Friday, February 21, 2014

In His Own Words

 ARHS currently closed.  What happens on Monday?

So for those of you just joining me on this sad -- but all too typical -- Amherst story of hypocrisy, this is the four-page response penned by the father of the white student who posted a "threat" on a Facebook confessions site hoping it would bring relief from the relentless bullying by three black students who did not like his use of the "N-word", the (supposedly) hip 5-letter version ending in "a".

As the narrative clearly shows numerous school employees either witnessed the physical altercation that occurred at the end of the week or were made aware of the situation by the father prior to the physical confrontation.

The schools punished both the father and son via suspensions but thus far none of the bullies have received a suspension. 

The schools also violated the state anti-bullying law (enacted in the aftermath of Phoebe Prince being bullied to death) by not contacting the Amherst Police Department after the father first voiced his concerns.


Anonymous said...

Ms Custard, you got some 'splainin' to do!

Are your eyes open now? said...

H.R. = House of Sadism

Have I made myself clear?

For some, it's way beyond greed.

-Squeaky Squeaks

Anonymous said...

The school has also got some explaining to do. Right now I bet there banging their heads together to come up with more lies to justify Custard's actions.

We should all be watching for the latest spin of lies to come out of the school. They will be looking to cover their asses.

Anonymous said...

When a person in authority over others in a workplace indicates that she has been disrespected, who can argue?

There is a set of presumptions, based on race, that operate in Amherst (and most communities in Massachusetts, for that matter), all of which flow against this parent and his child.

I'm still betting that the print media and the local school committee don't touch this.

Anonymous said...

I sense another very large pay out coming soon. This is not going away $$$$$$

Anonymous said...

Regardless of Ms Custard or the parents stories accuracies they are different. A good HR person should have listened to both and found 3rd parties to verify either.

It is clear that not only is Kathy Mazur showing complete incompetence in this matter but that she has further tarnished the administrations reputation. She could have been opened to both sides and stopped this dead in its tracks. She should resign or be let go. She is not up to the job of HR in the school system. She is going to cost the town lots of money if this becomes a legal issue.

Anonymous said...


Thanks for protecting the interests of justice and truth. The public deserves to know what is going on and what treatment families receive in Amherst schools. Hopefully a full accounting will come of all of this.

Larry Kelley said...

"You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

Walter Graff said...

Prediction... Everyone will say what they want to say puffing themselves up and demanding action, Geryk will "explain" as will her cronies talking in hyperbole and nodding in agreement with everything said acting all concerned and willing to work with the public to resolve the matter, the School Board will act "all in charge" and will speak in long "thoughtful" sentences and more hyperbole passing the rhetoric from one member to the next.

We will be told that we do not know the whole truth and that is why we can't grasp what is really happening, we will be told that things that were leaked and found one the internet (no authority on the subject or anything for that matter) were only part of the picture, presented in a way that does not encapsulate the whole story, and due to the complex nature of the subject we'll just have to trust those directly in charge

We'll hear from the Amherst police that matters are being take care of, we will hear that things are being done by all involved and unfortunately due to the sensitive nature of the incidents and those involved, what is being done can not be completely revealed, we will be told that authorities are involved and investigating so unfortunately some things can not be revealed at this time but will all be spelled out at a later time for all.

Ms Geryk will reiterate that her office and the office of all of those involved is always open to the public and she will urge all to talk to her about anything that concerns them, and finally all those in "authority" will urge us to ignore the man behind the curtain, etc, etc.

In truth, NOTHING will happen, nothing of any consequence will be done, nor will anything reasonable be accomplished. Geryk will rely on her psychological smoke screens and circular talk to once again cover up things long enough that they will disappear in time and we will be left with the same shitty school system we currently have run by an unqualified superintendent and her cronies.

Welcome to Amherst where everyone makes noise and then disappears into the woodwork saved by patience and time.


Anonymous said...

Its been clear for years now that the Human Resources department is only a disaplinary body and not a resource for the employees. There is no reason for them to investigate as it would only cloud their misguided and erroneous judgement.

Anonymous said...

my children attended ARPS, I Attended ARPS, My Father Attended ARPS, It appears nothing has changed, taxed and taxed for our "great" school system and all we get to show for it is potholes.

NWSC said...

On Friday after receiving a call from my son I did go to Ms. custard's office but not alone

I had a co-worker with me the entire time we were in the high school

Larry Kelley said...

And I bet they didn't write up your co-worker.

