Victim
can get lost amid concerns about teachers, lawsuits -- Part I
"I hope things are going
as well as possible for you. I was deeply saddened to lose you as our coach because of
such unfortunate circumstances."
-- September 1, 1994, letter from Omaha Superintendent David Land to former
teacher and basketball coach Danny Joe Roberts.
The "unfortunate
circumstances" Land alluded to involved Roberts' arrest at school on two charges of
felony first-degree violation of a minor.
A 14-year-old girl on
his basketball team told police that Roberts, then 33, frequently offered her rides to
school. On one trip, he stopped his truck on the side of the road, asked her if she loved
him and pulled his pants down.
"I said, `No. That
is sick. Just let me out,' " the girl told police. "He grabbed my head and he
pushed me down onto his lap and I started to cry ... and he would not let me up."
Three more charges
followed: second-degree violation of a minor for fondling the same girl and two other
girls, ages 15 and 17. Roberts pleaded no contest to all charges Feb. 14, 1995. He served
one year of his six-year sentence.
Two weeks before Roberts
entered his plea, Superintendent Land asked the state Department of Education to revoke
Roberts' license temporarily. State law allows teaching licenses to be revoked for felony
convictions.
But according to his
letter, it was the $2,860.59 that Roberts had been overpaid and still owed the district
that concerned the superintendent -- not the assaults on students.
"The school law of
Arkansas ... states that the Department of Education shall revoke the teachers license to
teach until all the money is repaid," Land wrote.
"The return of this
money has been and is a major issue with the local school board and community due to the
nature of the resignation of Mr. Roberts."
The state Board of
Education eventually revoked Roberts' license -- because of his felony convictions -- in
August 1995, a year after he was arrested. But it wasn't at the insistence of Land or the
Omaha School Board.
In a separate case, Roberts' wife, Nora Mae Roberts, pleaded
guilty May 26, 1995, to a charge of second-degree endangering the welfare of a minor. Nora
Roberts, a fourth-grade teacher at Omaha Elementary School, had sex with a 17-year-old
high school student. She received a one-year suspended sentence and was fined $1,000.
Land said he wasn't
aware of the Nora Roberts case, even though it involved a student and teacher at his
school.
"We had a coach
that was charged with fondling little girls," said Land, when asked about teachers
with criminal backgrounds in Omaha. "That's our only dismissal, and he's in the pen.
We don't really have much of a problem here."
Land's offhanded
referral to the Danny Roberts case is an example of how some school officials view teacher
misconduct.
At state and local
levels, officials insist that sexual abuse and other criminal misconduct by teachers is
not a problem in Arkansas.
In an eight-month
investigation, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette has found 103 teachers charged in the last
seven years with a variety of criminal complaints.
In the last three years alone, 21 people holding teaching licenses have been
charged with sexual crimes.
Those figures do not
include cases in which records were expunged to preserve a teacher's reputation, or those
that were not prosecuted.
The cases represent a
small percentage of Arkansas' 38,000 teachers. But interviews and reviews of school and
court records show, in some districts, how officials and school boards sidestep the legal
and ethical issues that surface when teachers are accused or convicted of crimes.
Where officials look the
other way, teachers are protected at the expense of the children.
-- Fifth Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney Tom Kennedy of Russellville
in a May 28 letter to a reporter.
The file became public
information when the Arkansas State Police completed its criminal investigation Feb. 1,
1994.
The boy told police that he and
Polczynski had had sex for a year, from the summer of 1992 through June 1993.
Polczynski was then 36 and married with a child.
"She told me later
on that she didn't want me to tell anyone about what we were doing because she would go to
jail and that she would get fired from her job," the boy told police.
Polczynski confessed to
the boy's mother that she was in love with him, according to a police report. She agreed
to look for another job, stop seeing the boy and get counseling.
But Polczynski continued
to call the boy, follow him after school and give him gifts, a police report stated.
The mother told police
she decided to pursue prosecution because Polczynski had stopped going to counseling.
Although she resigned from the Dardanelle School District, Polczynski got a teaching job
in Mount Ida, about 60 miles away.
Polczynski did not
believe there was anything wrong with her affair with the boy except that it was not
"the Christian thing to do," according to psychiatrists who treated her in July
1993.
Polczynski
"guessed" her relationship with the boy was legally and morally wrong, one
doctor wrote, but "on the other hand, she states, `He got pleasure from it and I got
pleasure from it, so ...' "
In exchange for no jail
time, Polczynski pleaded guilty on July 19, 1994, to the lesser charge of first-degree
violation of a minor. Her sentence was 10 years' supervised probation, loss of her
teaching license, prohibition from working around children, and "successful
completion" of a treatment program for pedophiles at Arkansas Children's Hospital at
her own expense.
Prosecutor Kennedy said
he was worried about the victim in the case. But only one line in his 20-line letter to
the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette refers to the victim.
"My primary concern
in any case is the victim," Kennedy said later. "I'm not as concerned about the
defendant as I am about other members of her family.
"This is the only
case where anybody ever requested information that I was hesitant on, and it's because of
the age of the victim and my knowledge that he's had continuing problems."
Kennedy said he demanded
permanent revocation of Polczynski's teaching license as a condition of her probation,
upon request of the victim's mother. He is one of a few prosecutors to ensure that a
teacher convicted of a felony has lost her license.
Most victims do not wish
to relive their experiences in a trial, let alone in the news media. But in several of
these cases, the children or their parents say they have come forward in hopes of
preventing other children from being molested.
Arkansas school
districts must report the names of teacher felons to the state licensing office within
five calendar days of a conviction, under a law that took effect in July 1995.
Districts also were
required to immediately submit a list of convicted teachers employed within the last two
years.
The lists would alert
the state to begin the process of revoking licenses of teachers convicted of felonies and
take those teachers out of classrooms.
Despite several highly
publicized convictions, none of the state's 311 school superintendents had submitted a
list to the Education Department's Office of Teacher Education & Licensure six months
after the reporting law took effect.
A year after the
law took effect, two superintendents had sent in names of convicted teachers. Another two
superintendents submitted names, but only after a state official called and prompted them.
"I'm not sure this
law tells the school districts to become Pinkerton detectives," said S.T.
"Skip" Hibblen, coordinator of the department's Office of Teacher Education
& Licensure.
However, one of those
publicized cases took place in a town of 4,388 where the conviction of a popular football
coach was reported by local and state news media.
While the reporting law
is new, the concept of revoking licenses for felony convictions is not. A 1989 update to
education laws allowed the state Board of Education to revoke licenses when teachers are
convicted of felonies.
Copies of new school
laws are sent to school officials after each legislative session by the Arkansas
Association of Educational Administrators. In January, Hibblen sent an extra memorandum,
reminding superintendents of the new reporting requirements.
"If superintendents
don't know, a portion of that is their fault," said Suzanne Griscom, a staff attorney
for the state Bureau of Legislative Research.
"Ignorance is no
excuse," Griscom added.
State officials say the
lack of reports from district officials proves that there are few, if any, felons holding
teaching licenses.
"If we look at
30,000 teachers, I don't think we have a real problem of people in the classrooms with
felonies. It is a small percentage. We have a couple of exceptions," said Frank
Anthony, the state department's assistant director of technical assistance.
Gene Wilhoit, director
of the Education Department's General Education Division, said he was not aware that
districts had ignored the reporting law.
"The assumption you
have to make at that point is there are not offenders out there, or if there are
offenders, then there needs to be some sort of stronger sanctions against the districts
for not reporting," Wilhoit said.
Leaders of the Little
Rock School District, the state's largest, have turned in one name of a teacher felon. And
that was only when officials discovered that the teacher would be featured as a felon on a
nationally broadcast television show.
"We're waiting for
the state department to give us guidance of when they're looking for that list," said
Little Rock School District spokesman Suellen Vann. "We haven't done anything about
it."
Later, Vann acknowledged
that the district had received a reminder from the state to report felony cases. But she
said it would be difficult to come up with a list of teacher felons in a district with
1,800 certified teachers.
"How would we go
about getting that information? Would we have to go back to every employee for the last
two years and ask them, or go to law enforcement? If someone has been with us for some
time, if they've been employed with us for a time period, we wouldn't know (if they've
been convicted)," Vann said.
"We only have to
report those to the state if we're made aware of them," she said. "I'm sure
there are some that we're not aware of."
The district learned of
one teacher's felony conviction when reporters with "American Journal," a
nationally syndicated television news magazine, came calling last spring.
On May 9, the show aired
a segment on teachers with criminal backgrounds "in the heartland." Along with
educators in Michigan and Kansas City, Mo., the story featured Willie Slater, who taught
at Little Rock's Henderson Junior High School until this year.
Slater, 52, was
convicted of second-degree battery and being a felon in possession of a firearm in a 1987
shooting. Witnesses told police that Slater fired a pistol through a window into his
ex-girlfriend's home on Thanksgiving Day, hitting a man in the hand. He served six months
of his three-year sentence.
On his 1992 Little Rock
teaching application, Slater wrote that he had been convicted of battery charges in 1970.
He did not mention the 1987 shooting onviction.
The school district gave
his name to the Education Department on May 2, a week before the television show aired.
But current state law
allows revocation of teaching licenses only for felony convictions after July 1989, so
Slater can stay in the classroom.
Slater told
"American Journal" he considers his crimes to be history.
Last week, Vann said
Slater is not teaching this fall, nor has he been paid. She said the district
administration has recommended a disciplinary action to the school board, but declined to
say why.
Carl Latting, a former North Little Rock High School teacher and coach, was
charged with first-degree sexual abuse Nov. 1, 1991.
A 16-year-old female student told police and school officials that Latting
had taken her out of her first-period class, walked her to his office, asked her if she
were sexually active, fondled her breast and tried to take off her clothes.
Latting, then 51, was acquitted April 24, 1992, because under the law at
that time, the charge of first-degree sexual abuse did not apply unless "forcible
compulsion" occurred or the victim was under 14 years old. Pulaski County Circuit
Judge John Langston said he could not find a charge that would cover the alleged behavior.
PART II:
The student had testified in court that Latting didn't force her to
do anything. But she said she was "hurt" by what happened. Her first-period
teacher testified that the girl was crying and shaking after she returned to class,
according to a newspaper report at the time.
Latting denied that he touched the girl. His attorney said he had merely taken her to his
office to counsel her. Latting taught social studies and physical education and coached
girls basketball for grades 10-12 at the high school's east campus.
The case outraged state women's groups and was mentioned on Rush Limbaugh's nationally
syndicated radio show. Arkansas Attorney General Winston Bryant drafted legislation that
expanded the state law on sexual violation of minors to include school personnel.
The old law applied only to guardians, temporary caretakers or people in a position of
trust or authority over a minor between the ages of 13 and 18.
Under the new statute, it is also illegal for teachers or other school employees to have
sex with students or engage in any sexual contact with them, regardless of whether the
student consents.
North Little Rock Superintendent James Smith suspended Latting with pay after he was
arrested. Smith later asked the school board to fire Latting because of "loss of
effectiveness." The board agreed June 23, 1992, voting 5-2. Latting is now teaching
and coaching boys basketball in Earle.
Latting was not North Little Rock's only problem in recent years.
Among the others was Nathaniel Askew, who was never accused of harming schoolchildren. But
he did have a felony record and was three times led away from school in handcuffs.
Askew, who taught special education at Rose City Alternative Elementary School, was fired
last October for "loss of effectiveness," on Smith's recommendation.
Askew had lost nine civil suits between 1983 and 1995 for nonpayment of bills.
