cover 1999-2002 - SCI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

STUDENT SUSPENSION HEARINGS Victims on Trial: The Treatment of Sex Abuse Victims and Victims of Other Serious Crimes in Board of Education Student Suspension Hearings An investigation by this office un<strong>cover</strong>ed that BOE procedures in disciplinary hearings neglect the rights of victims of sexual abuse and other crimes. The report began by focusing on a single issue at student suspension hearings: the failure of BOE procedures to protect victims from improper cross-examination about their prior sexual experience. In that case, a 14-year-old female student was asked by the attorney for the 19-year-old male student accused of sexually attacking her whether she had “ever licked any other boy’s penis” and whether she had “ever had sex with a boy.” As we detailed in our report, that line of questioning is in sharp contrast with “rape shield” or “victim shield” laws enacted more than a generation ago for victims in criminal trials. Remarkably, there is no BOE regulation, State regulation, or State law to prevent a victim of sexual Our investigation revealed that victims of sexual misconduct were being victimized again during BOE disciplinary hearings by being compelled to answer embarrassing and irrelevant questions about their sexual history. misconduct from being victimized again at a proceeding to discipline her attacker, by being compelled to answer embarrassing and irrelevant questions about her sexual history. In addition to allowing improper questioning of victims, the BOE’s disciplinary procedures neglect the rights of victims in a variety of other ways. Specifically: • Victims receive little advance notice of the hearings at which they are to testify, and are often unaware that they will be cross-examined by an attorney for the accused. 62
• Victims do not have the right to an attorney at the hearings; and, generally, no one is present to object or to otherwise protect the victim from harsh crossexamination or inadmissible evidence. • There are no counselors to support victims when confronting their attackers in the hearing room. • Victims who do not have a command of the English language do not have access to foreign language interpreters. • Hearings are held in small offices in which victims must sit facing their alleged attackers across a narrow table with little or no security. • The hearing undermines the prospects for a successful criminal prosecution of the accused. Indeed, schools rarely inform the police or prosecutors about the hearing. • Victims often miss school because their attacker still attends that school. Even when there is an arrest, an accused student cannot be sent to another school until a disciplinary hearing is conducted. Recommendations and Results This office recommended a sweeping revision of the disciplinary procedures to take into account the rights of victims and their families and to address the specific failings detailed in our report. In response, Chancellor Levy issued a statement announcing that he agreed with most of our recommendations and directing that new procedures be put in place before the start of the 2001-<strong>2002</strong> school year. He formed an advisory committee for that purpose, led by the Deputy Counsel to the Chancellor. After study by the committee, the BOE set out to revise Chancellor’s regulation A-443. The significant changes that were made are as followed: • Rape shield protection language which establishes parameters for the admissibility of evidence regarding prior sexual history of a victim; • Expansion of the school’s right to have a staff advisor present at all suspension hearings; • Inclusion of more detailed alternative instruction requirements. 63
Page 1 and 2:
___________________________________
Page 3 and 4:
EDUCATOR CHEATING………………
Page 5 and 6:
INTRODUCTION The Office of the Spec
Page 7 and 8:
Hijacked On The Technology Superhig
Page 9 and 10:
Home Instruction: Teachers Cheat Ch
Page 11 and 12:
eview. As a result, on January 2, 2
Page 13 and 14:
eview of bank account records and p
Page 15 and 16: Recommendations and Results We reco
Page 17 and 18: costing in excess of $250, the cust
Page 19 and 20: Vendor Corruption The Retberg Child
Page 21 and 22: Thomas’s conduct led to the disco
Page 23 and 24: Employee Theft Time Abuse: Julian G
Page 25 and 26: This incident could have been avoid
Page 27 and 28: The outraged BOE employee who made
Page 29 and 30: Mark Drexler An examination of atte
Page 31 and 32: secretary spoke with Antonick by ph
Page 33 and 34: Recommendations Antonick submitted
Page 35 and 36: severity of his injury after leavin
Page 37 and 38: EDUCATOR CHEATING Several major inv
Page 39 and 40: Recommendations and Results We reco
Page 41 and 42: his stint as proctor for the 2000 P
Page 43 and 44: Recommendations Concerned about the
Page 45 and 46: FAILURE TO REPORT CRIMES AND MISCON
Page 47 and 48: Dangerous Consequences: Officials a
Page 49 and 50: IS 278, Brooklyn On a hot and humid
Page 51 and 52: The attack in the stairwell of CS 6
Page 53 and 54: STUDENT SAFETY Charles Serrano: Usi
Page 55 and 56: SEXUAL ABUSE AND MISCONDUCT From th
Page 57 and 58: Shortly after the victim transferre
Page 59 and 60: To investigators, the female studen
Page 61 and 62: ARREST CASES Carlos Diaz On August
Page 63 and 64: Hood was indicted by a Queens Grand
Page 65: Nadal admitted that he had physical
Page 69 and 70: Franklin Simon: Hired by the BOE Wi
Page 71 and 72: proceedings. The teacher was paid t
Page 73 and 74: Williams was arrested in September
Page 75 and 76: Grand Illusion: An Investigation In
Page 77 and 78: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST______________
Page 79 and 80: ADMINISTRATIVE OUTCOMES 1 _________
Page 81: III. Outcomes of Cases From Prior R
show all

cover 1999-2002 - SCI

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?