Petition to Rescind the appointment of AP at Rock Creek Valley ES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do fully admit to not knowing all of the details but let's make sure we are not jumping on a bandwagon for a person who was wrongly accused.

He was acquitted and staff at Ritchie Park said that the whole thing was overblown and fishy. It was also started because the AP called her husband about how to handle it- and he just happened to be a police officer. So many things seem off in this case. It seems like you are trying to drag a person down when it actually might be the county that is at fault.

This is incorrect.
Also, all administrators and teaching staff are mandated reporters. The AP had to report this incident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because there is not enough evidence to convict him does not convince me that he should be around small children.

Even if it’s not true?

The video. Speaks for itself

The video wasn't even enough to convince the judge to continue the trial. Did you see a video different from the judge's (genuinely asking)?

The judge looked at the video from the angle of “is this man a criminal “. As a parent, I am looking at it as “is this man ethical?”

So no, I do not believe he should have grabbed a developmentally delayed FIVE year old in that manner. No I do not believe he should have even lifted his foot as an intent to stomp near or on that child’s body. Whether he made contact or not, we’ll never know but it certainly looked like he was intending to. And that’s enough for me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because there is not enough evidence to convict him does not convince me that he should be around small children.

Even if it’s not true?

The video. Speaks for itself

The video does not show he hit the child’s foot. The judge noted that the child does not react as if his foot was ever hit.

Enough already. He lost his school, was arrested, case was dismissed or he was acquitted, and MCPS seems lucky that he didn’t sue them for how things were handled.

I believe it’s time to move on and allow him to return. No doubt he will be micromanaged and watched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because there is not enough evidence to convict him does not convince me that he should be around small children.

Even if it’s not true?

The video. Speaks for itself

The video wasn't even enough to convince the judge to continue the trial. Did you see a video different from the judge's (genuinely asking)?

The judge looked at the video from the angle of “is this man a criminal “. As a parent, I am looking at it as “is this man ethical?”

So no, I do not believe he should have grabbed a developmentally delayed FIVE year old in that manner. No I do not believe he should have even lifted his foot as an intent to stomp near or on that child’s body. Whether he made contact or not, we’ll never know but it certainly looked like he was intending to. And that’s enough for me

. Can someone link to the video?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do fully admit to not knowing all of the details but let's make sure we are not jumping on a bandwagon for a person who was wrongly accused.

He was acquitted and staff at Ritchie Park said that the whole thing was overblown and fishy. It was also started because the AP called her husband about how to handle it- and he just happened to be a police officer. So many things seem off in this case. It seems like you are trying to drag a person down when it actually might be the county that is at fault.

This is incorrect.
Also, all administrators and teaching staff are mandated reporters. The AP had to report this incident.

Exactly. I’d like to see all of his supporters change their tune if their own precious babies were grabbed by an admin the way this child was

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do fully admit to not knowing all of the details but let's make sure we are not jumping on a bandwagon for a person who was wrongly accused.

He was acquitted and staff at Ritchie Park said that the whole thing was overblown and fishy. It was also started because the AP called her husband about how to handle it- and he just happened to be a police officer. So many things seem off in this case. It seems like you are trying to drag a person down when it actually might be the county that is at fault.

This is incorrect.
Also, all administrators and teaching staff are mandated reporters. The AP had to report this incident.

As an educator I agree we are mandated reporters but that’s to child protective services or MCPS investigations. We do not report to the police and that is clear in our training videos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because there is not enough evidence to convict him does not convince me that he should be around small children.

Even if it’s not true?

The video. Speaks for itself

The video does not show he hit the child’s foot. The judge noted that the child does not react as if his foot was ever hit.

Enough already. He lost his school, was arrested, case was dismissed or he was acquitted, and MCPS seems lucky that he didn’t sue them for how things were handled.

I believe it’s time to move on and allow him to return. No doubt he will be micromanaged and watched.

I actually Hope the family sues mcps. And wouldn’t Mr winter be suing mcpd ? What does mcps have to do with his arrest and the charges ? Nothing at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Be happy there is an administrator who is willing to not let kids do whatever they want. It appears that some parents get upset when their children cant do whatever they want whenever they want to.

