Long story short, Christine changed attorneys, as is her right, at the last minute. The arbitrator had no problem having a hearing without an attorney representing Christine, and the DOE "attorney" seemed to have no problem. Suffice it to say, why do felons have more rights than teachers? Why would a felon get a continuance if he or she changed attorneys, but not a teacher like Christine?
Read on;
Ms._Rubino-1
5 comments:
Has the estate of Franz Kafka retained their legal reps yet Looks to me like somebodt is publishing his lost notebooks. Is there a circle of Hell anywhere in Dante for these insufferable tools of the state ? How do you not laugh in their stupid faces?
Man...this is a funny read! I love the part..where she says, she cannot cross examine witnesses, and that she is only a math teacher. I have a feeling the Board-adjourned, because the due process issue was raised. Kudos..to her, for raising that. How the Hell....do they expect teachers to do the job of a lawyer? Well, I am sure she could have..since most of them bobble heads-controlled by Terri Europe"
Please Lord don't let the author of this blog be a teacher, for his pupils shall be detriments to society. Even in the world of NY ed blogging, this puppy is a new pit of stupidity, coated with a veneer of patrician superciliousness. Smarm, smarm, smarm. The fact that you deign to call others "self-righteous"....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
I happen to KNOW he is a teacher (and a kick-ass one at that). He is a teacher who has seen the demise of our school system firsthand, and who, every day, sees the damage being done to children with the forced implementation of ineffective and inappropriate teaching programs, and is smart enough and astute enough to call it what it is - a huge social experiment on inner-city children.
SoBronx also appears to understand the working of the court system, and was able to infer that what happened in the case of Ms. Rubino was a complete miscarriage of justice. In any other court, it would be unheard of for a plaintiff to be forced to question witnesses on her own when she had clearly only been given the background information and retained new counsel the day before.
And Anon 11:06 - it was nice of you to pepper your response with nice, high-quality vocabulary like "detriment", "partician", and "supercilious" (that one is particularly impressive), however, your application of advanced vocabulary in proper context does not cover up the fact that you said absolutely NOTHING in your comment.
Sling mud and run. How brave.
Anonymous # 2
Does what SoBronx blogger say scare????
Good.
It should.
Post a Comment