incident took place in front of
Ms. Del Galdo's Kindergarten
students in the beginning of the
2000-01 school year.
| Version #1 Original November 21, 2001 Report |
Below is a section of the "Nov. 21, 2001"
report created by Richard Werlin clearly after
February 22, 2002, and almost certainly after
March 13, 2002. This document was
feloniously submitted in place of the true
"November 21, 2001 Report "to the Office of
Administrative Hearings by CVESD, through
its attorney Mark Bresee of Parham & Rajcic.
report created by Richard Werlin clearly after
February 22, 2002, and almost certainly after
March 13, 2002. This document was
feloniously submitted in place of the true
"November 21, 2001 Report "to the Office of
Administrative Hearings by CVESD, through
its attorney Mark Bresee of Parham & Rajcic.
| Why did the CVESD board, administration and lawyers feel the need to commit multiple felonies? What was so bad about the truth? Answer: The district was covering up crimes committed by itself and the employees who attacked Maura Larkins. |
| Exhibit 7 was written after Michelle Scharmach was sued by Maura Larkins, but presented as if it were written almost two years before. |
Here are two versions of Assistant Superintendent
Richard Werlin's November 21, 2001 report. Werlin
collected allegations, but never allowed the accused to
respond. He kept secret the fact that Michelle
Scharmach had made a general allegation, and never
asked Michelle Scharmach to give a detailed account
of her allegation.
Richard Werlin's November 21, 2001 report. Werlin
collected allegations, but never allowed the accused to
respond. He kept secret the fact that Michelle
Scharmach had made a general allegation, and never
asked Michelle Scharmach to give a detailed account
of her allegation.
Human Resources Asst. Supt. Richard Werlin created the
Michelle Scharmach hoax at Castle Park Elementary School
Michelle Scharmach hoax at Castle Park Elementary School
This false allegation was bad enough. In fact,
Michelle Scharmach and Lynn Del Galdo were
hostile to Maura Larkins in the library, causing
Larkins to be puzzled and surprised, but not
hostile.
But then Scharmach, Werlin, and Mark Bresee
decided that they could come up with a bigger
false accusation, and so they created a
replacement document and submitted it to the
Office of Administrative Hearings.
This constituted felony obstruction of justice.
Michelle Scharmach and Lynn Del Galdo were
hostile to Maura Larkins in the library, causing
Larkins to be puzzled and surprised, but not
hostile.
But then Scharmach, Werlin, and Mark Bresee
decided that they could come up with a bigger
false accusation, and so they created a
replacement document and submitted it to the
Office of Administrative Hearings.
This constituted felony obstruction of justice.
| Version #2 Fraudulent "November 21, 2001" Report |
| The first six exhibits were legal documents, not attempts to prove the allegations against Maura Larkins were true. Michelle's hoax letter, therefore, was exhibit #7. |
Exhibit 44 of the Maura Larkins dismissal hearing.
The district used a correct copy of the first page of a
three-page document that was hand-delivered to Maura
Larkins on November 21, 2001 by Richard Werlin, along
with two pages that had been changed. Then the
district added a page that was written by Michelle
Scharmach after she was sued by Maura Larkins.
Michelle had written it to the district in an attempt to
justify her false and paranoid allegations. This
unsigned, undated hoax letter was used as the district's
first exhibit after the six legal documents it placed at the
front of its exhibit folder.
The district used a correct copy of the first page of a
three-page document that was hand-delivered to Maura
Larkins on November 21, 2001 by Richard Werlin, along
with two pages that had been changed. Then the
district added a page that was written by Michelle
Scharmach after she was sued by Maura Larkins.
Michelle had written it to the district in an attempt to
justify her false and paranoid allegations. This
unsigned, undated hoax letter was used as the district's
first exhibit after the six legal documents it placed at the
front of its exhibit folder.
| But Werlin never followed through on the restraining order idea. He would have had to provide some actual, specific accusation against Larkins, and that he could not do, because Maura Larkins had never threatened anybody. Also, if he put the accusations in writing, they would no longer be secret from Maura Larkins, and she would be able to respond to them. |
This is one of the reasons that schools are
failing
Because those in control are unable, or unwilling,
to put kids first. Below are all-too-typical
examples of the type of behavior to which many
board members, administrators and teachers
devote enormous amounts of time, energy and
taxpayer money. Then they devote more
taxpayer money to covering up their wrongdoing.
Are these people crazy? Are they ignorant or
dim-witted? Or are they corrupt? The public has a
right to know the answer to these questions.
failing
Because those in control are unable, or unwilling,
to put kids first. Below are all-too-typical
examples of the type of behavior to which many
board members, administrators and teachers
devote enormous amounts of time, energy and
taxpayer money. Then they devote more
taxpayer money to covering up their wrongdoing.
