The Bank Examiner

[don]

About ten miles from my current residence, there was an interesting situation a couple of years ago.

It seems that a bank examiner had come to inspect the books at the local bank. He found that a lot of money had been siphoned from the accounts of elderly citizens into the personal account of a bank employee.

The bank employee was known to all in the community as one of the nicest, friendliest people at the bank or in the whole town. She was active in her church and other civic affairs and generally well-liked by all.

Yet the evidence was clear, she had siphoned over $100,000 from the accounts of trusting citizens into her own pocket. The resulting publicity was, needless to say, embarrassing to the bank and needed to be addressed.

The question is: "What should a bank's board of directors do at this point?"

Option A: Recognize her popularity among customers, reprimand her privately and educate her and her co-workers that stealing is wrong while taking steps to prevent bank examiners from ever finding such embarrassing information about their bank.

Option B: Ignore all the good things she's done for the bank and the community and fire her while taking steps to make sure that the books are examined more often and more thoroughly.

Which of these options do you think would instill public confidence in the bank?

Now, look at the actions of the Kearny school board in the Matt LaClair case. Which option did they choose?

[Strife767]

About ten miles from my current residence, there was an interesting situation a couple of years ago.

It seems that a bank examiner had come to inspect the books at the local bank.  He found that a lot of money had been siphoned from the accounts of elderly citizens into the personal account of a bank employee.

The bank employee was known to all in the community as one of the nicest, friendliest people at the bank or in the whole town.  She was active in her church and other civic affairs and generally well-liked by all.

Yet the evidence was clear, she had siphoned over $100,000 from the accounts of trusting citizens into her own pocket.  The resulting publicity was, needless to say, embarrassing to the bank and needed to be addressed.

The question is: "What should a bank's board of directors do at this point?"

Option A:  Recognize her popularity among customers, reprimand her privately and educate her and her co-workers that stealing is wrong while taking steps to prevent bank examiners from ever finding such embarrassing information about their bank.

Option B: Ignore all the good things she's done for the bank and the community and fire her while taking steps to make sure that the books are examined more often and more thoroughly.

Which of these options do you think would instill public confidence in the bank?

Now, look at the actions of the Kearny school board in the Matt LaClair case.  Which option did they choose?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quite a parallel.

[Guest StaggerLee]

About ten miles from my current residence, there was an interesting situation a couple of years ago.

It seems that a bank examiner had come to inspect the books at the local bank.  He found that a lot of money had been siphoned from the accounts of elderly citizens into the personal account of a bank employee.

The bank employee was known to all in the community as one of the nicest, friendliest people at the bank or in the whole town.  She was active in her church and other civic affairs and generally well-liked by all.

Yet the evidence was clear, she had siphoned over $100,000 from the accounts of trusting citizens into her own pocket.  The resulting publicity was, needless to say, embarrassing to the bank and needed to be addressed.

The question is: "What should a bank's board of directors do at this point?"

Option A:  Recognize her popularity among customers, reprimand her privately and educate her and her co-workers that stealing is wrong while taking steps to prevent bank examiners from ever finding such embarrassing information about their bank.

Option B: Ignore all the good things she's done for the bank and the community and fire her while taking steps to make sure that the books are examined more often and more thoroughly.

Which of these options do you think would instill public confidence in the bank?

Now, look at the actions of the Kearny school board in the Matt LaClair case.  Which option did they choose?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You cant hurl verbal allegations with out expecting to go to a court room. Lets hope stalking and an illegal vehicle tracking device is not used in this case too. You cant change history no matter how much money you pay to bias lawyers or greedy investigators who are paid to cover up the truth while they publicly propagate their clients twisted version of the event in question.

[Guest Guest]

About ten miles from my current residence, there was an interesting situation a couple of years ago.

It seems that a bank examiner had come to inspect the books at the local bank.  He found that a lot of money had been siphoned from the accounts of elderly citizens into the personal account of a bank employee.

The bank employee was known to all in the community as one of the nicest, friendliest people at the bank or in the whole town.  She was active in her church and other civic affairs and generally well-liked by all.

Yet the evidence was clear, she had siphoned over $100,000 from the accounts of trusting citizens into her own pocket.  The resulting publicity was, needless to say, embarrassing to the bank and needed to be addressed.

