Gary Tudesko, Is his court appeal today?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kingofthehill

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
1,806
Remember the young man who parked off campus and had a shotgun unloaded in the backseat of the cab of his truck. He went hunting in the morning and didn't have time to bring the gun back home so he parked off campus.

I believe his appeal is today... Fingers crossed he gets to go back to school and all this crap is dropped and left behind.

JOe
 
It is going on right now. try cbs13 sacramento - google it for link. It is a an appeal to the board of education in his school district not a court trial. The CBS news story is alluding to him having a gun within 1000 feet of a school though that has nothing to do with his expulsion or earlier suspension since that is a criminal charge that he was never charged with and as the relevant school codes all have to do with possession of a gun on school property and/or school related activities - which the principle decided included traveling to school and parking on a public street and then walking to school. The search was obviously illegal and the school violated it's own policy by not calling or attempting to contact the young man's parents as their own policy states. His truck was hit by a dog from a private company looking to find something to convince the school to buy their services and when they didn't find anything in school or on school grounds they started searching the side streets around the school. If the school board doesn't reverse the expulsion they will have a nice lawsuit on their hands - the school district has already hired lawyers though. Sounds to me like the principal and superintendent need to be expelled for their mishandling of this whole situation.
 
yeah, other students were suspended for 5 days because used shotgun shells were also detected in their trucks/cars.

If their gonna swing this "ZERO Policy" crap, that apply's to ALL in my opinion... I really hope he wins and they really hit that school district HARD.

JOe
 
from cbs 13 coverage:

"Board Member Has Question...
Member Has Questions:

"Where in the student handbook does it indicate whether or not a street is school property," asked Glen County Board of Education membe, Eugene Massa.


"I couldn't answer that question," responded the school districts attorney, Matt Juhl Darlington.

Members of the audience snickered when that the question was asked. It appears to be fundamental to this argument. Was the street that the student parked on considered to be school property? And if so, was it conveyed as such in the student handbook?

We're waiting for closing arguments to begin.


PS: The board just ruled that they will issue their ruling on this appeal, Friday at 10am."
 
This type of thing is ridiculous. Why punish the ones that try to do the right thing? I mean the problem is the people that don't bother to follow the rules and for some reason they seem to skate by without any bumps in the road. If he were carrying concealed on the property they might have an argument but seriously....the street? Come on Libs you can do better than that.
 
...a school has zero authority or right to say on a public street not on school property...only law enforcement may enforce law regarding any 1000-foot rule...and they didn't...why are we reading this????
 
Why punish the ones that try to do the right thing?

because this lil angel has a history of doing the wrong thing. he pushed real hard by his own admission and when it bit him het got religion. hes failing out right now move him to alternative ed like hes been begging for
 
http://ukiahcoachbrown.blogspot.com/2010/01/guns-stupidity-and-willows.html
Tudesko said he believes the district targeted him because of his discipline record and claimed that Smith told him they were "looking for a way to get me into the community school." A letter to Tudesko's family explained that his initial suspension was being extended until his expulsion hearing because "Gary poses a continuing danger to himself and others." Who’s in the right? Let’s look at Gary’s discipline records:

• On Oct. 23, three days before the gun incident, Tudesko served a one-day suspension for parking his truck across the sidewalk and in the oleander near the school's tennis court.

• In May 2008, he was assigned Saturday school after he used racial slurs to disrupt a showing of "To Kill a Mockingbird," repeatedly saying the "N" word.

• And last March, he was suspended for four days for calling a teacher's assistant a "stupid Mexican."

In addition to his two suspensions, Tudesko acknowledged at least 25 office referrals for infractions ranging from "constant classroom disruptions," to fighting and cheating and making racially motivated "hate statements" on at least one occasion. Gary says that he was simply “running my mouth” and that it is all no big deal. Apparently, neither does mom.

At this point, I totally understand why Gary is up for expulsion and why the principal is sticking to his, pardon the pun, guns. Gary does not belong at the high school, period. Gary is probably correct that the Willows administration is out to remove him from the academic environment because there is no real reason for him to be there. He seems like the perfect candidate for the “all we need is a legitimate reason” clause of Ed Code, and it actually should not be that hard for administrators to remove problem students from campus. Sorry, I can’t blame the Willows admin on this one. Gary set himself up and Gary now lives with his poor decisions. His mom mentioned in a local Willows news article that his son “owns what’s his”. Well Gary, time to own up.
 
because this lil angel has a history of doing the wrong thing. he pushed real hard by his own admission and when it bit him het got religion. hes failing out right now move him to alternative ed like hes been begging for

But you don't punish someone for something YOU don't have authority to punish them for! They may be looking for an excuse, but they are fools to think that this will fly.

If he is that big a headache, then is shouldn't be any big deal getting rid of him with something that is legit. THIS isn't it!
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentis
Because our schools want to be partially in charge of our children (All of the rights and none of the responsibilities)
Actually schools can promulgate rules that restrict conduct while the student is "at school". Every thing that I have read about this little knothead suggests that he ought to be dumped into an alternative school where he won't disrupt the learning environment for the rest of the student body and the faculty. I just hate *******s, and if he has done half of what he's admitted to, he's an *******. This has less to do with RKBA and much more to do with civil conduct.
 
You might want to read the appeal filing from his attorneys as the administration did not follow their own rules on this, the principal did not tell the truth at his first hearing in order to get him expelled, and he was not ever offered or recommended counseling or alternative schooling before this non-incident. Nobody is suggesting he is an angel, but he did nothing wrong in the situation that the school used to expell him. In fact in the circumstances that day he was acting responsibly.
 
