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?