Anonymous said...

I am guessing the general public will never know the truth. I am also guessing the father will hire a lawyer and sue the school for improper suspension of himself. He'll also sue the school for not protecting his son. Both of these suits have a good chance of succeeding. The school will likely settle out of court and we'll have no way of knowing the outcome.

Anonymous said...

This all sounds familiar.
No accountability. deny, deny, deny......
It's the new trend:)
I love my Prius:) 8=@

Dr. Ed said...

Did I read that right -- that Custard alleges that someone (father, son, perhaps both) went down a hallway of ARHS shouting "F*****g N******"?!?

Does anyone honestly believe that the APD wouldn't have had to roll to the school -- for something if they'd actually done that?

This is the same kind of crap that UMass dumped on me. Fabrications, lies and all the rest...

Anonymous said...

I think it is only fair if the schools should settle this cas,e if it becomes one, that the tax payers should expect the incompetent employee/s who created the mess to be fired. This way we prevent future loss of funds to educate our children.

But then I remember who runs the show and realize that is never going to happen.

Anonymous said...

"This is the same kind of crap that UMass dumped on me. Fabrications, lies and all the rest..."

Ed, this isn't about YOU.

Anonymous said...

What the hell are the Selectboard members doing about this? They are the first government body that should be asking questions.

The end result of all of this will surely come down them.

Amherst, wake up! Get your heads out of your a***s.

Larry Kelley said...

The Select Board has zero say over School affairs and they are loath to even make public comments about such things.

Unlike Northampton, where the Mayor is in charge of the municipal budget but also serves as Chair of the School Committee.

Anonymous said...

No, the end result of this will surely NOT come down to the Select Board, based on the simple way that our government is set up.

We rejected a mayor-form of government a few years ago. The Select Board is not a five-headed mayor.

So Anon 8:35 am, you need to remove your head from the same place.

Larry Kelley said...

It is pretty scary to think about it: the Schools consume the lion's share of the town's total budget and the only oversight we have -- as taxpayers and parents of kids -- is the, gulp, Amherst School Committee.

And they have a well worn rubber stamp.

Anonymous said...

I would suggest that if people believe that the SC has become a rubber stamp they pay close attention to who gives large support to these candidates, like Rick Hood for example.

They should then see who is being supported in the upcoming elections by the same groups. Maybe if they want something different they should find candidates that are not supported by the political establishment of Amherst. I don't mean for just SC but also for Select Board.

Amherst take your town back or suffer in silence for the monster you have created and continue to feed.

Anonymous said...

"Justice for 'Justin'! "

Anonymous said...

One thing's for sure...if we're going to get to the bottom of this we'll need several more $100K-a-year administrators and probably an override or two.

Anonymous said...

If the so called leaders of the town of Amherst do not step forward to make this right, SB/SC or whoever!

The people of Amherst should speak up LOUD AND CLEAR on this issue.

Anonymous said...

As I have posted in the past my son was continuously bullied in the ARPS system. I sat with the administrators and their repeated response was they had to witness it first hand, and when I tried to let them know who the repeat offenders were I was told that "we don't mention names"! so how the hell do you control the situation! I finally told them it was turning to a matter of self preservation and he was going to fight back. The only response they had was then he will be punished. Shame on those people and shame on the ARPS. I since pull one out and the other will be soon out of ARPS. Get off your high hog Amherst you school system is only average and full of deceits and controversy!

Larry Kelley said...

Well, there is an Amherst School Committee meeting Tuesday night at the High School.

And yes, they will simply pass the buck and say "take it up with the Regional SC".

But Amherst SC makes up 5/9th's of the Region. As such, it's certainly appropriate for parents to reiterate that ignoring bullying because of race simply cannot stand.

The young man who was bullied and mistakenly tried to use a "threat" on Facebook to stave off further bullying is a School Choice student who does not live in Amherst, Leverett, Pelham or Shutesbury.

Who will represent him? If not Amherst -- where "Social Justice" reigns supreme -- then who?

Anonymous said...

People can make comments at the next Amherst SC meeting but they should also, and most importantly, go to the next regional meeting, which is scheduled for march 11th, I believe.

Anonymous said...

\The Town Meeting page ( includes two items relevant to this discussion:

1. March 3 is the deadline to file miscellaneous (that is, non-zoning) petition articles for this spring's Annual Town Meeting.

