The recordings are now online

[Bryan]

Bryan is incapable of listening, and certainly incapable of evaluating the evidence objectively.

If that's the case, then why should Paul sink to the level of poisoning the well (fallacy)?

He refuses to see the evidence from any perspective except that of his own twisted assumptions.

Probably more than anyone else on this board, I have been the one to call for an examination of evidences.

You, Paul, have tended to avoid discussions of evidences (though I'm happy to note a handful of notable exceptions).

Instead you prefer to poison the well and engage in personal attacks, such as your current post.

Why do that, if the evidence is really on your side?

Is it to show how deeply spiritual you are?

Right now, he can't be reached with reasoned argument, because he is not coming from reason.

For example?

Oh, that's right--you don't have any. This is the poisoning the well phase.

He is coming from a mind made up in advance, and determined to reach the conclusions he wishes to reach.

The evidence argues against you.

Time and again, I refrain from drawing hard conclusions where more evidence is warranted.

I have stated caveats regarding unknown evidence probably more consistently than anyone else on this board.

Yet here you are, Paul, poisoning the well by painting me as incapable of fairly assessing the evidence.

Show, don't tell.

For example, the "boo hoo" in response to my comment that the teacher was engaged in bullying is a snotty response that overlooks the central fact: it is the teacher's conduct that is the central issue, not the student's response.

You have made your response an issue by repeatedly making public statements about this affair, Paul.

And it is your response to which I referred by mocking your poor Matthew stance.

We get a measure of your sincerity by the way you treat your son in this. One minute he's the poor, helpless 16 year old to be protected from the deplorable behavior of Paszkiewic. The next he's the sly master of ceremonies making fools of Somma and Paszkiewicz.

Which is it, Paul?

If your arguments are good and sincere, then consistency is a reasonable expectation. You're flunking that test.

It is heartening to know that others have a similar reaction to mine when I heard this recording (the meeting in Al Somma's office). As you can imagine, my reaction as a parent may have been stronger than yours. It was like watching my son being walked through the looking glass toward the red queen. So my thanks to those who have written and confirmed what I've known all along.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, at least you're objective and not pre-judging anything!

Unlike me!

[Bryan]

Bryan

You are still lying and splitting hairs.

I am not lying, and I do not think you can offer a reasonable example in which I am (supposedly) "splitting hairs."

"Taken out of context"?  You have the entire context right before you but you still deny what was said?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do I deny what was said?

You have my post before you, so where did I deny what was said?

It is precisely because I have the context before me that I argue that the words were taken out of context.

I made the case in an earlier post. You're welcome to treat the specifics of my argument. You're current tactic fails to address my argument, other than through soft ridicule (fallacy).

Whoa! Surprise, you do present an argument below. Thanks. I'll fashion a response when I have a bit more time (to examine your claim in light of the context).

[Guest Paul]

3.  How has Mr. P conducted himself with respect to Matthew in school since the meeting?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As well as could be expected under difficult circumstances, except for the very important failure to say "I will not have this student attacked in my name," or otherwise come to his defense when he was being abused. That is a major failure of character in my view. But face-to-face, he treated Matthew OK after the meeting.

[Strife767]

Hearing about Matthew's exploits in KHS so far, I find it difficult to believe that all of this would have ended with an apology.

An apology plus a correction of Paszkiewicz's false statements about science (particularly his inaccurate definition of the Big Bang as well as telling his students that evolution is faith-based as a religion) was all it would have taken. Is that too much to ask?

I really wish Paul would sue already instead of holding Kearny hostage as he seems to want to do.

1. There is a mandatory waiting period, iirc.

2. Paul has made it quite clear he doesn't _want_ to sue the town--if the Board and Paszkiewicz do what they should have done all along, there is still hope to end this matter in one swift stroke...that is, if they have the brains to do it. Otherwise, they will be willingly costing their community money, as well as destroying their reputation in court.

[Strife767]

People should be aware that Mr. Somma was Mr. Paszkiewicz's teacher and crew coach when Paszkiewicz was in high school at Kearny High.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well...that explains it. It's still messed up, though.

[Guest Guest]

Well of course: Matthew was supposed to be put in his place at the meeting. Any other outcome is unacceptable. Problem is, having correctly predicted the behavior of several adults in positions of authority over him, Matthew had them headed off to the point that they now look foolish and worse. He outsmarted and outmaneuvered them. And oh, how you hate it!

That's not the outcome you wanted, Bryan, so you have to solidify your assumptions and re-work the facts around them. You may continue to see Mr. Paszkiewicz as the victim here, but reasonable people do not. He thought he would put the student in his place, but that's not how it is turning out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think most reasonable people are wondering why the hell Matthew's parents were not in that meeting.

[Guest Steve_C]

The only thing that's sad in this situation is the number of lost souls that are posting on KOTW, those that deny God, those that stubbornly insist that if they can't see God, he doesn't exist. Your ignorance is what is truly sad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's funny.

You rely on faith. I don't. I don't need faith like you do. You don't need any evidence for what you believe. I don't need to believe that I'll live forever in some disconnected spiritual form among the clouds or wherever. Or if I don't make the imaginary sky god happy I'll be tortured for enternity. Ultimate reward or endless punishment for not believing? It's silly.

I was raised catholic. I even managed to get confirmed. It was the confirmation process that actually sealed the deal for me becoming an atheist eventually. I'm not a lost soul.

We're all born atheists.

[Guest Guest]

People should be aware that Mr. Somma was Mr. Paszkiewicz's teacher and crew coach when Paszkiewicz was in high school at Kearny High.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And?

[Guest Lawyer]

I think most reasonable people are wondering why the hell Matthew's parents were not in that meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The kid (Matthew) handled himself like a champ. Despite Mr. P's psychology games (which he undoubtely used on prior students with apparent success), the kid stuck to his objective. Objective: Get "yes" or "no" answers to whether Mr. P made the "preaching statements". You got to love it. Three educators in a room and a Junior in high school was able to turn the tables on them and walk out with basically a recorded confession. Hire this kid. He can take a deposition for me anytime.

Matthew understands the law. Matthew has great instincts. Matthew has balls of steel. He can be on my team anytime he wants.

A Lawyer.

[Guest Guest]

I think most reasonable people are wondering why the hell Matthew's parents were not in that meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh that's because Mr. Somma didn't want him to be there. At least, that's what Paul said.

[Guest Paul]

I think most reasonable people are wondering why the hell Matthew's parents were not in that meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mr. Somma said he would not allow it.

[Guest Paul]

Probably more than anyone else on this board, I have been the one to call for an examination of evidences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, Bryan, what you call for is a microscopic examination of eyebrow hair follicles when the issue is a fractured leg. Most of your demands are not germane, and your methods are niggling at best.

[Guest Guest]

People should be aware that Mr. Somma was Mr. Paszkiewicz's teacher and crew coach when Paszkiewicz was in high school at Kearny High.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And gym teacher in grade school.

That being said - seeing how long Somma knew (and taught) Dave and knowing the (albeit often misguided) propensity of co-workers to back each other up - do you think it was unreasonable that Somma was initially inclined to support Dave? It may have been the wrong decision, but I can't say that I completely fault him for it - many of us would have made the same mistake.

How has Somma responded to you since your production of the recordings?

[Guest Guest]

As well as could be expected under difficult circumstances, except for the very important failure to say "I will not have this student attacked in my name," or otherwise come to his defense when he was being abused. That is a major failure of character in my view. But face-to-face, he treated Matthew OK after the meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here, here. I still have faith that he will somehow come around and take his rightful place BETWEEN Matthew and those that have treated him harshly. Although, I must admit that my faith in him is dwindling.

[Guest Guest]

Well of course: Matthew was supposed to be put in his place at the meeting. Any other outcome is unacceptable. Problem is, having correctly predicted the behavior of several adults in positions of authority over him, Matthew had them headed off to the point that they now look foolish and worse. He outsmarted and outmaneuvered them. And oh, how you hate it!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know I would have hated it - but sometimes we all need a proverbial "kick in the pants" to get us back in line. I think the fact that the kick came at the "foot" of a 16 year old has got to make it sting just that much more.

[Strife767]

I think most reasonable people are wondering why the hell Matthew's parents were not in that meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Most reasonable people who were paying attention know why: his parents weren't allowed to be present at the meeting.

[Strife767]

And?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, it makes his apparent bias toward Paszkiewicz in the meeting more understandable, for one.

[Guest Guest]

I think most reasonable people are wondering why the hell Matthew's parents were not in that meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

After listening to the recording it’s obvious. If a lawyer went into that meeting and asked question like they were on trial, they would know the LeClair’s motives. By sending Mat in with questions requiring yes and no answers and coached by his father, Mr. P was in a no win situation. If he apologized and admits, they sue. If he doesn’t, they sue. Well played by the lawyer and his puppet. There are a few things that don’t make sense. Mat said he felt “unsafe” in the class and had to record. He said he felt safe in the meeting, then why record. Mr. P asked anyone if they felt uncomfortable with the discussion, everyone including Mat said no, so how was he unsafe? If he felt unsafe then why did he keep asking questions about religion? And why does he have to protect the other students? What does he mean by “unsafe”?

After the letter Mr. P respected Mat’s request and stopped mentioning religion in class and treated him like any other student. Paul said he wasn’t allowed in the meeting, yet Mat was asked by Mr. P why his parents did not speak with him. This issue could have been settled in one meeting with everyone, but then there would be no TV coverage and scholarships. I think Mat is the liar.

[Guest Dingo Dave]

The kid (Matthew) handled himself like a champ.  Despite Mr. P's psychology games (which he undoubtely used on prior students with apparent success), the kid stuck to his objective.  Objective: Get "yes" or "no" answers to whether Mr. P made the "preaching statements".  You got to love it.  Three educators in a room and a Junior in high school was able to turn the tables on them and walk out with basically a recorded confession.  Hire this kid.  He can take a deposition for me anytime.

Matthew understands the law.  Matthew has great instincts. Matthew has balls of steel.  He can be on my team anytime he wants.

A Lawyer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My sentiments exactly.

[Guest Guest]

As well as could be expected under difficult circumstances, except for the very important failure to say "I will not have this student attacked in my name," or otherwise come to his defense when he was being abused. That is a major failure of character in my view. But face-to-face, he treated Matthew OK after the meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How was he being abused?

[Guest Paul]

(Paul) "People should be aware that Mr. Somma was Mr. Paszkiewicz's teacher and crew coach when Paszkiewicz was in high school at Kearny High."

And?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The question had to do with Mr. Somma's role in the meeting, if I recall correctly. He may not have been entirely objective. No great sin in itself, just a bit of useful background.

[Guest Guest]

Mr. Somma said he would not allow it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And you just accepted that. Once again, after all of the posts that you've made here that obviously show you're more than willing to get involved, I find it hard to believe you did not attend the meeting because of Somma. I think it suited your purposes not to attend that meeting.

[Guest Chicago IP Attorney]

Paul, having listened to the recording of the meeting with Somma, I just want to say that Matt's one heck of a kid. Througout the meeting, he was composed, polite, and persistent. I know people twice his age who practice law for a living who aren't nearly as together in the heat of the moment as Matt is. You and your wife are to be commended for how he's turned out so far.

[Strife767]

Here, here.  I still have faith that he will somehow come around and take his rightful place BETWEEN Matthew and those that have treated him harshly.  Although, I must admit that my faith in him is dwindling.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't blame you--every chance he gets to lessen the damage, he makes things worse. Every denial of wrongdoing should be expected to elicit that kind of response from reasonable people.

[Strife767]

I know I would have hated it - but sometimes we all need a proverbial "kick in the pants" to get us back in line.  I think the fact that the kick came at the "foot" of a 16 year old has got to make it sting just that much more.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I remember before I started posting on KOTW, I read about this issue on some random blog shortly after I first learned of it, and the author said one funny thing to close his/her post on the subject that's still stuck with me, giving me a small chuckle when the issue becomes a bit too depressing:

"Well, this proves once again that fundamentalists are stupider than teenagers."

At least, it was something like that. *chuckles*