In a separate Pulaski County criminal case, he pleaded guilty in August 1987 to felony
theft by deception for a hot-check charge.
Askew started to miss school during the 1994-95 year when police arrested him on new
hot-check charges.
On a 1994 criminal hot-check charge, Askew, then 46, pleaded guilty and was sentenced in
June 1995 to one year's probation and was ordered to pay restitution of $515.56 to
Arkansas Power & Light Co. within four months.
In September 1995, Pulaski County Special Judge Mike Sherwood ordered Askew to pay
$3,998.27 restitution for five new felony counts of theft of property through hot checks,
five counts of failure to pay warrant fees and one count of failure to appear in court.
"It was his not being here that made him ineffective," Smith said. "Another
issue was, what kind of an example is it setting for the kids?"
Askew appealed the dismissal in circuit court and the case is pending.
Smith has yet to ask the state to revoke Askew's license.
"I never heard of that before -- revoking a license. I've been in this for more than
30 years," Smith said. "Until recently, that was something that happened
occasionally with doctors or pharmacists."
Askew still has a license to teach -- until 2003.
Four months after he was fired from North Little Rock, Askew was back in the classroom as
a substitute teacher in neighboring Pulaski County Special School District.
To be a substitute, he only had to present proof of a high-school education and show up at
a workshop.
When asked on a job questionnaire, "Have you ever been convicted of any offense
against the law and/or are you now under charges for any offense against the law?"
Askew answered, "No."
Askew taught at Oak Grove and Crystal Hill elementary schools before an official
recognized his name and took him off the substitute list.
Earlier this year, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette asked each of the state's 311 school
districts to provide the names of teachers who had been fired or who had resigned.
Under the Freedom of Information Act, the records can be released, though school districts
are not required to create a list of teachers if a list does not already exist. In the
spirit of openness, some school districts readily offered the names of terminated or
resigned teachers. Most did not. About one-third of the districts never responded. Most of
those that did respond said something like Don Jones, superintendent of the Greenbrier
School District:
"Once you determine whose personnel files you wish to copy, I will form an opinion as
to whether and to what extent `disclosure would constitute clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy.' "
North Little Rock also balked at providing some information under the state's Freedom of
Information Act.
Under the law, parts of the Latting and Askew files became public information when their
suspension or termination was completed. Yet, North Little Rock administrators at first
refused to release anything.
In 1992, Superintendent Smith first refused to release Latting's file, and the attorney
general's office sent an opinion saying it was public.
Last spring, Smith again refused to provide the file to the newspaper, and he also
declined to release Askew's file.
The administrators finally opened the teachers' files --but withheld evaluations. Only
after being threatened with legal action did they comply fully.
School officials ought to be aware of the Freedom of Information Act, said Kellar Noggle,
executive director of the Arkansas Association of Educational
Administrators. Significant updates on changes in the Freedom of Information Act are
"a normal part of our conferences and programs," Noggle said.
The administrators group regularly sends superintendents new opinions from the attorney
general's office on open meetings and open records as part of a monthly packet of
publications.
Tommy Venters, executive director of the Arkansas School Boards Association, minimized
school districts' responsibilities under the law. He said administrators don't have to
send the media or public any information -- just provide the files at their office, a
place to sit and access to a copying machine.
The attorney general has said public agencies may charge a "reasonable" fee for
copies of documents. In one case, the attorney general said 25 cents a page was a
reasonable fee.
The Heber Springs Public Schools asked the Democrat-Gazette for $1 a page and the
Centerpoint School District in Amity, about 30 miles southwest of Hot Springs, asked $1.25
a page.
Lynn Public Schools in Lawrence County charges $10 a page.
"That's really wild. I can't imagine anyone would do that," said Venters.
"Even a dollar a page would shake me up."
"I don't have a lot of latitude when somebody calls me for a reference."
-- Jerry Rose, former superintendent, Newark Public Schools.
Not only do superintendents not tell the state or the public about problem teachers, they
sometimes don't tell each other.