2. There's also a link to a "How to File a Petition Article" document, which says that only 10 signatures are required to file an Annual Town Meeting Petition Article.

Petition Articles could take a form like, "To see if the Town will ask the School Administration TO EXPLAIN…."

Since Town Meeting is Amherst' legislative body, it could alternatively or additionally be asked IF THE SCHOOL APPROPRIATION WILL BE REDUCED IN THE AMOUNT OF THE SALARY OF A SPECIFIC SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR.

Petition Article proponents get to make their case before any opponents speak,

MainStream Media coverage of this story is thereby obtained, putting pressure on School Administration and School Committee to come clean at long last.

Z1 said...

Larry, If I am correct, don't the employees work for both the Amherst and Amherst Regional schools?

I would think that the SC would take an interest in possible litigation and at least look to investigate the accusations against their administration? If George is in fact an employee of the Amherst school committee and the HR department is in their employ as well, it would certainly be in their best interest to become involved as early as they can.

It's pretty clear now that there was no investigation into the real or complete story.

Administration appears content with accepting the word of other administrators as fact and acted not in the best interest of the schools but in the easiest way, with the best chance of silencing the employee as to not feel the repercussions from the improper handling of both situations.

Another issue is the whole social justice message. While the theory is sound, the implementation is lacking. From what I've seen, Warrior Week at ARHS focused on racism of minorities and the privilege of being white. Correct me if I am incorrect, but the weeks schedule sure made it seem that way.

With that attitude, minorities feel empowered while majorities are left to feel poorly and forced to step back for fear of treading on someone's feelings or worse - civil rights. How can anything positive come from silence? Just because you are part of a larger group shouldn't mean that you step aside to allow the others to step up. Are the majorities being forced to relinquish their civil rights so others can obtain theirs?

Why have we heard nothing of Justin's return? What is the schools plan to bring him back into the building? Have the bullying concerns been fully addressed and can the school accept responsibility for his safety? What other organizations are involved at this point? There are so many unanswered questions.

One would fear that the situation has only been paused, waiting to rear its ugly head again soon.

Dr. Ed said...

My point was/is that the clique that runs things are so secure in their unquestioned authority that their fabricated lies don't even pass the "straight face" test.

I ask again, does anyone honestly believe that those two words could be used in the High School without there being an altercation of some sort?

Was there one? I don't think so.

And yet, apparently, Custard feels comfortable alleging they were even though anyone of even marginal intelligence knows that they couldn't have been.

That's my point.

Anonymous said...

As a parent of a Leverett Elementary student I am watching very closely at the efforts to regionalize with Amherst at the elementary level. As it stands, my plan is to wait and see but if regionalization happens I will be pulling my child out and going elsewhere. When it comes time to vote for or against the regionalization I sincerely hope that folks in town have done their research in depth and think of their children's future at the hands of an unbelievably dysfunctional system that is currently called the Amherst Public Schools.

Anonymous said...

Let's see - a kid calls black kids a word I will not repeat and brings a gun to school. This kid also makes a threat, and I quote: "tbh I'm packing mostly everyday at school. but since I'm calm and am able to keep my composure none dies. i have it for protection yet ppl still think they can bully me."

Yet we have pages of comments defending this kid and his dad? What kind of dad even raises a kid like this?

Nobody commenting, I assume, has experienced the school drama first hand. My daughter has - and this kid is messed up.

What is wrong with you people? You don't even know the whole story.

Larry can just post anything - any opinion he has - and he gets flocks of sheep behind him blindly in support.

You don't know the facts. You don't know the people. You don't know everything about this story aside from a really messed up opinion from some blogger.

Leave it to Amherst to defend a kid for threatening to kill other students! AND his father for raising him with such morals. Wow. Just wow.

Larry Kelley said...

Try getting your facts straight:

The kid did NOT bring a gun to school. His "threat" is rather vague in that he doesn't actually threaten anyone, but suggests the bullies should leave him alone.

Which, unfortunately, they did not do.

People know a LOT more about this story than school officials would prefer because of the "messed up opinion of some blogger."

And the documents I published are not MY opinion, they are the opinions/story of school officials and the father.

Anonymous said...

Wow just wow Anon 8:43. It's high time you got your facts straight.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:43, you do not have the story straight. The kid used a slang word in a congratulatory way to a friend. That word is used way more commonly than most parents know.
At no time was a gun brought to school and there was no public reason for anyone to put the word use and the anon threat together.
I could go on, but its been covered.