News reports indicate

During the trial, several people testified that the student had difficulties staying in class for long periods and would often get up to walk around the school. On the day of the incident, the student left the cafeteria several times.


During a roughly five-hour bench trial, Montgomery County Circuit Judge Sharon Burrell said the student was inconsistent in his testimony and that he showed no outward signs of pain in the video. She said the state didn’t prove whether the student was upset because his foot was stomped on or if it was because he was scared or upset about having to do something he didn’t want to do.

There wasn’t even enough evidence to continue the trial. He was NOT acquitted, the case was so weak the judge dismissed the case.

Read your post. He did it. There were a million ways to handle it. This is abuse. A child with special needs may express pain differently. What if it were your child?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because there is not enough evidence to convict him does not convince me that he should be around small children.

Even if it’s not true?

The video. Speaks for itself

The video wasn't even enough to convince the judge to continue the trial. Did you see a video different from the judge's (genuinely asking)?

Judges don’t always make the best decisions or even fully consider evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be happy there is an administrator who is willing to not let kids do whatever they want. It appears that some parents get upset when their children cant do whatever they want whenever they want to.

News reports indicate

During the trial, several people testified that the student had difficulties staying in class for long periods and would often get up to walk around the school. On the day of the incident, the student left the cafeteria several times.


During a roughly five-hour bench trial, Montgomery County Circuit Judge Sharon Burrell said the student was inconsistent in his testimony and that he showed no outward signs of pain in the video. She said the state didn’t prove whether the student was upset because his foot was stomped on or if it was because he was scared or upset about having to do something he didn’t want to do.

There wasn’t even enough evidence to continue the trial. He was NOT acquitted, the case was so weak the judge dismissed the case.

Read your post. He did it. There were a million ways to handle it. This is abuse. A child with special needs may express pain differently. What if it were your child?

+1

His supporters are blindly believing in him and with no regard to the child with a disability which was so clearly documented. Instead they blame the victim and imply he deserved it. So incredibly sick just like Andrew

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be happy there is an administrator who is willing to not let kids do whatever they want. It appears that some parents get upset when their children cant do whatever they want whenever they want to.

News reports indicate

During the trial, several people testified that the student had difficulties staying in class for long periods and would often get up to walk around the school. On the day of the incident, the student left the cafeteria several times.


During a roughly five-hour bench trial, Montgomery County Circuit Judge Sharon Burrell said the student was inconsistent in his testimony and that he showed no outward signs of pain in the video. She said the state didn’t prove whether the student was upset because his foot was stomped on or if it was because he was scared or upset about having to do something he didn’t want to do.

There wasn’t even enough evidence to continue the trial. He was NOT acquitted, the case was so weak the judge dismissed the case.

Read your post. He did it. There were a million ways to handle it. This is abuse. A child with special needs may express pain differently. What if it were your child?

There was no case. Stop trying to ruin this man’s life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be happy there is an administrator who is willing to not let kids do whatever they want. It appears that some parents get upset when their children cant do whatever they want whenever they want to.

News reports indicate

During the trial, several people testified that the student had difficulties staying in class for long periods and would often get up to walk around the school. On the day of the incident, the student left the cafeteria several times.


During a roughly five-hour bench trial, Montgomery County Circuit Judge Sharon Burrell said the student was inconsistent in his testimony and that he showed no outward signs of pain in the video. She said the state didn’t prove whether the student was upset because his foot was stomped on or if it was because he was scared or upset about having to do something he didn’t want to do.

There wasn’t even enough evidence to continue the trial. He was NOT acquitted, the case was so weak the judge dismissed the case.

Read your post. He did it. There were a million ways to handle it. This is abuse. A child with special needs may express pain differently. What if it were your child?

There was no case. Stop trying to ruin this man’s life.

The original post was about how the elementary school community has a petition to keep him out of their building. No one is trying to ruin his life. Perhaps he should take a hint that he’s not exactly welcome back to schools and pursue something in offices away from kids. This is just not a good fit after everything that has happened

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be happy there is an administrator who is willing to not let kids do whatever they want. It appears that some parents get upset when their children cant do whatever they want whenever they want to.

News reports indicate

During the trial, several people testified that the student had difficulties staying in class for long periods and would often get up to walk around the school. On the day of the incident, the student left the cafeteria several times.


