Page 39 of 69 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 390 of 682

Thread: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to cla

  1. #381
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    You of course leave out dishonesty, and yes leaving out MATERIAL facts from your application or resume IS considered dishonesty. There are lies of commission and omission, they both qualify as dishonesty. It's a far stretch to presume she omitted the info because she forgot about it. She omitted the info because she knew it would disqualify her from the job. That's dishonesty.

    Not to mention, as reported and linked, she was dishonest when asked about it.
    where is the link i still havent seen it, not saying its not true im saying i havent seen the link about "lies"
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  2. #382
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    where is the link i still havent seen it, not saying its not true im saying i havent seen the link about "lies"
    Post #229.

  3. #383
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    09-30-14 @ 01:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    70

    Re: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to

    So Open Minded That Your Brain Didn't Skip The Sides Of Your Ear Canal As It Fell Out

  4. #384
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    09-30-14 @ 01:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    70

    Re: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to

    What Business Does Anyone Have Viewing Pornography
    On Company Time, With An Employer's Equipment ??
    Grounds For Termination, On The Spot

  5. #385
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Post #229.
    thanks but i was hoping for more than a spokesperson saying she lied in conversation to faculty.

    Now i admit that might matter to some people but not to me, one bit, its nobody business in conversation.

    What I wanted is something in her contract that said full disclosure or something like that, word of mouth about ones legal, non-criminal past doesn't matter to me.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #386
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    thanks but i was hoping for more than a spokesperson saying she lied in conversation to faculty.

    Now i admit that might matter to some people but not to me, one bit, its nobody business in conversation.

    What I wanted is something in her contract that said full disclosure or something like that, word of mouth about ones legal, non-criminal past doesn't matter to me.
    Well, that's not what that says. She didn't lie in casual conversation as you imply, but on direct questioning from the district rep about the issue.

    As for her contract, I showed you what one could be fired for under the morals clause in California teacher's contracts.

    I get it, YOU wouldn't fire her. And if this hadn't become a news item they may not have either. But the fact is, she did something wrong by not disclosing a material fact on her application, and then later lied when asked about it. You know, it's always the coverup that sinks you.

  7. #387
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    1.)Well, that's not what that says. She didn't lie in casual conversation as you imply, but on direct questioning from the district rep about the issue.

    As for her contract, I showed you what one could be fired for under the morals clause in California teacher's contracts.

    3.)I get it, YOU wouldn't fire her. And if this hadn't become a news item they may not have either.
    4.) But the fact is, she did something wrong by not disclosing a material fact on her application, and then later lied when asked about it. You know, it's always the coverup that sinks you.
    1.) uhm whos post are you talking about, my EXACT statement above stands, please point out where i said causal conversation, dont try to paint my statement as anything its not lol

    and the article says this:""She repeatedly and consciously had a pattern of lies and cover-ups when asked about it by her employers," DeLapp said. "She would say 'I didn’t do it' or would create other lies to try and minimize the damage."

    2.) again who are you talking too? you didnt show me anything, if its in this thread id like to read it and like to know that was in HER contract

    and to be clear im totally ok for firing her if there is a clear violation in her contract or she did lie in a place she legally/contractually shouldnt

    thats what i want to know and what ive been asking


    3.) no i wouldnt fire her IF she was a good teacher and this doesnt violate any agreements/contracts we had, hell if she was a good teacher I still might not fire her.

    4.) no thats not a fact that she did something "wrong", its an opinion unless her contract or any agreements she had were violated.

    Now its an opinion that might be enough to keep her fired but that doesnt make it a fact unless it fits the terms i outlined
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #388
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    1.) uhm whos post are you talking about, my EXACT statement above stands, please point out where i said causal conversation, dont try to paint my statement as anything its not lol
    I quoted it for you, it's right there.

    Originally Posted by Objective-J
    thanks but i was hoping for more than a spokesperson saying she lied in conversation to faculty.

    Now i admit that might matter to some people but not to me, one bit, its nobody business in conversation.

    What I wanted is something in her contract that said full disclosure or something like that, word of mouth about ones legal, non-criminal past doesn't matter to me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    and the article says this:""She repeatedly and consciously had a pattern of lies and cover-ups when asked about it by her employers," DeLapp said. "She would say 'I didn’t do it' or would create other lies to try and minimize the damage."
    And "faculty" are not her employers. That would be the district. She lied when asked about it by the district, repeatedly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    2.) again who are you talking too? you didnt show me anything, if its in this thread id like to read it and like to know that was in HER contract
    I showed you what is included in the morals clause for California teacher's contracts. You seem to conveniently lose your place in the thread and can't find links. Please don't play games.