Anonymous said...

I think what we have in this Amherst tableaux are all the ingredients to determine whether the school system is for fairness and equal justice under the law:

Is certain language ok for thee but not for thou?
Is discipline and suspension to be applied only for certain offenses/offenders, and not for others?
Is a social justice agenda actually an obstacle to student learning and socialization,and to effective school administration?
Can the school committee rise to the occasion and function for the good of all students?

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:43am, Larry is bringing the facts from the school and father to the public. All 3 of my kids went through the ARHS as did I and they were bullied and threatened and the school never did what they should of. I even was bullied when I went their. To me I see a scared bullied kid who made a threat to hopefully get the bullies to leave him alone. Not a smart move, but their are more people then you think who know who everyone is and none of it is right. ARHS is no longer the number one school and most likely will never be as long as certain people are allowed to run things. One of my kids was threatened with being killed and he replied with don't threaten me or I will punch you, it was my son who got removed from classes, yet the student who not only threatened my son, but the whole school with violence, was allowed to stay in classes. Pretty messed up if you ask me.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:43

If the school were above board with everything and proactive they would get in front of all of this in the press. Instead they allow Larry to be the focal point of coverage.

If they had a leg to stand on they would speak up to defend themselves. They have not. My guess is they are sitting back trying to figure out how to spin and discredit the important players involved as they have always done.

Transparency, (or sunshine) is a great disinfectant. Since they have not used it we can only assume it would do more harm than good to the administration.

I'll just sit back and see what Maria Geryk, Mark Jackson, and Kathy Mazur come up with this time. It is sure to entertain and infuriate.

Anonymous said...

Anon: 8:43

Have you considered that many on the Blog who go by Anon, are siding with the father and son (though no one is defending the kids actions), have had unfair experiences with the Amherst School system.

If Amherst did not leave a trail of unjust decisions, and discipline in their wake there would be no one to question them.

Unfortunately they have left a sea of very angry parents who come here to vent as they have no other recourse. You reap what you sow.

Dr. Ed said...

Let's see - a kid calls black kids a word I will not repeat

1: Even if this were true, it still would be speech which is protected by the First Amendment - something he would have a legal right to do.

2: He praised his Black friend with a word which other Black students routinely use for praise.

The wind blows while we wind a clock -- same spelling, two very different words...

and brings a gun to school.

Even Team Maria's Minions aren't alleging that...

Nobody commenting, I assume, has experienced the school drama first hand. My daughter has - and this kid is messed up.


It's the standard tactic of simply declaring someone to be crazy & dangerous -- on the basis of absolutely nothing -- so as to justify treating him badly.

It is the modern version of accusing someone of witchcraft -- the ultimate destruction of an individual, even worse than accusing someone of being a Communist in the 1950s because you could prove that you weren't a Communist.

What is wrong with you people? You don't even know the whole story.

Maliciously false accusations of mental illness started with the Soviets who even invented a fake mental illness to allege that their dissidents had.

Malicious false accusations of vague & unspecified mental illness - along with the totally unfounded assertion that the student is inherently "crazy & dangerous" has been a routine practice at Planet UMass for nearly a decade and I am not surprised to see it raise its ugly head at ARHS as well.

And then for convincing proof that they are reading from the same UMass playbook:

You don't know the facts. You don't know the people. You don't know everything about this story aside from a really messed up opinion from some blogger.

The actual logical fallacy here is called "Appeal to Authority" and the claim is that because this person has access to alleged information that others don't have, the person is right.

That was so true with Westmoreland in Viet Nam, wasn't it?

The problem here is that it becomes impossible for the victim to refute any of this -- it rapidly becomes too complicated for anyone to care to listen to.

It's exactly what was done to me, and I can even tell "Justin" & "George" what will be coming next.

I'm going to end this here because I do have work to do -- just remember that little quotation from Pastor Martin Niemöller --

"In Germany, they came first for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.."

Dr. Ed said...

"If Amherst did not leave a trail of unjust decisions, and discipline in their wake there would be no one to question them."

Anyone remember the story about the little boy who cried "wolf"?

It is alleged that what really happened at Virginia Tech was that the school had overreacted so many times in the past that when they had real cause for alarm, no one believed them.

Anonymous said...

Oh, Larry, I am Anon 8:43. You did not walk the halls with this kid. My daughter has. This kid should be suspended. He is racist. He made a violent threat to a government building. He's lucky he wasn't thrown in jail. This is not an isolated incident. Black students at ARHS did not feel comfortable around him. Let's just put it that way.