Are these people crazy? Are they ignorant or
dim-witted? Or are they corrupt? The public has a
right to know the answer to these questions.
Why did Michelle Scharmach
walk out in the middle of her
2004 deposition?
Because her lawyer, Kelly Angell Minnehan,
ordered her to do so.
walk out in the middle of her
2004 deposition?
Because her lawyer, Kelly Angell Minnehan,
ordered her to do so.
| Fourth page--written after Michelle Scharmach was served with a lawsuit for defamation of character on March 13, 2002. Michelle addressed the letter to Gretchnen Donndelinger, almost certainly at Rick Werlin's request, even though Donndelinger had already gone to another school. It was probably originally addressed to Rick Werlin or Superintendent Libia Gil. Libia Gil resigned a few days after the suit was filed and served. Maura Larkins was dismissed by the board several weeks later. |
These changes were made to the third page:
Michelle Leon-Scharmach: Employee has
indicated that she felt that Ms. Larkins was
hostile toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in front of
students. Ms. Leon-Scharmach stated that
one incident took place in front of Ms. Del
Galdo's Kindergarten students in the
beginning of the 2000-01 school year.
indicated that she felt that Ms. Larkins was
hostile toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in front of
students. Ms. Leon-Scharmach stated that
one incident took place in front of Ms. Del
Galdo's Kindergarten students in the
beginning of the 2000-01 school year.
| Exhibit 7 This hoax document was also attached to the altered, back-dated document presented as Exhibit 44. |
| True version: |
| Altered version: |
Lynn Sallans
Cardiff School
Sallans, Lynne Cardiff School Teacher 107 eMail
Website
Bjorstad, Nancy Cardiff School Teacher 109 eMail
Website
CARDIFF SCHOOLS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
SEPTEMBER MINUTES
Thursday, September 17, 2009
6:30pm
Cardiff School MultiPurpose Room
Cardiff SEA Officers:
Co president Mark Whitehouse
Co-President Greta Ott
VP AH Kristen McCartney
VP CS Carrie Elwin
Co-Treasurer Becky Smith
Co-Treasurer Stacy Davis
Co- Secretary Dede Watson
Co- Secretary Meghan Laurs
Superintendent Tom Pellegrino
AH Principal Jill Heichel
CS Principal Julie Parker
CS Teacher Reps Lynne Sallans / Nancy Bjornstad
MINUTES, REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 14, 2008 Page 2
Hearing Session:
Superintendent Pellegrino reported the new website will go live on August 25th.
Key staff will
be trained on Friday and all teachers will be receiving training next Friday. Mr.
Pellegrino
informed Trustees of the new staff that has been assigned to the different sites:
Renee-Claire
Steel, SDC; Kathy Williams, RSP; Amy Shireman, GATE-Science; Amy Price,
Language Arts
Specialist, and Tammy White, Tech Specialist will be working at Ada Harris.
Cardiff staff will
include: Lynne Sallans, K/1; Casey Payte 1/2; and Jill Thompson, SDC. Kathleen
Merchant
will be joining the District as a Psych Intern.
Julie Parker reported Cardiff School is off to a great start. Combination class
teachers
Lynn Sallans and Casey Payte have a great attitude and spirit. Back to School
Night was
a success. All staff is looking forward to a great school year.
• Jill Heichel reported Ada Harris had a great start as well. There are many new
faces but a
lot of good energy. The digital stations are installed and staff is being trained.
County
Superintendent Randy Ward visited last week and toured classrooms along with
Tom.
• The Superintendent and the Director, Fiscal Services, attended the Schools for
Sound
Finance workshop in Solana Beach.
The consent calendar was approved as presented.
http://www.123people.com/ext/frm?ti=person%20finder&search_term=casey%
20payte&search_country=US&st=person%20finder&target_url=http%3A%2F%
2Fwww.cardiffschools.com%2F175610725104847690%2Flib%
2F175610725104847690%2FMin9-15-08.pdf§ion=weblink&wrt_id=217
Cardiff elementary district hires new superintendent
Jun 29, 2007 ... ENCINITAS -- Tom Pellegrino, curriculum instruction and
assessment coordinator for Bonsall schools and principal of Bonsall Elementary
...
www.nctimes.com/.../article_629476a0-539a-5ed2-b5e5-64e939e3236b.html -
| Some people who have no coping skills imagine that everyone thinks in the same distorted way that they think. |
| San Diego Education Report |
| SDER |
San Diego
Education Report
Education Report
| SDER |
| SDER |
| SDER |
The Michelle Scharmach hoax was a story created after Assistant Superintendent Richard
Werlin produced his one and only report about Maura Larkins (the Nov. 21, 2001
"Report of Allegations").