Just to add do I think some of his past behaviors were okay - no. On the other hand he did not break the rules that day. And he evidently hasn't been using illegal drugs or drinking and driving - unlike Obama, Bush, Clinton, or Cheney. He is/was 16 and he used abusive language, was disrespectful in word and behavior, and has gotten poor grades so he had to go to summer school. For this he should be expelled with no prior help offered and for following the rules the day he got into trouble?
 
Well, lets look at the facts that are so outrageous that evidently they make it okay to hang him out to dry over an incident where the school and principal overstepped thier bounds.

From his appeal brief:

"Fully 24 of those documents were detention referrals spanning a 2½-year period. Gary has only been referred to detention once in the current school year. And although every form gives teachers the opportunity, nowhere on any of the referrals is there a request for intervention on behalf of the staff or student. Not for behavior, not for academics, not for counseling or anger management, not even for an alleged “hate statement.” In fact, a majority of the referrals were from 2007 when Gary was in the 9th grade for talking in class, not having a textbook, or for having his cell phone in class.


Beyond the lack or relevancy, the complaints come from the same seven (7) teachers, with 80% coming from the same four (4) teachers. None of those teachers were present at the hearing, nor is there any indication Willows High attempted to bring them to the Hearing.


Teachers giving referrals: 7
Mr. Korling 5 20%
Ms. Samons 7 28% (2 years w/Gary)
Ms. Lungren 4 16%
Mrs. Conklin 4 16%
Ms. Albert 2 8%
Mr. Lewis 2 8%
Mr. Holly 1 4%
Notably, nowhere on any Student Referral Form is there a request for intervention. Not
for behavior, not for academics, not for counseling or anger management, not even for an alleged “hate statement.” And there is nothing to suggest Gary posed a danger to himself or others. For purposes of this Board’s review, perhaps the most notable fact above (and one verified by the record produced by the district) is that no intervention, plan, meetings, or outreach was ever conducted or even recommended for Gary by Willows High School. In fact, the current Willows Resource Officer has known Gary since the 5th grade, and has never intervened, or offered any type of counseling to Gary regarding his school challenges. Testimony of Officer Alves, Transcript at 30, line 20-21; at 31 lines 3-4.)"

If you think he should be expelled for his prior transgression fine - but don't support a railroading over his having unloaded shotguns in his locked truck parked off school property. And don't support a school administration that violated their own rules of procedure, conduct, and due process.
 
Cassandrasdaddy,

yeah, the kid might be a dumba$$. That still doesn't give the school the authority to "create" offenses out of thin air to hang him on, which is what you're promoting.

That's sad.
 
School board reinstated Gary.

CALNRA: NRA/CRPA Reinstate Expelled Student Gary Tudesko
01/22/2010 10:45 AM - PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY

Today, the Glenn County Board of Education reversed Principal Mort Geivett and reinstated Gary Tudesko at Willows High School. This represents a victory for law-abiding gun-owners, particularly young adults who wish to enjoy their rights without being hassled by robotic bureaucrats and inane "zero tolerance" policies that would ruin a students record before respecting his Constitutional rights.

To review the facts in this story, please visit:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2010&summary=glenncoboe
 
Fantastic!

Been a great week for the 2nd!...

He better be as straight as an arrow because i bet they are gunning for him and just looking for any "Valid" reason to get rid of him.

Very happy with this decision!

JOe
 
bet he can't finish the year. what are the ged programs like out there?

Just what business is that of yours? It's not. But since you just have to make it an issue: If they really wanted him gone they had plenty of opportunity to do it well before this. They didn't. Infact they didn't appear to follow their own policies before. In fact, it seems the ONLY policy they follow is the one they don 't have to use their brainpans for.

This was never about his prior behavior in school. It really wasn't even about the guns. This was about a branch of the .gov (school district) overstepping their authority, illegal searches and seizures and the use of private security to perform de facto (and illegal) law enforcement duties.



Get It?!?!?!?!?
 
i suspect this "This was never about his prior behavior in school" was/is more true for you and some of the other outside players than for the young man and the school.

what search was illegal? didn't they call him out and he aknowledge he had the guns? did they enter his car? what do you feel they seized? my understanding was that he left with his guns to go home no criminal charges. in fact the local head cop knew him and stated what he believed the kids intent was and wasn't as why he wasn't charged and he let him go home free. seems there was actually a fair amount of good sense applied. none of that 1000 foot gun free zone charges. its possible he might get it together and start to pass a class other than shop but one things sure now that hes served his purpose he won't be bothered by his new friends helping him anymore.
 
cassandrasdaddy, I agree with you that the kid is a little git who's in for a rough road if he doesn't de-rectify his cranium, but that doesn't justify the school's attempt to railroad him. The school board agrees with me:

1. "The District governing board acted in excess of its jurisdiction..."
2. "The Pupil was not afforded the opportunity for a fair hearing..." [with a quote from the principal suggesting that his primary goal was to show the student who is boss]
3. "There was prejudicial abuse of discretion by the District..." on two separate grounds

The Board ordered the District to reinstate Gary, expunge all references to his expulsion from his record, and pay "any costs incurred by the Pupil or his parents or guardian related to the preparation of the record on this appeal...."

In other words, the Board smacked the principal pretty severely.

Is Gary a walking attitude problem? I don't know, but the evidence seems to say yes. Does that mean he deserves to be punished for this incident? No.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top