MCPS bus driver arrest

[Anonymous]

*They

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

You think child molesters leave finger prints on their victims? They leave marks, but not that kind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

My mind is boggling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

You think child molesters leave finger prints on their victims? They leave marks, but not that kind.

perhaps you think they put gloves on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

You think child molesters leave finger prints on their victims? They leave marks, but not that kind.

perhaps you think they put gloves on?

Most kids are molested by someone they know really well. Like this “Mr. Steve” or their coach or an uncle. If molesters left prints that police lifted, they would have been charged because the standard response is “I never touched that kid. Why is he lying?”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

You think child molesters leave finger prints on their victims? They leave marks, but not that kind.

perhaps you think they put gloves on?

Most kids are molested by someone they know really well. Like this “Mr. Steve” or their coach or an uncle. If molesters left prints that police lifted, they would have been charged because the standard response is “I never touched that kid. Why is he lying?”.

or an aunt let's not make this all about men .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

You think child molesters leave finger prints on their victims? They leave marks, but not that kind.

You need a surface that you can lift fingerprints from. Skin and clothing are not optimal. Plus, DNA evidence make a much stronger case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

You think child molesters leave finger prints on their victims? They leave marks, but not that kind.

perhaps you think they put gloves on?

Most kids are molested by someone they know really well. Like this “Mr. Steve” or their coach or an uncle. If molesters left prints that police lifted, they would have been charged because the standard response is “I never touched that kid. Why is he lying?”.

or an aunt let's not make this all about men .

Pretty sure all the MCPS cases have been men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

MCPS employee here. Fingerprinting is already a part of the background check. In most of these cases it seems like these people are getting caught for the first time, so even yearly checks might not help. Frankly, I'd like to see some kind of system in place for monitoring suspicious employees. I've known teachers who I get a bad feeling about and there is nothing to do but watch and be ready to report.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

You think child molesters leave finger prints on their victims? They leave marks, but not that kind.

perhaps you think they put gloves on?

Most kids are molested by someone they know really well. Like this “Mr. Steve” or their coach or an uncle. If molesters left prints that police lifted, they would have been charged because the standard response is “I never touched that kid. Why is he lying?”.

or an aunt let's not make this all about men .

And there it is!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ive said it before and I'll say it again:
Keep. Men. Away. From. School age. Children.

I await your blahblahblah replies.

That means you or your husband or your brother or your boss
Make women leave their husbands on the day they give birth
Idiots like you ....

Exactly. There is no way to keep men away from school age children because school age children have fathers and uncles and grandfathers and older brothers and neighbors. And then their friends have fathers and uncles and grandfathers and older brothers and neighbors. It's impossible to keep your child away from men and stupid to try.

I’m not endorsing her position, but I took it to mean professionally, not all men under all circumstances.

How stupid is that ?
a male teacher maybe some a husband and father uncle and grandfather.
Her position is absolutely and totally nonsensical .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ive said it before and I'll say it again:
Keep. Men. Away. From. School age. Children.

I await your blahblahblah replies.

That means you or your husband or your brother or your boss
Make women leave their husbands on the day they give birth
Idiots like you ....

Exactly. There is no way to keep men away from school age children because school age children have fathers and uncles and grandfathers and older brothers and neighbors. And then their friends have fathers and uncles and grandfathers and older brothers and neighbors. It's impossible to keep your child away from men and stupid to try.

I’m not endorsing her position, but I took it to mean professionally, not all men under all circumstances.

How stupid is that ?
a male teacher maybe some a husband and father uncle and grandfather.

Her position is absolutely and totally nonsensical .

At least her writing was coherent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The need to actually do a real background check on all MCPS employees, including a finger print.

Why? Because most of the people who are committing these crimes have done it before but have not been caught. For whatever the reason they are able to get away with it, the kids don't talk, they are scared to talk etc. But if their finger prints are required to be on record, chances are they will never apply in fears that at sometime in the past they left a finger print in the past. The county is too cheap to actually do this so this is what we are left with.

MCPS employee here. Fingerprinting is already a part of the background check. In most of these cases it seems like these people are getting caught for the first time, so even yearly checks might not help. Frankly, I'd like to see some kind of system in place for monitoring suspicious employees. I've known teachers who I get a bad feeling about and there is nothing to do but watch and be ready to report.

Thanks for writing in. I didn't want to say this because I am not an employee, but given that parents who chaperone a field trip that extends outside the school day (like returning at 8pm or overnights) have to be fingerprinted, I am pretty sure all employees who have any contact with kids are also fingerprinted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This can’t keep happening. I recommend background checks done every year

Is there anything to indicate that this guy had been caught before?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This can’t keep happening. I recommend background checks done every year

He’s never been arrested before in Maryland. Most sex abusers don’t have records. There are cameras all over that bus. What they should do is implement a policy of regular review of the tapes.