Until you are black and walking the halls at ARHS around this particular student, your argument is just hot air.

I am astounded that torches are raised against black kids who were called the N word - and worse by a white kid who even threatened to kill them. I am also astounded that so many in Amherst think it's right for white kids to use the N word - period. I don't care if a million people are doing it or saying it. What is wrong is wrong.

Anonymous said...

February 23, 2014 at 12:21 PM:

It's called the right to privacy - especially important for minors.

The bullying, from what I hear from my ARHS student, went the other way around. The white kid who is suspended bullied the black kids who are not.

Stop listening to this blogger and let the school do it's job.

Larry Kelley said...

Yeah, the old marginalize the messenger routine.

Sure go ahead, only listen to the man, err, woman behind the curtain.

Anonymous said...

I know, Larry. You go right ahead and teach your kids your morals - that it's okay for them to call black kids the N word. That it's funny and not an insult. That they shouldn't be punished for saying that in the classroom, in a public place, on the job. That they can threaten to kill schoolmates in a post online and face no consequences. Since you're white with privilege, I'm sure you'll get away with it.

But, personally, I teach my kid that it's wrong to even so much as think that word. I would not stand for it if my kid posted such a comment online - intentionally or not. I actually punish my kid for wrongdoings, and I'm very glad the school does, too. I would support a suspension for any child who did that.

Everyone reading this blog needs to step back and rethink their morals if they're sending the message to their kids that it's okay to say the N word. They also need to ask themselves if they are in a position to do what this kid's father did and get away with it - or would they, too, be fired?

We are adults. We are teaching the next generation. We should be teaching accountability and respect and maturity.

Dr. Ed Part 1 said...

Part 1 f 2:

My blood is boiling -- I now understand why Clarance Thomas said what he did during the oral argument of Loving v. VA -- I'm doing my best not to respond viscerally to this.

You did not walk the halls with this kid. My daughter has.

Ever read Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird? Do you not understand the irony here?

This kid should be suspended.

"'Sentence now, Verdict Later'" said the Queen..."

He is racist.

1: Racists tend not to have Black friends and if you understand what the term "racist" actually means, you'll understand why, and how much of an understatement my "tend not to" is.

2: Arguing that a kid should be suspended because he is a racist is quite fascist.

3: You have a Constitutional right to be a racist -- you can only be punished for what you do, not what you think. The entire tradition of Western Law -- from Hammurabi on -- is that one can only be punished for doing explicit things.

He made a violent threat to a government building.

1: No he didn't -- there is a legal definition of what a threat is, not that I want to confuse anyone with facts...

2: I have heard UMPD officers publicly state that it is perfectly OK for a woman to pull the fire alarm to avoid being raped -- I agree, but am citing the officers for legal reasons.

The basic issue, and this goes all the way back to Exodus 22.2, is that you have the right to defend yourself.

3: If you want to talk about criminal threats, let's talk about what a certain UM AfroAm professor said on the front steps of the DA's Office during the Jason Vassell affair....

He's lucky he wasn't thrown in jail.

Because, apparently, we just throw people in jail on a whim -- all that legal/judicial stuff being quite irrelevant.

This is not an isolated incident.

Straight from the playbook -- make vague references to lots of other unspecified (nonexistent) incidents. This is particularly nasty because one must first know exactly what one is accused of having done before one can demonstrate that he/she/it didn't do it.

Black students at ARHS did not feel comfortable around him.

They wouldn't "feel comfortable" around Clarance Thomas, Alan West either -- and both are Black men. For that matter, I suspect they wouldn't "feel comfortable" around Bill Cosby -- particularly if he was to say some of the things he's been saying recently.

Again, straight out of the playbook.


Dr. Ed Part 2 said...

Part 2 of 2

Until you are black and walking the halls at ARHS around this particular student, your argument is just hot air.

Because we have no problem with the Black students themselves being racists and not wanting a White student in the midst of their clique.

I am astounded that torches are raised against black kids who were called the N word

Because vigilantism is always the preferred approach to all perceived injustices.

- and worse by a white kid who even threatened to kill them.

Aren't we being a little bit hypocritical here? If we are going to permit children to use violence against other children, then shouldn't all the children be permitted to do this?

Heaven forbid that the administration be running that high school....

I am also astounded that so many in Amherst think it's right for white kids to use the N word - period.

Wrong and criminal are two very different things.

Worse, exactly what part of the Civil Rights laws aren't being violated when you say that people can and can not use a specific word on the basis of their skin???

I don't care if a million people are doing it or saying it. What is wrong is wrong.

The United States Federal Court would beg to differ -- and absolutely every hate speech code that has ever even made it to court has been thrown out.

That is a fact. Go look it up -- you can not ban words...

It's called the right to privacy - especially important for minors.

As we throw everything shy of the kitchen sink into this -- another tactic from the playbook.

The white kid who is suspended bullied the black kids who are not.

Oh, really?!?!?

1: Which student committed the crime of "assault" as defined by the General Laws?

2: I don't believe that he was suspended for bullying -- and you can't change the reason for a suspension after the suspension starts.

3: Peer bullying is the many against the one, not the other way around.

Stop listening to this blogger

Another tactic in the playbook is to silence anyone who speaks up on behalf of the victim.

and let the school do it's job.

Because we all know they are doing such a good job of doing that....

Sunlight is the best disinfectant and this game simply will not work if all the facts are out in the public domain.

Anonymous said...

Remember, this all started when the child of the other school employee saw a post on facebook regarding a congratulatory post to a African-american FRIEND!

The problem here is the bullying that wasn't dealt with when the uninvolved student of color at the high school took it upon himself ( with the help of a few friends)to police the use of the "word". If anything there was a violation of Justins freedom of speech far before there was any indication of firearms being involved. Justin is not a racist. He comes from an area where his friends are of all ethnicities. If he was truly a racist, how is it that the makeup of his friends is so diverse? His post was a cry for help after inaction of the high school administration to his complaints. Anyone who has been bullied in the past knows exactly how he felt.

Rather than work with the family, the school has decided to suspend the student (for an incident outside school and only associated via an anonymous unsanctioned Facebook page.) And theaten the fathers livelihood for trying to keep the situation from getting further out of control. Given the seriousness of the issue, I would expect that George would have been welcomed into a meeting at anytime during the day to assist with the resolution of the problem.

I would guess, that administration feels they don't need, or more so don't want Assistance/interference from the parents as it's easier to keep it in house and out of the "sunshine".

Dr. Ed said...

Yeah, the old marginalize the messenger routine

Larry, that too is right out of the playbook -- and the attacks on you will likely get much worse.

One of the reasons why my hatred of UMass is so visceral and personal is not because of what they did to me (which was bad enough)as much as what they did to those who were supporting me.

I don't (yet) know exactly who gave the edict, nor really even why, but the institution was directed to adopt a "scorched earth" approach to me -- and that included stomping on my supporters.

THAT is why I will never forgive, why I will never forget, and why there will eventually be retribution.

Machavelli warned against trying to destroy people because of the high price you inevitably will pay if you fail -- which UMass ultimately did -- I do have my doctorate.

I'm-unna take this right foot said...

"Stop listening to this blogger and let the school do it's job."


Anonymous said...

We really don't know the truth here, do we?

Mom and Dad are the first people a kid lies to......and the last people they come clean to, later on.

Dad may be completely sincere, and entirely mistaken, based on whatever his kid has told him.

Perhaps we should acknowledge that we just don't know?

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:16, nobody is saying that using any form of the N word is ok. They have ony pointed out how it has become slang for that generation. Try googling it, with the "a" ending, and lyrics. If using the word "N***a" is racist then there are alot of racist kids of color at ARHS, and in the music world.
What it comes down to is that NOBODY should say it. No matter what their color.

Anonymous said...

Anon: 9:16

Your type of response is exactly the problem Amherst faces. No one on this blog has ever said "Justin did not deserve a suspension" He made threats and he got suspended. Justice done.

The problem everyone has is that the reason for his threats were from being bullied. He was bullied for using a word that everyone including Justin's father finds offensive.

When he was bullied nothing was done to stop it. His father was suspended unjustly with lots of excuses form the administartion. If you can't see the injustice on the other side of the story than you need to re-assess your values.

You are allowing your very justified hatred of a disgusting word, used to oppress people, to cloud your judgement of the whole story. Please wake up.

I for one think Larry's kids are going to be just fine.

Anonymous said...

"You are allowing your very justified hatred of a disgusting word, used to oppress people, to cloud your judgement of the whole story. Please wake up."

