Another sex offender still working with MCPS

[Anonymous]

I hope people start relaying their concerns over MCPS's extremely passive views on sexual assaults in our school system. How this man still has an active job with the school district is beyond me. A likening to young girls, sodomizing a dog. Caught watching Hoover girls undressing. Yuck!!

http://www.wjla.com/articles/2014/11/convicted-peeping-tom-re-arrested-for-molesting-family-dog-still-employed-by-mcps-109340.html

[Anonymous]

He's working as a building maintenance worker at a bus depot, where he has zero contact with students.

Do you think that sex offenders should be unemployed, or do you think that they should be employed, but not by the school district, even in a job where they have zero contact with students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He's working as a building maintenance worker at a bus depot, where he has zero contact with students.

Do you think that sex offenders should be unemployed, or do you think that they should be employed, but not by the school district, even in a job where they have zero contact with students?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He's working as a building maintenance worker at a bus depot, where he has zero contact with students.

Do you think that sex offenders should be unemployed, or do you think that they should be employed, but not by the school district, even in a job where they have zero contact with students?

Yes, I believe that a man that has admitted having problems with underage girls, jerking off in public to them, sneaking in a locker room where he worked and watching girls undress at a middle school (and jerking off to them) and now just recently sodomizing and having oral sex with dogs should not have any employment with a school district. None. Absolutely zero. If you were the parents to one of the girl's victimized, you would think the same as me. This is repulsive. He is very sick and will act on it again. Just another MCPS employee that is a predator quietly getting moved from job to job instead of fired.

So yes, I think ANY person that is a child predator should not have any job within a school district. I can't believe there are people out there that do. I am amazed how many people lower the standards of MCPS.

[Anonymous]

These people should be sent to an island or executed

[Anonymous]

Thank the unions for this one

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank the unions for this one

why? and which union?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's working as a building maintenance worker at a bus depot, where he has zero contact with students.

Do you think that sex offenders should be unemployed, or do you think that they should be employed, but not by the school district, even in a job where they have zero contact with students?

Yes, I believe that a man that has admitted having problems with underage girls, jerking off in public to them, sneaking in a locker room where he worked and watching girls undress at a middle school (and jerking off to them) and now just recently sodomizing and having oral sex with dogs should not have any employment with a school district. None. Absolutely zero. If you were the parents to one of the girl's victimized, you would think the same as me. This is repulsive. He is very sick and will act on it again. Just another MCPS employee that is a predator quietly getting moved from job to job instead of fired.

So yes, I think ANY person that is a child predator should not have any job within a school district. I can't believe there are people out there that do. I am amazed how many people lower the standards of MCPS.

I have to agree

[Anonymous]

Service Employees International Union, Local 500.
I would have bought that a sexual offense while on school property was a fire-able offense under the union contract. What I want to know is who made he decision to transfer him rather than fire him?
And yes, even offenders need to get a job, but seems like an incident like the one he was convicted of should forfeit his job with his employer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's working as a building maintenance worker at a bus depot, where he has zero contact with students.

Do you think that sex offenders should be unemployed, or do you think that they should be employed, but not by the school district, even in a job where they have zero contact with students?

Yes, I believe that a man that has admitted having problems with underage girls, jerking off in public to them, sneaking in a locker room where he worked and watching girls undress at a middle school (and jerking off to them) and now just recently sodomizing and having oral sex with dogs should not have any employment with a school district. None. Absolutely zero. If you were the parents to one of the girl's victimized, you would think the same as me. This is repulsive. He is very sick and will act on it again. Just another MCPS employee that is a predator quietly getting moved from job to job instead of fired.

So yes, I think ANY person that is a child predator should not have any job within a school district. I can't believe there are people out there that do. I am amazed how many people lower the standards of MCPS.

I have to agree

+1. I wouldn't care if he had a job fixing Greyhound buses at the Greyhound depot or working in a warehouse or whatever, but in a school system (any capacity)? Absolutely not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+1. I wouldn't care if he had a job fixing Greyhound buses at the Greyhound depot or working in a warehouse or whatever, but in a school system (any capacity)? Absolutely not.

I honestly don't understand the difference between fixing Greyhound buses at the Greyhound depot and school buses at the school bus depot.

[Anonymous]

Locked up on an island in the middle of shark-infested waters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1. I wouldn't care if he had a job fixing Greyhound buses at the Greyhound depot or working in a warehouse or whatever, but in a school system (any capacity)? Absolutely not.

I honestly don't understand the difference between fixing Greyhound buses at the Greyhound depot and school buses at the school bus depot.

If he is an MCPS employee with an MCPS badge, can we ENSURE he has zero access to children? I agree that we are all better off if offenders have jobs and are not destitute and desperate with nothing to lose, but I agree they have no business working for any employer whose purpose is to serve children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If he is an MCPS employee with an MCPS badge, can we ENSURE he has zero access to children? I agree that we are all better off if offenders have jobs and are not destitute and desperate with nothing to lose, but I agree they have no business working for any employer whose purpose is to serve children.

In the OP's link, Dana Tofig says, "As a building maintenance worker in a bus depot, an employee would have no contact with students in any way."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If he is an MCPS employee with an MCPS badge, can we ENSURE he has zero access to children? I agree that we are all better off if offenders have jobs and are not destitute and desperate with nothing to lose, but I agree they have no business working for any employer whose purpose is to serve children.

In the OP's link, Dana Tofig says, "As a building maintenance worker in a bus depot, an employee would have no contact with students in any way."

You can say that he won't as a normal part of his work duties, but it seems to me that an MCPS badge could be used to obtain access to children.