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    and to be clear im totally ok for firing her if there is a clear violation in her contract or she did lie in a place she legally/contractually shouldnt

    thats what i want to know and what ive been asking
    And again, for the umpteenth time, and as has been sourced - she is in violation of the morals clause. The panel found her guilty of just that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    3.) no i wouldnt fire her IF she was a good teacher and this doesnt violate any agreements/contracts we had, hell if she was a good teacher I still might not fire her.
    See above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    4.) no thats not a fact that she did something "wrong", its an opinion unless her contract or any agreements she had were violated.

    Now its an opinion that might be enough to keep her fired but that doesnt make it a fact unless it fits the terms i outlined
    You keep asking the questions as if they haven't been answered. NOT my opinion alone. I've shown you what California teachers can be fired for under their morals clause. I've shown you where she was dishonest with her employers. You know from the OP that the same thing was found in this hearing. If that's not enough to break this resistence to the facts, meh, think what you want.

  9. #389
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,553

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    on one of her videos she mentions being a teacher at the beginning, if I remember correctly
    Link or it didn't happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Because that summer mowing lawns is in all liklihood not relevent, not material, to the job being sought. Now, if you left out your summer working as an intern for NAMBLA while applying for a job as school janitor, that would be a material omission that would qualify as intentional dishonesty.

    And again you try to presume with a straight face that she just forgot about this part of her employment history and/or didn't think it was relevent (despite the clear indications that it was - like the contract, the employment application, the posted job specs which detail what you can be fired for should you get the job).
    NAMBLA is having sex with kids is, which could certainly be an issue if you're around kids all day. Working in porn is having sex with consenting adults, completely legally, and considering none of her students are adults, it really is completely irrelevant.

    I never said she forgot, I said she's not required to list it, because she isn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    Does it even apply to behavior PRIOR to enlistment?
    Of course not, and that's my point. I would certainly have been disciplined severely if I were a porn star during my time as a soldier, but it would be absolutely irrelevant if I used to be one, just as in this case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    Porn, short of some very limited production companies, is an extremely sleazy and disgusting market and industry, regardless of your views on sex and sexuality. Also, the reason she should admit to it, and the likely reason she didn't, is it would obviously have an impact on her teaching ability. And not based on any issue of morality, but on the nature of the relationship between students and teachers.
    That's absolutely untrue. You're making an unsubstantiated claim that because she was in porn she would try to **** her students. That's probably why you brought up NAMBLA. Man, really reaching on that one, aren't you?
    Last edited by RabidAlpaca; 01-18-13 at 03:43 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  10. #390
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    1.)I quoted it for you, it's right there.





    2.)And "faculty" are not her employers. That would be the district. She lied when asked about it by the district, repeatedly.



    I showed you what is included in the morals clause for California teacher's contracts. You seem to conveniently lose your place in the thread and can't find links. Please don't play games.



    And again, for the umpteenth time, and as has been sourced - she is in violation of the morals clause. The panel found her guilty of just that.



    See above.



    You keep asking the questions as if they haven't been answered. NOT my opinion alone. I've shown you what California teachers can be fired for under their morals clause. I've shown you where she was dishonest with her employers. You know from the OP that the same thing was found in this hearing. If that's not enough to break this resistence to the facts, meh, think what you want.
    1.) thanks for the quot and proving i never said casual conversation LMAO like i said next time ask me instead of wrongly assuming, ANY talking IS conversation LOL
    2.) faculty is her employer


    fac·ul·ty
    [fak-uh l-tee] Show IPA
    noun, plural fac·ul·ties.
    1.
    an ability, natural or acquired, for a particular kind of action: a faculty for making friends easily.
    2.
    one of the powers of the mind, as memory, reason, or speech: Though very sick, he is in full possession of all his faculties.
    3.
    an inherent capability of the body: the faculties of sight and hearing.
    4.
    exceptional ability or aptitude: a president with a faculty for management.
    5.
    Education .
    a.
    the entire teaching and administrative force of a university, college, or school.

    b.
    one of the departments of learning, as theology, medicine, or law, in a university.
    c.
    the teaching body, sometimes with the students, in any of these departments.



    3.)wrong again YOU did not show ME anything, maybe you posted it, i have not read this whole thread so if you did, post it again and it be nice to know if this was in HER contract, and i already said if anything is in her contract that supports her firing so do i LOL so yes i agree dont play games

    4.) until i see I dont know that and IF she is then im fine with her firing, now post the link and proof this was her contract also.

    5.) I agree see above, link and proof this effects her please

    6.) again see above
    dishonesty i dont care about unless its a contract/agreement violation

    the OP NEVER mentions any contract/agreement violation so that is not true
    Ill wait for the links and proof, you may be 100% right but your word/opinion is meaningless
    Last edited by AGENT J; 01-18-13 at 03:56 AM.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

Page 39 of 69 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •