"Alabama educator cleared after student recants sex charges/Catherine Bell, 34, was suspended from her job as an assistant principal at Pelham High School and resigned under pressure following the scandalous accusations."
December 14, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
33 comments:
The story doesn't mention the gender of the student involved. C'mon, I have biases to confirm here!
Rate Your Professor gone wild. And the unsafe community wanted to believe that the story was a TMZ scandal and probably true.
Sad to hear this happened and she was innocent. Hopefully the student who made the false allegation is sued for damages.
The indictment, filed last May, alleged that Bell had engaged in sexual conduct with a male student between December 2012 and November 2013.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2872314/Teary-assistant-principal-falsely-accused-having-sex-teenage-student-forced-sell-home-couldn-t-work-revealed-turned-allegations-surfaced.html#ixzz3Lsc56OCZ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
According to the local articles, it was a male.
Also there is this:
According to the court order, the defendant, in exchange for the case being dismisses, granted "full, complete, and absolute release from all civil and criminal liability stemming directly or indirectly from the instigation, investigation, pursuit, arrest, incarceration, prosecution, defense, or any other aspect of this case and any companion case." However, the order continued, the order "does not bar the Defendant from seeking or pursuing any remedy for restoration of any professional or teaching license, certificate or authority, or from seeking restoration of any employment, position, tenure, including back earnings and benefits, to which she may be entitled."
Charges dropped against former Pelham assistant principal accused of sexual activity with student
I'm glad false accusations of sexual assault almost never happens. The almost non-existent list gets longer and longer.
alan markus said...
"...full, complete, and absolute release from all civil and criminal liability stemming directly or indirectly from the instigation, investigation, pursuit, arrest, incarceration, prosecution,..."
IOW, they - police, persecutor and court - are guilty of something besides incompetence and want to get away with it.
This case shows why lynch mobs have not been legal process since the Lonesome Dove frontier days. Real due process with good Lawyers will usually save the day.
I live in the area where this happened. The high school is a 5 minute drive from my house. The arrest was all over the news.
Now, if the local TV stations covered it I missed it, and I record and watch one of the local stations evening newscast almost every day.
As my wife said when I mentioned this, "her reputation is shot."
And she does look like someone that can't believe this is happening. Just like you would look if you suddenly realized you were the central character in a horror movie.
I will admit to bias: I look at that mug-shot and see 'crazy eyes'. 'Crazy eyes' are always guilty of something. Innocent with 'crazy eyes' makes me nervous.
I am Laslo.
Danno,
I would like to see the boy sued. As a minor, I assume that the parents are on the hook as well.
She should sue them all until she has their house, car, 401K and the gold in their back teeth.
Let them spend the rest of their lives living in a Dumpster somewhere.
Publish the kids name widely and vilify him in every possible venue.
Publish the names of the cops and prosecutor and vilify them as well.
John Henry
Danno,
I would like to see the boy sued. As a minor, I assume that the parents are on the hook as well.
She should sue them all until she has their house, car, 401K and the gold in their back teeth.
Let them spend the rest of their lives living in a Dumpster somewhere.
Publish the kids name widely and vilify him in every possible venue.
Publish the names of the cops and prosecutor and vilify them as well.
John Henry
Ann,
I have mixed feelings about you posting the woman's picture and name.
I am fine with you posting the story. That needs to get disseminated as widely as possible. I am fine with the woman's name and mugshot being publicly available.
OTOH, I think using them, even when writing about her exoneration may contribute to the number of people who know she was originally charged, even if she was exonerated.
It might be best to leave sleeping dogs lie.
But I might be wrong and posting her name/pic along with her exoneration might be just the thing.
As I say, I have mixed feelings here.
John Henry
In a local news article Bell was quoted as saying,
"I've never had a scratch on my record,"
"...on my record"
"...on my record"
"...on my record"
"...on my record"
"...on my record"
Sue 'em.
Sue 'em all.
Time for Ms. Bell to be a millionaire.
Sue the school, sue the kids parents, sue the police, sue left and right.
Find the dirtiest, lowest, meanest lawyer you can and let loose the dogs of litigation.
Assistant principles handle discipline. Student decided to get her.
Student needs to be expelled. At least.
Alan Markus just pointed out an aspect of the case as scandalous as the original accusation. They know she is innocent and still insist on a waiver to dismiss the case!