During a roughly five-hour bench trial, Montgomery County Circuit Judge Sharon Burrell said the student was inconsistent in his testimony and that he showed no outward signs of pain in the video. She said the state didn’t prove whether the student was upset because his foot was stomped on or if it was because he was scared or upset about having to do something he didn’t want to do.

There wasn’t even enough evidence to continue the trial. He was NOT acquitted, the case was so weak the judge dismissed the case.

Read your post. He did it. There were a million ways to handle it. This is abuse. A child with special needs may express pain differently. What if it were your child?

There was no case. Stop trying to ruin this man’s life.

The original post was about how the elementary school community has a petition to keep him out of their building. No one is trying to ruin his life. Perhaps he should take a hint that he’s not exactly welcome back to schools and pursue something in offices away from kids. This is just not a good fit after everything that has happened

Since he was cleared by the courts and MCPS he should be allowed to continue his career. Making an argument not to permit him in a school is saying what happened in the courts and with his due process doesn’t matter. As a result you are saying he did do it when it was never proven which does in fact ruin him. Let’s also be honest he didn’t choose where to go, MCPS did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be happy there is an administrator who is willing to not let kids do whatever they want. It appears that some parents get upset when their children cant do whatever they want whenever they want to.

News reports indicate

During the trial, several people testified that the student had difficulties staying in class for long periods and would often get up to walk around the school. On the day of the incident, the student left the cafeteria several times.


During a roughly five-hour bench trial, Montgomery County Circuit Judge Sharon Burrell said the student was inconsistent in his testimony and that he showed no outward signs of pain in the video. She said the state didn’t prove whether the student was upset because his foot was stomped on or if it was because he was scared or upset about having to do something he didn’t want to do.

There wasn’t even enough evidence to continue the trial. He was NOT acquitted, the case was so weak the judge dismissed the case.

Read your post. He did it. There were a million ways to handle it. This is abuse. A child with special needs may express pain differently. What if it were your child?

There was no case. Stop trying to ruin this man’s life.

The original post was about how the elementary school community has a petition to keep him out of their building. No one is trying to ruin his life. Perhaps he should take a hint that he’s not exactly welcome back to schools and pursue something in offices away from kids. This is just not a good fit after everything that has happened

Since he was cleared by the courts and MCPS he should be allowed to continue his career. Making an argument not to permit him in a school is saying what happened in the courts and with his due process doesn’t matter. As a result you are saying he did do it when it was never proven which does in fact ruin him. Let’s also be honest he didn’t choose where to go, MCPS did.

+1

It sounds like he has already suffered a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be happy there is an administrator who is willing to not let kids do whatever they want. It appears that some parents get upset when their children cant do whatever they want whenever they want to.

News reports indicate

During the trial, several people testified that the student had difficulties staying in class for long periods and would often get up to walk around the school. On the day of the incident, the student left the cafeteria several times.


During a roughly five-hour bench trial, Montgomery County Circuit Judge Sharon Burrell said the student was inconsistent in his testimony and that he showed no outward signs of pain in the video. She said the state didn’t prove whether the student was upset because his foot was stomped on or if it was because he was scared or upset about having to do something he didn’t want to do.

There wasn’t even enough evidence to continue the trial. He was NOT acquitted, the case was so weak the judge dismissed the case.

Read your post. He did it. There were a million ways to handle it. This is abuse. A child with special needs may express pain differently. What if it were your child?

There was no case. Stop trying to ruin this man’s life.

The original post was about how the elementary school community has a petition to keep him out of their building. No one is trying to ruin his life. Perhaps he should take a hint that he’s not exactly welcome back to schools and pursue something in offices away from kids. This is just not a good fit after everything that has happened

Since he was cleared by the courts and MCPS he should be allowed to continue his career. Making an argument not to permit him in a school is saying what happened in the courts and with his due process doesn’t matter. As a result you are saying he did do it when it was never proven which does in fact ruin him. Let’s also be honest he didn’t choose where to go, MCPS did.

+1

It sounds like he has already suffered a lot.

Hopefully mcps will rethink that decision now that the community at RCV has expressed themselves and they don’t seem to be standing down.