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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ffs people, do some of you literally not GAF about children at all? Do you think a person needs to be convicted of a crime to be disqualifies from leadership positions? What is more important? Protecting children? Or protecting predators?

We've seen the evidence as much as you have and don't think he's a "predator." I'm not sure why that's hard to understand. I don't think removing him protects children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was accused of stomping his foot on a child but acquitted in court without having to put on a defense. Not having to put on a defense is extremely rare and shows how there was no evidence it happened and the witnesses lacked credibility. This includes the video that does not show that any contact was made.

I mean… on the video he clearly kicked at the boys foot multiple times. That alone should disqualify him.

There is no evidence of this at all!

He makes three motions and even pushes the foot…it’s really clear

[Anonymous]

I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

I'm similarly baffled. I assume these people have had bad experiences with MCPS that now cause them to assume the worst. I don't see anything troubling in the video, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was accused of stomping his foot on a child but acquitted in court without having to put on a defense. Not having to put on a defense is extremely rare and shows how there was no evidence it happened and the witnesses lacked credibility. This includes the video that does not show that any contact was made.

I mean… on the video he clearly kicked at the boys foot multiple times. That alone should disqualify him.

There is no evidence of this at all!

He makes three motions and even pushes the foot…it’s really clear

I've watched the video now several times and I have no earthly idea what you think you're seeing in the video. Yes, there seems to be one stomping motion, but not three. And there doesn't seem to be anything underneath his foot when he does it (nor does the kid seem to react when contact would have occurred). After the stomping motion he slides his foot, but he's sliding his foot away from the direction of the kid. I don't see anything that looks like pushing the foot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

I'm similarly baffled. I assume these people have had bad experiences with MCPS that now cause them to assume the worst. I don't see anything troubling in the video, either.

We all saw what happened with Biedleman. We also know this incident was reported to teachers by students (not the victim). The defense attorneys themselves say one angle does not tell the full story. On top of that this video is so blurred it doesn't tell us much. But MCPS deserves ZERO trust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

I'm similarly baffled. I assume these people have had bad experiences with MCPS that now cause them to assume the worst. I don't see anything troubling in the video, either.

We all saw what happened with Biedleman. We also know this incident was reported to teachers by students (not the victim). The defense attorneys themselves say one angle does not tell the full story. On top of that this video is so blurred it doesn't tell us much. But MCPS deserves ZERO trust.

OK, but why don't you trust the judge?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

I'm similarly baffled. I assume these people have had bad experiences with MCPS that now cause them to assume the worst. I don't see anything troubling in the video, either.

We all saw what happened with Biedleman. We also know this incident was reported to teachers by students (not the victim). The defense attorneys themselves say one angle does not tell the full story. On top of that this video is so blurred it doesn't tell us much. But MCPS deserves ZERO trust.

OK, but why don't you trust the judge?

I don't trust anyone who doesn't have some basic awareness of autism, but that's not the point. My standard for a school leadership position is a little higher than "they couldn't prove he committed a crime"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

I'm similarly baffled. I assume these people have had bad experiences with MCPS that now cause them to assume the worst. I don't see anything troubling in the video, either.

We all saw what happened with Biedleman. We also know this incident was reported to teachers by students (not the victim). The defense attorneys themselves say one angle does not tell the full story. On top of that this video is so blurred it doesn't tell us much. But MCPS deserves ZERO trust.

Fine. I don’t trust MCPS either.

But in this case, the judicial system took over and made a ruling. Why do you not trust that?

Sounds like some parents just dislike this guy and are looking to end his career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

I'm similarly baffled. I assume these people have had bad experiences with MCPS that now cause them to assume the worst. I don't see anything troubling in the video, either.

We all saw what happened with Biedleman. We also know this incident was reported to teachers by students (not the victim). The defense attorneys themselves say one angle does not tell the full story. On top of that this video is so blurred it doesn't tell us much. But MCPS deserves ZERO trust.

Fine. I don’t trust MCPS either.

But in this case, the judicial system took over and made a ruling. Why do you not trust that?

Sounds like some parents just dislike this guy and are looking to end his career.