No, I'm trying to tell you that this kid is exaggerating and was NOT bullied. He was a jerk to a lot of people in school. This is not an angelic child. My kid goes to school with him. I believe my kid, who has first hand experience, who said he is racist and mean to a lot of people, rather than a blogger or his blind sheep who are listening to a biased account from the suspended student's father.

Get both sides of the story before you jump to conclusions and run to the school with torches lit and white hoods accusing black kids of bullying. Are we in Alabama or Amherst?

Larry Kelley said...

The real scary part is you actually think you are defending/helping the schools .

Reread your last paragraph. You really ought to be ashamed.

Anonymous said...

No, you should be ashamed.

Anonymous said...

My kid goes to school there too with ALL of them. There are no excuses for either side and all should have been punished. According to what our kids have been taught, it falls under the category of bullying.
I find your comment about hoods and torches horribly offensive.

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:58am In response to what you wrote. 1. If it was the other way around, then why wasn't the white students parents contacted and only the black students was? 2. If it was the other way around, why did the white student feel the need to make a threat in hopes of being left alone? 3. If it was the other way around, why was it that the black student put his hands on the white student? Basically the school did not do their job the right way. 4. Why didn't the black student get in trouble for putting his hands on the white student? (that happened before any threat was made) 5. Why didn't the school step in before it got so bad and when the white students parents asked for their help? It shows that it's where you are in status at the school. The higher possitions get faster results and in their favor weather it's right or wrong. If you hold a lower possition it don't matter. Why is it that the hard working parents in the lower possition get pushed around and nothing happens to the parents in the higher possitions? Both my daughters and my son have been bullied by not only students but by staff as well and not a damn thing was ever done, no matter how hard I tried. 6. Why did the black student feel the need to get involved in something that had nothing to do with him? So many questions and the school did not act as they should have and fast enough. At the first sign of trouble both sets of parents should have been contacted and the PD. That did not happen and any time the white parent asked for help it was brushed under the rug. The school can't seem to do their job. If they had in the first place it wouldn't have gone this far. The school tries to and seems to be able to hide a lot of wrong doings. Mr. Kelley has only shown facts and I am thankful he is bringing all this out in the open. The school has to stop hiding things and own up to things when they have done something wrong, not try to place blame other places. Also in response to Anon 2:53pm I find your comment about hoods and torches extremly horrible and offensive. So far only have I seen is truth brought forward and being a parent who has had to deal with my own kids being bullied and nothing being done I am glad someone is standing up and getting to the bottom of things. Keep up the good work Mr. Kelley

Anonymous said...

In response to Anonymous 2:53: My child, a person of color, goes to school with all the parties also; and says the white student was definitely targeted. The students involved would comment on the white students' Facebook prior to this incident, because they have an attitude about him. Some of the student peers think the white student was overpunished, and the students of color were underpunished.

Anonymous said...

I am wondering when the personal connection will be brought to light about the Dean and the mother of the boy who initiated the bullying? They are friends outside of school. What role did that play in the initial dealings and slow to no reaction of the school dealing with the bullying?

Anonymous said...

Looks like it just was brought to light

Larry Kelley said...

But wait, there's more.

Adam Sweet said...

Looks like MassLive is doing some of the 'splaining, Larry. At least they're giving you credit:

Larry Kelley said...

Yeah, and they always spell my name correctly.

Anonymous said...

My solution to bullying? Carry a smartphone and use any of the apps suggested on copblock:

Post 'em to Youtube and watch 'em go viral

Remember the teenager who confronted her former abuser on Youtube live? Yeah...she was fired and faces jail time.

If more people did that then we'd have fewer abusers and more truth

Anonymous said...

the MassLive article indicates that
"Schools Superintendent Maria Geryk will meet with the chairs of the Amherst Regional, Amherst and Pelham school committees Tuesday" to talk about a number of issues including the alleged bullying and then later states that the meeting will be held Tues at 7 pm at the HS library.

This is when/where the Amherst School Committee (SC) meeting is scheduled. Is that meeting now being superceded? Will the Pelham and Regional SC members then be at the Amherst SC meeting? It's not clear.

Anonymous said...

It is also not clear whether this discussion between Maria and the chairs will be in public. Because meeting with the chairs of the three committees does not constitute a quorum of any of the committees, the meeting is not subject to public meeting laws. It may be that the regularly scheduled meeting due to start at 7 pm will start a tad later. My guess is the meeting between Maria and the 3 chairs will not be a public meeting. Also, note that there is a budget subcommittee meeting that ends at 645. My guess is that Maria will meet with the chairs between 645 and 7.

