Are Communications with me "safe"?

From time-to-time I have mentioned that email to me is safe from prying eyes. Why do I say that? Because it is.

I wrote a blog in Illinois and frequently found fault with the sheriff's department and a number of police departments in the county. People thought I didn't like cops. That's not true. I like cops who believe the laws are for them, too. They should be first to obey the laws, not last.

A number of deputies fed me the dirt from the sheriff's department, and it was driving the sheriff crazy. He couldn't find the leaks. After the sheriff fired a deputy who had complained about racial profiling (and had three years' worth of documentation to prove it), that deputy filed a Federal wrongful-termination lawsuit.

The sheriff had his attorney subpoena 27 months' worth of my blog records as part of that case. As soon as I received the subpoena, I knew I was not going to reveal sources. The deputies (and others) were counting on my word never to reveal sources. So I wrote up a Motion to Quash and filed it pro se in the Federal courthouse.

That was in 2010, and I filed it in person. When the court clerk told me that the magistrates heard such motions on Wednesdays and Fridays and asked when I wanted the court date, I asked, "What do you have in 2015?" She laughed and told me I couldn't put it off that long, and she gave me a court date 30 days later.

I shined my shoes and put on my best suit (my only suit) and went to court. When my matter was called, the magistrate asked me one or two questions, and he turned to the sheriff's attorney. He told her that her motion had nothing to do with the (deputy's wrongful termination) case and that the sheriff was just on a "fishing expedition" (his words). 

"Mr. Philpott, you have won your motion." I was feeling seven feet tall as I walked out of the courtroom.

Of course, it could have gone the other way. He could have ordered me to produce the records. I had already hidden them and would not have done so. If he had threatened me with Contempt of Court and jail, I would have told him my car was in hourly parking across the street and asked if I could take it home (40 miles away) before going to jail. Federal judges don't usually have a sense of humor, but I would have tried it, anyway.

I might have sat in jail weeks or months, but he never would have gotten any names out of me.

So, your email to me is safe. Write to gusphilpott@gmail.com or call 847.971.7083

Look out - here comes the DOJ

You read last week about the National School Boards Association running off to the Biden Administration for help; right?

Now read this: 

DOJ launching effort to combat threats of violence against school officials

Here's a little story that might help you decide what to do when the FBI knocks on your door.

On March 20, 2019 trustee-elect Teresa Holmes filed a harassment report against me at the Richland County Sheriff's Department (RCSD). I had sent an email to all board members on that Wednesday morning, telling the board if Holmes and McKie were not going to be sworn in legally by the next Tuesday's board meeting, then I intended to file charges on Friday (two days later). That was at 10:30AM.

By 1:00PM Holmes was at the RCSD, 27 miles from her Blythewood school place of employment, and registering her complaint with Deputy Jenkins.

 

On the next afternoon, while I was cleaning up dog poop in my backyard, my cell phone rang. I answered, and it was a Deputy Sergeant calling from RCSD to tell me he had a report in front of him that I had been harassing a school board member. Thanks to my law-enforcement experience, I immediately thought of the Miranda Rights ("Anything you say, can and will be used against you in a court of law"), and I knew I wasn't going to "give" him anything. He didn't know that, though.

So I said, "That's interesting." After he talked a little longer, I thanked him for calling and said Good-bye. He said he wasn't done yet. I asked, "Is there something else?"

He said he would like to get my side of the story, and I said, "I'm sure you would."

I knew I wasn't going to tell him a thing on the phone. I said I wanted to read the report, and he told me to come on down (to RCSD). When I got there, he greeted me at the door and escorted me upstairs to the office of the Deputy Chief of Criminal Investigations. Now, I was not intimidated at all by that, and I walked right in, shook hands with the DC and sat down. They pushed the report across the table to me.

"Before I read this, I'm going to tell you a little story. When I lived in Denver, the minister of the church I attended was accused by his former step-daughter of molestation. The girl, by then an adult, was mad that the minister and her mother had divorced. (She later retracted her accusation.) A Denver Post reporter saw the minister on a sidewalk one day and asked him about the charge. He said, "Young lady, if I weren't a minister, I'd say it's all bullshit." The reporter printed his exact words in the Denver Post.

Then I read the report about Holmes' complaint. I told the DC and the Sergeant. "This is all bullshit. I wasn't going to "give" you anything, but I am." I pointed to each sentence in the deputy's report. "This is a lie. This is a lie. This is a lie. This is a lie. This is a lie. You haven't got anything."

At one point the sergeant said in a surly voice, "You just want those two women kicked off the board."

I didn't take the bait. I paused and said calmly, "No, I just want them to take the oath of office and become legal members of the board." 

The decision at RCSD was that no crime had been committed. 

That was March 21, 2019. Holmes and McKie still have not taken the oath of office legally. They are not legitimate members of the board. They cannot serve as officers of the board. And yet???

The morale of the story. When the FBI or SLED or RCSD or the cops show up at your door, if you don't know your rights and what you are doing, keep your mouth shut! "You have the right to remain silent." Exercise that right. Be polite, but exercise your rights!!!

Where is Red4Ed?

Remember when teachers walked out for a May 1 rally at the State Capitol?

Richland 2 wasn't going to close. For 2-3 weeks, "schools will be open". Then the board and the superintendent caved. How many of the then-Board members spoke in favor of the walk-out. (They forgot they were "Management" Or maybe they never knew.) On just the day before May 1, the District announced schools would be closed.

Did all the teachers get paid for that day?

I certainly never heard about any of them whining about not getting paid.

Maybe ALL the teachers should walk out on behalf of those who must quarantine.

For a teacher who must quarantine, it's not like he went skinny-dipping in Lake Michigan on January 1 and got pneumonia.

Teachers don't have a choice about being at the front of the classroom, when kids show up and sneeze or cough. Then Little Johnny (no offense, Johnny) comes up with a positive COVID-19 test, and suddenly Rules apply.

Maybe it's just a little misunderstanding that some teachers are being told they will not get paid during quarantine. 

Or maybe it's not.

If a teacher must quarantine, will he be paid?

I don't recall ever hearing the question of pay-during-quarantine come up at a board meeting. What is your understanding?

If a teacher unsuspectingly becomes a "close contact" of a person who has a positive COVID test, that teacher must quarantine; right? Is that in the Richland 2 rules? Policies? Guidelines? 

So, if that teacher must quarantine, even if symptom-free and with a negative COVID test, why wouldn't that teacher be paid?

Can the teacher just call the bank, utility companies, etc., and tell them, "Richland 2 isn't paying me, so I can't pay you. Too bad"?

If a teacher is symptom-free and possesses a negative COVID test, why shouldn't that teacher go to work and get paid?

It is the employer (the school district) who is controlling whether the teacher works. 

Why should a salaried teacher take in on the chin for a District rule?

Coments below, please.

If you wish to comment anonymously, email me at gusphilpott@gmail.com  Your privacy is assured.

Open Letter to the Editor of The State

Good evening, Mr. Tolley,

On October 3, 2021 at 6:00AM The State published a Letter to the Editor by Terrence Cummings and included a photo of the Richland 2 Superintendent in front of R2i2. The State's headline was "School board trustees who walked out sent wrong problem-solving message to students".

Mr. Cummings' letter read:

"WALKOUTS NOT THE ANSWER

"The implication of The State’s editorial about Richland School District Two is that walkouts are appropriate means for objections or problem-solving. The menacing question is: “Will future dissents result in walkouts?”

"What is more important is that our students and our children, for whose education and character we are responsible, deserve better examples and more mature methods of proffering advice and addressing a grievance than through the unseemly and untoward behavior we witnessed from the three members who walked out, which only delayed an approved contract that had already been vetted legally, as your editorial attests."