The judicial system determines the outcomes of criminal cases. We are talking about an HR decision, which should have a different standard than a criminal case, and is all on MCPS. How many times does this have to be explained to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

I'm similarly baffled. I assume these people have had bad experiences with MCPS that now cause them to assume the worst. I don't see anything troubling in the video, either.

We all saw what happened with Biedleman. We also know this incident was reported to teachers by students (not the victim). The defense attorneys themselves say one angle does not tell the full story. On top of that this video is so blurred it doesn't tell us much. But MCPS deserves ZERO trust.

Fine. I don’t trust MCPS either.

But in this case, the judicial system took over and made a ruling. Why do you not trust that?

Sounds like some parents just dislike this guy and are looking to end his career.

The judicial system determines the outcomes of criminal cases. We are talking about an HR decision, which should have a different standard than a criminal case, and is all on MCPS. How many times does this have to be explained to you?

DP. He didn't just rule on the case, though. After reviewing the evidence and hearing the testimony, he determined there wasn't evidence supporting the charge. The main thing the rest of have to go off of is the video, and that doesn't show contact. Several people, myself included, seem to think the video suggests there *wasn't* contact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I’m watching a different video than many posters. It honestly looks like nothing.

I'm similarly baffled. I assume these people have had bad experiences with MCPS that now cause them to assume the worst. I don't see anything troubling in the video, either.

We all saw what happened with Biedleman. We also know this incident was reported to teachers by students (not the victim). The defense attorneys themselves say one angle does not tell the full story. On top of that this video is so blurred it doesn't tell us much. But MCPS deserves ZERO trust.

Fine. I don’t trust MCPS either.

But in this case, the judicial system took over and made a ruling. Why do you not trust that?

Sounds like some parents just dislike this guy and are looking to end his career.

The judicial system determines the outcomes of criminal cases. We are talking about an HR decision, which should have a different standard than a criminal case, and is all on MCPS. How many times does this have to be explained to you?

DP. He didn't just rule on the case, though. After reviewing the evidence and hearing the testimony, he determined there wasn't evidence supporting the charge. The main thing the rest of have to go off of is the video, and that doesn't show contact. Several people, myself included, seem to think the video suggests there *wasn't* contact.

The video we can see is blurred. Not sure why you think it is up to you to decide who gets to be in a position of authority around our kids.

The police spoke AT THE TIME (not 8 months later) with the people involved, saw an unblurred video that showed the child "immediately weeping" and had enough to arrest him. That is enough for me to give the CHILD the benefit of the doubt and keep this guy away from kids.

[Anonymous]

Btw I think we need to remember, the witnesses are all children. This poses a particular difficulty for proving a criminal case in a court of law. And maybe he shouldn't go to prison, but it also doesn't mean we should discount what the kids said they experienced and saw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was accused of stomping his foot on a child but acquitted in court without having to put on a defense. Not having to put on a defense is extremely rare and shows how there was no evidence it happened and the witnesses lacked credibility. This includes the video that does not show that any contact was made.

I mean… on the video he clearly kicked at the boys foot multiple times. That alone should disqualify him.

There is no evidence of this at all!

He makes three motions and even pushes the foot…it’s really clear

I've watched the video now several times and I have no earthly idea what you think you're seeing in the video. Yes, there seems to be one stomping motion, but not three. And there doesn't seem to be anything underneath his foot when he does it (nor does the kid seem to react when contact would have occurred). After the stomping motion he slides his foot, but he's sliding his foot away from the direction of the kid. I don't see anything that looks like pushing the foot.

It's 100% clear at the 1:18 mark in the video (https://www.fox5dc.com/news/video-appears-show-former-maryland-principal-stomping-foot-kindergartner-autism). You can absolutely see him make a forward motion and contact the child's foot with his. The motion is TOWARDS the child's foot and makes contact. I don't know if that is a stomp--it may not be. But it is prohibited physical contact.

[Anonymous]

It's so bizarre to me that people are suggesting he's definitely innocent and that the kid "didn't react" based on a video that blurs the all the children's faces, the blurring makes it hard to see other things and both Winter and the child are partially obstructed by the news ticker on the bottom of the screen at the point when he allegedly grabs his clothes and sits him down. Really people? You cannot possibly expect us to believe you are unbiased observers with no personal interest in this case.