Anonymous said...

In response to anon 10:12pm from 2/24/14, Glad that you brought up the fact of a connection between the dean and the mother of the boy who initiated the bullying was brought forward for people to know. That would explain why the dean only contacted the black students parents and not the parents of the white student being bullied at all. It also shows the dean favored the black student over the white student. What about the fact that the black students father is in a higher possition then the white students father. The plain truth is the school/staff did not act fast enough or follow the rules or laws that were put in place to proctect any and all sstudents from being bullied. Their slow actions and trying to hide it and keep it inhouse all it did was make things worse. The school will try real hard to sweep this all under the rug and I hope they don't get to do that again like so many other times. It's not right. Too many unanswered questions. Glad to see MassLive has picked up the story. Also very glad that Mr. Kelley is trying to bring out the truth to it all.
In response to anon 7am from today, I guess the only way to find out if the school will address the bullying issues tonight will be to go to that meeting.
Makes one wonder about all the other schools with the same issues and is nothing being said. Is it happening?? Just remember this is where we send our kids to be safe and learn.

Dr. Ed said...

I am wondering when the personal connection will be brought to light about the Dean and the mother of the boy who initiated the bullying?

This sounds like something that the State Ethics Commission might be interested in.

They have an "Attorney-of-the-Day" -- whom anyone with actual knowledge of the relationship can call at (617) 371-9500 or toll-free at (888) 485-4766

And folks, there are still payphones....

Dr. Ed said...

It appears that this isn't about race -- and instead of saying "Black" and "White", I suggest the use of the term "FOC" -- "Friend of Custard" to indicate the difference which isn't about race.

Hence, Custard only contacted the parents of the FOC child, and not the parents of the other child.

It's also alleged (*I* don't know it to be a fact) that the FOC's father is a professional employee of the school district as well.

The corrupt acts (and this is what they are) include failure to comply with STATE LAW as well as both DESE & district policy regarding allegations of bullying, violation of state law regarding school suspension (no matter how you look at it), and not suspending the FOC child and his friends.

This is serious stuff.

Let's take race out of this and put gender in -- let's use the example of Steubenville High School.

Let's say that a female student was raped by students whom the school wished to protect -- for whatever reason. That's what happened there...

And then there's Penn State covering up what Jerry Sandusky was doing -- they did exactly what Custard allegedly did, for exactly the same reasons.

When you are dealing with minor children, there are certain things you must do when the child tells you certain things, and that's true for both rape and bullying -- these are legal mandates.

I've long said that Maria G will go down in flames -- and this may be the incident that does it...

Anonymous said...

Custard didnt do anything because she thought it wasnt bullying, they were defending their race. Therefore, its also racial.

Anonymous said...

It's now ok to defend your race by being a bully? Really?
There is something majorly wrong with this idea.

Their criminal agenda, your paralysis said...

Unfortunately Bob and Joyce became overly "involved".

Seems sadly familiar doesn't it?

Don't be distracted people.

These roaches are capable of ruining ~everything~.

And they're ~your~ responsibility,

aren't they?

You let them in, you know who they are, you know what they are.

Now, what are you going to do?



Anonymous said...

Comment posted on the Masslive article, from Debbie Westmoreland, the Superintendent's Assistant:
"It is inaccurate that Superintendent Geryk is meeting with the three School Committee Chairs at 7:00 p.m. tonight to discuss the High School Incident.
Tonight's meeting is a regular business meeting of the Amherst School Committee, which deals exclusively with the Amherst elementary schools. Superintendent Geryk meets regularly with the three School Committee Chairs for "housekeeping" discussions, such as planning future agendas and topics. These are internal working meetings."

Larry Kelley said...

So squeaky, are you suggesting Rob Detweiler was fired because Maria didn't like his wife's dissertation?

Anonymous said...

It is interesting that Detweiler's wife's advisor (Woodland) for her dissetation was getting a major contract from the schools for consulting in the central office at the same time.

Larry Kelley said...

In a no bid contract no less.

Dr. Ed said...

And people still wonder why I claim that there is little distinction between UMass and the ARSD????

I've been dealing with these people for way way way too long...

Nina Koch said...

Dr. Detweiler's dissertation is not about Amherst. The study was conducted in a different regional district.

It's an interesting dissertation but I'm not sure what it has to do with the topic of this thread.