Shame on them, and shame on her lawyer for counseling her to agree to that. What an outrage.
"I have mixed feelings about you posting the woman's picture and name."
I've got to admit I didn't think about that. The picture and the story were in the newspaper. I think the story and the picture help her at this point. And, frankly, just on an aesthetic level... that's the most beautiful mugshot I have ever seen. I'm speaking about the photograph as a whole, not making a judgment about whether the individual is the most beautiful person ever to appear in a mugshot. I know there are websites about that, and I've looked at them. I mean the expression and the color and lighting and everything.
"Alan Markus just pointed out an aspect of the case as scandalous as the original accusation. They know she is innocent and still insist on a waiver to dismiss the case!"
Do they know she is innocent? Maybe the teenager recanted because he can't take the pressure or feels sympathy toward her. This is someone who must have lied once.
That might have been connected to the deal for a waiver. She did not have to take that deal, and she certainly knows what the truth is.
"Alan Markus just pointed out an aspect of the case as scandalous as the original accusation. They know she is innocent and still insist on a waiver to dismiss the case!"
Do they know she is innocent? Maybe the teenager recanted because he can't take the pressure or feels sympathy toward her. This is someone who must have lied once.
That might have been connected to the deal for a waiver. She did not have to take that deal, and she certainly knows what the truth is.
12/14/14, 9:53 AM
Just maybe she has had enough of her life ripped up for long enough that she agreed to this just to end it. After years of vilification/loss/unemploymnet sometimes you just want it to end.
AA: That might have been connected to the deal for a waiver. She did not have to take that deal, and she certainly knows what the truth is.
And they did not have to offer her a "deal" in which she surrenders her rights under duress.
You're just defending a corrupt system. The "deal" is part of the corruption, it'd never fly anywhere else.
" That might have been connected to the deal for a waiver. She did not have to take that deal, and she certainly knows what the truth is.
12/14/14, 9:53 AM "
I could buy your justification for a corrupt system if the waiver was only for the government itself and not for those in the government who are the actors in this. Spare the taxpayers and punish the officials.
Child sexual abuse wasn't a public problem before the 70s.
Child (physical) abuse wasn't a public problem before the 60s.
Nor was drunk driving, before the 60s.
They were all personal moral failings.
Mankind survived thousands of years that way, but that was before TV ratings took over the news.
Discovering a new public problem is ratings gold.
I suggest that there are too many public problems, the easy way to power.
Against MADD, my friend Fred Grampp said that if it weren't for the drunks, most of them wouldn't be mothers.
More of that is needed.
The lady is the victim of a public problem, not a false accusation.
Another false accusation!! Everybody wants to get in on the fun these days. In modern America, we destroy people simple for the fun of watching them burn! In the public these days, there seems to be no sense at all of actual justice, of due process, or of right and wrong. Moral education has completely broken down, and now we reap the whirlwind!! Watch out, or you too will be sucked up in the twister.
And they did not have to offer her a "deal" in which she surrenders her rights under duress.
I can't believe her obligation is enforceable under those circumstances.
Government is like Animal House: "He can't do that to our pledges. Only we can do that to our pledges."
Alan Markus just pointed out an aspect of the case as scandalous as the original accusation. They know she is innocent and still insist on a waiver to dismiss the case!
I saw that bit about the waiver, but another article from the Daily Mail made it sound like the waiver was for her, saying she could never be charged with this crime again. I don't know which article is correct.
She's got crazy eyes!
The 'waiver' appears to state that she cannot bring charges against the authorities who handled the case, beyond what she would rightly have should this situation not arisen. i.e. she can get her license back, back pay, etc. but cannot sue for damages.
I don't think the robot text is working to prevent robots from posting...
I feel sorry for her and hopes she gets some justice. By that, I mean I hope she wins a very large legal settlement.
By the same token, I feel sorry for men who are wrongly accused. At least she had actual legal processes to go through instead of a college kangaroo court without benefit of legal representation.
I'm with Althouse on this one. She might be innocent. She might not. Victims recant all the time, especially when romantic relationships took or continue to take place between suspect and victim.
As to the waiver - I am ambivalent about it. A recanting "victim" can sure make it hard to prove a charge beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not ethical to go forward if you believe you cannot. But I am not so sure that that should preclude the state from asking for the waiver, if the state actors have not engaged in malfeasance.
Post a Comment