The question is: "What should a bank's board of directors do at this point?"

Option A:  Recognize her popularity among customers, reprimand her privately and educate her and her co-workers that stealing is wrong while taking steps to prevent bank examiners from ever finding such embarrassing information about their bank.

Option B: Ignore all the good things she's done for the bank and the community and fire her while taking steps to make sure that the books are examined more often and more thoroughly.

Which of these options do you think would instill public confidence in the bank?

Now, look at the actions of the Kearny school board in the Matt LaClair case.  Which option did they choose?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nice try!! Sounds like someone whose desperate for support, but Mr. P. did not commit any crime. Your parallel doesn't work.

I have one that does work.

What about "the boy who cried wolf!"

[Guest Keith-Marshall,Mo]

You cant hurl verbal allegations with out expecting to go to a court room. Lets hope stalking and an illegal vehicle tracking device is not used in this case too. You cant change history no matter how much money you pay to bias lawyers or greedy investigators who are paid to cover up the truth while they publicly propagate their clients twisted version of the event in question.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What exactly is your implication?

[don]

Nice try!! Sounds like someone whose desperate for support, but Mr. P. did not commit any crime. Your parallel doesn't work.

I have one that does work.

What about "the boy who cried wolf!"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In this post, I was not addressing the behavior of the teacher or the student. I was addressing the January behavior of the school board.

They say they privately reprimanded the teacher and then take steps ... not to prevent the teacher from doing it again ... but to prevent evidence of any such behavior in the future.

This, to me at least, does not seem like the way to instill confidence.

[Guest Guest]

About ten miles from my current residence, there was an interesting situation a couple of years ago.

It seems that a bank examiner had come to inspect the books at the local bank.  He found that a lot of money had been siphoned from the accounts of elderly citizens into the personal account of a bank employee.

The bank employee was known to all in the community as one of the nicest, friendliest people at the bank or in the whole town.  She was active in her church and other civic affairs and generally well-liked by all.

Yet the evidence was clear, she had siphoned over $100,000 from the accounts of trusting citizens into her own pocket.  The resulting publicity was, needless to say, embarrassing to the bank and needed to be addressed.

The question is: "What should a bank's board of directors do at this point?"

Option A:  Recognize her popularity among customers, reprimand her privately and educate her and her co-workers that stealing is wrong while taking steps to prevent bank examiners from ever finding such embarrassing information about their bank.

Option B: Ignore all the good things she's done for the bank and the community and fire her while taking steps to make sure that the books are examined more often and more thoroughly.

Which of these options do you think would instill public confidence in the bank?

Now, look at the actions of the Kearny school board in the Matt LaClair case.  Which option did they choose?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you really think that's even close to this situation? Maybe in Strifey's push broom world where he suckles the town t*t by day, and fights Constitutional injustice by night.

[Guest Paul]

Nice try!! Sounds like someone whose desperate for support, but Mr. P. did not commit any crime. Your parallel doesn't work.

I have one that does work.

What about "the boy who cried wolf!"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, because everything Matthew said has proved to be true.

[Guest Guest]

You cant hurl verbal allegations with out expecting to go to a court room. Lets hope stalking and an illegal vehicle tracking device is not used in this case too. You cant change history no matter how much money you pay to bias lawyers or greedy investigators who are paid to cover up the truth while they publicly propagate their clients twisted version of the event in question.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What are you blabbering about?

[Strife767]

Do you really think that's even close to this situation? Maybe in Strifey's push broom world where he suckles the town t*t by day, and fights Constitutional injustice by night.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Aww, that might have hurt my feelings...15 years ago. So close!

[Guest Guest]

No, because everything Matthew said has proved to be true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And you can "prove" that several students have asked to be transfered my Mr. P's class. Where is your proof? As Johnny Cochran said "You make no sense!"

[Strife767]

And you can "prove" that several students have asked to be transfered my Mr. P's class.

What does that have to do with the fact that Matthew was not "crying wolf" and in fact has proved every single one of his allegations with the recordings of the class? Nice try at dodging, but I'm not going to let you get away so easily.

Do you even know what it means to "cry wolf?"

[Guest Guest]

Aww, that might have hurt my feelings...15 years ago. So close!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's good that you've accepted your lot in life.