Ronald Biggs, formerly assistant principal at Newark High School, was investigated twice
by law enforcement officials for alleged sexual abuse of students in 1992.
In January, a student filed a sexual misconduct complaint against Biggs, according to the
Independence County sheriff's office. Law enforcement officers said they did not know why
T.J. Hively, 16th Judicial District prosecuting attorney, never charged Biggs.
Nine months later, three other 16-year-old female students told Arkansas State Police that
Biggs, then 52, had repeatedly pinched, grabbed and fondled their buttocks. They also said
he had made sexual comments to them.
One of the girls said Biggs had pulled her into a bathroom, kissed her and fondled her
breasts after telling her he thought she was "sexually frustrated."
At first, Biggs denied touching the girls. Later, he told a police investigator that he
had touched one of the girls in a sexual manner, "but not for sexual
gratification."
Workers for the state Department of Human Services stated in a concluding report that the
girls' complaint was founded. But Prosecutor Hively decided not to move on the case.
"There wasn't sufficient evidence to file charges," Hively said. He told police
investigators he did not feel that the main victim in the case would be a credible
witness, according to a police report.
The next year, Biggs applied to become principal at Gentry High School, near the Oklahoma
border.
Gentry officials say Rose did not advise them about the earlier investigations.
In an April interview, Rose confirmed that he did not discuss the investigations when
Gentry officials asked about Biggs. He said Biggs' personnel file was "still
confidential to another superintendent before he is employed. Legally, I can't give any
information."
Last week, Rose said he did tell Gentry officials about "a complaint" that had
been investigated by the state police but that no charges had been filed.
Biggs was hired and moved across the state to Benton County.
On July 28, 1995, a 15-year-old female student at Gentry High told police that Biggs had
kissed her, made sexual comments to her and stuck his hand down the front of her pants.
Biggs denied the allegations, but the girl had secretly taped Biggs telling her he wanted
to make love to her.
On Feb. 23, Biggs pleaded guilty to the charge of contributing to the delinquency of a
minor, a misdemeanor.
Randy Barrett, Gentry superintendent, said he believes Jerry Rose should have been more
forthcoming about the 1992 investigations involving Biggs.
"I just believe that's the way it should be between peers," Barrett said.
"I've never tried to deliberately keep someone from getting a job. But I've never
covered up for anyone and I've never left a piece of the picture blank, either.
"The question we superintendents like to ask each other is, `If this person was
applying at your school, would you hire them?' It gives you a lot of freedom to say,
`No, I wouldn't,' and no further explanation may be needed. ... There's still a way to
tell someone there's been a serious problem without violating anyone's confidence."
Rose told the Democrat-Gazette that he hedges on recommendations in cases like Biggs'
because he is afraid of lawsuits.
"I can be held liable for any information I put out," Rose said.
Nancy Hamm, a Fayetteville attorney who has represented school districts, teachers and now
parents suing school districts, disagreed. "Truth is a defense," said
Hamm, who currently is representing a family suing Biggs.
"My recommendation is, you give honest evaluations to any prospective employers who
call you," Hamm said.
Noggle of the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators acknowledged that
"sometimes people are a little reluctant" to discuss allegations when they give
references.
"You would hope that the people who are checking the references would be pretty
sensitive to pick up that in conversations, where there are gaps or where they hesitate to
say anything one way or another," Noggle said.
Even if questions arise during a reference check, a teacher may still be hired, said
Venters of the Arkansas School Boards Association.
When school districts are desperate to fill teaching slots, thorough reference checks fall
by the wayside, Venters said.
Some administrators may lower their standards so they can put a teacher in every
classroom.
"You just get down to the point that school's going to start tomorrow, and you need a
teacher, and the only one you've got has got some questionable marks on it,"
Venters said. "What do you do? Leave a class vacant or hire someone on probation and
try to work with them and work it out? That's a call that the board and superintendent has
to make.
"And sometimes they make the wrong calls, but a majority of the time, they make the
right call."