Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schools should be doing more background checks though. You think this would be a yearly thing.

No. Schools are already doing the job of social workers and food banks and mental health professionals and and and. They don't need to do the job of police too.

Maybe they should hire better people and we wouldn’t be arguing about who is responsible for flagging the criminals in their midst. Whether it’s School Board members or school-based guidance counselors, FCPS no longer attracts the best.

Anonymous wrote:Schools should be doing more background checks though. You think this would be a yearly thing.

No. Schools are already doing the job of social workers and food banks and mental health professionals and and and. They don't need to do the job of police too.

Strikes me the police did an incompetent job. I don't know anything about the relevant processes, but if asked on the fly I would have suggested calling the head of security at FCPS and then followed up with a confirming email. A real person and a email record.

Anonymous wrote:Schools should be doing more background checks though. You think this would be a yearly thing.

Why? There's a system in place already. Except for human error, which could occur anywhere, it works.

Schools should be doing more background checks though. You think this would be a yearly thing.

They didn’t hire a sex offender. Keep up.

Anonymous wrote:The police effed this one up. Fcps makes a million mistakes but this ain't one.

Obviously hiring yet another sex offender reflects poorly on FCPS.

I just read the chesterfield police chief’s post. His office sent an email to sbraprand! Not only did they miss the undeliverable bounce backs but they didn’t even notice they had a typo of Brabrand’s name as their email address. Great detective work.

The police effed this one up. Fcps makes a million mistakes but this ain't one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “annual background checks” line is once again straight from those openfcps hacks. No, the school system doesn’t need to spend time and money doing that. Police need to fulfill their legal duty to inform schools of arrests. Why does open FCPS always come back to attacks on the public schools, hmmm, why could that be?

I'm not in Open FCPS (ugh, are they still a thing?) but I don't see why we can't have annual background checks. The school board wastes plenty of money on other stuff. This might actually prevent this sort of situation from happening again. That said, it does seem like the fault lies with the police department.

There aren’t enough resources (money nor people) to do background checks annually.

The backgound checks are cheaper than one kf the covid tests we have sitting in storage.

+1. And it’s quite possible that any decent vetting during the hiring process would have surfaced red flags with regards to scum like this Glasgow counselor, even if the two arrests occurred after he was hired.

They do thorough background checks at hiring. They already do “decent vetting.” Stop making up stories and acknowledge that the police screwed up. There was a good process to know about the arrest but the police didn’t do it. Getting them to do their legal duty makes way more sense than imposing another time and money obligation on FCPS.