Sunday, January 10, 2016


We don't know what season of House Cards in the FWISD we are in but it sure seems like an eternity when nothing seems to work and the past keeps us from a better future.

We know that the players in this House continue to cause harm to everyone in the district and how they clean house when you are go against them.

Let's go back to the Palazzolo case and the recent Appeals Courts hearing.  In the transcript, Brandt, the attorney in charge of the case, takes on Dr. Sutherland and ex-member Vasquez.  His defense of the district is that because both members changed their vote the second time to fire Palazzolo that it should seal the case and end it.  He mentions Sutherland so many times that basically she is the savior of the case and/or maleficent.  We recall from the Sutherland deposition that she stated that the district had lied in the case because of the many missing records that were never presented to the board before the vote.  Another defense for Brandt is that the courts never considered their affirmative defense which meant that the statute of limitations should have been imposed because the firing of 2010 and 2012 were completely different.  What struck us very odd but something as a warning to many of us is that, at the end of the transcript, if you report something illegal with merit you can still be fired for doing what they consider criminal or a violation.  So what you reported illegally is mute and should not proceed to any further litigation.  So because Palazzolo was fired the second time then the case should have not been considered and the jury who awarded Palazzolo should have considered that defense even when the courts have turned it down many times.  At the beginning of the appeal the judge shut Brandt down for trying to talk bad about the trial court judges.  This goes to show everyone that it's the FWISD way to defame people and spread lies about them.  Glad that someone finally did something about it.  But we are not legal scholars so you be the judge of the appeal case.  We do have  scapegoat... Sutherland..

We also have Barbara Griffith who basically was involved in setting up Dansby to what became a very costly and not so positive departure.  Needham made sure that Dansby would leave after he decided not to follow her instructions on giving contracts to her buddies.  So Dr. Scribner you may need to watch out for those individuals who are here for their bidding and will betray you.  Will Needham do the same to the current superintendent?  Griffith is untouchable!
This also brings something to mind, did she set him up during the blunder of the release of the executive session audio?  What role did she play in this?  She of all people should know that you never record the session. -Transcript of Executive Session
Depositions by Griffith and everyone there that day of the executive session.

No comments :

Post a Comment