Instead of simply apologizing to Maura Larkins for having committed misdemeanors
against her, CVESD decided to quietly insert this false story into the "interim report" and
present the spoliated version to the Office of Administrative Hearings. The purpose of the
spoliation was to aid in the cover-up of events at Castle Park Elementary. The cover-up
was, as is so often the case, worse than the original crime: spoliation of evidence is a
felony.
CVESD never completed its "investigation" into the allegations against Maura Larkins.
Instead, documentary evidence has disappeared.
Attorney Daniel Shinoff did a partial investigation, collecting documents at Castle Park
Elementary School. But no one ever interviewed Maura Larkins, the target of the
allegations. Mr. Shinoff has failed to produce for the Superior Court approximately forty
of the Bate-stamped documents he collected.
One suspects that those documents
implicated teachers and administrators
in wrongdoing and proved that the
allegations against Maura Larkins
were false. Is it possible that those
documents ended up shredded and
burned in a school maintenance yard
as did documents of another Dan
Shinoff client, San Ysidro School District?
Why did Superintendent Libia Gil and her top administrators Richard Werlin, Lowell
Billilngs, Maria Guasp and Dennis Doyle, as well as the school board, refuse to investigate
these serious allegations that teachers feared that Maura Larkins might kill them?
Because the district was covering up illegal actions committed by the school board and
top administrators, including Superintendent Libia Gil.
Werlin produced his one and only report about Maura Larkins (the Nov. 21, 2001
"Report of Allegations").
Instead of simply apologizing to Maura Larkins for having committed misdemeanors
against her, CVESD decided to quietly insert this false story into the "interim report" and
present the spoliated version to the Office of Administrative Hearings. The purpose of the
spoliation was to aid in the cover-up of events at Castle Park Elementary. The cover-up
was, as is so often the case, worse than the original crime: spoliation of evidence is a
felony.
CVESD never completed its "investigation" into the allegations against Maura Larkins.
Instead, documentary evidence has disappeared.
Attorney Daniel Shinoff did a partial investigation, collecting documents at Castle Park
Elementary School. But no one ever interviewed Maura Larkins, the target of the
allegations. Mr. Shinoff has failed to produce for the Superior Court approximately forty
of the Bate-stamped documents he collected.
One suspects that those documents
implicated teachers and administrators
in wrongdoing and proved that the
allegations against Maura Larkins
were false. Is it possible that those
documents ended up shredded and
burned in a school maintenance yard
as did documents of another Dan
Shinoff client, San Ysidro School District?
Why did Superintendent Libia Gil and her top administrators Richard Werlin, Lowell
Billilngs, Maria Guasp and Dennis Doyle, as well as the school board, refuse to investigate
these serious allegations that teachers feared that Maura Larkins might kill them?
Because the district was covering up illegal actions committed by the school board and
top administrators, including Superintendent Libia Gil.
CVESD isn't the only district to
spoliate evidence: Superintendent in
Steubenville, Ohio indicted
spoliate evidence: Superintendent in
Steubenville, Ohio indicted
CTA officials also spoliated evidence
in support of Rick Werlin
in support of Rick Werlin
Why This Website
Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz v. Maura
Larkins defamation
SDCOE
CVESD
Castle Park
Elementary School
Law Enforcement
CTA
CVE
Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz
Silence is Golden
Schools and Violence
Office Admin Hearings
Larkins OAH Hearing
Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz v. Maura
Larkins defamation
SDCOE
CVESD
Castle Park
Elementary School
Law Enforcement
CTA
CVE
Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz
Silence is Golden
Schools and Violence
Office Admin Hearings
Larkins OAH Hearing
These shredded SYSD documents escaped burning.
Many others did not. Photo: Aaron Bergin, SDUT
Many others did not. Photo: Aaron Bergin, SDUT
Dec. 2013
Southwestern College
shooting: remarkably similar
investigation of a dramatically
different event
Southwestern College
shooting: remarkably similar
investigation of a dramatically
different event
Jan. 2014
Teflon trustees?
CVESD board members Pam Smith and Larry Cunningham, who
spent tax dollars to cover up crimes, are still on the CVESD
board, but the careers of several administrators have ended.
Teflon trustees?
CVESD board members Pam Smith and Larry Cunningham, who
spent tax dollars to cover up crimes, are still on the CVESD
board, but the careers of several administrators have ended.
EXHIBITS for grievances
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
GRIEVANCES filed by
Maura Larkins
Maura Larkins
CVESD, Attorney Mark Bresee and Human Resources Asst. Supt. Richard Werlin created
the Michelle Scharmach hoax at Castle Park Elementary School
the Michelle Scharmach hoax at Castle Park Elementary School