YahooNews picked up that letter and photo and published it today: https://news.yahoo.com/school-board-trustees-walked-sent-100000475.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=ma

I presume that the headline was written by staff of The State. Using that photo would lead a reader to believe that the headline reflected the position of the superintendent and the District.

Mr. Cummings' opinion is just that. It happens to be wrong, but he is entitled to issue his opinion.

The three trustees walked out because Administration and the vice-chair did not provide them in a timely manner with the full details necessary to voting on the superintendent's proposed revised contract, and the Administration and vice-chair did not provide information earlier than the three days required by Board Policy. In other words, three of the trustees were expected to make a decision on information they had not had adequate time to consider. 

At least two of the trustees requested a delay in the consideration of the agenda item. When it was obvious that extra time would not be granted, the three walked out. That halted the meeting, because a quorum was no longer present.

 

Mr. Cummings conveniently omitted facts from his opinion letter.

Since the board (majority) intended to approve the superintendent's enhanced contract retroactively, a delay of two weeks in approval would have made no differently whatsoever. If the chair had been in control of the meeting, the superintendent's contract decision could have been postponed, and the rest of the board's business could have been conducted.

Sincerely,

Gus Philpott

Inappropriate Messages from Holmes? Anyone?

Has anyone else received what you considered an unprofessional, inappropriate, rude or offensive reply from Teresa Holmes, a trustee-elect of the Richland Two school board who has never taken the oath of office legally?

At the September 28th board meeting I read an email to the board that she sent to me after I had written to the District's public relations director and suggested that Holmes' board member bio should be updated.

In case you missed my previous article about it or the public participation segment of that board meeting, here is what Holmes wrote to me on September 15, 2021 at 10:57PM:

"Gus, I have often tolerated you hateful remarks and email. However, this time you have gone too far.  I lost my husband Rev. Dr. Jacob A. Holmes Jr. 4 years ago which, I know you are fully aware of.  I will no longer tolerate nor concern myself with your continuous diatribe of falsehoods and insults.  After this message you are officially blocked from any further contact   with me.  Go spout your hate on those who care  about you and what your deceitful lying  mouth has to say.....Do not contact  me again or include me in your racist, hateful. lying  remarks or emails.  It is sad that someone of your advanced age is not concerned about your mortality and relationship with God.  I will pray that God will forgive your outright evilness and have mercy for your pitiful soul.  It has to be hard working on being so evil.  

       

Widower,

Dr. Teresa Holmes 

#Officallydonewithyourfoolishness"

Holmes has also threatened to sue me three times, because I continue to complain that she has never taken the oath of office legally and, therefore, is not a legitimate member of the school board and cannot serve as an officer of the board.

I myself find her message unprofessional and offensive. It may even border on defamatory and libelous, considering use of the hashtag. A person representing a public body (non-religious school board) should refrain from invoking religion in a message to a school district constituent. 

I had no knowledge of her marital status or of her being a widow (not a widower). She is wrong to accuse me of being "fully aware" of that. 

If you have received any inappropriate message(s) from Teresa Holmes, please post a comment below or send a direct message to me at gusphilpott@gmail.com  I shall not disclose your name and/or the content of any direct email to me without your express consent.ft

Is Vax Compliance Coming?

Read this article about a State of Virginia Library employee who chose not to comply with Virginia's vax-passport-or-weekly-COVID-test requirement.

Czar Northam ruled in September, and the library employee saw the handwriting on the wall.

What will Richland 2 teachers and staff do, if the superintendent decides to follow Northam down the rabbit hole?

If 2,000 teachers didn't show up on Monday, would the school board notice? Would it give the superintendent a bigger raise for making a "tough decision"?

Or would the superintendent think, "Maybe I made the wrong decision."

Would the board (meaning "The Four" (the majority, who rule)) ever admit to making a wrong decision?