New Geisel twists...
New Geisel twists: I was at a wedding this past weekend in Connecticut and people were asking me about the Geisel case. After I described it to them, many had the same reaction: when is the hammer going to fall on the school? Well, we may be heading that direction. As WRGB reports:
Point #2: Why is CBA taking field trips to Florida?
Point #3: Geisel becomes more of a train-wreck with each published story, no?. Drinking on field trips is not particular unusual among high school students - it's why the French class field trips to Montreal are universally popular - but what's the ice-breaker here when Geisel decides she wants to booze with the students? That's the $64,000 question that hasn't been answered - how did all of this initially start? One plausible explanation is that this was informal blackmail from the start - Geisel was caught drinking at school or on a field trip by some of the students and sought to protect herself by bringing the students in on it, hoping they wouldn't tell the school. At that point, her relationship with the students could have escalated rather easily - she becomes their drinking buddy and alcohol source and they ultimately retain the threat of sqealing.
Don't read me wrong - I believe Geisel is the guilty one here and the students are the victims. Period. But the missing link in this case is how the relationships started, and it's far from clear that it was purely premeditated predatory behavior by Geisel, although i'm confident that was part of it.
If this case isn't plea-bargained, the trial is going to be an absolute circus.
administrators from CBA were due to meet with Soares Wednesday afternoon concerning issues that have been raised about what CBA knew regarding Geisel, when they knew it and if Geisel served alcohol to students on a school sponsored trip to Florida in February.
Point #1: Obviously, CBA is going to claim they acted on this as soon as they found out about it. And they probably did. If they are guilty of anything, it's most likely of being completely oblivious of teacher behavior that must have been common knowledge among many of the students. I doubt that makes them liable as far as the DA is concerned, but it might result in civil suits down the road in addition to the obvious-and-already-done damage to their reputation. And god help them if it comes out that they knew about any of this and didn't do anything.Point #2: Why is CBA taking field trips to Florida?
Point #3: Geisel becomes more of a train-wreck with each published story, no?. Drinking on field trips is not particular unusual among high school students - it's why the French class field trips to Montreal are universally popular - but what's the ice-breaker here when Geisel decides she wants to booze with the students? That's the $64,000 question that hasn't been answered - how did all of this initially start? One plausible explanation is that this was informal blackmail from the start - Geisel was caught drinking at school or on a field trip by some of the students and sought to protect herself by bringing the students in on it, hoping they wouldn't tell the school. At that point, her relationship with the students could have escalated rather easily - she becomes their drinking buddy and alcohol source and they ultimately retain the threat of sqealing.
Don't read me wrong - I believe Geisel is the guilty one here and the students are the victims. Period. But the missing link in this case is how the relationships started, and it's far from clear that it was purely premeditated predatory behavior by Geisel, although i'm confident that was part of it.
If this case isn't plea-bargained, the trial is going to be an absolute circus.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, August 11, 2005 at 8:48 AM.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
At 10:32 AM ,From a journalistic/legal standpoint, I'd be a little leary of this statement:
Don't read me wrong - Geisel is the guilty one here and the students are the victims. Period.
I don't recall there being a trial or conviction. Good blog, by the way.
At 2:16 PM ,
Don't read me wrong - I believe Geisel is the guilty one here and the students are the victims.
Anonymous -
Next time you offer your alleged journalistic/legal opinion, at least do so based upon an accurate, full, and extensive presentation of the statement in question.
Smalbany did NOT type "Don't read me wrong - Geisel is the etc. etc. etc. ..." That was your substandard effort.
Instead, the Smalbanian wrote, and I - unlike you - quote (with CAPS for emphasis), "Don't read me wrong - I BELIEVE Geisel is the etc. etc. etc."
Smalbany qualified his post with the words "I believe."
Anonymous, pal, buddy of the Bish, Viceroy of all things Vandenburgh, I believe you're a sap and a schill for Howie and Paul. I also believe that:
Paul Newman's the greatest living actor today;
Peter Gammons belonged in the Baseball Hall of Fame a decade ago;
Cooperstown, as a community, doesn't get nearly the positive ink it should;
The finest coffee, not just in Albany but throughout New York state, can be found at The Daily Grind on Lark Street in Albany or at its companion Troy location;
A pay-per-view debate featuring Alan Chartock vs. Fred Dicker, each bound to a chair and gagged while the other is speaking, would raise more than enough revenue to solve the state's long-term budget problems;
A-Rod hits home runs, but Derek Jeter wins rings;
And weekend mornings are best spent with the person one loves.
All of those I believes are my opinion, just as the Smalbanian offered his opinion on Geisel. Personally, I disagree with the Smallish one's view of the case. Geisel's guilty, but so our those CBA white-collar criminals to be. I wouldn't want anyone of those alleged gentlemen dating a young lady in my family. If any of those alleged CBA gents showed up at my house, I'd go out and purchase my first weapon. Self defense purposes only, of course.
Then again, I believe - an opinion - each of those alleged CBA gentlemen needs a load of buckshot in his backside. Toss in the same lead-in-posterior treatment for John Sweeney's punk son, nearly a year after almost beating a kid to death and still no trial and no coverage in Rex's Times Useless.
A host of opinions, that's what I just listed.
But there's one thing I know: arguments based on half-truths draw only the iggy from me. Until you can present your argument based upon the truth and only the truth, the facts and only when those facts are displayed in detail to the exact letter, then you, pal, friend, Buddy of the Bish and Viceroy of the Vandenburgh, will gain no respect from me.
Grow up, use the facts, and state your case.
Otherwise, prepare to be flogged with the facts each and every time you bring a weak backside effort like your 11:32 a.m. post into any domain that I frequent.
At 1:57 PM ,
dork
» Post a Comment