MCPS Whistleblower Details Lies, Retaliation in Sexual Harassment Case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope the post will be sued…

Lawyer here. No they won't and if they are, it'll be thrown out. She had no direct contact w/Beidleman. She's not even a part-time employee-she is a substitute in a massive district. Face it, Joel. You have no case. Your days are numbered. Deal with the repercussions of your disgusting actions.

[Anonymous]

I beg to differ. Trust me this will all turn around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I beg to differ. Trust me this will all turn around.

You're a poster on an anonymous message board

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I beg to differ. Trust me this will all turn around.

It just did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I beg to differ. Trust me this will all turn around.

It just did.

BOOM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone can allege anything in a lawsuit. Take it with a grain of salt until proven.

+1 As we’ve seen from the start, McKnight and her teams’s handling of this case has been above board and by the book from the start. A masterclass in effective policies being executed to the T by the administration. MCPS leadership deserves the benefit of the doubt in this until otherwise proven liable in a court.

LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope the post will be sued…

The Post can be sued, but there is no case. There would only be a case if the Post/Robbins knowingly lied, which did not occur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope the post will be sued…

Lawyer here. No they won't and if they are, it'll be thrown out. She had no direct contact w/Beidleman. She's not even a part-time employee-she is a substitute in a massive district. Face it, Joel. You have no case. Your days are numbered. Deal with the repercussions of your disgusting actions.

Th ey found he wasn't guilty of any wrong doing. What are you talking about? I only trust the first report. The latter ones are just cherry picking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope the post will be sued…

Lawyer here. No they won't and if they are, it'll be thrown out. She had no direct contact w/Beidleman. She's not even a part-time employee-she is a substitute in a massive district. Face it, Joel. You have no case. Your days are numbered. Deal with the repercussions of your disgusting actions.

Th ey found he wasn't guilty of any wrong doing. What are you talking about? I only trust the first report. The latter ones are just cherry picking

The first report would be the one that Khalid Walker submitted, not the one that was submitted with a fraudulent date. That first report found so much evidence of wrongdoing that the head of HR thought it would force MCPS to fire you, Joel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope the post will be sued…

Lawyer here. No they won't and if they are, it'll be thrown out. She had no direct contact w/Beidleman. She's not even a part-time employee-she is a substitute in a massive district. Face it, Joel. You have no case. Your days are numbered. Deal with the repercussions of your disgusting actions.

Th ey found he wasn't guilty of any wrong doing. What are you talking about? I only trust the first report. The latter ones are just cherry picking

The first report would be the one that Khalid Walker submitted, not the one that was submitted with a fraudulent date. That first report found so much evidence of wrongdoing that the head of HR thought it would force MCPS to fire you, Joel.

That's not true

[Anonymous]

Why is nobody asking for a Non-Retaliation Policy? The #1 reason people do not report things is fear, uncertainty, and doubt, primarily due to retaliation.

Nearly all of the MCPS C-Suite have little experience being at the C-Suite. Reading the profiles of each of the C-Suite (which is too difficult to find) showcases that each is in a growth-type role for their career. Therefore, they are new to MCPS, new to their roles, and generally fearful of losing their opportunity. In such situations, people who lack experience are more likely to deceive, ignore, and retaliate. And let's be clear: "Bullying" and "retaliation" are two separate behaviors.

It is time for MCPS to hire 'experienced' candidates who have weathered the storm and can rebuild a broken organizational culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope the post will be sued…

Lawyer here. No they won't and if they are, it'll be thrown out. She had no direct contact w/Beidleman. She's not even a part-time employee-she is a substitute in a massive district. Face it, Joel. You have no case. Your days are numbered. Deal with the repercussions of your disgusting actions.

Th ey found he wasn't guilty of any wrong doing. What are you talking about? I only trust the first report. The latter ones are just cherry picking

The first report would be the one that Khalid Walker submitted, not the one that was submitted with a fraudulent date. That first report found so much evidence of wrongdoing that the head of HR thought it would force MCPS to fire you, Joel.

That's not true

They authorized secondary reports when the original ones didn't say what they wanted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is nobody asking for a Non-Retaliation Policy? The #1 reason people do not report things is fear, uncertainty, and doubt, primarily due to retaliation.

Nearly all of the MCPS C-Suite have little experience being at the C-Suite. Reading the profiles of each of the C-Suite (which is too difficult to find) showcases that each is in a growth-type role for their career. Therefore, they are new to MCPS, new to their roles, and generally fearful of losing their opportunity. In such situations, people who lack experience are more likely to deceive, ignore, and retaliate. And let's be clear: "Bullying" and "retaliation" are two separate behaviors.

It is time for MCPS to hire 'experienced' candidates who have weathered the storm and can rebuild a broken organizational culture.

I'd rather they stop focusing on this nonsense and put some effort into educating kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is nobody asking for a Non-Retaliation Policy? The #1 reason people do not report things is fear, uncertainty, and doubt, primarily due to retaliation.

Nearly all of the MCPS C-Suite have little experience being at the C-Suite. Reading the profiles of each of the C-Suite (which is too difficult to find) showcases that each is in a growth-type role for their career. Therefore, they are new to MCPS, new to their roles, and generally fearful of losing their opportunity. In such situations, people who lack experience are more likely to deceive, ignore, and retaliate. And let's be clear: "Bullying" and "retaliation" are two separate behaviors.

It is time for MCPS to hire 'experienced' candidates who have weathered the storm and can rebuild a broken organizational culture.

I'd rather they stop focusing on this nonsense and put some effort into educating kids.

I'd rather principals stop bullying and sexually harassing their staff and put some effort into educating kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was very good work done by Alexandra Robbins. Interestingly she did it with MoCo 360 and not the WaPo. I wonder why that's the case?

Either way, I believe every word Khalid Walker says and I knew they were scapegoating him. Good for him for fighting back. Brian Hull has got to go.

bcs she is a substitute teacher for mcps and can no longer publish articles regarding this topic with the Washington Post due to conflict of interest. Probably another disgruntled mcps employee trying to get some shine like the social studies teacher that is over 60k in debt with the federal government just got a divorce and has three kids… Talk about a setup…

all this gossip and innuendo and it turns out there's a conflict of interest...

It has made the anti-McK faction that's been out for her head since day 1 happy